Critics’ reviews

Gattaca (1997)

10 reviews from 10 publications. Critics’ score 67: 5 positive, 2 mixed, 1 negative.

Back to our review of Gattaca

67
Positive
5
Mixed
2
Negative
1

Most critics respond favourably to Gattaca’s intelligent premise, treating its genetically stratified society as a thoughtful way to examine discrimination and inherited privilege. The strongest agreement concerns the production design: the reviews repeatedly praise a carefully imagined future whose restrained, retro-futuristic appearance supports its ideas. Enthusiasm for the human story is less consistent, though the relationship between Vincent and Jerome draws praise, as does the suspense surrounding Vincent’s deception.

The reviews range widely on whether that controlled style sustains an involving drama. Variety finds Ethan Hawke sympathetic and the story emotionally engaging despite plot contrivances; The AV Club finds his performance wooden and the mixture of detachment and sentimentality inert. Pace also divides critics: Eye for Film praises taut suspense, while Empire finds the plotting slow. The Los Angeles Times offers the strongest rejection, arguing that solemnity and conventional melodrama weaken the treatment of its ethical question.

RogerEbert.com
24 October 1997 · Roger Ebert
90*

This is one of the smartest and most provocative science fiction films, a thriller with ideas whose hero challenges a genetically stratified system. It singles out the visually exciting production design and the central relationship between Vincent and the real Jerome for praise.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
24 October 1997 · Janet Maslin
80*

A handsome and fully imagined work of cautionary futuristic fiction that treats genetic privilege as the next form of bigotry. It singles out the obsessive attention to detail in world-building and production design.

Read the full review →
Variety
9 September 1997 · festival review
75*

An intelligent and timely sci-fi thriller that is emotionally engaging for most of its length despite some illogical plot contrivances. It singles out Ethan Hawke’s sympathetic lead performance and the superlative production, design, and editing for praise.

Read the full review →
The AV Club
26 March 2008 · C · Nathan Rabin
57

The review finds the production design timeless and the genetic engineering theme still relevant but faults the film for a charisma vacuum at its center, wooden lead performance from Hawke, and an inert mix of Kubrickian detachment and sentimentality.

Read the full review →
Empire
1 January 2000 · Neil Jeffries
55*

The film offers a great premise and intriguing retro-futuristic visuals but the plot unfolds too slowly with little action, making it easier to look at than to watch. Hawke is blandly perfect while Law delivers the most exciting performance as the bitter cripple.

Read the full review →
Los Angeles Times
24 October 1997 · Jack Mathews
30*

A deadening cautionary tale whose earnest script feels like naked exploitation of a timely ethical question. It singles out the solemn, overly serious tone and conventional melodrama for complaint.

Read the full review →
The Hollywood Reporter
8 September 1997 · Duane Byrge

The critic praises the stylish visuals and intelligent premise of genetic discrimination in a futuristic society but criticizes the icy, unemotional characters that reduce the film to a visual essay rather than a full-blooded human story.

Read the full review →
Time Out
21 July 2014 · TCh

The film evokes the classically alienated dystopias of Brave New World and Fahrenheit 451. It is chilly, elegant, and a little bloodless.

Read the full review →
Eye for Film
19 January 2001 · Angus Wolfe Murray
80*

The critic praises Niccol's icy, Kafkaesque vision of a genetically stratified future ruled by purity codes and the film's taut, heartbeat-like suspense that makes every moment count. It highlights the controlled performances and stainless, early-morning-lit design that heightens the intrigue.

Read the full review →
Collider
25 March 2021 · Matt Goldberg
75*

The critic revisits the film as a story of genetic discrimination and the human spirit's triumph, comparing it to Brave New World and praising its subtle systemic critique and stylish mid-century modern design. They note its focus on individual perseverance over collective change as a limitation rooted in 1990s ethos.

Read the full review →

Ordered by the weight we give each publication, then by score. Scores are normalised to 100; * means inferred from an unrated review. Summaries are ours, not quotations; follow the links for the reviews themselves. How we rate