• 1  Turney, J. (1998). Frankenstein’s Footsteps. Science, Genetics and Popular Culture, New Haven: Yal (...)

1Genetic engineering is one of the most controversial themes in several disciplines, such as medicine, bioethics and biotechnology. In addition to the problems regarding the real technological and scientific possibility to modify or alter human DNA, there are a number of ethical and legal issues. While this is often subject to discussion in the scientific world, only some topics are mentioned in the media and brought to the attention of the general public. Nevertheless, new practices have social implications and frequently suggest a perspective that is dystopian, if not apocalyptic. According to Jon Turney, the myth of Frankenstein has influenced public discussions on biology, including the recent field of genetic experimentation.1

• 2  Hardin, R., “If It Rained Knowledge”, Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 33 (1), 2003, pp. 3-24:22 (...)

2It is clear that most people cannot share the complete specialist knowledge of scientists. But this does not mean that they cannot reflect on the questions that are raised by scientific progress. As reported by Russell Hardin, “civilization has only continued and progressed because we do not generally demand that our knowledge meet Locke’s or even contemporary scientists’ standards”2.

• 3  Gattaca (1997, 106 minutes). Directed by Andrew Niccol, starring Ethan Hawke, Uma Thurman, Alan Ar (...)

4This article shares Wartenberg and Mulhall’s view that at least certain movies are capable of philosophical intervention (§2). On this basis, it considers several movies on the theme of genetic engineering, throughout the history of cinema. By focusing on some particularly recurrent representations, fears, hopes and ethical arguments, I seek to offer a categorisation (§3). Moreover, my contribution focuses on one of the most philosophical science fiction movies on genetic engineering to date: Gattaca, an American film written and directed by Andrew Niccol in 1997 (§4). Based on the criteria set out in the following discussion, I aim to demonstrate that Gattaca not only takes a specific position on this theme, but also develops a precise argument through its narrative.3 Finally, in the conclusion (§5), I will briefly discuss the main thesis of this movie, which is both a thought experiment – the description of a future in which it is possible to predetermine the entire DNA of human beings – and a critique of the view that a perfect screening of human DNA could imply a real and desirable genetic determinism.

• 4  Deleuze, G. (1986). Cinema 1: the Movement-Image, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press – fol (...)
• 5  Benjamin, W. (2008), The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, London: Penguin.
• 6  See Žižek, S., The Pervert’s Guide to Cinema, directed by Sophie Fiennes, 2006 (150 minutes) – fol (...)
• 7  Cavell, S. (1980), The World Viewed. Reflections on the Ontology of Film, Cambridge: Harvard Unive (...)
• 8  Mulhall, S. (2008), On Film, London and New York: Routledge.
• 9  Wartenberg, T. (2007), Thinking on screen. Film as Philosophy, London and New York: Routledge.
• 10  Mordacci, R. (2019). Filmmaking as Self-Writing: Federico Fellini 8½. In C. Rawls, D. Neiva, S. S. (...)

5From Ingmar Bergman to Woody Allen and beyond, film has always played an important role in bringing philosophical problems to the attention of wider audiences. Many philosophers have studied the relationship between philosophy and cinema from very different perspectives: Gilles Deleuze4, Walter Benjamin5, Slavoj Žižek6, Stanley Cavell7, Stephen Mulhall8 and Thomas Wartenberg9, among others. In Thinking on Screen: Film as Philosophy, Wartenberg lists several narrative techniques through which films may present philosophical arguments. Narrative itself is of course an argumentative method that is also used in philosophical writing, from Plato and St. Augustine to Friedrich Nietzsche and Jean-Paul Sartre. As Wartenberg explains, these cinematographic narrative techniques include: the explicit illustration of a philosophical theory (for example, Modern Times), the elaboration of a thought experiment (The Matrix) and the ability to provide a counterexample to a philosophical thesis (The Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind). In addition to this list, there is also so-called self-writing, which takes its origin from an individual biographical story and draws existential conclusions about the meaning of life and human agency10.

• 12  Jonas, H. (1985), The Imperative of Responsibility: in Search of an Ethics for the Technological A (...)

