Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 388 posts

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#181

Post by to11mtm »

peter303 wrote: post #152
GuB-42 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally, movies that focus on set design age much better than movies that focus on effects. If you make a good set, it will look good no matter how technically advanced your setup is. It may look better when filmed using the latest cameras, but it will never look wrong when it isn't, because it is the real thing. Effects are not the real thing, and as technology improved people have gotten better at noticing and ar…

You mean they dont still use 1980s computer screens in 22nd century Star Trek?

For how bad much of the computer imagery has changed, the overall bridge sets in the TOS films look a -lot- better to me than all of the fancy CGI stuff.

All of that said...

There's a certain correctness in my head to the idea that in a pre-replicator future [0], it would be more smart to use a bunch of physical buttons and CRT type monitors.

The main reason that comes to mind, is that a simple CRT is probably easier to fabricate on a deep space mission than a flat screen, if it needs replacement. Similar for all the buttons/lights/switches.

Now, it wouldn't necessarily be -easy- for a ship in deep space to re-fab these components. Thus the need for 'low-fi' graphics, since you might be in a region where the best your folks can fab is NTSC-quality.

[0] - While TOS had food synthesizers, that seems like a subset of a full replicator's functionality.

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#182

Post by cm2187 »

giantg2 wrote: post #175
cm2187 wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not sure why you would associate eugenics with genocide. As the article mentions, today you can promote or suppress a gene by simply patching the genome. And frankly I am not sure which is more dystopian: a future where none of the kids are born with genetic diseases, predisposition to be obese, or simply stupid or ugly, vs the present where a kid has to live with those things he can do nothing about.

"I am not sure why you would associate eugenics with genocide." Historically eugenics has included some mistreatment of those with undesired traits, upto and including genocide.

Historically chemistry has been used to produce Zyklon B. Doesn't mean chemistry is bad.

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#183

Post by hgsgm »

peter303 wrote: post #152
GuB-42 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally, movies that focus on set design age much better than movies that focus on effects. If you make a good set, it will look good no matter how technically advanced your setup is. It may look better when filmed using the latest cameras, but it will never look wrong when it isn't, because it is the real thing. Effects are not the real thing, and as technology improved people have gotten better at noticing and ar…

You mean they dont still use 1980s computer screens in 22nd century Star Trek?

They use 1960s plastic and foam panels with arrays of giant light bulbs.

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#184

Post by hgsgm »

to11mtm wrote: post #181
peter303 wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean they dont still use 1980s computer screens in 22nd century Star Trek?

For how bad much of the computer imagery has changed, the overall bridge sets in the TOS films look a -lot- better to me than all of the fancy CGI stuff. All of that said... There's a certain correctness in my head to the idea that in a pre-replicator future [0], it would be more smart to use a bunch of physical buttons and CRT type monitors. The main reason that comes to mind, is that a simple CRT is probably easier…

TOS had famously low budget fake "high school theater" quality sets. They are only tolerated because the story is good.

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#185

Post by sangnoir »

refuse wrote: post #34
beebmam wrote: post #25

I found it really hard to relate to any of the characters in the film, to the point where they were barely recognizable as humans. Does it make sense, in a world like the one in Gattaca, for a person that is part of a discriminated class, to go into space, instead of trying to change the society around him to be less discriminatory? It seemed to me like the whole effort was a self-motivated, flaccid revenge fantasy t…

> Does it make sense, in a world like the one in Gattaca, for a person that is part of a discriminated class, to go into space, instead of trying to change the society around him to be less discriminatory? Most people in discriminated classes in the real world don't go out trying to change society.

...and the few that attempt to change society almost always fail, or don't live to see the change they fight for in their lifetime.

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#186

Post by TacticalCoder »

jonplackett wrote: post #36

Gattaca trivia you may already know - the name is made out of the letters of the genetic code G, A, T and C

Oh I know: I loved the movie so much (and still do) and found it so cool that the movie was named that way on purpose that I gave my daughter four given names and they start respectively with G, A, T and C...

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#188

Post by pixelmonkey »

This movie holds up. I recently rewatched and really, really enjoyed it. (Some spoilers embedded in the below.)

One thing I love about the script is how the 4 main characters give us all the different angles on the genetic dystopia problem.

Vincent is genetically "inferior", but psychologically "determined" to overcome physical limitations. He has to use his mind and body to overcome his genetics.

Jerome is genetically "superior", but psychologically defeated due to his accident causing permanent physical limitations. He has to use his mind to compensate for his body, and he "lends" his genetics to Vincent, to make Vincent as capable in their society as he once was. Vincent helps Jerome finally achieve his own potential by the end, thus the final scene.

Anton is genetically "superior", but mentally and physically weak. His willpower atrophied as he was constantly told about his genetic superiority. In a way, he allowed his genetics to act almost like an inheritance that made him soft and unambitious. Through the flashbacks, we get the sense that he was always a little cocky about his genetic superiority. He was "born into success". But through adult Anton, we learn that all he has done with his genetics is to become a conformist in this dystopian society. A rule enforcer of the genetic state itself, not someone striving for any higher purpose. When Anton loses the swim match to Vincent, he lets him go on with his plan (not shown in the script or movie), presumably because Vincent has proven that genetics alone do not determine ability, shattering one of his core beliefs.

Finally, Irene. She is genetically "upper class", but not "superior". She illustrates the degree to which genetics had become a class marker, like wealth in our current society. She is genetically strong enough to join the space exploration program, but not strong enough to be an astronaut, perhaps only a scientist. (Her last name is Cassini.) She is just as driven by passion for humanity's potential as Vincent, and just as angry about the genetic lottery. That is why they connect as they do. But, in her case, she discovers -- through Vincent's display of willpower -- that her heart condition does not have to limit the life she can lead today. Irene represents society at large, discovering that living your life under the determinism of genetics (or any other limiting class & rule system) will cause you to live a smaller life than you otherwise could.

Vincent shows us what we can aspire to despite our imperfections, and Irene shows us how to come to terms with living a happy life despite our imperfections.

"Irene" has its origin in the Greek word for "peace" (coming to terms with life as it is). Whereas "Vincent" has its origin in the Latin word for "conquer" (fighting against life's limitations and winning).

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#189

Post by hgsgm »

duxup wrote: post #38
anonporridge wrote: post #8

The great thing about Gattaca is that the cinematography ages incredibly well on top of the amazing plot. A lot of great sci-fi is marred by cheap effects that look incredibly dated only a decade later. Gattaca chose to focus on the story and create a minimalist future environment that still looks beautiful 25 years later.

I was watching an Industrial Light And Magic documentary on Disney+ and it had Spielberg talking about the transition to digital, and he goes out of his way to make the point that effects are great but if you're not presenting it right and telling a story that is worthwhile the film just won't last.

Jurassic Park, full of dinosaurs(!) had less CGI than most mundane action movies of today.

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#190

Post by coryrc »

Filligree wrote: post #123
whatshisface wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always took it as implied that, although the 99% chance was their real knowledge of the distribution, this was a story about the one guy that ended up flying to space.

He does not actually fly to space in-movie, and from what I recall, it seems entirely plausible that he'll have a heart attack and die during the first flight. With all the implications that has for the rest of the team.

After surviving jogging on the treadmill? I don't think space launch is /that/ stressful.
Post reply on HN