Ghost in the Shell

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. (03/29/2017)

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. (05/15/2017)

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*- (08/27/2017)

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%. (04/22/2018)

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. (10/01/2017)