Slashdot Mirror


Animal Cloning Comes to Hollywood

Kate Thompson writes "A week after San Francisco's Genetic Savings and Clone revealed the sale of their first cat to a customer, the Boston Phoenix reports that GS & C acknowledges it has been hired by anonymous buyers in Hollywood to bank genes of show business animals."

159 comments

  1. Yawn... by Black+Parrot · · Score: 5, Funny


    They're already cloning all their scripts.

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    1. Re:Yawn... by adeydas · · Score: 1

      cloned scripts, then comes cloned animals, followed by cloned actors and ended with a cloned film watched by cloned audience... that's what they could have shown in 'the 6th day'...

    2. Re:Yawn... by b0r0din · · Score: 4, Funny

      Thank God that George Lucas rebelled against Hollywood, not only by creating a biting satire of their business (title of Star Wars II anyone?) but by doing what no one in Hollywood has ever done - continue to add more and more to his original movies.

      Let's examine, shall we? "Star Wars" obviously refers to movie stars and the battles they fight for supremacy of the movie industry. Obviously the Empire is Hollywood.

      Luke Skywalker - George "Luke"-as? He wrote himself into his own film. Also he walks on the sky, ie. he's better than everyone else. Something tells me George never got past this one. Insert cliched Greedo whine.

      Han Solo - Solo, as in "primadonna" - movie actors in general. Selfish assholes who would pretend to know what a parsec is.

      Princess Leia - Princess "lay ya"? The porn industry.

      R2D2 - Robots who make no sense, ie. movie producers.

      C3PO - Robots who act all pretentious and annoy the fuck out of you with english accents, ie. movie directors.

      Obi Wan Kenobi - Umm, best boy grip?

      Darth Vader - wears a big black mask, is evil. This is the producer Lucas couldn't sell his original script to.

      I could go on, but you get the point. Does this post have anything to do with cloning animals? Not really. But who cares about cloning animals when you can make up some random shit about Star Wars?

    3. Re:Yawn... by LucidBeast · · Score: 1

      Now we know how Harrison Ford will star in all the upcoming Indiana Jones movies and how Arnold can star in the next twenty Terminator movies without a walker.

    4. Re:Yawn... by damyata · · Score: 1

      Why not simply clone their ultimate goal - the profits - and spare us the rest of the process.

    5. Re:Yawn... by Vampyre_Dark · · Score: 4, Funny

      I would think C3PO would be the FCC?

      R2D2 - *beep beep bloop* (Make with the naked wookie chicks!)

      C3PO - My word, we can't do that now can we! We might offend those midwesterners! How un-american!

      Chewie - OOOWAAAAAHHHHHHHHH! (Hey, I AM a wookie CHICK, you insensitve clod!)

    6. Re:Yawn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      > I could go on, but you get the point. Does this post have anything to do with cloning animals? Not really. But who cares about cloning animals when you can make up some random shit about Star Wars?

      +6 Funny this post was. The Slashdot zeitgeist is with you. A new Slashmeme have we? It matters not, so long as we can make up some random shit about Star Wars.

    7. Re:Yawn... by mizhi · · Score: 2, Funny
      Thank God that George Lucas rebelled against Hollywood, not only by creating a biting satire of their business (title of Star Wars II anyone?) but by doing what no one in Hollywood has ever done - continue to add more and more to his original movies.


      And to think, with all that originality, Chapters 1 and 2 still sucked.
      --
      Humorless sig goes here.
    8. Re:Yawn... by Gatton · · Score: 1

      Maybe you should write the script for Lucas' next picture. Already I can see you would be a far better screenwriter :-)

  2. Oh boy! by Phidoux · · Score: 2, Funny

    They gonna clone Brad Pitt now?

    1. Re:Oh boy! by Epistax · · Score: 1

      Ooh! I've always wanted a bare knuckle boxing pikey! Besides I'm going to buy a car soon; I think he could be instrumental in the negotiation process.

    2. Re:Oh boy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least one good thing will come out of this: Eventually, they'll be able to obtain Humphrey Bogart's DNA and clone him. Then we'll see once and for all whether he was indeed the model for the Gerber baby :-)

    3. Re:Oh boy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You might get a good deal on the car, but somehow you'll end up with a pikey dag in the process. And you'll end up buying someone a caravan.

  3. lassie and others by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Seems breeding for specific roles is more likely to be productive then depending on genetics. If animals are anything like people, success often is followed by sloth.

  4. This might work for Babe: 3 by Capt'n+Hector · · Score: 2, Interesting

    That is, if they ever decide to make one. For the first two, they had to use a LOT of pigs, because they only look that cute for the first week or so of their lives.

    --
    Quid festinatio swallonis est aetherfuga inonusti?
    Africus aut Europaeus?
    1. Re:This might work for Babe: 3 by gl4ss · · Score: 2, Funny

      so.. they had a lot of pork during the filming, or what did they do with the obsolote pigs? man, i want to be a film producer! BABY PORK RIBSSSSS DRIPPING IN SAUCE--

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    2. Re:This might work for Babe: 3 by The+Mutant · · Score: 3, Informative

      Apparently, no fewer than 47 piglets.

