So, Ghost in the Shell seems to be pretty good

[MatParker116]

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/ghost_in_the_shell_2017/

Sitting at a 71 so far, so far the concencus seems to be some story issues but a masterpiece in terms of visuals. Looking forward to seeing it. ScarJo sounds good according to the Telegraph:

Purists may not want to hear it, but she?s ideal at the conceptual side of the role. The unusual disconnect between Johansson?s intelligence and her coolly dispassionate looks has been exploited before, most brilliantly in Jonathan Glazer?s Under the Skin. Here she is both ghost and shell ? a pair of soulful eyes, welling with memory and confusion, stranded inside a gorgeously supple action figure.

Well done to all involved.

 

[maninahat]

I'm disappointed to hear that the story is going to be a unimpressive, but I heard it will be a pretty movie and I'll definitely give it a watch. Or just watch Under the Skin again.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Saw it yesterday. ScarJo's great in it. Also Kitano, Pitt and the guy that plays Batou.

I'm disappointed to hear that the story is going to be a unimpressive, but I heard it will be a pretty movie and I'll definitely give it a watch. Or just watch Under the Skin again.

It's pretty much a remake of the 1995 version.

 

[Scarytown_v1legacy]

I.....was not expecting this. With the late review embargo I figured it was going to dive into the sub 30 ratings. It's still early, but at least now I won't have Dragonball Evolution flashbacks of never getting my 2 hours+money back.

 

[Bob_McMillan]

Interesting. I may watch it now, if only for ScarJo's sweet bod

 

[Zhukov]

It's pretty much a remake of the 1995 version.

Wait... really?

Because the previews and whatnot that I've seen seemed to be suggesting a bunch of iconic scenes but a very different plot.

Not that I'm complaining, I'm willing to give this movie a chance and besides, the plot of the 1995 GITS was a bit of a mess. However it did seem like they were stamping a somewhat boilerplate plot onto it.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

It's pretty much a remake of the 1995 version.

Wait... really?

Because the previews and whatnot that I've seen seemed to be suggesting a bunch of iconic scenes but a very different plot.

Not that I'm complaining, I'm willing to give this movie a chance and besides, the plot of the 1995 GITS was a bit of a mess. However it did seem like they were stamping a somewhat boilerplate plot onto it.

I've only seen the 1995 film so I don't know how much it borrows from the show. Except:

Spoiler

Kuze from SAC takes the Puppeteer's role.

As far as I can tell it's a retelling of the 1995 version, just with some scenes out of order, a bunch of action filler and a more classical resolution.

 

[Scarim Coral]

As ironic as it sound (I say I would see it if it got good reviews), I'm not watching it only cos the local cinema here times are very inconvient for me right now.

 

[Mister K]

So it's basically a shell, but without a ghost?

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

So it's basically a shell, but without a ghost?

Hello, the title of every review.

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

I'm disappointed to hear that the story is going to be a unimpressive

The story of the original movie wasn't that impressive. An A.I fuses his intelligence with a human(ish)? As ideas go it's not unoriginal, but it's not exactly edge of the seat storytelling either. Maybe if they dropped all the philosophy subtext they kept having the main characters ramble on about, the main story could have been developed in to something truly engaging.

 

[MrBoBo]

So basically, it's an inferior movie to the original. Which... didn't need made. At all.

 

[Redryhno]

So basically, it's an inferior movie to the original. Which... didn't need made. At all.

To be fair, it was an attempt at introducing the mainstream west to the original materials. Which I don't think is that bad of a thing. I mean, Edge of Tomorrow was a pretty decent reskinning of AYNiK and it got people interested in the managa and led them to other things. Pacific Rim gave people a reason to not feel as uncomfortable talking about Eva(though I hope that it led people to better franchises and shows). Hell, even the new Power Rangers has started people asking about Sentai and Kamen Rider.

I mean, 2 successes(personal opinion) out of 4 attempts at the west to recreate them aren't all that bad. Even Oldboy led people to the Korean adaptation which led them to the original.

Still wished they'd been able to find literally anyone but Johannssen though, girl's pretty enough, but she can't act worth shit, and the Major needs someone that can do more than the detached lonely girl look.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

So, can anyone who's seen it confirm some info for me

Spoiler

is she actually the brain of a Japanese woman in scarjo's body and does the movie end with her standing over her Japanese body's grave hugging her Japanese mom

Yup.

Spoiler

The name of the Japanese woman is also revealed at the very end to be Motoko Kusanagi. ScarJo's Major is actually named "Mira Killian".

 

[MrBoBo]

So basically, it's an inferior movie to the original. Which... didn't need made. At all.

To be fair, it was an attempt at introducing the mainstream west to the original materials. Which I don't think is that bad of a thing. I mean, Edge of Tomorrow was a pretty decent reskinning of AYNiK and it got people interested in the managa and led them to other things. Pacific Rim gave people a reason to not feel as uncomfortable talking about Eva(though I hope that it led people to better franchises and shows). Hell, even the new Power Rangers has started people asking about Sentai and Kamen Rider.

I mean, 2 successes(personal opinion) out of 4 attempts at the west to recreate them aren't all that bad. Even Oldboy led people to the Korean adaptation which led them to the original.

Still wished they'd been able to find literally anyone but Johannssen though, girl's pretty enough, but she can't act worth shit, and the Major needs someone that can do more than the detached lonely girl look.

I'm not against remakes if A) It's better than the original and B) It does it's own thing

"The Fly" and "The Thing" come to mind.


Stuff like this, Total Recall, Robocop e.t.c... they are inferior and cynically made. I can see from the trailer it has no nudity or blood because lowering the age rating will bring in more money, or at least that's how they perceive it.

If the original is good and still holds up then there is literally no point to these existing beyond some Hollywood chump getting some swag bags.

 

[Redryhno]

I'm not against remakes if A) It's better than the original and B) It does it's own thing

"The Fly" and "The Thing" come to mind.


Stuff like this, Total Recall, Robocop e.t.c... they are inferior and cynically made. I can see from the trailer it has no nudity or blood because lowering the age rating will bring in more money, or at least that's how they perceive it.

If the original is good and still holds up then there is literally no point to these existing beyond some Hollywood chump getting some swag bags.

Except it's not a remake. It's an adaptation. The movie is a reintroduction to the franchise for western audiences that weren't interested in it(or just weren't into anime/manga at the time) when it came out almost 30 years ago.

Those things you're talking about actually are remakes, they're Hollywood movies originally made in the west, this is a Hollywood movie that is originally from Japan. It's an adaptation. There's a difference and acting like there's not beyond people seeing money(something that is done with pretty much everything Hollywood) is willful ignorance at best.

 

[MrBoBo]

I'm not against remakes if A) It's better than the original and B) It does it's own thing

"The Fly" and "The Thing" come to mind.


Stuff like this, Total Recall, Robocop e.t.c... they are inferior and cynically made. I can see from the trailer it has no nudity or blood because lowering the age rating will bring in more money, or at least that's how they perceive it.

If the original is good and still holds up then there is literally no point to these existing beyond some Hollywood chump getting some swag bags.

Except it's not a remake. It's an adaptation. The movie is a reintroduction to the franchise for western audiences that weren't interested in it(or just weren't into anime/manga at the time) when it came out almost 30 years ago.

Those things you're talking about actually are remakes, they're Hollywood movies originally made in the west, this is a Hollywood movie that is originally from Japan. It's an adaptation. There's a difference and acting like there's not beyond people seeing money(something that is done with pretty much everything Hollywood) is willful ignorance at best.

Is it as good as the original? No.
Does it have any valid reason to exist other than making easy money? No.
Does it being deemed a remake or adaption change any of this? No.

 

[McElroy]

Hey. I might actually look into an excuse to go see it now.
Edit: most praise seems half-assed. Most likely a pass for me.

 

[maninahat]

I'm disappointed to hear that the story is going to be a unimpressive

The story of the original movie wasn't that impressive. An A.I fuses his intelligence with a human(ish)? As ideas go it's not unoriginal, but it's not exactly edge of the seat storytelling either. Maybe if they dropped all the philosophy subtext they kept having the main characters ramble on about, the main story could have been developed in to something truly engaging.

That's true, but then again that was 1995, and we've had even more derivatives since then - to not do something fresh with the story is a big mistake.