Perhaps I grew up in a different era, but it's precisely that same aesthetic which makes me see these landings as futuristic because they align so well with those images.

The ascent into space looks like a massive show of raw power, and in contrast these vertical landings look so graceful and controlled.

> The ascent into space looks like a massive show of raw power, and in contrast these vertical landings look so graceful and controlled.

Personally, I think both are a "massive show of raw power" - both literally and figuratively.

Literally goes without explanation. But what I mean of the word "figuratively" is that it shows our capability as a species to fully harness our intellect, knowledge, and emotions to do this kind of engineering, despite knowing it can all go horribly wrong (especially in the case of manned space flight).

Certainly there are many other drivers to why we do this (profit in the case of SpaceX certainly is a great one), but part of it is also to show ourselves we can push beyond what seemed or seems impossible at times, and make it routine, and eventually both practical and relatively "safe" (always knowing it might never be perfect).

The Space Shuttle was perfectly capable of carrying its main fuel tank into orbit... I always wondered why they didn’t do that as standard, then later connect up all the now empty tanks, pressurise them and hey presto, instant space station, far bigger than the ISS. Such a waste to just drop them.

Nasa offered to take the tanks into orbit if a private company would step up to do something useful with them but nobody ever did.

I was sure for a while that they'd have to revert to using nets to catch the rocket at the final moments of landing.

That is exactly what I thought.