Ghost in the Shell 2017


So here’s some sneak peeks to Ghost in the Shell live action-






I know that MPC are doing the VFX, so I’m expecting some great CG elements.

It’s still way too early too tell, until a trailer comes out, but I feel visually the designs and concepts can still be even more impressive. What I mean is, it feels like the style is echoing a retro western sci-fi film, rather than being ghost in the shell.

From what I’ve seen so far, I feel that Project 2501 fan project, 2 years ago, was much better at capturing the essence of GITS.

Project 2501 (contains some nudity)-

Interesting how a certain in the original anime 1995 movie, is interpreted by both the Project 2501 and the new live action film. However I do dislike the overly packed live action version, just feels too fifth element like. I do wonder, should they be copying shots from the anime? Or should it refer the manga more.

Original anime shot-

Project 2501-

2017 Live Action-

Interestingly, the 2017 live action, seems to have a warmer hue to it, maybe it’s the light coming from bed. This is one of the elements that make it like a cheesing retro sci-fi, the big light boxes and lighting coming from below and upwards, just not liking that feel to it. Also look at that chunky box with a cable coming out of it, just looks clumsy.

I do want to say, the live action is an entirely original story, so it isn’t a direct adaption, but more like an inspired by. I like Scarlett Johansson, but not in this role.


It looks like it pays strong visual homage to the animated films.
That’s about all I can say for now. :stuck_out_tongue:


This guy cut together a pretty strong trailer.


That soundtrack!


Easier to watch with this. And confirms my thoughts that the visual style will be very strong. :slight_smile:


I noticed they use the track ’ TYPE 2052 “HADALY” ’ from the “Ghost in the Shell: Innocence” soundtrack for the first trailer. Hopefully they will use Kenji Kawai to compose some music for this film, as for me the brilliant soundtracks are a big part of the Ghost in the Shell franchise.


When i watched the movie “Lucy” i had a vision.
I knew immediately that someone somewhere would greenlight the long-cooking “Ghost in the Shell” adaption with Scarlet Johansson as Motoko Kusanagi.
Why? Because those people take the most obvious choice the one that does not need any creativity.
Luc Besson had infused the movie Lucy with a dose of “GitS” style in some scenes so the whole thing served well as a testcreening.

Scarlet looks pretty - check.
She can shoot - check.
She can kung fu yo ass - check.
in an Asian setting - check.

Hey lets do this chinese animation thing with Scarlet Johansson! :banghead:

I wonder how “Ghost in the Shell 2017” would look like if Besson had casted someone else in that Lucy role.

I could compile a (short) list of competent directors who could have done this movie the right way, but Luc Besson and Rupert Sanders would not be on that list. For obvious reasons.

I like Scarlett Johansson, but not in this role.


Milla Jovovich? Charlize Theron? :stuck_out_tongue:
Personally I might have gone with Antje Traue but with maybe a little more aggressive “flattening” makeup so her face appears a little… featureless. Not only does it match the anime art style in a way for female heroines… it also gives off the vibe that she should look “somewhat synthetic”.

Directors? I dunno… Len Wiseman?


Ridley Scott? Ghost In The Shell is a Blade Runner 1.5

Noomi Repace, Kate Mara or her sister Rooney Mara

But my personal choice would be Yolandi Visser. But someone would have to voice over her for this movie.,Yo-Landi(die_Antwoord)%26_Philip_Nelson(cropped).jpg


Yeah I think we all have that “Find someone who can look manufactured/synthetic” type of female face. :stuck_out_tongue:

I kind of like their idea though of Beat Takeshi as Daisuke Aramaki

But again… I’m not keen on the slavish imitation of the anime/manga hairdo. I’d be thinking more about what the character represented and what the persona of that projection could be in live action rather than this sort of quasi-literal interpretation.


You must be trolling guys.
I reject all of your suggestions with the exception of Antje Traue and Ridley Scott.
While i like Charlize Theron and i could see her in that role it clearly falls under the “to obvious and simple” category.
You already forgotten Æon Flux?

Len Wiseman is imho not enough of a wise man :stuck_out_tongue: and i think this movie needs a real one.

Nah i think Darren Arronofski would be somewhere on top of my list. David Fincher and Michael Mann too.
A man can dream right?


