at least this exercise in idiocy reminded me to add “gattaca” to my netflix queue

gattaca_still_ethan_hawke Has anyone else been following the National Review’s latest attempt to claim that every great movie ever made is somehow sekrit conservative propoganda, in spite of the fact that Hollywood is run by a cabal of liberal Jews and “Big Homo”?

Some of their choices are obvious (Red Dawn — WOLVERIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!), some of them are just stupid and sad (Ghostbusters). But none of them made me repeatedly bang my head against the handiest hard horizontal surface until they sullied one of my favorite movies by putting it on their list, Gattaca:

In this science-fiction drama, Vincent (Ethan Hawke) can’t become an astronaut because he’s genetically unenhanced. So he purchases the identity of a disabled athlete (Jude Law), with calamitous results. The movie is a cautionary tale about the progressive fantasy of a eugenically correct world—the road to which is paved by the abortion of Down babies, research into human cloning, and “transhumanist” dreams of fabricating a “post-human species.”

Has whoever wrote this execrable piece of trash ever actually seen the movie? What “calamitous results”? Ethan Hawke fullfills his lifelong dream of going into space — and has sex with Uma Thurman — while Jude Law gets to hand his legacy off to someone who will do more with it than he ever could, then die with dignity.

Not to mention that “genetic purity” hasn’t traditionally been a liberal concern. (Hint: I know the Nazis called themselves “National Socialists“, but they weren’t actually liberals. I know, crazy!!) Transcending barriers of race and class, however, has been.

(This is the last 5 minutes, so if you’ve never seen the movie and one day want to, uh, spoiler alert. Also, I always thought it was strange that they were going into space wearing business suits.)


2 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. Renee
    Sep 14, 2010 @ 13:57:54

    I may be alone in this, I had a slight problem with Vincent jumping into bed with the movie’s only prominent female character. Her only real role in the movie was love-interest. How progressively original.

  2. pinstripebindi
    Sep 14, 2010 @ 15:53:38

    I don’t think that’s the case. Irene illustrated several things to we-the-viewer, among them:

    1. The fact that even the genetically engineered sometimes don’t meet the artificially high standards set by the existing science, as she had a risk of heart disease that kept her from going into space;

    2. The incredible bravery it takes for Vincent to do ordinary things like crossing a street (and the moment at which she realizes this is one of my favorite moments of the film);

    3. The isolation Vincent’s “borrowed ladder” forces on him, as relationships will always threaten to reveal his secret (DNA everywhere!).

    These are mostly things that point out things about Vincent, but Vincent is the protagonist of the film. I don’t find it particularly aggravating or anti-feminist of the film makers.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: