Ghost in the Shell (Teaser)

[cmad1977]

Big yawn.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Madlefty]

Few people care about diversity.

Her role as Black Widow and Lucy in Lucy probably convinved the producers she is viable as an action star and draw crowds to an sci-fi action flick by herself. Lucy, a sci-fi action flick staring Johansson, made 463 million dollars world wide on a 40 million budget. I'm pretty sure producers want to recreate that success with GitS. Plus she can act, is pretty and is famous.

Young directors with little experience handling big projects is the trend now. Some are successful (Guardians of the Galaxy) others less so (Fantastic Four). Snow White and the Hunstman focused a lot on estehtics, so he does seem like a good fit for GitS. The teasers tell us he doesn't disappoint on that front.

Quote. Scarlett seems to be not so similar to the original character, but maybe she's the right choice for revenue purposes

 

[Ryujin]

Few people care about diversity.

Her role as Black Widow and Lucy in Lucy probably convinved the producers she is viable as an action star and draw crowds to an sci-fi action flick by herself. Lucy, a sci-fi action flick staring Johansson, made 463 million dollars world wide on a 40 million budget. I'm pretty sure producers want to recreate that success with GitS. Plus she can act, is pretty and is famous.

Young directors with little experience handling big projects is the trend now. Some are successful (Guardians of the Galaxy) others less so (Fantastic Four). Snow White and the Hunstman focused a lot on estehtics, so he does seem like a good fit for GitS. The teasers tell us he doesn't disappoint on that front.

I like that Hollywood is at least trying something new, by looking for fresh eyes on how to present a story to the audience. Unfortunately "Fantastic Four" wasn't one of those. They didn't trust the director they chose and tossed him out on his ear (after which he had a meltdown). Obviously this is pure speculation but based on what has been released about Trank's vision it would have done better than the third act debacle that the producers hastily threw together, in place of the original scripting.

 

[Dualazi]

The fact that this is even being made depresses me, and the trailers have done nothing to alleviate that feeling. The original GitS movie was a masterpiece, still is, and was one of the defining films of 90's anime. I also hold zero faith that Hollywood idiots won't butcher key elements of the plot, like they've done with All You Need is Kill, and any number of book franchises warped through its lens.

My one dear hope is that this bombs spectacularly so they don't attempt anything else anime-related for a while.

 

[Imaculata]

The fact that this is even being made depresses me, and the trailers have done nothing to alleviate that feeling. The original GitS movie was a masterpiece, still is, and was one of the defining films of 90's anime.

Agreed. It is a master piece.

I also hold zero faith that Hollywood idiots won't butcher key elements of the plot, like they've done with All You Need is Kill, and any number of book franchises warped through its lens.

Sadly, Hollywood has a VERY poor record when it comes to live-action adaptions of anime. So I echo that lack of faith. Despite that I like Johansson as an actress.

My one dear hope is that this bombs spectacularly so they don't attempt anything else anime-related for a while.

If the final product is as bad as probably many of us dread, then it should bomb spectacularly. There should be a huge backlash if they mess this up. I hope there is.

But lets hope that they don't mess this up.

 

[Kramodlog]

I like that Hollywood is at least trying something new, by looking for fresh eyes on how to present a story to the audience. Unfortunately "Fantastic Four" wasn't one of those. They didn't trust the director they chose and tossed him out on his ear (after which he had a meltdown). Obviously this is pure speculation but based on what has been released about Trank's vision it would have done better than the third act debacle that the producers hastily threw together, in place of the original scripting.

And it isn't a sequel. For all its problems, I hope this production is a financial success cause I want some new(ish)* stories.

*GitS isn't that new, I know.

 

[Joker]

Allow me to qualify my following thoughts by saying that I am extremely biased.

Pardon the cliché, but when I saw the original movie for the first time, it blew my mind. This film defined the genre for me. Heck, it defined movies for me.
Every movie I've seen since has been held up to this one to see how close they came to challenging and entertaining me as a viewer.