      Now that's a lot of pork!

    3. Re:This might work for Babe: 3 by Trillan · · Score: 1

      Dude, you beat me to it. :)

      Bacon every morning! Droooool...

    4. Re:This might work for Babe: 3 by Walt+Dismal · · Score: 1

      Dude! Where's My Pork?

    5. Re:This might work for Babe: 3 by mpe · · Score: 1

      so.. they had a lot of pork during the filming, or what did they do with the obsolote pigs?

      Depends how true the stereotype of lots of people in Hollywood being Jewish is...

    6. Re:This might work for Babe: 3 by riffzifnab · · Score: 3, Funny

      "For years, the Royal Family kept a large herd of pigs at Windsor castle in England." pork.co.nz

      "...so be wary of any man who keeps a pig farm." -Snatch

      Look out for the Royal Family...
    7. Re:This might work for Babe: 3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So why do they call him Boris the "Bullet-Dodger"?

    8. Re:This might work for Babe: 3 by AviLazar · · Score: 1

      Resistence is futile, you will be assimulated to Jewish Hollywood

      --

      I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    9. Re:This might work for Babe: 3 by MissTuxie · · Score: 1

      Oh god! Now they'll finally produce The Babe Show, starring 342 piglets, a lassie clone and a farmer who you can swear looks like Mel Gibson.

  5. Fairly good idea ... by cablepokerface · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think that some of these animals are pretty 'talented' and it maybe hard to find an animal (like a movie bear or something) which has the potential to learn well and has the right 'personality'. Cloning the ones that just died ensures you that at least the animal is capable of learning the stuff you want to teach it.

    I am not bothered about the whole cloning issue, I think it is an inevitable thing, also with humans.

  6. Nature versus nurture by beders · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Just because the cloned animal has exactly the same genes, doesn't mean that it will exhibit the same behaviour.

    The dog that played Benji might have had an ideal temperament for filming, but it's clone, brought up slightly differently might be a right little ankle biter.

    1. Re:Nature versus nurture by zakezuke · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Just because the cloned animal has exactly the same genes, doesn't mean that it will exhibit the same behaviour.

      Seems ideal to study nature vs nurture.

      --
      There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
    2. Re:Nature versus nurture by SpinyNorman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You don't need clones for that - identical twins suit the same purpose, and humans make rather better study subjects.

      In many cases, even when separated at birth (e.g. adoptions where twins are separated), identical twins show freakish similarities in things that you'd assume would be more a matter of "free will" or nurture.

    3. Re:Nature versus nurture by gauge+boson · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, even their phenotype (expressed genetics) might be different from the original due to environmental influences. This is practically guaranteed for female clones because they have a lot of extra genetic material in the second X chromasome that gets turned off during gestation. This can lead to some rather stark contrasts between 'originals' and clones - e.g., cloned cats with different color patterns. For instance, CC is a tiger-tabby because her surrogate mother, not the original (a calico), was.

      --
      This is sqrt(not) a sig.
    4. Re:Nature versus nurture by AviLazar · · Score: 1

      Are identical twins genetically EXACTLY the same?

      Nature vs Nurture --- a big argument though from my communication classes we determined (with our professors agreement) that it is a combination of both.

      --

      I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    5. Re:Nature versus nurture by DrEldarion · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, they are, hence "identical". What happens with identical twins is that the egg splits after it has been fertilized, leading to two people with the exact same DNA.

    6. Re:Nature versus nurture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Are identical twins genetically EXACTLY the same?

      Yes.

      Nature vs Nurture --- a big argument though from my communication classes we determined that it is a combination of both.

      "Nature vs Nurture" is *NOT* the same as testing identical DNA.

      In the womb, every fetus is subjected to hormones and other chemical signals, which direct its' growth - this is clearly nature, but is significantly different from genetics. Even twins get different amounts, as they don't occupy the exact same position in the womb.

      Testing on identical twins is a good way to study, but doesn't provide 100% conclusive proof one way or the other that a particular trait is determined solely by DNA.

    7. Re:Nature versus nurture by SpinyNorman · · Score: 1

      Identical twins are actually closer than clones, since they not only share nuclear DNA, but also Mitochrondrial DNA (from their mother). A clones's Mitochrondrial DNA comes from the egg, not the DNA donor.

    8. Re:Nature versus nurture by pizzarobot · · Score: 1

      But I'm sure that half the point of cloning hollywood animals is to preserve the looks of the animal and any odd spots or other marks on their body, which should be identical in a clone.

      Besides what's stopping this company from in the future making 10 clones of the famous animal? Or even 100s? Then people would be able to pick the animal which had a similar behaviour. Now you have a pet with similar looks and behaviours.

  7. Presenting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    LASSIE 2.0

    And now you can take your very own Lassie home after the movie! You send us the cash, we send you your very own Lassie in a box. Overnight delivery, we swear! The dog has food and water in the box, we assure you...

