Talk:Gattaca

In this edit, User: Dimadick states, Reverted. The lead does not mention drama at all, and this seems like OR. It suffices to refer to any of many WP:RELIABLE source^{[1][2][3][4][5][6][7]} to discover that Gattaca is also a drama (as well as a romance). Drama is not mutually exclusive to thriller (indeed, it’s part of a different system of classification). The claim that the movie is not a drama is an unsupported opinion by someone who does not seem to have looked at any evidence. The fact that the lead does not mention drama is an omission, not evidence. Strebe (talk)

Really? The lead does not mention drama, and you did not just add drama to "thriller". You simply removed the thriller categories. Dimadick (talk) 06:16, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

So discussion on the films genre has come up again, I would like to refer to WP:STICKTOSOURCE which states that "Source material should be carefully summarized or rephrased without changing its meaning or implication. Take care not to go beyond what the sources express or to use them in ways inconsistent with the intention of the source, such as using material out of context. In short, stick to the sources." and per MOS:FILMGENRE which states "Genre classifications should comply with WP:WEIGHT and reflect what is specified by a majority of mainstream reliable sources." In short, we should apply only the genres that are reflected in sources. I'll go through some reviews here and come up with what the general organization. I'll try to be unbiased with this, and not just google search "Gattaca drama" or "Gattaca space opera" or something to hunt and find sources.

• New York Times: "Gattaca is rated PG-13 (Parents strongly cautioned). It includes clinical scientific detail, one brief sexual situation and some violence in its final moments. Older children with a taste for science fiction should find it intriguing." source
• Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun Times: "This is one of the smartest and most provocative of science fiction films, a thriller with ideas"
• Hollywood Reporter: "n Oct. 24, 1997, Columbia Pictures unveiled Andrew Niccol’s sci-fi thriller Gattaca, starring Ethan Hawke and Uma Thurman, in theaters. The Hollywood Reporter’s original review is below....Gattaca is an intelligently-conceived sci-fi chiller starring Ethan Hawke and Uma Thurman. source
• Empire: "Sci-fi written and directed by first time helmer Andrew Niccol, a vision of the 21st century when genetic engineering is the accepted norm to produce perfect people" source
• Variety: "Andrew Niccol's impressive feature debut, is an intelligent and timely sci-fi thriller that, with the exception of some illogical plot contrivances, is emotionally engaging almost up to the end." source
• Entertainment Weekly: "That's not a coincidence. Gattaca's mournful pace puts it squarely in the tradition of Big Think sci-fi, especially films like George Lucas’ THX 1138, Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner, and Jean-Luc Godard’s Alphaville (as Hawke’s love interest, Uma Thurman exudes some of the luminous sadness of Anna Karina)." source
• IGN "...Gattaca marks Niccol's directorial debut. His translation from page to screen of such an ambitious sci-fi mystery showed the world that he had what it took." source
• Time Out ". Self-consciously at a remove from the trashy B-movie sensibilities which have dominated science-fantasy movies in recent times, this harks back to the vacuum-packed, classically alienated dystopia of Brave New World and Fahrenheit 451. Chilly, elegant, and a little bloodless." source
• CNN "It's not very often that you see a real honest-to-God science fiction film."source
• Los Angeles Times: "Niccol’s script, which has the earnest simplicity of a freshman philosophy paper, is merely naked exploitation, a sci-fi snow job that projects a contemporary ethical question--would a perfect human be human?--into a solemn future where the worst-case scenario unfolds as conventional Hollywood melodrama." source
• Austin Chronicle "For all its genre-hopping (science fiction, mystery, love story, socio-political exploration), Gattaca never gets away from itself; it's firmly rooted in Hawke's masterful humanity, making this less a sci-fi epic than a simple (and simply wonderful) lesson in humanity and the direction in which one hopes it's not heading." source
• SF Gate " In that moment "Gattaca" has the science-fiction chill that audiences want and expect.

That chill is largely absent from the rest of "Gattaca," and so is another science-fiction kick"source

• USA Today "...if smart sci-fi is your vial of tea, Gattaca won't disappoint." source

So from the above (and we can find more, but I think this is plenty), I primarily see science fiction and occasionally it says Science fiction thriller, but usually attached, and a few other scattered classifications. With this, I'd suggest we label it as science fiction in the lead. Perhaps if there are more specific genre discussion to be had, a section can be made for that in the article. Tagging @Strebe: on this for further discussion. Andrzejbanas (talk) 20:01, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

I’m confused by the intent of MOS:FILMGENRE (thanks for drawing that to my attention). There is benefit, and no harm, to listing all the genres that appear in reliable sources, since we are not talking about mutually exclusive categories. Categories help people make sense of things. As long as the category does not represent a WP:FRINGE belief, it’s going to be a useful angle to understanding the film. The crispness of a single genre doesn’t reflect reality for many films. Not that I’m trying to start a referendum on this, but… I disagree with the applicability of WP:WEIGHT to categorization in the context of blurred boundaries or boundaries that simply do not exist (not just film, but all topics). And do I trust Ebert’s designation of “thriller” more than Austin Chronicle’s omission? Sure. Anyway, a second-best way to deal with this is as you propose: a section discussing the genres. Strebe (talk) 20:41, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

The purpose of it is not to swamp the lead with genres as genre is subjective, we should go with the one that is most primary. In this case, from the search above, I do not think I'm out of line in saying science fiction makes sense for the main genre in the lead. Again, I did not see any serious applications of what genre it fits into more from my quick look above, but we don't use our own personal perceptions, we go with what the general discussion is (and in this case, I have found science fiction predominantly). I think it could be good to create a section discussing nuances of the genre if you can find any, I did something similar for the film Drug War in the past. Maybe something like that @Strebe:? Andrzejbanas (talk) 21:39, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Alternatively, I also made one for Tetsuo: The Iron Man which could also work. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:22, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

While transhumanism is of great relevance to the film, the "Transhumanism" subsection under Legacy consists entirely of a verbose description of the opinion of a single individual.

Almost all of the content should be removed and replaced by a single sentence.

Alternatively the section should be re-titled to more accurately reflect its content. FelizKulpa0009 (talk) 07:14, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

I don’t think the section should be retitled; I think it should be deleted or filled out responsibly. You are welcome to make improvements, of course. Strebe (talk) 00:05, 26 January 2026 (UTC)