8Many of the films discussed in this essay present numerous ethical concerns. In particular, it is interesting to note how many filmic characters hold opinions and points of view that resemble, in a simplified form, the positions of philosopher Hans Jonas. His principle of responsibility12 tried to establish a normative criterion for an ethics of technological society, being aware of the fact that progress confronts human beings with unprecedented challenges. For the first time in history, thanks to unprecedented technological developments, human beings hold the power to destroy nature, or to imagine possible futures on Earth in ways that were not even imaginable before. In particular, Jonas focused his attention to the long-term consequences that would mainly affect future generations. In this context, Jonas appealed to the so-called fear heuristics, which basically invites humans to imagine the worst possible scenario for every circumstance, in relation to technological developments. The popular films mentioned in the next paragraph do not cite the philosophy of Jonas, with all its implications and possible objections, but they similarly imagine terrible scenarios that follow scientific and technological discoveries related to genetic manipulation.

• 13  This distinction is presented in the entry of the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: “A common d (...)

10I have chosen a particular movie, Gattaca, to demonstrate how film can function as a philosophical thought experiment, illustrating a society where it is possible to choose the genetic make-up of one’s children and to foresee their future and talents. This movie imagines a kind of planned eugenics that goes far beyond being able to genetically intervene to cure a person or to prevent certain diseases13. Moreover, the film provides a counterexample to the theory according to which scientific progress can configure itself as a perfect genetic determinism and as a morally desirable step forward for humanity.

• 15  Jurassic Park (1993, 126 minutes). Directed by Steven Spielberg, starring Sam Neill, Laura Dern, J (...)

14The most famous set of movies about genetic experiments is, of course, Jurassic Park15. The first film in the series, directed by Steven Spielberg, (1993) features a scene, which illustrates a de facto genetic manipulation: the blood of a mosquito living in Jurassic times, imprisoned in a fossil, is mixed with the DNA of a frog to produce dinosaur clones. One of the merits of this film lies in its ability to reach a wide audience and to bring the theme of genetic engineering to the attention of mass culture. There is often a time when a theme, whether scientific or philosophical, comes out of academia and settles forcefully in the collective imagination. In this plot, the billionaire John Hammond has the plan to resurrect dinosaurs, which have been extinct for over 60 million years. It is only thanks to a cocktail of genetic combination that Mr. Hammond has succeeded in the cloning processes that result in the ability to recreate some dinosaurs on Isla Nubar, an island off Costa Rica, with the aim of creating an amusement park. The situation will get out of hand, although the franchise produces several sequels where the audience will see that some dinosaurs can develop a kind of empathy towards their human trainers.

• 16  Island of Lost Souls (1932, 71 minutes). Directed by Erle C. Kenton, starring Charles Laughton, Ri (...)
• 17  The Fly (1986, 96 minutes). Directed by David Cronenberg, starring Jeff Goldblum, Geena Davis, Joh (...)

161) The first group includes films that represent images of our deepest fears and depict dystopian scenarios that warn us against the pitfalls of technological development. One of the first science fiction horror films to tackle the problem of genetic manipulation with the technology of its time is a 1932 movie called Islands of Lost Souls16. In the plot, a castaway arrives on a remote island in Oceania where he meets a scientist who lives with strange creatures, including a young and fascinating woman, Lota, who only appears to be a woman. This scientist is researching the evolutionary possibilities of plants and animals trying to transform them into human beings through plastic surgery, blood transfusions, glandular extracts and X rays. The tools of his bio-anthropological research obviously do not include genetic manipulation but it is clear that the director has something like that in mind (Watson and Crick will discover the double helix structure of the DNA molecule in 1953). Lota is herself actually the result of the prolonged manipulation of a panther. The film ends with the sacrifice of this creature, in order to help the protagonist escape. This movie is classified as a horror film, and the creatures, not intrinsically evil or bad but dangerous, are depicted as the protagonists of a waking nightmare that ends only when the survivor manages to return to England and the civilized world. So, in this movie scientific progress is presented as fascinating (the protagonist is attracted to Lota and betrays his girlfriend with her), but in reality, is dangerous and can become a threat. It suggests that it is better that such fantasies remain confined to daydreams. Many years later, the 1986 film by David Cronenberg, The Fly17, puts us in front of an even more distressing nightmare, which questions the very personal identity of the protagonist, in his becoming something other than himself. The scientist Seth Brundle manages to build a teleportation machine, into which he accidentally enters without realizing that he is not alone: a fly has also entered into the machine with him. Progressively, his body begins to unravel as he discovers that his DNA has been altered and mixed with that of the fly, because the teleportation machine had not been programmed to identify two creatures and thus automatically merged them together. The scientist turns into a terrible creature worthy of a body horror that ultimately made a lot of people feel sick at the movie’s premiere in Toronto. In this case too, the theme of the possible modification of human DNA refers to a horrific scenario, which incarnates the worst nightmares. A total loss of humanity is expected as a result of this genetic combination, which runs counter to the laws of nature. The protagonist becomes a giant insect, bringing out the brutality of an animal with which it is impossible to reason, and which inspires only fear. So, this first group of movies includes thought experiments that describe a loss of humanity through the use of technologies that are always associated with unintended and particularly disastrous consequences.