    1. Re:Presenting... by y86 · · Score: 0

      I'll wait for the 2.4 series, all the bugs worked out and solid USB support!

    2. Re:Presenting... by Scoria · · Score: 1

      all the bugs worked out and solid USB support!

      I apologize, but that comment is inherently unhealthy.

      --
      Do you like German cars?
  8. Coming soon! by ez_TAB · · Score: 1, Funny

    Lassie Returns (again)
    Flipper Returns (again)
    Mister Ed Returns (again)
    Benji Returns (again)

    etc...

    --
    Quote from ???: "There are lies; there are damn lies; and there are benchmarks."
  9. All right, then. by Scoria · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You can clone the animal, but not the intensive training required for participation in show business.

    --
    Do you like German cars?
    1. Re:All right, then. by cshark · · Score: 1

      Yet. I'm convinced that this training will be available for download at some point. Good old practical applications of wet wires ala Matrix.

      --

      This signature has Super Cow Powers

  10. Obviously by obeythefist · · Score: 3, Funny

    So that they can keep the cute dog in the TV show sitcom alive for all 30 seasons.

    What I can't wait for is when Fluffy Clone #2726A flips out and eats the cute wisecracking kid.

    Bet they can't clone him....

    --
    I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
    1. Re:Obviously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      It might actually work pretty well. Imagine a Collie version of Shining, with the dog coming trough the door yelling "Here's Lassie!"

    2. Re:Obviously by AviLazar · · Score: 1

      then maybe cloning won't be too bad and they can replace the kid with someon useful?

      --

      I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
  11. Does this say something for originality by baryon351 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Does this say something for originality, and the fear of showbusiness people that their talent and success is all wrapped up on the abilities of one cat, dog, pig, britney, whatever?

    1. Re:Does this say something for originality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It says more, I think, about the needs of the audience they're catering to. Yes, stars do have a lot of their success depending on doing the same thing they always have.

      People don't have concentration spans any more. It was hard enough learning to understand an actor in their first movie, or a pop starlet singing their first song, so once they have one success they cling for dear life to that 'same old tired cliche'. Britney's success is guaranteed by the momentum of millions of unthinking fans.

      Work, Obey, Consume, Die or something.

    2. Re:Does this say something for originality by metlin · · Score: 2, Funny

      Rehashing an old joke -

      What do you call one Britney on the moon?
      Problem.

      What do you call 100 Britneys on the moon?
      Problem.

      What do you call 1,000 Britneys on the moon?
      Problem.

      What do you call 1 million Britneys on the moon?
      Problem.

      What do you call all the Britneys on the moon?
      Problem solved!!!

      You may now continue expounding Britney's talents. ;-)

    3. Re:Does this say something for originality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's wrong with that?

  12. Oh crap... by Guus.der.Kinderen · · Score: 3, Funny

    In other news today: Warner Bros announces "Free Willy Again."

    1. Re:Oh crap... by metlin · · Score: 1


      My willy is always free...

    2. Re:Oh crap... by Zorilla · · Score: 1

      You might want to go to the E.R. and get that checked out. Put it on ice.

      --

      It would be cool if it didn't suck.
    3. Re:Oh crap... by b0r0din · · Score: 1

      He said free, not 'Erect,' you insensitive clod.

    4. Re:Oh crap... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *Whoosh!*

      Try "free" as in "not attached", you deductive, intelligent individual.

  13. This is just stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does this deserve to be on the slashdot front page? This has to be one of the stupidest ideas I've heard of. Several thousands dollars to get an animal that MIGHT look the same but will not act the same, as opposed to a few hundred dollars to have a trained animal's fur died to match the original.

  14. Star pets or Star's pets? by Baljet · · Score: 1

    U can bet the Osbournes will never again run low on 4 legged $hit spreaders.. and there must be plently of others who would be up for keeping their own pets forever.. that'll be where the money's at for the service...

  15. Homeward Bound 6 by kaedemichi255 · · Score: 1

    All those dogs and cats in the Homeward Bound movies can now carry on the legacy for generations to come! Rejoice!

    1. Re:Homeward Bound 6 by Zorilla · · Score: 1

      Don't forget "Air Bud Plays Jai Alai"

      --

      It would be cool if it didn't suck.
  16. But what about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now if they could only clone certain entertainers faces after getting mauled...

    1. Re:But what about? by cshark · · Score: 1

      Or their asses. Many celebs insure their asses for big bucks. Me, I'm going to be altruistic and donate mine to science.

      --

      This signature has Super Cow Powers

  17. I think I saw this in a movie once . . . by richardmilhousnixon · · Score: 1

    So what happens when the clone starts having flashbacks of a time when his predecessor accidentally killed a prostitute and burned down the motel to cover up the crime?

    --
    -- sometimes AND gates turn me on.
    1. Re:I think I saw this in a movie once . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...there you go projecting again.

  18. Doesn't work that way. by Gordonjcp · · Score: 4, Informative
    Look at identical twins - how many do you know who have *exactly* the same personality, interests, tastes, etc.? Allow for the similarity of upbringing (non-twin siblings are usually pretty similar), of course.


