Skip to main content

There’s nothing sadder than a puppet without a ghost.

Ghost in the Shell
(1995)

(SPOILERS) I’ve never been much of an anime buff. I dutifully watched Akira, which didn’t impress me all that much, and I caught at least some – or that should probably be quite enough – of Legend of the Overfiend on its first (British) TV screening. Ghost in the Shell was something of an exception, however, wearing its ideas on its cybernetic chin and as stylish as it was cerebral. Revisiting it as a prelude to the release of its US live-action remake, the visual aesthetic remains as indelible, but most notable is how strongly it has been both influenced and influential.


On the debit side are Blade Runner – enormously so – but also Robocop. You can see the former most superficially on a design level, in its used-future cityscapes and the willingness to engage in ambient longueurs between scenes or action. This is an animated movie with an active interest in distilling mood and melancholy. If Ghost in the Shell is unable to go quite as far as Blade Runner, that’s partly because it misses the latter’s eschewing of over-verbalised ruminations on the nature of humanity. Sir Ridders’ film gave just enough to enable tone and performance to do the heavy lifting. Of course, here there’s a much denser backstory to be explained, with its cybernetically-enhanced humans, full cyborg bodies (the ghost being the soul in a manufactured shell) and the development of AI. The consequence being that the picture gets bogged down in its own wordy exposition at times.


Motoko: Perhaps the real me died a long time ago. And I’m a replicant made with a cyborg body and a computer brain. Or maybe there never was a real “me” to begin with.

But it does mean that Ghost in the Shell has a distinctive enough palate of ideas to differentiate it from being a mere Blade Runner imitator; we’re more concerned with Major Motoko Kusanagi’s ruminations on what it means to be human than the AI’s, although that does come into play later, when the Puppet Master is given voice. Indeed, the up and down and back and forth on the subject here, for a 22-year-old film, has renewed currency with Elon Musk’s raving intent to merge the human brain with AI (and, given the way these things tend to happen by stealth, I use raving more to imply that he’s a deranged mentalist than that his transhumanist “vision” is unlikely to happen in due course).


Regarding the veracity of her identity, Motoko speculates “Maybe all full replacement cyborgs start wondering like this”, further observing “I believe I exist based on what my environment tells me”. And, in an environment where everyone has implants and anyone can be hijacked with fake memories (“Your family exists only in your mind” one hacking victim is told), Ghost in the Shell provides a too-plausible harbinger of what might not be as far round the corner as we like to think.


After all, much of the motivation here is already common currency. The mysterious Project 2501 was created “for industrial espionage and data manipulation”, which in the current age of passively complicit mass observation and the suggestions of intelligence services’ capability of faking foreign governments’ intelligence services’ hacking abilities seems like an entirely credible baseline incentive.


The argument of the AI itself, pertaining to what it wants, is much more ambivalent and less threatening than envisaged by the prophets of doom of a Musk-scented future. All it wants, like Roy Batty, is to have the same opportunities as a bona fide human (one amusing line finds the AI demand “As an autonomous life form, I request political asylum”), and “To be human is to continually change”; thus, he proposes merging with the Major (so able to die when her physical brain dies) such that “You will bear my offspring in the net itself and I will achieve death”.


The Major appears to have few qualms about this, and Ghost in the Shell is generally sharper in reflecting our stealth reliance of gadgetry (once we have handheld items for every purpose, the next step is guiding us to a point where we casually accept their implantation) than the more profound impact of entirely surrendered physicality. Indeed, focussed as it is on more abstract philosophising, it’s approach is almost clinical. As such, there are notable comparisons to be made with Robocop. Apart from the obvious visual signposting – the action sequence finale, in which Motoko fights the walking tank is a straight lift from Murphy’s set-to with the ED209, which is further riffed on in his fight with Robocop 2 – Ghost in the Shell fails to come to grips with the effect of the ruination or loss of the physical body. In Robocop’s case, this resonates through swift, bold, but highly effective strokes as Murphy returns to his family home, now for sale, and flips out as he is beset by memories of the life of love and warmth to which he can never return. His later use of baby food for target practice further underlines his emotional and physical emasculation. Contrastingly, Motoko betrays unnerving acceptance of her flesh and blood-deprived state.


And yet, being what it is, deriving from a genre based at least substantially on titillating teenage boys, Ghost in the Shell is all about the body, specifically the female body. The picture obliquely signals Motoko’s barrenness in the Puppet Master’s mutually beneficial offer (apparently, there’s an earlier reference to her menstrual cycle, which doesn’t survive in the subtitled version), but most of the time she is singularly identified through parading around in sheer, flesh-coloured body stockings (and thigh socks), or further, flashing her cybernetic breasts (but, no doubt a knock-on from Japanese censorship rules, she is effectively absent genitalia). Also along these lines is the fetishisation of dismemberment, leaving isolated, immobilised, displayed female torsos; one might argue it’s simply there to emphasise the indifference of the replaceable body, but there’s a persistent to the male gaze that suggests otherwise. Unfortunately, such elements rather serve to highlight the anime’s shortcomings in terms of emotional range, an area the US remake, more overtly positioned towards exploring, also fails to capture.


