Forum - View topicNEWS: Live-Action Ghost in the Shell Film Teased in 3 Videos With Scarlett Johansson
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Alan45
 Village Elder Posts: 9934 Location: Virginia |
|
|||||||||||||
|
You are very likely right, it will not be a "faithful" adaptation. They are not making this for fans of the franchise. While I'm sure they would like to get some positive reactions from existing fans, the film is being made to appeal to the general public. If every GITS fan in the country went to see the film, as long as it doesn't appeal to the general movie going public it will be a financial failure.
You would get a faithful live action adaptation only if it was made in Japan with a Japanese cast and crew. Even in those circumstances the director is likely to take liberties. As far as that goes, even the first anime movie deviates significantly from the manga and the second goes off into never never land. If you have ever read a book on which a US movie was made you will realize that the film industry seldom even tries to be faithful to the source media. They take the basic concept and go with that and sometimes even that is changed beyond recognition. Since the people making the live action GITS claim to be fans and have apparently at least watched the prior anime, this is likely to be more like the original than not. Regardless it doesn't matter. If this is a significant success it may help the overall franchise. If it fails it will not hurt the anime version. It is not as though Funimation quit selling Dragon Ball anime because the live action movie failed. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
BadNewsBlues
Posts: 6198 |
|
|||||||||||||
You can have a multitude of bad/ignored movies under your belt that in itself doesn't make you a bad actor or unbankable. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
relyat08
 Posts: 4125 Location: Northern Virginia |
|
|||||||||||||
And people who have lived even longer know that nothing ever stays the same forever. You don't know definitively that this is going to be bad. Saying otherwise is just arrogance. It might be awful, it might not be. You can't know for sure until you see it. Also, being faithful isn't inherently better. Edge of Tomorrow is a pretty loose adaptation and that was still a decent film, and a box office success. Following the source material perfectly is not an automatic positive point toward an adaptation in any way. The movie has to stand on its own, first and foremost. Taking liberties with the source material is often a good thing. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
Gatherum
 Posts: 773 Location: Aurora CO |
|
|||||||||||||
So? A good long while ago, I saw a clip from the first live-action Death Note film. Now, to be upfront, I never saw the whole film, and have no idea how successful it was, critically or commercially. But what I did see was this: The clip covered what I believed was the first introduction of Ryuk to Light, followed by the bus scene in which Light manipulates a gunman to touch a piece of the Death Note so that the latter would see Ryuk and freak out. Was it a terrible scene? No. But was it unique? Absolutely not, because the scene was almost a frame-by-frame, word-for-word recreation of the same scene in the anime. Ryuk himself was this cheap, clay-looking CGI representation of his two-dimensional counterpart which otherwise exhibited no other design changes. Putting aside the fact that he looked stupidly out-of-place compared to the rest of the props and people in the film, it begs a question: What is the point of watching a remake or adaptation of something that changes nothing except the visual medium in which it presented? I saw the same scene, executed far better in the anime. What compulsion do I have to watch this newer, live-action version that offers nothing new except the cheap novelty (in this case) of live-action? Again, I never saw the whole film, but that really isn't the point; I'm just using that scene as an example. I never understood this about fans--comic book fans especially. They get all butthurt over such things as, say, changes made to the costume of Superman for Man of Steel, both to differentiate it from that seen in Superman Returns, and to avoid the inevitable camp of a grown man wearing what looks like a red speedo over blue tights in a live-action setting. That film had other problems, but this surely was not one of them. I'm thankful that Hollywood filmmakers don't cater to those fans, because they don't really understand the implications of their complaints, and film adaptations would be boring as hell, if not damn stupid-looking, if they were heeded. But I digress; you can cry about the fact that this film adaptation of Ghost in the Shell will not be "faithful", but what do you mean by that? Are you really chomping at the bit for a literal recreation of the 1995 animated film in live-action form? What would be the point? You might as well just watch the 1995 animated film. Or (re-)read the manga. And what about Stand Alone Complex? Do we criticize it for deviating from Mamoru Oshii's manga--aesthetically, narratively, and thematically? Are the first and second seasons weaker because they concern "The Laughing Man" and "Hideo Kuze" (respectively) instead of "The Puppeteer"? American localization of anime has had a turbulent history, and so has Hollywood when it comes to adapting source material (we can beat the dead horse of Dragonball Evolution for an easy example), but believe it or not, a fair chunk of changes made to such properties in the transition to a new medium are made out of necessity, whether it be to keep the finished product within the boundaries of acceptable length, to make it appeal aesthetically, due to budget constraints (unfortunately), or to downright make it unique--its own entry that stands by itself. I'm looking forward to this film because it will be different. I just hope that it's a good kind of different--which is pretty much impossible to measure objectively. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
casualfan
Posts: 333 |
|
|||||||||||||
|
I will judge the movie based on the plot and execution, which is a heck of a lot more significant than the ethnicity accuracy bs. Hopefully it'll be an entertaining one.