    The other problem is that, as we found with "Dolly the Sheep", cloned animals are inherently pretty unhealthy, because their cells age a lot faster (lies to children explanation). At two years old, Dolly had a lot of problems that would really only crop up in a much older animal, presumably because the cell's genetic "clock" was not "reset" (LTC again).


    Still, nice work if you can get it. Who's going to tell the difference, even if the animals are *not* cloned?

    1. Re:Doesn't work that way. by GiveMeLinux · · Score: 1

      Temperament of the parents plays a large role (but not the only factor) in what the temperament of the offspring will be. That's why dog breeders et al don't just choose the prettiest animals, but also the smartest and least agressive (at least in theory).

    2. Re:Doesn't work that way. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry buddy, but before you trash on cloning maybe you should at least learn about the results more recent than the FIRST successfull clone. Many companies across the world are cloning with NO such premature aging that took place in Dolly.

  19. Our hollywood star stunt cat died.. by basvdlei · · Score: 1

    let's clone a new one!

    1. Re:Our hollywood star stunt cat died.. by forgotten_my_nick · · Score: 4, Funny

      Or keep 10 clones on hand for the "Throw the cat in the blender" scene. Then when animal rights people come over to check you can show them the real cat and they will never know the difference.

    2. Re:Our hollywood star stunt cat died.. by r00td43m0n · · Score: 1

      Now they're going to start using real animals again because they have a replacement on hand.

    3. Re:Our hollywood star stunt cat died.. by KD5YPT · · Score: 1

      1. Clone myself.
      2. Take assassination contract.
      3. Kill said person.
      4. Send clone on trial.
      5. PROFIT!
      6. Repeat from 1 if clone got executed, else from 2.

      --
      In US, you can easily buy enough major firearms to wipe out your neighbourhood but a few little fireworks are banned.
    4. Re:Our hollywood star stunt cat died.. by bar-agent · · Score: 1

      I was going to say something about Bonsai kittens...but I can't. I just can't. Even entertaining the concept of a Bonsai kitten makes me queasy. Who knew?

      --
      i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]
  20. Re:This might work for Babe: 3 - how so? by linoleo · · Score: 1, Insightful

    they had to use a LOT of pigs, because they only look that cute for the first week or so of their lives.

    And in what way precisely is cloning going to address this issue?

    --
    Be faithful to your obsessions. Identify them and be faithful to them, let them guide you like a sleepwalker. JG Ballard
  21. Genetic Vs Exogenetic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This might actually be a good thing, it could help us realise just how much personality and talent is dependent of exo-genetic development. I.E. does our DNA make us vote for retards like GWB or is it down to all the adatives in our food and the utter crap we watch on TV as kids?

    1. Re:Genetic Vs Exogenetic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, finally a comment from the politically marginalized left! Thanks!

    2. Re:Genetic Vs Exogenetic by KD5YPT · · Score: 1

      It's a combination of additives in our food, craps on TV, the stupidity of humanity, and the corruption of the government that led to the election of GWB.

      1. Humans are inherently dumb.
      2. People tend to vote for people similar to themselves.
      3. GWB is dumber then Kerry.
      4. Therefore, more people vote for GWB.

      --
      In US, you can easily buy enough major firearms to wipe out your neighbourhood but a few little fireworks are banned.
  22. Obsolete technology by dannytaggart · · Score: 3, Interesting

    By the time this cloning technology gets off the ground, it will be easier/cheaper to replicate the animal with CGI.

    --
    PimpMyMazda.com - Crazy mods to a 2002 Mazda Protege DX.
  23. Glossing over the actual money maker. by will_die · · Score: 4, Interesting

    While selling back a physical looking animal will bring in a fair chunk of change, and really how big can that market be. How much work would they have to do to make a benji next year, the main thing would be the breed and same hair color and pattern ; thoses can be changed by dye and makeup.

    Where the big money will be is selling clones to the public. When a popular show/movie has a animal the sales of that animal almost aways increases. For example when the comedy Fraiser was on the air the Jack Russell terrier rose in popularity in the each year(in 2000 along by 21%). Now instead of purchasing any Jack Russell terrier you can purchase a clone of the actual one on the show. How much do you think people would pay for that?
    Granted costs will have to come down ALOT, but if you are thinking for the future this is the way to go.

    1. Re:Glossing over the actual money maker. by Chris+Huelsbeck · · Score: 1

      I just had the same thought... instead of lifeless cheapo plastic replicas of our favourite Movie and TV Pets, we could now own an exact genetic replica. This would be quite a new way of francise business...

    2. Re:Glossing over the actual money maker. by DeltaHat · · Score: 2, Funny

      How much would you pay for a copy of the tiger that tried to eat Roy Horn?

    3. Re:Glossing over the actual money maker. by shird · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Given that a cloned animal is expected to have health problems and not live as long etc, I would pay less. Who cares that it doesnt have a spot in the exact same spot, Id rather have a healthy pet. People that want something that looks exactly the same may as well buy a stuffed animal, as they arent really buying the animal for the right reasons and would have to not care about its health etc.

