That Hollywood live-action Ghost in the Shell filum.

[Glebe]

Couldn't find the old thread (wasn't there an old thread?)... anyway, first pic. Except for not-being Japanese, I reckon Johansson looks the part.

What do you think?

[greenman]

You had your typical "professional geeks" flying into a rage about a western casting but really you look at the original film and indeed the nature of the character and that's not really an issue. Its a pretty obvious casting in that she's played action roles and characters with a good deal of self doubt/existential angst.

My worry would be more that its being directed by the guy who did Snow White and the Huntsman, granted I'm just going from reputation there not having seen it and I spose did at least look visually somewhat interesting from the trailers.

[popcorn]

There's been a lot of talk about the casting of a white actress in the role. Here's some interesting Twitter chats I saw on the matter, from @JonTsuei:

I've been seeing a lot of defenses for the ScarJo casting that seem to lack a nuanced understanding of a Ghost In The Shell as a story.

The manga came out in 1989, the first film 1995. An era when Japan was considered the world leader in technology. Everything hot in that era came out of Japan. Cars, video games, walkmans, all of that. Japan was setting a standard. This is a country that went from poised to conquer to the Pacific to forcibly disarmed. They poured their resources into their economy. And as a country that was unable to defend themselves, but was a world leader in tech, it created a relationship to tech that is unique. Ghost In The Shell plays off all of these themes. It is inherently a Japanese story, not a universal one.

This casting is not only the erasure of Asian faces but a removal of the story from its core themes. You can "Westernize" the story if you want, but at that point it is no longer Ghost In The Shell because the story is simply not Western. Understand that media from Asia holds a dear place in the hearts of many Asians in the west, simply because western media doesn't show us. Ghost In The Shell, while just one film, is a pillar in Asian media. It's not simply a scifi thriller. Not to me, not to many others.

Respect the work for what it is and don't bastardize it into what you want it to be.

I thought this was an interesting take. I know exactly what he means about it being tied to a particular time and place - an era when Japan was producing oceans of fascinating, exciting media and technology. I remember that time fondly, when I'd buy games magazines in the 90s and marvel at the far-out stuff Japan was producing.

He says a couple of things I question, though. "It is inherently a Japanese story, not a universal one." I think that's true, but unremarkably so. Does a "universal" story really exist? I mean, the Marvel superhero stories are credibly American stories, not universal stories, I think. Any story can be molded and remolded into any other number of things, and why not? He says "You can "Westernize" the story if you want, but at that point it is no longer Ghost In The Shell because the story is simply not Western." OK, sure; but you could say the same thing of any adaptation ever. You're always creating something new. "Respect the work for what it is and don't bastardize it into what you want it to be." Why are we happy to "bastardize" (aka "adapt" or "reshape") some works but not others?

The answer is: "Ghost In The Shell, while just one film, is a pillar in Asian media." Putting aside the fact that Ghost in the Shell is not "just one film" but actually a large media franchise of comics, films, games, TV series and so on... as I understand it - and I could be wrong - the first Ghost in the Shell film actually found a bigger audience in the west than it did in Japan. It became a cult hit exactly because of its exciting Japanese-ness to western eyes. So I think it's fair to say it's a pillar of Asian media, but it might be a pillar that only really exists in the context of western media, as weird as that sounds. I'm not exactly sure what my point is there, though...

I do think it's a shame the actress isn't Asian. But my preference for greater diversity in popular culture comes mainly from selfish boredom, rather than some grander political ideal. It would have been cool to have an Asian actress because it would have been different.

[greenman]

If theres one thing Pacific Rim proved its that casting Rinko Kikuchi in a western version of Japanese films will not stop it becoming a standard westernised blockbuster. She just comes across as a Japanese actress plucked out of the air for having some Hollywood presense to me, can't really see her working in that role.

Ironically what I think you point out isn't that Ghost in the Shell's story is inherently Japanese but actually that Japan is now a much less obvious setting for such a story having lost its technological pre eminence and if anything comes across as a bit of a holdout to the rise of the internet.

[popcorn]

It's pretty funny that Scarlett Johansson is apparently still going to be playing a character called Motoko Kusanagi. According to Wikipedia.

[BlodwynPig]

Surely there are other actresses out there. She's in everything that features black tight fitting clothing

[greenman]

It's pretty funny that Scarlett Johansson is apparently still going to be playing a character called Motoko Kusanagi. According to Wikipedia.

Even that really doesn't matter, the character is essentially a robot with a brain inside.

[Alberon]

Even that really doesn't matter, the character is essentially a robot with a brain inside.

That's true.

The picture looks good, but then I'm reminded how the lead actress in the live action Aeon Flux looked right, but the film was an utter disaster.

[Blumf]

Is this just going to be a retread of the first film? Because there's so much more they could be playing with from the GitS universe.

The picture looks good, but then I'm reminded how the lead actress in the live action Aeon Flux looked right, but the film was an utter disaster.

