Ghost in the Shell

The entire time I was watching, I was thinking that I’ve waited a long time for proper cyber orgies like these. But I’ve realized that apart from gorgeous animations, perfectly edited and rendered city of the future and amazing music, it’s extremely important for a movie to have a soul. And that soul is, amongst other things, created by the actors themselves. But this time, they didn’t exactly manage to do that. Pilou Asbæk and Takeshi Kitano have absolutely amazing roles, but Scarlett Johansson is so awfully stiff that the entire movie ends up being stiff. A shame. (01.10.2017)

I assume that hardcore fans of the original will be grumbling, and sci-fi enthusiasts won't be completely thrilled either, but I can’t say that Ghost in the Shell is a dud. Though I wouldn't consider it a good film even by mistake, either. It looks great, the passages through the city full of giant holograms are beautiful, the makeup artists and the overall production designers did a great job, and that's probably the main reason to go to the cinema. Unfortunately, the rest is weaker. Scarlett Johansson stares weirdly and looks terribly serious most of the time, without any sex appeal or charm. The action is more average than interesting, and although it doesn't offend, I can't remember a single scene that I would want to see again a few hours after the screening. The main problem, however, lies in the woefully transparent and uninteresting plot, which is B-movie level and embarrassingly predictable. Overall, we have a visually attractive world, but with fairly boring characters doing not very entertaining things, and you'll always know what will happen fifteen minutes in advance. I didn't get bored, but I wouldn't go again even by mistake. (15.05.2017)

Shell without the ghost. The scenography, design and audiovisual performance are excellent, the cast sympathetic, but from the complex spirit of the original, only a predictable and stenciled shell about naive souls abused by the corporation remains. It doesn't matter that the screenplay literally quotes certain ideas when there is essentially nothing left of the original meditation on "being a machine" except for a dozen revenge stories. But I could let that go. No one expects that the 180 million dollar blockbuster will suffice with wordless shots of sad facades and people's faces. But what I won’t let go is the second half and the fact that Sanders is a director with a sense of effect and smooth texture, but his style lacks the essence that would bring this nice cyberpunk wallpaper to life. It could have been worse, I agree. But it could have been better, one always realizes whenever a ghost really flashes in the movie - whether in the wobbly gait of Takeshi Kitano or the sad eyes of Pilou Asbæk. If this is what the Deus Ex adaptation would look like, I would actually be quite satisfied. But Ghost in the Shell is more than just a facade. (29.03.2017)

A more personal and therefore bolder version of what was seen in the Japanese vision. I don't need a secretive philosophy at all costs, although it hypnotized me many times in the animated Ghost in the Shell. It fascinates me with its inaccessibility, but precisely because it never lets me completely in, it still forces me to be too polite and reserved towards it. On the other hand, Mira gradually allows me to reach through all of its layers, and I am happy to meet her halfway. Action symphony and fatal conceptual crossroads have finally found each other at their very best. (08.07.2017)

The shell is there, but where is the ghost? Ghost in the Shell is a narrative action-packed summer blockbuster intended for an audience with the mentality of a 14-year-old boy raised on video games. However, its cyberpunk appearance does not hide the cyberpunk philosophy. The title invokes the idea of a great conspiracy, a mystery that will be surprisingly revealed in the end. But the plot is trivial and predictable. Furthermore - and I really don't like this - the creators try to evoke the feeling of something smarter, with a philosophical overlay. Fortunately for Sanders' film, both Matrix sequels, which are probably the most glaring example of this flaw, were two levels stupider than Ghost in the Shell. Even the visuals didn't impress me as much as the creative team intended. It is overdone and not darkly depressing enough, as befits cyberpunk. The action is too frenzied, simply tailored to the generation of computer kids. It will receive two stars from me only just barely, and they are mostly for Scarlett. Overall impression: 35%. (22.04.2018)

I haven’t seen/read the original, so… Visually impressive. An interesting story, but doesn’t go into as much depth as it could do. I presume that the comic book does. Philosophical themes are only lightly hinted at, while action plays the leading role and it’s really good to watch. Scarlett Johansson is really robotic (probably intentionally), while Michael Pitt is excellent. I didn’t see many parallels with The Matrix, so I have no idea why it’s compared to it. Sanders has nothing to be ashamed of in terms of direction. (30.03.2017)

Who the fuck is Rupert Sanders and why does such an artless routine artist get 150 million, solid actors and a good composer to make a boring, hopelessly unimaginative, sterile shithole full of darkened shots, uninteresting plot and logical lapses? You could do such wonders with all the glitter and jingle of those fluffy big city visuals! The inspiration from Cloud Atlas and Blade Runner is quite obvious, but completely wasted. After this disappointment, at least we know for sure that we don't want this contrived void as a sequel to Blade Runner! (01.04.2017)

A bit of a weaker combination of Robocop and Blade Runner... Especially when I think of the latter film, I'm struck by how dated and unsurprising Ghost in the Shell feels, while Blade Runner is still a great philosophical spectacle to ponder and still has something to say about people, humanity and other values. I quite liked the special effects, Scarlett Johansson had one and a half expressions from start to finish, but the role didn't give her more options, so okay. The action scenes weren't completely bad (maybe only the one against the walking tank or whatever it was, was terribly boring) and the music sounded interestingly atmospheric (it also wanted to remind me of Vangelis' Blade Runner), but I didn't take away any great experience from the movie theatre this time. In addition, it seemed to me that the film lasted about two and a half hours. (03.04.2017)

I was intrigued by the cast, which made me excited to see the film, but I was actually disappointed. There were a few interesting moments now and then, which is not enough for 107 minutes, so it ended up being average to below average. I liked Takeshi Kitano, who kept reminding me of a koala bear. But the special effects gave the whole film a cheap plastic feel to it, like a kind of action PVC theater. It's a shame because the theme had decent potential. 3*- (27.08.2017)

It’s kind of nothing... On one hand, there are magnificent, spectacular shots that demonstrate the high quality of the effects, although sometimes they do look strange. But then there's the story, which I didn't enjoy in this American adaptation. It's as if the Americans wanted to make a Blade Runner that only pretends to be Ghost in the Shell. You can't compare it to the anime version. (20.08.2017)