      --
      I.O.U One Sig.
    4. Re:Glossing over the actual money maker. by KD5YPT · · Score: 1

      Actually, $0.

      I do not want a clone of the tiger that likes to eat people.

      --
      In US, you can easily buy enough major firearms to wipe out your neighbourhood but a few little fireworks are banned.
  24. Re:Article text in case of slashdotting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    for a second i was hoping that news outlets had picked up the think about your breathing troll :(

  25. Clone my wife! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now, if Peter Jackson had been able to clone 100,000 copies of my wife he'd have had his Orc army without needing special effects.

    1. Re:Clone my wife! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We are the fighting Urukhai!

    2. Re:Clone my wife! by dorker · · Score: 0

      FUNNIEST POST EVAR! Thank you!

      (sorry about your wife)

  26. Lucas is behind it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...he took AOTC too literally.

  27. MPAA releases press release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q: What is the DNA and how does it work?

    A: DNA is the copy protection system adopted by nature to provide security to copyrighted content of animals and to prevent unauthorized copying of that content. DNA is akin to the lock on your house.

    Anticipating what digital technology meant for anti-piracy efforts, nature relied on the security provided by DNA in manufacturing, producing and distributing to the public copyrighted animals. Those animals, many of which involved investments of tens and even hundreds of millions of atoms, were distributed with DNA protection.

    DNA allows consumers to enjoy the benefits of animals because nature is able to issue their animals while at the same time preventing massive piracy of their copyrighted works. De-encryption destroys this protection, which is why distribution of de-encryption devices were formally prohibited in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

  28. Carlin by Zorilla · · Score: 1

    Whatever happened to the Georce Carlin way of getting your old pet again?

    "The good thing about dogs is that they don't live too long...After a while, you can get a new dog - looks just like the old one. That way, you don't have to change any of your pictures. You go to the pet shop with a picture and say, 'Get me one a'dese!'"

    --

    It would be cool if it didn't suck.
    1. Re:Carlin by Mr.+BS · · Score: 0

      I'll tell ya what happened... his way went into rehab.

  29. it's only a matter of time now.... by ralinx · · Score: 1

    it's only a matter of time now before they start cloning the Olsen Twins... not that i would object.

    1. Re:it's only a matter of time now.... by dustinbarbour · · Score: 1

      Like every other guy on the planet I eagerly awaited tehir 18th birthday. Why? I don't know. Perhaps they'd appear in Playboy or something. But now that the time has come and gone, I'm quite disappointed in the two of them

      Thin as rails, strungout and still making shit for movies. What a disappointment. And to think.. they had more potential as sex symbols than any other pair of girls.. perhaps ever!

      BTW, I'm a scant 22 years old. I'm allowed to lust after 18 year olds. You 40-somethings need to knock that shit off!

    2. Re:it's only a matter of time now.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lusting why?

      18 year olds are poor performers, you gotta teach them everything.

      go with the 20-24 year olds.

      btw i want clones of those two simply to murder them repeatidly. a lot of people die of natural accidents every year, WHY cant they be two of those people.

    3. Re:it's only a matter of time now.... by KD5YPT · · Score: 1

      Um... can we please move away from disturbing thoughts and such...

      Back to parent, cloning the olsen twins could be a test to see which cloning technique is better (the natural cloning or artificial?)

      --
      In US, you can easily buy enough major firearms to wipe out your neighbourhood but a few little fireworks are banned.
  30. Credits? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can see it now...

    "No animals were harmed in the making of this movie...that YOU know of."

    1. Re:Credits? by Zorilla · · Score: 1

      Sam: Where can I put this so it doesn't hurt anybody we know or care about?
      Max: Out the window, Sam. There's nothin' but strangers out there.

      *BOOM!*

      Sam: I hope there was nobody on that bus.
      Max: Nobody we know, at least.

      --

      It would be cool if it didn't suck.
    2. Re:Credits? by antoy · · Score: 1

      Damn. Just lost my mod points :-)

  31. Will it really though? by lxt · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Genetic Savings & Clone are currently cloning cats for $50 000 - that's pretty cheap already compared to getting an effects house to create a photorealistic character. Sure, I havn't factored in the cost up bringing up the animal, but CGI is still comparatively expensive, and the results aren't always that believable - the best CGI effects work is typically on fictional characters (Gollum), where movements are a combination of motion capture and keyframing. You'd still need an animal to base movements on - I can't recall a recent film which had a believable CGI animal (that's a "realistic" animal, rather than a talking / exagerrated character). On a more practical front, I'm sure actors would actually prefer working with an animal (trouble that they may be), so they can realistically react to them - you just don't really get that with a CGI character (unless you get an actor to perform with the cast, and composite over. This may work for human like characters, but completely defeat the point for animals, because you'd still need one in the scene).