Good example, this is what I'll be expecting. Something that just about manages on visuals, but misses the point entirely. (e.g. there's a critique of capitalism running through the GitS stories, not unusual for cyberpunk, I bet they miss that, or at least only hit on it by accidentally copying it over)

My worry would be more that its being directed by the guy who did Snow White and the Huntsman, granted I'm just going from reputation there not having seen it and I spose did at least look visually somewhat interesting from the trailers.

SWatH isn't terrible, no worse than many other fairy tail/fantasy films[nb]better than the utterly soulless 2005 The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe film for example[/nb], but it isn't good either. Certainly worth a lazy punt if you're in an undemanding mood, it does have a lot of good visuals. If only they ran the script by someone who understood folklore and humans.

[greenman]

That's true.

The picture looks good, but then I'm reminded how the lead actress in the live action Aeon Flux looked right, but the film was an utter disaster.

Aeon Flux was always going to be a bit of a disaster as anything close to a mainstream blockbuster I would say given the nature of the original material.

Whilst Ghost in the Shell could suffer that way I actually think another danger is pandering to your "okatu" japanophile audience, the kind of cutesy crap Rinko Kikuchi represented in Pacific Rim that's totally unsuited for Ghost in the Shell.

My main doubt would be whether Disney/Dreamworks has the balls to follow though and turn it into a character study of any depth, if they do than I would say Johanssen  is well suited to that as stuff like Under the Skin and Lucy.

[Paaaaul]

They've already dun a holywood liveaction remake. It's called The Matrix.

[samadriel]

The Matrix ripped off the aesthetic of the film ('green'), but apart from that, it's not very GitS-y.

[popcorn]

Even that really doesn't matter, the character is essentially a robot with a brain inside.

This is a strange rationalisation. Looks matter, especially in, you know, a visual medium. Presumably if they cast a hideous naked 100-year-old man in the role the nerds would object.

edit: right, I misread this exchange entirely and my response makes no sense. Good work me, another classic internet post in the bag.

[greenman]

This is a strange rationalisation. Looks matter, especially in, you know, a visual medium. Presumably if they cast a hideous naked 100-year-old man in the role the nerds would object.

edit: right, I misread this exchange entirely and my response makes no sense. Good work me, another classic internet post in the bag.

Basically the character could previously have been Japanese but now have a non japanese looking robot body.

In terms of the looks that's obviously a larger issue beyond this film or hollywood and the character was always very attractive and indeed wasn't the series criticized for titillation with this? that said I think the film uses the cliché to its advantage very well playing up the loss of individuality the shop mannequin looks have on her.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARTLckN9e7I

You could say the same for the nudity in the film as well that has some purpose beyond titillation.

Again this version could well be dreadful crap but I don't think the casting of Johanssen will have anything to do with that.

[Consignia]

There's certainly a lot to be said for not literally following the source material. There's no need for it use the same location and characters, just take the themes it broad strokes and adapt to what you want to say.

I'm not really looking forward to this despite quite liking the original films. Precisely because it's going to be too slavish to the original material, too in awe of it.

[Spiteface]

Even that really doesn't matter, the character is essentially a robot with a brain inside.

This is why I don't have the "whitewashing" problem others seem to. Also, to me "being Japanese" isn't a defining trait of the Major's character, nor is GitS an overtly Japanese story.

This live-action movie hopefully won't be as underwhelming as ARISE was. I've never dropped a series of anything before, but after parts 1 & 2, I couldn't be arsed with watching the rest. A shame because I love the 90's anime movie, and Stand Alone Complex. I feel like I need to watch Innocence again as a lot of it seemed to go over my head though.

[Alberon]

Not watched ARISE yet. The film better have the Tachikomas in AND get them right.

[Glebe]

Exclusive: 'Ghost in the Shell' Producers Reportedly Tested Visual Effects That Would Make White Actors Appear Asian.

Crikey. Bit dodgy in this day and age, that.

[phantom_power]

They did it in Cloud Atlas.

I don't have a problem with the casting. Would people expect a remake of a French film to have a French cast and be set in French France?

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

[Spiteface]

They did it in Cloud Atlas.

I don't have a problem with the casting. Would people expect a remake of a French film to have a French cast and be set in French France?

I'm offended the Major isn't being played by Gerard Depardieu in this film.

If they're doing some CGI fuckery to make everyone look Asian... then why don't they just go with an Asian cast anyway? That's just weird and surely a waste of time and money.

[popcorn]

I don't have a problem with the casting. Would people expect a remake of a French film to have a French cast and be set in French France?

Not a fair analogy. The argument, whether you agree with it or not, is about representation. French people (whites) do not suffer disproportionate representation in western media; they're white. Meanwhile, in America, mainstream media has a huge bias in favour of white people, disproportionate to the actual demographic of its country, which essentially betrays a preference.

