Jump to content

Dreamworks To Remake Ghost In A Shell Into A Live Action Movie


A24

Recommended Posts

I'm surprised Spielberg wants to get this made... and yet he doesn't want to direct. What is wrong with him? This sort of film is the kind of challenge he needs right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

I wonder if Spielberg will take over directorial duties like he did with Catch Me if You Can. I'd love to see what he (and John Williams) would do with it. Though I can hardly imagine the backlash from purists bitching that they didn't use the original music.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Is that movies about the lions? The Michael Douglas version was live.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 10 months later...
  • 2 months later...

Michael Pitt Lands Villain Role Opposite Scarlett Johansson in 'Ghost in the Shell'

 

Let's hope he can stay sober long enough to finish filming!

(He got kicked off both Boardwalk Empire and Hannibal due to his drug problems)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Maybe they changed the setting to some American city, like they wanted to do in the infamous Akira movie in development hell.

4 minutes ago, nightscape94 said:

Unfortunately it was unthinkable that they cast a Japanese woman.

 

They're getting better at casting non whites in big movies, as long as they're men. Only one trangression per character allowed, like in Rogue One.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just came across this brighter version of the ScarJo pic

 

 

Ghost In The Shell

 

Not sure why there's 2 different versions or which is officail...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Thor said:

Looks a bit like UNDER THE SKIN, 

 

Would you say that if it was, let's say, Jennifer Lawrence? I don't think so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Alexcremers said:

 

Would you say that if it was, let's say, Jennifer Lawrence? I don't think so.

 

Scarlett is part of it, true, but it was mostly about the look, colour scheme etc. A cross between LUCY (my favourite film that year) and UNDER THE SKIN. Looking forward to seeing a trailer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because

 

they'd have to rip graphically her body apart and end up placing the head in a robot body that looks like a little girl

. But I don't even know if this movie is going to be R rated. 

 

The 1995 film is not the most Hollywood of things, besides the fanservice.

 

Hell, even when the Wachowskis sold The Matrix as a live action Ghost in the Shell, what they actually had in their hands was rather different in tone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw the original film shortly after it came out in the 90s, and then again two years ago in preparation of a "Top 100 films of the 90s" list we were doing for Montages. Still, I can't remember much of the storyline. It's a film that relies more on philosophy communicated through images and sound. As others have said, I'm curious to see how much of that they're going to translate into the live action version; or if they're going to "dumb it down" for more mainstream audiences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎4‎/‎15‎/‎2016 at 6:01 AM, Brónach said:

But I don't even know if this movie is going to be R rated. 

 

It better be.  I feel a PG-13 theatrical with a slightly edgier R cut for blu ray, but nothing near where it should be.

 

I'm incredibly nervous about this movie.  I'm not even a hugely knowledgeable anime guy, but that movie, along with Akira, where very important movie experiences for me as a young teen in the mid-90s.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My guess is that it's just a random PG13 ScarJo vehicle, a generic action film with all white leads and such. It can't be as cool as The Matrix, which is the actual American sci-fi action movie inspired by Ghost in the Shell (and still very different!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was cool in the Matrix. It's weird as hell in Ghost in the Shell. The thing is (not suddenly) that they've managed for it to be bad to have an essentially non-white cast in a Hollywood movie, because they've built a weird loop that doesn't allow, in this case, for the creation of Asian movie stars. Specifically the loop affects non-white women. In that area, Pacific Rim called a lot my attention, but generally they only allow for a single trangression per character. Which is why "okay, you can have a woman as the lead of Rogue One, but only if she's white, and you can have people of color in Rogue One, as long as they're men".

 

Don't get me wrong. It's not like I watch Master and Commander and say "they should be non white women!". Context is important. The sociocultural context of a film and its source material is important, and the subtle ideas sci-fi and blockbuster movies transmit to a massive audience by doing often simple choices also are.

 

This probably also ties in with the topic of white audiences constantly reading Japanese anime characters as white.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hollywood generally caters to a western, white audience. And mostly male.

 

If ethnic people have an issue with they they should maybe look at other things rather then wining about it. And enjoy the relative freedom they have been granted!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What does "ethnic people" even mean?

 

Also it seems to me obvious that Hollywood is starting to cater very slowly to more people than that, for commercial reasons. What's interesting is how they do it, how they juggle the thing.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But isn't "ethnic" a cultural label, referring to language, religion, and so on?

 

I think what made me annoyed about this movie were the reports they were experimenting with digital tricks to make white actors look Japanese. I don't know how true was that, but it was hilarious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Brónach said:

But isn't "ethnic" a cultural label, referring to language, religion, and so on?

 

It can be. Depending on context.

1 minute ago, Brónach said:

 

I think what made me annoyed about this movie were the reports they were experimenting with digital tricks to make white actors look Japanese. I don't know how true was that, but it was hilarious.

 

That is an interesting idea actually. 

Of course Sean Connery was made to look Japanese back in 67, but it didn't look very convincing.

 

CGI might solve the problem though that for some reason its no longer acceptable for white actors to play non-white roles. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

 

It can be. Depending on context.

 

I see them using "PoC" as a generic label, but it's odd to me to say " a PoC", and sometimes they totally blur and hide which PoC they should be talking about specifically...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

CGI might solve the problem though that for some reason its no longer acceptable for white actors to play non-white roles. 

 

I have a better looking, cheaper idea!

 

Seriously... the "acceptable" thing... the world changes. Whatever things happened to be 50 years ago, they'd not necesarily be the best or cooler ones, and also not whatever things happen to be now. And it never changes in a straight line on a topic, it goes back and forth, and completely changes somewhere and nothing somewhere else...

 

One direction I would like to see is more adult mid-size, risky genre movies, instead of megafranchises who annoy everyone by wanting to please.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.