    1. Re:Will it really though? by nystagman · · Score: 1

      Genetic Savings & Clone are currently cloning cats for $50 000 That's a lot to pay for a little pussy. /sorry. had to be done.

      --
      Theory and practice are the same in theory, but different in practice.
    2. Re:Will it really though? by 16K+Ram+Pack · · Score: 1

      Some fictional characters aren't believable. Would Jar Jar have survived that long without someone clubbing him to death?

    3. Re:Will it really though? by danila · · Score: 1

      The best CGI effects are on real people. Spiderman and Matrix sequels both had photorealistic CGI renderings of their lead actors in many closeup scenes.

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
  32. genetics and environment by max+born · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Scientifically, this could make for some interesting "nature vs. nurture" experiments.

  33. re: ..MPAA press release.. by b100dian · · Score: 1

    Somebody mod this guy..umm.. or girl.. DOWN, please!!He's trying to steal copyrighted ideas from MPAA! Ever since the first DNA... bla bla

    On topic: not only was Hollywood selling only movies (clones of player's performance), now the players themself'll be cloned!! But we know that cloning the clone... whatever

    --
    gtkaml.org
  34. Re:This might work for Babe: 3 - how so? by LucidBeast · · Score: 1

    Well, the pigs have to look all the same, don't they? Although to my eye they already do.

  35. I can allready hear it by Ized · · Score: 1

    "Here Lassies! Come over here Lassies!"

    1. Re:I can allready hear it by Zorilla · · Score: 1

      Good thing you decided to clone the "l" in your subject block as well!

      Alllllllllllllllright!

      --

      It would be cool if it didn't suck.
  36. Clone Natalie Portman by PsiPsiStar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Well, someone had to say it. But seriously...

    I'm all for folks getting in on the cloning business. At the worst, it can't be more unethical than what many pet farms already are.

    This provides a financial incentive to refine the technology and make the whole thing more acceptable and familiar to people. Animal breeding has fewer ethical restrictions than medical cloning, so there are fewer ethical roadblocks.

    --

    ___
    It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
    1. Re:Clone Natalie Portman by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who is Natalie Protman?

    2. Re:Clone Natalie Portman by Zonnald · · Score: 0

      I want a Beowulf cluster of Natalie Portman.

    3. Re:Clone Natalie Portman by Zonnald · · Score: 0

      Number 9 on the AskMen 2003 top 99. That's who.
      AskMen
      2004 not yet published.

    4. Re:Clone Natalie Portman by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot the side of hot grits, or perhaps only old people in Korea have hot grits w/ a Beowulf cluster of Natalie Portman on teh spoke!

  37. If you thought OS monoculture was bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Just wait until the dog from Fraiser out numbers normal Jack Russell terriers.

  38. Why wait til they die? by exekewtable · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why wait till your favourite animal asset dies before reinvesting? Just make another one, train em up and get two going at once!! Two Flippers filming at once! too easy. at 50 grand its only a matter of time (probably about 3 months)

    1. Re:Why wait til they die? by shird · · Score: 1

      Could you seriously tell the difference between one dolphin to the next? In fact a cloned one would look even less like the original because it would obviously be younger.

      --
      I.O.U One Sig.
  39. Steven King is probably writing the story ... by NZheretic · · Score: 2, Funny

    Combining Cujo with Pet Sematary.

  40. Must learn to read headlines more closely... by Zab+UvWxy · · Score: 1

    ...I whipped past this one and thought it said "Animal Crossing Comes to Hollywood", and wondered why in God's good name anyone would want to make a movie out of that game.

    --
    "I don't get it." -- ObviousGuy
  41. um by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what the fuck is this

    1. Re:um by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably some random wanker's tripe lifted from "Everything2". At least it reads most of the "quality" "writing" on that site.

  42. Off-topic by Cackmobile · · Score: 1

    But my mates and I came up with the best use for genitic engineering (while stoned). Imagine minature animals of all species. How cool would it be to have little crocadiles in your fish tank say 10cm long. Little elephants and giraffes as pets. Awesome

    --
    -- Karma Karma Karma Karma, Karma Chameleon - Boy George
    1. Re:Off-topic by Zonnald · · Score: 0

      Please. No Spy Kids 2 references.

    2. Re:Off-topic by Taladar · · Score: 1

      John Hammond had one those Mini Elephants in Jurassic Park (the book) for his tour to get funding for the park.

    3. Re:Off-topic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Little elephants and giraffess as pets.. well, that's nothing....

      How about little stoned slashdot guys as pets... watching their brain purpled up, dreaming of becoming real slashdot humans?

    4. Re:Off-topic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought of that too, but that wasn't genetically modified. They used chemical techniques on a regular elephant while it was developing to keep it to that size. Hammond let potential investors think it was genetic modification. Or at least that was how it happened in the book; I don't recall much of the movie.

    5. Re:Off-topic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Mythological Theme Park.

      An idea for the 21st Century - see real unicorns (horses, with narwhal tusk gene splices), hydra, pegasi, griffins...