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
Lord Oink
Posts: 876 |
|
|||||||||||||
Kind of my point. I've seen Hollywood ruin many adaptions. Books, comics, video games, cartoons. Fans who have had these adaptions already know what to expect, so you do not have to wait til the movie comes out to judge it. Maybe it's because I'm an anime fan, but "not making it for fans of the franchise" seems ridiculous. Imagine if they made a new adaption of Hunter x Hunter, or the director of One Piece Gold came out and said "Oh, by the way, this anime isn't for fans of the franchise" It makes no sense. Anime is the prime example of aiming adaptions at fans of the source material.
You kind of just explained why live action adaptions are pointless, even Japanese ones. The cheap novelty of live-action is because America doesnt take animation seriously. That's the only reason. Same reason Netflix Note exists despite already having a perfect anime adaption. Comic fans have it just as bad. I dropped comics a long time ago, but I still wince at things like Spider-Man Homecoming. I cringed when Scott Pilgrim came out, then when I saw the actually faithful 2D sidescrolling video game I said "Why wasn't it like this?" Animation stigma, I know. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
Primus
 Posts: 2801 Location: Toronto |
|
|||||||||||||
I'm sure Scarlett has been in some genuine flops over her career, but your examples are pretty poor. The Island came out in 2005, well before she'd become a household name, and the film in question was Michael Bay's attempt at doing something smarter, which is not what audiences want from him. Under The Skin was never meant to be a big film. It got an extremely limited release in most markets. In North America, it only played in 176 theatres. For comparison, Ghost in the Shell will likely open in 2500+. You're probably right in saying that she isn't a huge draw for the Marvel movies. However, Paramount was likely looking at her presence in those films, as well as the fact that Lucy, a film that pretty much rested on her, did $463 million off of a $40 million budget, and figured she'd have some boxoffice clout. Paramount has really struggled over the last few years, with multiple high profile flops (TMNT: Out of the Shadows, Star Trek: Beyond, Ben-Hur, Terminator: Genisys, etc.) probably making them pretty risk adverse. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
BadNewsBlues
Posts: 6198 |
|
|||||||||||||
If you're judging a prospective work without actually bothering to experience it you're essentially complaining about something you never seen before, which isn't necessarily a good thing.
Given how picky and entitled the fans can be that's actually not as ridiculous as it sounds. It's also somewhat incorrect no one makes an adaptation of something with the intent of making it only for non fans. You really think films like Lord Of The Rings or Spider-Man were made only for people unfamiliar with the books?
This despite the fact that you have a large number of people who watch anime adaptations but may have never read the original source material of what the anime may be adapted from....which includes manga, video games, and even light novels (which aren't always translated into english).
If this were the case animation would be non existent in this country and studios like Disney wouldn't ever make animated films at all. We'd also stop seeing Warner Bros stop making more and more new straight to dvd features.
If it's perfect to you why is an issue that netflix is making an adaptation you're under no obligation to watch? And when it has no bearing on it either.
You wince at the mere concept of it? because almost nothing of the movie itself has been shown off at this point.