…hmmmm…looks like Scarlett’s role will just be known as The Major, so no Japanese name usage? Even thought the other characters carry Japanese names? I seriously doubt the audience would find it hard to identify with Motoko Kusanagi. If they wanted to simplify it, they could have just used Motoko. Fair enough, the character is nick named the Major and her colleagues use this name, but I think Motoko will not be used at all. I feel that this film won’t be your average audiences tastes, so it’ll be the GITS fans watching this(could have said scifi fan, but any sci-fi fan would most likely have seen GITS). I doubt the audience aren’t intelligent enough to understand a Japanese name.

Any case, since we are talking about who should play Motoko Kusanagi, I’ll throw a curve ball and I would have liked to see Yonekura Ryoko play the role. Although, I’ve only seen clips of her, but I think she fits the bill nicely-

Here’s a clip of her in action(just watch the teaser at the start, as the rest is a Japanese interview of her)-


I wonder if, they had shot a Japanese actress, but not have her speak and without mouth movements, and have a dubbed with robotic echo feel, would it have worked? I mean, in the GITS world the cyborgs can speak like telepathically or “wirelessly”. Would have been interesting. Also they could have had an actress play the virtual avatar too, as the cyborg body doesn’t have to look like the host.

Still think it looks like cheesy retro Sci-fi, even with the fan made trailer. Maybe they are getting inspiration from this-



Kitano is a funny notion, but agreed, Johansson is the epic fail already… Im looking forward to the fanfilm though, it could be much better imho.


Well Antje Traue is sort of the most serious choice I could make. Ridley Scott is sort of the directorial version of “too obvious” a choice. I mean, obviously you can choose the director of BLADERUNNER to direct a movie about synthetic humans.

Len Wiseman… I’d pick him on the strength of the TOTAL RECALL remake based on how he smoothly moves the film between the quieter moments and the faster/louder moments.

If I’m more daring, I’d probably push for Michael Mann (see: BLACKHAT). And if I’m really trying to go for something risky, I’d actually go with Michael Bay. Bay is a director who can probably channel the rarely used erotic content in the original Shirow Masamune graphic novels in addition to the big action that ended up in the OVA’s. I’m not saying the erotic content is necessary, but it’s a chance to “tie all of GITS’ threads together in one presentation”. Though it must be said Michael Mann can do that just as well.

However, in all those choices, the writer is of great importance. I’d probably try going after Peter Straughan (TINKER TAILOR SOLDIER SPY, OUR BRAND IS CRISIS).

I was initially thinking about how interesting it would be… since part of GITS’ ideas is how your “ghost” (digital replication of yourself?) can be downloaded into any kind of body and so on… that … basically the Major’s “ghost” was derived from a Japanese woman… but that the body she is inhabiting isn’t Asian in shape or form.


Michael Bay…really?
I agree that he probably could do the action right and the lesbian sex scenes but what about the long winded technology/philosophy talk? GitS is more slow burn than explosive blockbuster.
The problem with Bay is that he always pushes for maximum visual dynamic.
No matter if the scene context is slow or fast, comedic or serious, Bay is always like: MORE!
More parallax, more camera swooping, more lampposts, more zoom, move it faster and shake that cam like a booty!!!
And then he edits it together in half a second clips so that it all smears together as one huge blur of movement.

Nah, Padawan that isn’t daring i fear that it is boring as we have seen it already before.
I see where you coming from, you want that larger than life visuals and bombastic action style but then i think the job should go to John Woo instead.
Woo style is more elegant and beautiful, not as overwhelming, nearly as fast but easier on the eyes.
With a solid written script he could push this further than Bay i think.
Throw in an eccentric and genius Cinematographer like Christopher Doyle and there you have a daring mix.


Agreed. Not Michael Bay–he’s severely lacking in philosophical sensitivity and intellectual depth as a filmmaker. GITS is not a mindless action story. We have plenty of directors working today who are technically as good as Bay but with far stronger intellectual prowess and more substance in their creative vision.


Ehem… My “daring” choice was Michael Mann. My “risky” choice was Michael Bay. :stuck_out_tongue:

The “intelligence” in a film would also rely on who is Executive Producer and the relationship of Writer to Director.

