Ghost in the Shell live action movie

[Underseer]

Although Blade Runner is an excellent movie, it fails as an adaptation because it completely reverses the central theme.

The author got freaked out from hearing about Germans who complained about the noise coming from concentration camps. He thought they were monsters and hated the idea that such monsters could pass for human.

And that's what the story is about: the terror of monsters passing for human.

Except the movie made the monsters they good guys. If you understand the original inspiration for the story, then it's like the movie is saying that Nazis didn't get a fair shake from society.

 

[Underseer]

If they aren't going to bother honoring the source material, why pay all that money for they intellectual property in the first place?

a question i've often wondered when it comes to movies, given how utterly random and slap-dash it feels with regards to what properties they faithfully duplicate and which they totally screw up.

i'd imagine that GITS is a case nearly identical to john carter - someone in the process loved the source and passionately fought to sell the idea and somehow got it green-lit, then old white studio executives stuck their sweaty faces in the project and totally pig-fucked the entire thing trying to make it "more appealing to a broader audience."

When I heard that they were going to make Section 9 party of a corporation instead of three government, I started getting worried.

That's not to say that the source material doesn't have sharp criticism of the influence corporations have over the government, but this change just feels incredibly American. While they toned down that aspect, there were plenty of other changes to the story that just felt like something out of a generic American action movie.

 

[LordKiran]

If they aren't going to bother honoring the source material, why pay all that money for they intellectual property in the first place?

The reason that they pay for the intellectual property is because the public is already familiar with it, and they want to translate that familiarity into butts in seats.

We've seen this a thousand times before. If you don't show that you care about what fans like about the source material, this is what happens.

Non-fan: Hey, they made a movie about Panty Ninja Warrior. I heard of that before. I'll ask Ed. Ed knows all about that Panty Ninja Warrior stuff.

Fan: OMG it sucks! It's terrible! Her panties are supposed to be blue, not purple!

Non-fan: well, if that movie sucks, I will spend my hard-earned money on watching Fast and Furious 16: VW Beetles For Justice instead...

If a movie studio wants to buy an intellectual property to get more butts in seats, then great, but if they don't care enough to at least make a pass at pleasing the fans, then they're probably not competent enough nor passionate enough to make a good movie out of said property. Why spend the money on the rights to something if you're not going to put in a modicum of effort in doing what it takes to leverage that intellectual property into greater profits?

A good example of this is I, Robot. If they had just removed all references to Isaac Asimov, changed all the names, and called it an homage to Asimov instead of an adaptation of his work that used the title of one of his most famous stories, then what they would have had was just another fast, funny, and smart action movie typical of a Will Smith movie from that time. I would have been perfectly ok with it. But they had to put Asimov's name on it, and in my opinion, I had no choice but to judge the movie as an adaptation of the story I, Robot, and in that it falls miserably.

I make one exception for Starship Troopers. The director admitted he stropped reading the book after a couple of chapters, and indeed, the movie plays more like a satirization of the book rather than an homage or adaptation (the plot very loosely follows the books plot). However, despite being a huge Heinlein fan, I fucking love that movie.

See there's the rub. I don't ask that a movie necessarily be a faithful adaptation. I just ask that it be a good movie worth my time. This is why I say that if it doesn't measure up to the source material, you might as well just watch the source material.

Personally though if only because of my own political leanings, I kind of like that the movie of a book that advocates for authoritarianism would mock those very ideas.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Which is why you ask around. You have the internet.

But I've tried asking the internet questions I already know the answer to. I find that I need to spend more money, that my penis is too small, that there are MILFS in my area who want my penis, that everything is Obama's fault, unless it's Hillary's or Trump's, and legalizing marijuana will both save and destroy the Free World.

And Muslims want to kill me. But Jesus wants me to kill Muslims.

and that's just for whether you can use red beans in a black-bean-chili recipe.


If I'm looking for casual entertainment, I don't want to have to put in time doing homework to see if I can trust the websites that exist to guide me EITHER to enjoyment on a personal basis or to some other agenda they have, like maybe proving themselves to be awesome.

 

[KeepTalking]

Which is why you ask around. You have the internet.

But I've tried asking the internet questions I already know the answer to. I find that I need to spend more money, that my penis is too small, that there are MILFS in my area who want my penis, that everything is Obama's fault, unless it's Hillary's or Trump's, and legalizing marijuana will both save and destroy the Free World.

And Muslims want to kill me. But Jesus wants me to kill Muslims.

and that's just for whether you can use red beans in a black-bean-chili recipe.


If I'm looking for casual entertainment, I don't want to have to put in time doing homework to see if I can trust the websites that exist to guide me EITHER to enjoyment on a personal basis or to some other agenda they have, like maybe proving themselves to be awesome.

The answer is, if you are interested, go see the movie. No one will be able to tell you whether you will like it or not, they can only provide their experience of the film.

 

[Underseer]

Motoko had tea with her mother.

I don't think anything underscores how clueless the script writers were about the source material than that one scene.

 

[repoman]

I just don't get it, having a producer willing to have a screenwriter get in his face and say "hold on, this is killing the source material - you need to find another way to get this point across" is going to make a better movie and one that does not piss off even the most laid back fans of the source.

You can't make fanatics happy, but the casual fans should be easy to please.

Maybe the give the screenwriter/director a set number of vetoes over the studio/producer. So that the tea with mom scene would be axed with no recourse.

 

[Underseer]

I just don't get it, having a producer willing to have a screenwriter get in his face and say "hold on, this is killing the source material - you need to find another way to get this point across" is going to make a better movie and one that does not piss off even the most laid back fans of the source.

You can't make fanatics happy, but the casual fans should be easy to please.

Maybe the give the screenwriter/director a set number of vetoes over the studio/producer. So that the tea with mom scene would be axed with no recourse.

I'm not sure that would work.

The tea with mom scene was part of a deeper problem.

They added a bunch of Western bullshit about the "power of individuality." She could not become truly powerful until she "found herself" and remained true to who she was. Meeting her mother was but part of that process of "finding her true self."

In the movies and TV shows, Motoko and various other people willingly give up their individual identity in order to become something more than human. This is a very Asian idea, and exactly the opposite of what the live action movie did.

The problem was not adding the tea scene, they problem was adding an Americanized theme about individuality. The tea scene was there to reinforce the added theme. Even the amnesia was added to support the new theme.

The new theme is what didn't belong there.

 

[repoman]

So, how on earth did they get here to be fluent in english with zero japanese accent or general muscle memory mannerisms that japanese (as opposed to americans) have when speaking? I have not seen the film, but is she fluent in Japanese?

At any rate, language skills are deep core and would not be affected by amnesia.

I will see it sometime soon right after I rewatch the original and Innocence, just to wrap this up in my mind.

And at the risk of beating more dead horses, this seems to be the best breakdown of the live action despite of a few rough patches.