As far as influences go, the Wachowski sisters really are cap in hand to Oshii (“We wanna do that for real” they told producer Joel Silver, which might explain the lukewarm reception of someone doing Ghost in the Shell itself for real 18 years later – it had already been done), with such elements as The Matrix’s computer-generated green-on-black computer coding and the plug-ins into the backs of characters’ necks. They took the next step of depicting a malevolent AI (to humans, at least), of course, and structured their tale around a more classically defined hero narrative. And The Matrix isn’t, really, so much about what it means to be human, or even so much what it means to be diminished as a human, and much more concerned with the nature of reality. Little since Ghost in the Shell has really made strides in addressing the former theme, and less still has done so with acumen (A.I. Artificial Intelligence succeeds to an extent). Perhaps we’ll need to wait for Blade Runner 2049 for the conversation to come full circle. Fingers crossed.





Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

Our very strength incites challenge. Challenge incites conflict. And conflict... breeds catastrophe.

The MCU Ranked Worst to Best

Why would I turn into a filing cabinet?

Captain Marvel (2019)
(SPOILERS) All superhero movies are formulaic to a greater or lesser degree. Mostly greater. The key to an actually great one – or just a pretty good one – is making that a virtue, rather than something you’re conscious of limiting the whole exercise. The irony of the last two stand-alone MCU pictures is that, while attempting to bring somewhat down-the-line progressive cachet to the series, they’ve delivered rather pedestrian results. Of course, that didn’t dim Black Panther’s cultural cachet (and what do I know, swathes of people also profess to loving it), and Captain Marvel has hit half a billion in its first few days – it seems that, unless you’re poor unloved Ant-Man, an easy $1bn is the new $700m for the MCU – but neither’s protagonist really made that all-important iconic impact.

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

Stupid adult hands!

Shazam! (2019)
(SPOILERS) Shazam! is exactly the kind of movie I hoped it would be, funny, scary (for kids, at least), smart and delightfully dumb… until the final act. What takes place there isn’t a complete bummer, but right now, it does pretty much kill any interest I have in a sequel.

I have discovered the great ray that first brought life into the world.

Frankenstein (1931)
(SPOILERS) To what extent do Universal’s horror classics deserved to be labelled classics? They’re from the classical Hollywood period, certainly, but they aren’t unassailable titans that can’t be bettered – well unless you were Alex Kurtzman and Chris Morgan trying to fashion a Dark Universe with zero ingenuity. And except maybe for the sequel to the second feature in their lexicon. Frankenstein is revered for several classic scenes, boasts two mesmerising performances, and looks terrific thanks to Arthur Edeson’s cinematography, but there’s also sizeable streak of stodginess within its seventy minutes.

Can you float through the air when you smell a delicious pie?

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018)
(SPOILERS) Ironically, given the source material, think I probably fell into the category of many who weren't overly disposed to give this big screen Spider-Man a go on the grounds that it was an animation. After all, if it wasn’t "good enough" for live-action, why should I give it my time? Not even Phil Lord and Christopher Miller's pedigree wholly persuaded me; they'd had their stumble of late, although admittedly in that live-action arena. As such, it was only the near-unanimous critics' approval that swayed me, suggesting I'd have been missing out. They – not always the most reliable arbiters of such populist fare, which made the vote of confidence all the more notable – were right. Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is not only a first-rate Spider-Man movie, it's a fresh, playful and (perhaps) surprisingly heartfelt origins story.

Only an idiot sees the simple beauty of life.

Forrest Gump (1994)
(SPOILERS) There was a time when I’d have made a case for, if not greatness, then Forrest Gump’s unjust dismissal from conversations regarding its merits. To an extent, I still would. Just not nearly so fervently. There’s simply too much going on in the picture to conclude that the manner in which it has generally been received is the end of the story. Tarantino, magnanimous in the face of Oscar defeat, wasn’t entirely wrong when he suggested to Robert Zemeckis that his was a, effectively, subversive movie. Its problem, however, is that it wants to have its cake and eat it.

Do not mention the Tiptoe Man ever again.

Glass (2019)
(SPOILERS) If nothing else, one has to admire M Night Shyamalan’s willingness to plough ahead regardless with his straight-faced storytelling, taking him into areas that encourage outright rejection or merciless ridicule, with all the concomitant charges of hubris. Reactions to Glass have been mixed at best, but mostly more characteristic of the period he plummeted from his must-see, twist-master pedestal (during the period of The Village and The Happening), which is to say quite scornful. And yet, this is very clearly the story he wanted to tell, so if he undercuts audience expectations and leaves them dissatisfied, it’s most definitely not a result of miscalculation on his part. For my part, while I’d been prepared for a disappointment on the basis of the critical response, I came away very much enjoying the movie, by and large.

Rejoice! The broken are the more evolved. Rejoice.

Split (2016)
(SPOILERS) M Night Shyamalan went from the toast of twist-based filmmaking to a one-trick pony to the object of abject ridicule in the space of only a couple of pictures: quite a feat. Along the way, I’ve managed to miss several of his pictures, including his last, The Visit, regarded as something of a re-locating of his footing in the low budget horror arena. Split continues that genre readjustment, another Blumhouse production, one that also manages to bridge the gap with the fare that made him famous. But it’s a thematically uneasy film, marrying shlock and serious subject matter in ways that don’t always quite gel.

Shyamalan has seized on a horror staple – nubile teenage girls in peril, prey to a psychotic antagonist – and, no doubt with the best intentions, attempted to warp it. But, in so doing, he has dragged in themes and threads from other, more meritable fare, with the consequence that, in the end, the conflicting positions rather subvert his attempts at subversion…