• 18  Blade Runner (1982, 117 minutes). Directed by Ridley Scott, starring Harrison Ford, Rutger Hauer, (...)
• 19  Blade Runner 2049 (2017, 163 minutes). Directed by Denis Villeneuve, starring Ryan Gosling, Harris (...)
• 20  Ex Machina (2014, 108 minutes). Directed by Alex Garlands, starring Domhnall Gleeson, Alicia Vikan (...)
• 21  A.I. Artifical Intelligence (2001, 146 minutes). Directed by Steven Spielberg, starring Haley Joel (...)
• 22  Bicentennial Man (1999, 132 minutes). Directed by Chris Columbus, starring Robin Williams, Sam Nei (...)
• 23  Okja (2017, 120 minutes). Directed by Bong Joon-Ho, starring Tilda Swinton, Paul Sano, Ahn Seo-hyu (...)

172) A second group of movies could include films like Blade Runner18 (1982), a film that radically questions the positions associated with the first group: the problem here is not that genetic manipulation creates something inhuman; rather, human beings have become inhuman in treating the products of this manipulation as mere working tools. In this dystopian scenario, technology has exceeded all limits: we are in 2019, in a dystopian Los Angeles that looks like a visual representation of the very concept of postmodernism, where the protagonist, detective Rick Deckard, has the task of picking up some “skin-jobs”. These are androids called Replicants, the last frontier of genetic engineering, who rebelled against the task for which they were programmed. Ridley Scott wonders if it is really possible to treat these Replicants as merchandise or if, instead, they are able to feel emotions (especially empathy) and pain or develop intersubjective relationships. This would make them much more like people than objects – although they carry an expiration date and are designed for specific functions. In the sequel, Blade Runner 204919, directed by Denis Villeneuve, it is even shown that a certain type of Replicants is able to conceive and give birth to a child. This would confirm the argument that Replicants should be regarded as persons and enjoy the same fundamental rights as human beings. In a different way, Ex Machina (2014)20 questions the possibility of drawing a line between human beings and humanoids equipped with artificial intelligence. If a machine passes the Turing test, should we give it full human status, even if it is artificially and synthetically constructed? Or can we continue to treat it as a simple object of research, to be kept closed in a laboratory and on which to conduct experiments? This theme had already been explored in A.I. Artificial Intelligence21 (2001, directed by Steven Spielberg on a subject signed by Stanley Kubrick), set in 2125, where robots practically identical to children are also able to have feelings. A little robot who has the same feelings as a human being and the same forms of emotional attachment becomes victim of bullying and strong prejudice that will lead him to be abandoned and to suffer. The protagonist of Bicentennial Man (1999, based on a subject by Isaac Asimov)22 is a robot that could potentially be immortal, but who wishes to be recognized as a human being by the World Congress, at the cost of becoming mortal. In all these movies, the focus is not on the ethical limits of humanoids, but on the ethical limits of human beings. Moreover, this does not only apply to humanoids, but also to genetically modified animals. In a very realistic future, Okja23 (2017), a Korean-American movie directed by Bong Joon-ho, narrates the discovery of a new race: a genetically modified super-pig whose flesh is particularly delicious. Here the dystopia is linked to the exploitation of animals for purely economic purposes. The super-pig belongs to a little girl who wants to save her at all costs, but it suffers torture at the hands of an evil corporation. First, another super-pig rapes her, then a scientist extracts a sample of live meat from her, so it can be tasted to prove to consumers that it is very good. In the end, the camera also enters a slaughterhouse where these poor animals are brutally killed and only Okja and a piglet are saved. In this case, there is no fear of the product of genetic mutation, but of human beings and their corporate multinationals, which are not at all concerned or disgusted when carrying out cruel genetic experiments out of pure economic interest and with the sole aim of further increasing their wealth.

