Remakes are a huge part of Hollywood cinema, they have cemented their place as one of the largest contributors to the box office. Along with this they have also bought themselves a reputation for being notoriously shameless loose adaptations of stories previously held dear. Easy to write and even easier to market, the remake is a large-scale shortcut for film distributors. They have a pre-built target audience and recognisable imagery and characters that needn’t be cultivated in production. A teaser poster here, a leaked photo of a costume there and the internet hype machine will market the film for you. Nostalgia is the most important tool in this time of auto playing, subtitled videos on news feeds. People must be convinced that something is worth their time before they even click the link. What better way to provide this than by inserting into it something of which they are already a fan of. Yet it is possible that you could have the next Mad Max Fury Road on your hand, rather than the next Dark Shadows.
Ghost in the Shell is a phenomenally interesting marketing case study. One of the most successful anime films of all time that garnered a cult following due to its look, style and world building. 22 years on Paramount Pictures decided on a live action remake, piggybacking off the name of the original to create a film with only remnants of its look, style and world building. Far from an anime purest myself, I was not the biggest fan of the original, but Ghost in the Shell (2017) was nothing short of miraculous in how it allowed me to appreciate the 1995 version’s uniqueness. The remake demonstrates just how cookie cutter and homogenised an interesting story can become when given the committee treatment of Hollywood. The film retains most of the surface level factors of the original while removing any of the more ‘out there’ ideas put forward by the original.
The film stars Scarlett Johansson in the role as ‘the biggest star that would answer our calls’ playing Major, a cybernetic body hosting the consciousness of a woman. Using this chassis she fights crime along with a plethora of cybernetically enhanced police officers in a futuristic caricature of what can only be implied to be Japan.
There has been much controversy over the choice to cast the white American Johansson in the role of a Japanese law enforcing robot, many people see it as whitewashing of the mainstream media but that is another debate for another time. In terms of the film experience the biggest issue with the casting is that there is no geographical clarity, the film seems to attempt to sidestep the idea that Johansson is out of place by surrounding her with as many different nationalities as possible. While it is possible that this is an attempt to comment on multicultural society in a future world it is far more obvious that is a transparent attempt to cover up the flaw that it would look stupid if Johansson was the only non Asian in the cast. Like trying to correct mistakes with a pen, the heavy-set ink marks don’t hide the mistake, they just make it stand out more.
It all speaks to the consistent thread that runs through Ghost in the Shell like a poisonous gas, and that is incongruousness. Nothing in the film matches with anything else. It is a disjointed film on every level, from its screenplay to its mise-en-scene to its cast. It makes for a confusing, tonally impotent film experience that had me wishing it would hurry up and end fifteen minutes in. The original portrayed a detailed futuristic city filled with neon lights, dirty slums and holographic advertisements. The remake took this concept and ran with it, making every frame of the film so dense with world building visuals that there is absolutely no room for air. There is always so much on screen that the eye is drawn all about the place. Never having a single point of focus makes each scene a headache causer, it all merges into a blurry neon haze of disinterest. There are some interesting visuals in the film but they are lost in a sea of windowdressing. When it comes to visual world building sometimes less can be more.
Narratively the film is also all over the place, it begins with a scene of expository vomit before jumping right into a convoluted story about bot hacking that is never given any sort of weight. It then goes on to fully abandon the bot hacking storyline in favour of a conspiracy thriller and a journey of self-discovery for Major. That is all before its action climax and subsequent saccharine ending. It abandons the original movies idea of having a psychopathic villain with a eugenicist’s distorted world view in favour of a feebly humanised misunderstood bad guy. It then goes on, like so many unthrilling thrillers, to shift villainhood onto a large faceless corporation, removing any sense of scale to the threat. This would be forgivable on the whole if any of the action in Ghost in the Shell was exciting or visually interesting but the truth is that it is for the most part pretty basic action, bolstered by often strange looking CGI and infuriating slow-mo.
Ghost in the Shell (1995) is by no means a perfect film, it is too on the nose with its message, it waits too long to reveal its purpose and it is mainly comprised of scenes of expositional dialogue with little actually happening. Yet its flaws are its own, an example of vision overshadowing sense, it is too indulgent in its message because it is too interested in the ideas within, but at least there are ideas.
Ghost in the Shell (2017) is a product of a homogenised vision of what a film should be. It is the ghost of a generic thriller in the shell of a cyberpunk Japanese anime, with all the oddities and differences removed. It is bogged down with story points that have been done a thousand times before and restructures an odd, disjointed story into an odd, disjointed story that will be forgotten about in two months.