[phantom_power]

I take your point but the reason these films are Americanised is to make them less foreign,  whatever that foreign is. The representation thing is a wider issue that I think is more a problem with films originating in America. There should be more representation of diverse races in standard Holywood fair

[Kelvin]

This is why I don't have the "whitewashing" problem others seem to. Also, to me "being Japanese" isn't a defining trait of the Major's character, nor is GitS an overtly Japanese story.

This was my take on it, too. It's like the discussion about whether Bond should be black, or Link (in Zelda) should be a girl in the new game. Ultimately, the race/sex/sexuality of a character should only be static if that same quality is also central to their character or the themes of the story. If the character in GITS isn't defined by her race (or apparent race[nb]Since she's a cyborg.[/nb]), then changing it shouldn't impact whether the film is a good adaption or not.     

EDIT: I understand the point about representation. I think that's simply a question of marketability, though. They want a big name actress in it, because the series is relatively unknown and won't put enough bums on seats by reputation alone. There isn't a mainstream American-Asian actress with that kind of clout, or mainstream draw.

[Consignia]

Hollywood definitely has a problem with diversity. But it's completely separate to this adaptation, where changes to location can be easily be made.

That said, it would have been interesting to have cast Kusanagi as a black woman instead. It would curb any sort of "white washing" arguments.

[Catalogue Trousers]

There isn't a mainstream American-Asian actress with that kind of clout, or mainstream draw.

Lucy Liu begs to differ...

[Kelvin]

I thought about her, but a) she's not a big (movie) name nowadays, and b) she's not Japanese. 

[Madam Sexchrist]

I am curious to know if the same people (not on CaB) who switched on their pedantic powers and wailed about the PC agenda when The Dark Tower's producers 'unfaithfully' cast Elba as Roland Deschain[nb]and when he was cast as Heimdall[/nb] are amongst the people who are switching off, allowing a looser sense of fidelity to the source material, here and with the casting of Swinton in Doctor Strange.[nb]I'm reading comments that are even praising the choice of ScarJo for being a "strategic marketing plan," writing as if that's 'just the way things are' and we should not try to aim any higher than that, or make any commitment to changing things.[/nb]

If nothing else, it would demonstrate something of the essence of "political incorrectness." I take the points that have been made here in defence of the casting; my grievance is more towards the double standard that appears to be going on elsewhere.[nb]Provided, of course, that the same people who are defending the casting here are the same as those who complained about TTD's, which, to me, does not seem implausible at all.[/nb]

[popcorn]

EDIT: I understand the point about representation. I think that's simply a question of marketability, though. They want a big name actress in it, because the series is relatively unknown and won't put enough bums on seats by reputation alone. There isn't a mainstream American-Asian actress with that kind of clout, or mainstream draw.

This is correct, but it only explains why it happens. It doesn't justify it.

[Consignia]

I'm reading comments that are even praising the choice of ScarJo for being a "strategic marketing plan," writing as if that's 'just the way things are' and we should not try to aim any higher than that, or make any commitment to changing things.

I think this nails the most worrying point about this whole fracas. It's not that an adaptation has cast a white person where the original version used an asian person, if it's displaced from the original setting then actor race can change as well. It's that audience are praising business decisions of big studios and using such reasoning to say anyone other than a white person could take the role. It's a disturbingly conservative mind set, that you can appreciate if not like in the executive's heads, but seeing it in audience is just depressing.

That said, it's annoying to see 3D people being used. It's racist against 2D people.

[Madam Sexchrist]

Agreed. Kind of incidentally, the mentality of the studios (i.e., foreignness, otherness, or that which is little known just doesn't sell) puts me in mind of this exchange between Bowie and MTV's Mark Goodman.

"David Bowie: "Why are there practically no blacks on the network?"

Mark Goodman: "We seem to be doing music that fits into what we want to play on MTV. The company is thinking in terms of narrowcasting."

David Bowie: "There seem to be a lot of black artists making very good videos that I'm surprised aren't being used on MTV."

Mark Goodman: "We have to try and do what we think not only New York and Los Angeles will appreciate, but also Poughkeepsie or the Midwest. Pick some town in the Midwest which would be scared to death by... a string of other black faces, or black music. We have to play music we think an entire country is going to like, and certainly we're a rock and roll station."

David Bowie: "Don't you think it's a frightening predicament to be in?"

Mark Goodman: "Yeah, but no less so here than in radio."

David Bowie: "Don't say, 'Well, it's not me, it's them.' Is it not possible it should be a conviction of the station and of the radio stations to be fair... to make the media more integrated?"

That last point is very important and, if they were prepared to take a risk, to integrate actors who are little-known or unknown to Western audiences, I don't think having such a conviction would harm the studios. There are several occasions where audiences have been shown to adapt to new faces (albeit not in a fully conscious way) as long as the film or TV show or music video they appear in satisfies a certain (indeterminate) level of enjoyment - in fact, it's been shown so many times that I don't know why it even has to be mentioned in this day and age. It puzzles me that studios continue to underestimate themselves, and their own power to influence what sells (as long as they and the directors do their job properly), in this way.