• 24  Watchers (1988, 87 minutes). Directed by John Hess, starring Corey Haim, Michael Ironside, Barbara (...)
• 25  Sharktopus (2010, 89 minutes). Directed by Declan O’Brien, starring Eric Roberts, Sara Malakul Lan (...)
• 26  Rampage (2018, 107 minutes). Directed by Brad Peyton, starring Dwayne Johnson, Naomie Harris, Jake (...)

183) A third group includes movies that consider what happens when experiments are used for profoundly immoral purposes connected to military strategies. For example, in Watchers24 (1988) some scientists try to create humanoids that can be used as members of the army, the so-called Oxon. They are a sort of intersection between robots and hominids, which turn out to be dangerous and aggressive. A similar story is narrated in Sharktopus25 (2010), a horror science fiction in which a strange creature, half shark and half octopus, causes death and destruction. This creature is the result of genetic experiments carried out by a mad scientist working for the military force in order to create a new weapon. In a predictable way, the scientific team loses the control device, and that is where the problems begin. Similarly, in Rampage26 (2018), a movie based on a videogame, the protagonist has to deal with a gorilla, a wolf and a crocodile that have grown out of all proportion because of a genetic experiment that ended badly and threatened to destroy Chicago.

• 27  Mimic (1997, 106 minutes). Directed by Guillermo Del Toro, starring Mira Sorvino, Jeremy Northam, (...)
• 28  Deep Blue Sea (1999, 105 minutes). Directed by Renny Harlin, starring Saffron Burrows, Thomas Jane (...)

194) Another group of films, very similar to the previous one, explores situations where genetic manipulations are made for the good of mankind, but with apocalyptic consequences. In Mimic27 (1997), directed by Guillermo Del Toro, two scientists combine the DNA of many species to save the lives of New York children by eradicating a powerful virus. Three years later, monsters that look like giant insects begin to appear on the subway in search of human beings. As the title suggests, these creatures are also capable of imitating human appearance. Likewise, in Deep Blue Sea28 (1999), a team of researchers works in the middle of the sea to find a cure for Alzheimer’s and uses captive sharks as guinea pigs. These sharks break free and due to the genetic manipulations which they have undergone they become as intelligent as human beings.

• 29  Spiderman (2002, 121 minutes). Directed by Sam Raimi, starring Tobey Maguire, Willem Dafoe, Kirste (...)
• 30  Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015, 141 minutes). Directed by Joss Whedon, starring Robert Downey Jr., (...)
• 31  Deadpool (2016, 108 minutes). Directed by Tim Miller, starring Ryan Reynolds, Morena Baccarin, Ed (...)
• 32  X-Men (2000, 104 minutes). Directed by Bryan Singer, starring Patrick Stewart, Hugh Jackman, Ian M (...)

205) The only filmic genre in which genetic manipulation is not considered a threat is that of superheroes. In the realm of superheroes, there are several characters who have undergone genetic mutations: Spiderman29, for example, is the result of the union of Peter Parker’s DNA and a particular type of genetically modified spider, while the Maximoff twins in the Avengers30, Hulk and Deadpool31 are the product of a genetic manipulation that was carried out in military laboratory. Differently, the X-Men32 are creatures with natural and unpredictable genetic mutations and in all the films of the saga the problem is centred on their battle for fundamental rights. The genetic mutant is here mostly used as a face of “the outcast”, which is often unduly excluded from society. This idea is well represented by one of the most radical mutant leaders in the X-Men’s universe, Magneto, who has been a victim of Nazi persecution in the concentration camps during his youth. The theme of genetic engineering in these sagas is more than anything intended as an opportunity to invent extraordinary characters. Superheroes are different from ordinary people, either because they are gods (Thor, Wonder Woman, Superman), or because they have developed incredible technologies (Iron Man, Batman) or, precisely, because they are the result of genetic alterations that make them superhuman (Spiderman, Hulk, X-Men, Deadpool). Often, these superheroes make bad decisions which, in proportion to their powers, can cause particularly worrying consequences. But in most cases they are able to face dramatic situations that no one else, without their powers, could solve. In fact, the abilities of characters such as the Hulk or Spider-Man imply that even a laboratory accident can trigger incredible progress, not only from a purely technological point of view. These films support, sometimes naively, the thesis that the world needs heroes, and that science can contribute to this, even if there are both positive and negative aspects. Many of these movies face moral dilemmas, but they also express a positive attitude towards science and its future.

• 33  Elysium (2013, 109 minutes). Directed by Neill Blomkamp, starring Matt Damon, Jodie Foster, Sharlt (...)

216) Finally, there is the genre of political fiction. Elysium33 is a 2013 movie where only a few elected people on a rich space station can live in luxury and have access to medical capsules that can cure any disease by intervening on patients’ genetic code. All this happens at the expense of the majority of the population on Earth, who live in terrible conditions. In this case, the dystopian vision is not linked to genetic engineering. Medical advancement is considered a very precious good, a great achievement in the history of humanity. Dystopia is brought about by the fact that this resource is not equally accessible by all people, but only to a very small minority of the population, who has moved to space. Genetic engineering for healing purposes would therefore be positive if it did not produce further social injustice.

• 34  Brave New World (1980, 180 minutes). Directed by Burt Brinckerhoff, starring: Julie Cobb, Bud Cort (...)

22Lastly, it is impossible not to mention a 1980 movie based on Aldous Huxley’s dystopian science fiction novel Brave New World (1932)34. The themes of the novel and of the movie are eugenics and mental control, tools used to create a new model of society. The title itself means “an excellent new world”: we are in 2540, in a society based on the mass production of both goods and human beings. Scientists use extrauterine reproduction managed in special factories where the very concept of family is discarded, as there are no more bonds between parents and children and natural children are avoided with a compulsory contraception. Society is divided into castes from birth: some embryos are deprived of oxygen for a certain period in order to impose mental retardation or lower development possibilities in both physical and intellectual domains. Psychophysical conditioning is then carried out through the use of continuous slogans, social coercion and control. Superficially, this fictional world appears to be a perfect society where there are no worries, but in the end we understand that it has sacrificed freedom, personal feelings, critical thought and family with its bonds and authentic relationships. Gattaca develops this dystopian scenario, revised in a more contemporary perspective.

• 35  See also: Baldwin, J., “Posthumanist Panic Cinema? The Films of Andrew Niccol”, Cinema: Journal of (...)

23This film has attracted great interest.35 It is both a thought experiment that presents many of the risks and hopes associated with genetic engineering and a critique of the idea that a complete genetic determinism would be possible or desirable. Two quotations at the beginning of the film already introduce the audience to the film’s narrative: “Consider what God has done. Who can straighten out what he made crooked?” (Ecclesiastes 7:13) and “I not only think we will tamper with Mother Nature. I think Mother wants us to” (this is a quote from Willard Gaylin, co-founder of The Hastings Centre and a noted professor of psychiatry at Columbia University). One of the promises of genetic engineering that is presented in this movie is that parents of the future will be able to design their children, in a perfect realization of what Michel Foucault has defined as biopolitics. This is the definition offered in The Birth of Biopolitics:

• 36  Foucault, M. (2008), The Birth of Biopolitics. Lectures at the Collège de France, 1978-79, Hampshi (...)

24The theme [of the course] was to have been “biopolitics”, by which I meant the attempt, starting from the eighteenth century, to rationalize the problems posed to governmental practice by phenomena characteristic of a set of living beings forming a population: health, hygiene, birthrate, life expectancy, race… We know the increasing importance of these problems since the nineteenth century, and the political and economic issues they have raised up to the present. […] How can the phenomena of “population”, with its specific effects and problems, be taken into account in a system concerned about respect for legal subjects and individual free enterprise?36

• 37  See Marcuse, H. (1974), Eros and Civilization: A Philosophical Inquiry into Freud, Boston: Beacon (...)

32We are not in the Brave New World universe, where politicians scheme to create the perfect society even if turns into a dystopian. Differently, at the centre of this society lies the relationship between business policy and consumers. They can choose whether to employ private economic means to guarantee their children a better future (there is nothing like “the common good”, or “the future of a better community”). Genetic engineering is more related to a capitalist system than to Nazi eugenics: there is no idea of race and no discrimination based on ethnicity or gender. The real discrimination that humans have to deal with have an economic basis. In the background, of course, there is the imperative of greater productivity, which has been analysed by Marxist thought and the Frankfurt School, and in particular by Herbert Marcuse37 through his idea of the dominance of the performance principle. In the capitalist system, productivity and performance become a priority even over the primary needs of man – which begin to be manufactured according to productivity itself: this is the self-referential system that creates needs and desires.