The original is perfect. I don't think my bias is showing in that description. It has no superfluous scenes. It has no sharp edges. It is art, frame by frame.

So, this live-action version is going to come out and I'm a little wary.

I don't care that they cast a white actor to play the Major. She's a full body cyborg, it can be rationalized. While I don't rate Scarlett as an actor, I'm sure she'll do an adequate job with what she's given.
But I'll echo what has been said before: She's too human. The Major is suppose to show very little emotion.

I suppose my main concern is that the, albeit complex, themes of the original will be dealt with in a very hamfisted way. I am not confident that a Hollywood movie with a high-profile actor can deliver on that front and that we'll get some Matrix-esque action-fest instead.

Furthermore, I don't really like what I've seen in the teasers. MarkB mentioned that the cityscape works better in the live version. I see it differently. The contrast in the original makes it look like we're viewing it from inside someone's head. The window has a digital quality to it to build up the theme of reality vs. simulated reality. In the live-action version, the background blends in with the foreground, putting the focus on the Major and the Matrix plug she pulls from her brain. Maybe that's something that still needs to be adjusted in post.

I disagree with Goldomark's assessment that GitS is more about aesthetics than it is about character or plot. The whole movie is the Major trying to figure out who she is.

Also, I'm worried about these teaser shorts. I've had bad experiences with movies that put out a lot of extra content before a movie comes out. Prometheus did it, Suicide Squad as well. I don't know if I'm confirming my own bias here but movies that add a lot of material before it comes out generally leave me with a bad experience.

An on a last, optimistic note. If anything, I hope this movie points new audiences towards the original and the series.

 

[Imaculata]

MarkB mentioned that the cityscape works better in the live version. I see it differently. The contrast in the original makes it look like we're viewing it from inside someone's head. The window has a digital quality to it to build up the theme of reality vs. simulated reality. In the live-action version, the background blends in with the foreground, putting the focus on the Major and the Matrix plug she pulls from her brain. Maybe that's something that still needs to be adjusted in post.

Further more, the animated movie was not trying to portray a futuristic city like we are used to seeing in sci-fi movies. MarkB said that the cityscape in the animated movie looks too mundane... well that was the point of the movie.

The world of Ghost in the Shell, with all its technological advances, looks like a dilapidated version of the world of today. Humans are becoming more and more less human, while the world around them decays. It looks depressing and old. This is what the animated movie was all about. You won't see flying cars all over the place in Ghost in the Shell.

Take this scene for example:

[video=youtube;z2mXrndt1ZI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2mXrndt1ZI[/video]

Yes, they have robots, hi-tech weapons, optical camouflage, and digital communication through their brains. They even have cybernetic augmentations. But every day life looks very familiar. The city looks old and used up, and does not look hi-tech at all. Ghost in the Shell is supposed to look that way. It's not supposed to look futuristic. People still sell their fruit and vegetables at ordinary markets, while surrounded by decaying skyscrapers and neon signs, much like in Bladerunner.

This is especially obvious here.

 

[Joker]

Exactly. One of the things that interested me about the movies is that the world of the near future in GitS seems plausible. There wasn't such a giant leap forward in technology and more importantly, not one in society. We see the struggles and conflicts arising from where old meets new. Where the new is actually a level above human interaction.
The details are important. We see the same social and political interactions in the future as we see now. This makes it more compelling for me.

 

[Jester David]

Meanwhile, while I like the anime, I much preferred the original source manga. I found the anime needlessly compressed multiple stories and lacked some of the whimsy and wonder, replacing it pretension, over-seriousness, and T&A.

The TV series they did, Stand Alone Complex, was pretty solid. And interesting early look at meme culture.

But between the original manga, first anime, Innocence, SAC, Rise, the couple manga sequels and more there's a *lot* of GitS and a lot of people doing their own take on the characters. This movie has just as much right to the series. Happy to see a live action one, which could be cool.

The teasers are doing their job: teasing. Too often teasers are just short trailers. Teasers are almost an announcement. Getting people aware the movie is a thing.This does that.