There's no stigma against animation. And even then why in the world would you want to essentially watch an animated version of a comic book? You'd essentially be watching a motion comic. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
0nsen
 Posts: 256 |
|
|||||||||||||
|
The entire point is to not watch this. If you watch it and didn't like it, you still made them money. Vote with your wallet and ignore this movie. Complaining after the fact won't hurt them financially and anime adaptations have to hurt them, so they finally stop making them.
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
Alan45
Village Elder Posts: 9934 Location: Virginia |
|
|||||||||||||
|
@Lord Oink
My point is that if you think that all US film adaptations are poor why do you even care? Complaining, especially when you haven't seen the movie, isn't going to change things. All you need to do is ignore the entire thing. For the record, some really good movies have been made on very loose adaptations of the source material. Unless you think there is no such thing as a good movie. I didn't say that the movie version was intended to upset the fans, only that it could not be made solely for the fans. There are not enough GITS fans in the US to make the movie a success. I should point out that most anime adaptations of manga or light novels is not intended for existing fans of the series. For the most part it is intended as an advertisement to win new fans to the source material. This very commercial reason is why most anime doesn't stray to far from the original. I find your complaints about the faithfulness of an adaptation to be a bit ironic with regard to Ghost in the Shell. The original manga has been adapted four times and none of the adaptations have been particularly faithful to the original manga. SAC came closest but contains a lot of what in another series would be considered filler. Just which version would you like it to be faithful to? Onsen wrote:
Nonsense. If failure of movies based on anime would stop Hollywood from making adaptations of anime they would have given up long since. In any case, what the fans of the original do will have no effect on the success or failure of the movie. If it makes it with the general public it will be a success. If only the fans of the original like it, it will fail. What difference does it make that they are making a live action adaptation of anime? The rights holders get money for it, most likely up front. They also get publicity for the original even if the assessment is that the original is better. If it is a bad movie, it will fade from memory shortly and the original anime will still be there for the faithful to watch. I fail to see a down side. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
0nsen
Posts: 256 |
|
|||||||||||||
|
You're rationalizing this too much. There's one huge problem and that is that this movie will come into existence. It can never be undone. And then, some years down the line you talk to people. "Hey, do you know Gits?" - "Yeah, that's this shitty movie from awhile ago." - "But it's also..." - "Shit. I'm telling you, it's a huge pile of shit. Let's talk about something else."
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
Cptn_Taylor
Posts: 925 |
|
|||||||||||||
This is a bogus argument. It also happens with anime. The amount of shit anime is staggering and yet it can't be undone. So we live with it. Sometimes, one shit anime is remade years down the line and it ends up being good. Sometimes it ends up being as shit or shittier than the original. We live with it and move on. In other terms, if you're really terrified of the quality of this film and what it will entail for the original anime (which one by the way, the oshii film, the masume shirow original manga, the anime reimagining etc...), you should be absolutely terrified every time some Japanese studio puts out an anime. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
Alan45
Village Elder Posts: 9934 Location: Virginia |
|
|||||||||||||
|
@0nsen
You are kind of grasping at straws here. If you are talking with a fellow anime fan they will either know what you are talking about or will ask you to specify. If you are talking to a non anime fan they will not be familiar with the anime version and will have to have it explained anyway. Then you can force them to watch "the real thing" which they will not like because it is animated. If the movie is as bad as you expect it will fail because no one in the general public will bother to watch it. That is why bad movies disappear from memory. Where you might have a problem is if it is very popular. Then non anime fans will remember only the movie version. Of course, they weren't going to watch the anime version anyway so it doesn't matter. No anime fan who has watched any version of GITS is going to forget its existence just because a live action movie came out. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
Gatherum
Posts: 773 Location: Aurora CO |
|
|||||||||||||
You must be friends with some impatient-ass people who aren't worth talking to about anything. Just sayin': find some people in your life who will listen to you. It's valuable. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
Boomer
|
|
|||||||||||||
I couldn't agree more. But don't worry, after GITS, James Cameron will be moving on to another anime to bastardize with Battle Angel Alita on the horizon. At least that title is obscure enough for all but hardcore anime fans not to notice. I still shudder at the the thought nonetheless. |
||||||||||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group