      Mix up the genetically engineered species with weird and wacky natural species culled from all over the globe - there are some bizarre looking animals out there, that most people have never seen.

      I think it would be a real money-spinner :)

  43. Take my wife, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    please! But DON'T clone her!

  44. You will see Rin-tin-tin forever and ever... by Lucifugue · · Score: 0

    Now starting in a TV set near you... Rex, Chita and Rin tin tin for the 135934th time...

    Genebanking hollywood animals:
    Now, finnaly that's a decent business plan...

  45. in Hollywood... by bikerguy99 · · Score: 1, Funny

    we dont' say clone - we say body-double, you insensitive clod!

  46. Who I Really Want Cloned by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1

    is Falcor

  47. Re:This might work for Babe: 3 - how so? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Insightful? WTF.

    Obviously by using clones they can use different pigs rather than trying to stop the aging process. The 'cloning' addresses the fact that they would need to look alike. dumbass.

  48. Clone Jenna Jameson (with genetic modifications) by Luscious868 · · Score: 3, Funny

    1) Make clones of Jenna Jameson.

    2) Remove the "dirty slut" gene, replacing it with a modified version of the "obedient wife" gene (which morphs back into the "dirty slut" gene when she's in the sack with her husband). It might not hurt to genetically enhance her breasts while your at it so she won't have to pay for them later.

    3) Sell clones as mail order brides.

    4) Profit!

  49. Arnold sez : by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I'll be back. Soon"

    1. Re:Arnold sez : by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Already done in 6th day...

      and on the 7th day, Arnold blew more stuff up.

  50. Giving credibility to movies... by gmuslera · · Score: 2, Funny

    1) Make the movie
    2) Clone for real a cat
    3) Clone Schwartzenegger
    4) Make Washington to approve the "6th day law"
    5) In press release, say "see? even sci-fi movies we produce becomes real"
    6) ...
    7) Profit!
    8) "The day after tomorrow" becomes real

  51. Pet patents? DNA copyright? by OwlWhacker · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Since people started playing with DNA, it's obvious that people could start cloning things that belong to somebody else.

    Can you claim copyright on your pet?

    We've heard plenty about Intellectual Property (IP), but what about Physical Property (PP)?

    What if somebody cloned you? What legal issues could arise from this?

  52. Cloned pets don't look the same by guttergod · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I recently saw a TV-program about cloning pets. Cloned cats doesn't get the same pattern on the fur as the original. Some of the clones doesn't even get close to the same colour on the fur. In showbiz, shouldn't that make the clone useless?

    --

    Apple built a platform for their ideas, Google built one for everyone's.

    1. Re:Cloned pets don't look the same by KD5YPT · · Score: 1

      It does, but remember we're dealing with executives and producers, and I doubt they have an in-depth understanding into genetic cloning. They "believe" that cloning means the ability to reproduce identical looking thing (plant, animal, etc). However, any scientists dealing with cloning know that later environmental condition might create a different outcome.

      I remember there's a good example somewhere... can't remember where.

      --
      In US, you can easily buy enough major firearms to wipe out your neighbourhood but a few little fireworks are banned.
  53. Re:Pet patents? DNA copyright? by nystagman · · Score: 2, Interesting
    This "do you own yourself" question has actually been an actual, practical problem for over a decade now.

    I'm too lazy to look it up, but there was at least one case of a subject in a research study sueing the researcher for a share of the profits of a genetically engineered treatment/product that was developed from his tissue samples.

    I don't remember what the outcome was, but I suspect that nothing was clarified.

    --
    Theory and practice are the same in theory, but different in practice.
  54. Cloning and Hollywood by Cpach · · Score: 1

    Well the 2 make a great match. I mean hollywood to buy cloning and cloning is such a loved/hated technology. Atleast this can get the ball rolling. Hollywood has so much money behind it that it is also a great test market. We can eventually find out about cloning defects because hollywood is also one of the most watched industries. Well good luck to those who fork over their cash for a new tech. We all know how that goes. Every geek for his own.

    --
    you never know till you try!
  55. obligatory quote by AviLazar · · Score: 1

    "I'll be back"

    --

    I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
  56. More Lame Clone Movies by Sumbody · · Score: 2, Funny

    Another Fiddler on Another Roof
    The Day After the Day After Tomorrow
    Revenge of the Godfather
    The Matrix: Reloaded; Revisited
    The Thing, Yet Again

  57. Re: ..MPAA press release.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is slightly OT, but if a star person was cloned, who would own the copywrite: the cloned star, or the star's estate/family?

  58. Useless Technology by vettemph · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They should be spending their money on promoting the idea of saving sheltered and stray animals. We don't need more puppy mills. We need to save the ones that are going to get killed tomorrow because they shopped at the puppy mill today. Pure breeds with papers should be down played while saving the sheltered should be turned into a status symbol. Hollywood could fuel this change if they wern't such pompus assholes.
    I have an idea, Lets clone Britney so we can put Madonna "down".