But I never said using Bay is a sure-fire winner. :stuck_out_tongue:
Personally, I’d go with Michael Mann… the narrative and self-reflecting parts of GITS would be great accompaniment to the still shots Michael Mann likes to use when characters are deep in thought or planning their next moves.


This trailer looks bad to me and SJ is the least of my concerns.

It is sad but Cyberpunk is a fiction genre created in America with Blade Runner being the cinematic magnum opus, but then again THX 1138 is right up there as well, minus the cyborgs. Both are classics of cinema and were able to paint a very good picture of a future world very convincingly. But it seems it is 40 years later and that art of portraying an alternate near future is a lost art, or whoever made this is being intentionally absurd. Everything in the trailer screams retro punk not cyber punk, right down to the revolver and old VT100 style computer characters on screen. It really misses the point if they are going retro.

The whole appeal of GITS was its alternate vision of a near future with cyborgs and an internet you could plug your brain into, all of which were things which at the time were in early stages of development but still beyond the realm of the feasible. The only reason Japan made sense for the setting because at the time and still today, Japan was seen as a hi tech nation, even in some ways moreso than the U.S. But underlying it all was the vision of the near future tech which was well within the realm of the possible but potentially years away from happening. But that was almost 30 years ago (for the manga). Things have changed. Google and most silicon valley companies are rolling out AI as a normal everyday thing for people to use. Electro Optical Camouflage is almost a reality. Self Driving cars and other kinds of bots are here. Neural interfaces to computers are here and a lot of the stuff that was once seen as a possible near future is actually here now. But in the trailers so far all I see is a bunch of wires and “retro” tech. I don’t get it… The nationality doesn’t matter. It is about the ubiquitous hero caught up in a sci-tech dystopian future fighting to save their soul against the silicon corruption and fake plasticity of society and its cyborgs.


Interesting… so rather than pay direct homage to the original visually… because those “retro” things you point out are lifted directly from the interpretation of GITS’ future back in the mid 1990’s… You think for the live action feature film that maybe they should have pulled something like MINORITY REPORT’s development process where they hired Peter Schwartz (a Futurist) and designed everything as from a blank sheet of paper?

But you realize that a number of GITS core fans might cry foul that the resulting “world” while truly futuristic (as it would be devised as like 50 years after 2016 rather than 50 years after 1999 in terms of imagination), the result would bear no resemblance to the original work (eg: Thick cabling was both 1990’s future chic as well as being part of GITS’ “your wired mind” story theme expression).

As an artist how do you feel about making that kind of decision? :slight_smile:


Not really saying they need to hire a futurist. It is more about the visual cues and cinematography not really matching the story and looking a bit “retro”. Technically the story is still set in an alternate future world so that would mean that things should still look futuristic but based on modern tech and potential future developments of things that already exist as in a tantalizing look at things that could be in 10 years or more. The teasers don’t really give me that vibe at all. Need to see more at this point to really say. As an artist and programmer I am just more aware of many of the things that are just coming to the fore and other things that are still in incubation and so I kind of geek out on pointing out things in sci-fi that seem far out but are really quite close to coming true. But visually it just could be they are showing parts of the story where the main characters are in the more run down backwater parts of town which may be the reason for the less hi tech vibe. That is actually consistent with the Anime. The only super hi tech settings in the series are in the areas of the government, military, corporations and police.

As far as the ethnic angle goes, if they are going for a multi-ethnic urban megalopolis as seen in blade runner then they can’t have it set in Asia because those cultures are more homogeneous. Something like that would have to take place in a Western culture like America or parts of Europe or even Australia. Story wise it shouldn’t matter as long as the plot devices they use to explain it make sense.


See… I’m also a Programmer and Digital Artist. I understand where you’re coming from which is why I mentioned it as “50 years after 2016 VS 50 years after 1999”.

It’s sort of the difference between this:

“Total Recall as the Future of 1990”

And this:

“Total Recall as the Future of 2012”

The thing is… like some other posters pointed out: You can argue that some things in GITS are core to its intellectual ideas and not just “elements of world building” - those are easy to bring forward.

Of course, with a lot of work you could re-express certain ideas in alternative ways. But is that similar to what Columbia tried with the Ghostbusters 2016 film?

You see what I’m getting at? :slight_smile: