Respond to these rapid questions in our Is Genesis History quiz and we will tell you which Is Genesis History character you are. Play it now.
When I first saw “Genesis 2.0,” a speculative documentary about the current and potential dangers of excavating mammoth tusks for genomic research and animal cloning, I was ready to dismiss it as reckless, superstitious, anti-science garbage. But then I realized that I was wrong, and I realized that I was right. However, after watching the film for a few days, I’ve come to the conclusion that the film’s biggest flaw is its overemphasis on media-friendly personalities at the expense of useful information. That’s not surprising given the fact that many contemporary documentaries appear to be produced by filmmakers who idolize and/or imitate Michael Moore and Werner Herzog, among others. Though their respective approaches are difficult to pull off (as evidenced by their more recent films), Moore and Herzog’s respective approaches are particularly challenging, especially when the topic at hand is a dry as scientific research and the numerous factors that contribute to its study and application. “Genesis 2.0” passively asks viewers to make assumptions about the personalities of several of its subjects—mostly white-collar scientists, but there are also some blue-collar “mammoth tusk hunters”—on the basis of incomplete or vague insinuations about their backgrounds and personalities. Even though it is not a particularly edifying documentary, this film may appeal to those who wish to subscribe to its unconvincing conspiracy-theory-like logic (apparently, genetic research is bad because it is “playing God,” and it is underfunded and overseen by the Chinese government as well as cocky American scientists!).
An ominous scene opens “Genesis 2.0,” as a pair of adult Siberian men guide a small motorboat through unidentified icy waters in the film’s opening sequence (later revealed to be the Arctic Ocean, surrounding the “New Siberian Islands”). An equally unidentified woman provides some commentary (through voiceover narration), but not nearly enough to make this preface appear any more logical than it already does. This is primarily due to the cryptic and upsetting commentary provided by the narrator: “Fatuous and boasting you are[…]You, a credulous fool!” Furthermore, the quietly unnerving strings-heavy composition by Max Richter and Edward Artemyev, which serves as a backdrop to this ominous commentary—”How did you manage to set free that terrible Devil?”—doesn’t help matters.
Nevertheless, the filmmakers quickly contrast the opening scene of their film with a subsequent sequence in which an unnamed speaker at an American press conference called “iGem” (International Genetically Engineered Machine Foundation) delivers a plain-sounding speech about a “revolution” in a field of study known as synthetic biology. This revolution will only continue to grow as time progresses. Finally, some intertitles inform us that “every summer, students from all over the world congregate in Boston, United States” “They embarked on a journey that would lead them to an enticing future.” Yes, but, like, why are you doing this?
But you shouldn’t waste any more time and start this Is Genesis History quiz.
As I sat through “Genesis 2.0,” some of my most pressing questions were, in fact, answered. However, the responses I received were, in some ways, even more unsatisfactory than my initial questions (if you can imagine that). In this film, we follow the struggles of working-class mammoth hunters in Siberia as they search for valuable mammoth tusks that have been buried in the New Siberian Islands (surrounded by the Arctic Ocean). The mammoth hunters’ relatable struggles, combined with their reserved demeanor, make them excellent camera subjects. They are noble and stoic in their character. They have the appearance of action heroes, but their behavior is no different from ours: they try to call home, they try to find food, they try to make a buck, and they try not to die.
Is Genesis History Quiz
In contrast, co-directors Christian Frei and Maxim Arbugaev (the latter of whom also served as the film’s cinematographer during the New Siberian Islands sequences) film George Church, a famous American geneticist who occasionally stops to sign autographs for excited high school students who appear to recognize him. Church flashes a wide range of smiles for various cameras. He is also eloquent in his speech, though he never appears to address the moral implications of his research. The co-creators of this film may or may not have asked Church, “Hey, what are the moral implications of your studies, and why don’t you seem to be as concerned as we are?” This is all considered a big no-no in their eyes.
Also, you will find out which character are you in this Is Genesis History quiz.
Semyon Grigoriev, the Siberian mammoth expert, is given due credit for his work at least in part because of Church’s apparent lack of self-awareness. We see Grigoriev constantly deliberating, consulting, negotiating, and acting. He always appears to be thinking about where his research is coming from and what it will be used for, and his brother Peter is the most well-developed of the film’s mammoth hunter characters. The idea is that we’ll like Semyon, so we’ll only see one side of his personality, which is the endearingly reflective side. Eventually, everyone else in “Genesis 2.0,” including Peter and George, is revealed to be either a likely dupe or a potential fraud. What a world, and what a story this is.
For more personality quizzes check this: Wolf Warrior 2 Quiz.