    --
    The government which is strong enough to protect you from everything is strong enough to take everything from you.
    1. Re:Useless Technology by KD5YPT · · Score: 1

      There are several problem for this in Hollywood

      1. They need a look alike animal.
      2. The animal need to be trained from a relative young age (harder to train older animals).

      For the above two problem, using sheltered/stray animals might be somewhat impossible, unless they're lucky. And for most part, they don't their next movie depend on whether there's is a look alike puppy in an animal shelter.

      On the other hand, there are already cases where a former sheltered dog became a acting dog for commercial and provide income to support the shelter it came from. Forgot the dog name, but saw it on Discovery a while back.

      --
      In US, you can easily buy enough major firearms to wipe out your neighbourhood but a few little fireworks are banned.
    2. Re:Useless Technology by gaylenek · · Score: 1

      The wise and informed people get pets with good lines and purebred papers from private breeders. These are also people who understand that this pet will be with them for the life of the pet. The impulse, cheap, or uninformed shopper gets their large pet (cat or bigger) from the local pet store, who in turn, often get their stock from a puppy mill. Granted a lot of puppymill pups get purebreed papers because the AKC doesn't enforce individual inspections, as long as the parents are registered, the babies can be registered, just pay the fees.

      Take for instance some breeds of horses (warmbloods and sporthorses come to mind). There are still a handful of breeds that hold individual inspections on all animals that reach adulthood that the owners want to breed. If an individual animal is deemed not up to snuff, the animal is denied adult papers or breeding endorsements, meaning all of its offspring could be unregisterable if it is bred. The owners maybe warned to not breed a failed inspection animal by ways of fines or cancelation of foal papers (meaning the owner of the animal couldn't even say the animal was a purebred).

      My point (if you've stayed this far) is that taking all the $$ used to buy clones and pouring it into pet shelters isn't going to fix the pet shelter problem. Pets that end up in shelters are often purchased buy people who didn't realize that Fido or Fluffy was going to be so big/aggessive/hairy/noisy/smelly/etc... What needs to be changed is the mentatliy that pets are a commidity, not a commitment. Of course, society as a whole is really thinking that everything can be tossed when not wanted.

      --
      When in danger or in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.
  59. Cracked in the back by Dark+Demon · · Score: 0

    Damn.......I'm a clone......someone cracked me through the backdoor.........

  60. Re:Pet patents? DNA copyright? by ShadyG · · Score: 1
    This "do you own yourself" question has actually been an actual, practical problem for over a decade now.


    Alcohol. Drugs. Abortion. Prostitution. It's been a problem for a wee bit more than a decade.
  61. roarrr by Ambient_Developer · · Score: 1

    Siegfried & Roy's Royal White Tigers!!!

  62. Re:Pet patents? DNA copyright? by KD5YPT · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I doubt it... since YOU as a person did not create your pet (I seriously hope you did not genetically splice your pet), you merely own it, you cannot claim intellectual property rights. However, you may sue if they took samples of your pet without consent and develope something out of it. Not sure what the penalty is thou.

    However, if someone clone you without your consent, then you can sue. I remember there's a law somewhere about tissue sample collection. It basically state that for someone to acquire your tissue, they must have your consent and inform you of the purpose of the collection before the collection takes place. However, the above does not apply if you "discard" your tissue (like a gauzz to cover a bleeding wound). Then I'm not sure if there's a law to cover that at all. However, in a jury trial I will seriously doubt that anyone will let this sort of thing happen even if there's no basis in law.

    --
    In US, you can easily buy enough major firearms to wipe out your neighbourhood but a few little fireworks are banned.
  63. you forgot one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ET returns

  64. And in further news: by cyberzephyr · · Score: 1

    Nexus 7 replicants have run over the country...

    --
    I'm here for the experience, not the Hyperbole.
  65. Who's Next? by Astreja · · Score: 1

    "Meet the new hoss... Same as the old hoss." ...or perhaps "Baa-Baa O'Riley."

  66. Business Animals? by Butterwaffle+Biff · · Score: 1

    Business Animals? You mean they're going to clone Jack Valenti?

  67. Re:Clone Jenna Jameson (with genetic modifications by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
    5) Get sued by the creators of Stepford Wives. DOH!

    --
    Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
  68. You don't count training costs by dannytaggart · · Score: 1

    You don't count the cost of training the clone to behave like the original. That would run you up well over $50,000. Besides, once you've developed a CGI library of animals, the marginal cost of making an additional CGI "clone" is very low. You say "You'd still need an animal to base movements on" - well, same thing with a clone. You base the CGI animal on the original. Also, CGI technology is getting cheaper and better all the time. It's hard to imagine training costs for clones undergoing the same depreciation.

    --
    PimpMyMazda.com - Crazy mods to a 2002 Mazda Protege DX.
  69. Re:Pet patents? DNA copyright? by nystagman · · Score: 1

    Well, yes, I suppose. However I was referring to "ownership" in an "intellectual property" sense, not a "self-determination" sense. If we are going to discuss that, you forgot what is perhaps the biggest issue: slavery (in all its forms).

    --
    Theory and practice are the same in theory, but different in practice.