I am definitely excited though I can't help but worry that Paramount and Dreamworks will butcher the Laughing Man character, which was honestly what made me like SAC so much.
Yeah Hollywood has a spotty record when it comes to remaking Japanese cinema for Western audiences. Although I actually liked The Ring more than Ringu...
Ringu I think was a more original film, but the Ring was definitely better imo.
I think my concern lies more in an uncertainty with how they'll handle the character in a ~2 hour film. It took an entire season of 26 episodes to really build up the mystery and complexity of the Laughing Man case (realistically probably only like 13 episodes were actually about it in SAC). To see the Laughing Man reduced to a mere terrorist or "I have an evil plan" villain would disappoint me greatly. Even casting the character as a misguided extremist would probably sour my experience.
LordofHats wrote: Ringu I think was a more original film, but the Ring was definitely better imo.
I think my concern lies more in an uncertainty with how they'll handle the character in a ~2 hour film. It took an entire season of 26 episodes to really build up the mystery and complexity of the Laughing Man case (realistically probably only like 13 episodes were actually about it in SAC). To see the Laughing Man reduced to a mere terrorist or "I have an evil plan" villain would disappoint me greatly. Even casting the character as a misguided extremist would probably sour my experience.
Indeed
Honestly hoping for a one off political enemy thing that has nothing to do with laughing man or SaC.
That way they dont have to explain EVERYTHING for those new to the series.
Wow. She's like 20 years too young to play Kusanagi, and I can only expect an american take would be pretty painful. Hope this disappears like the various idiotic attempts to make Akira in live action.
ScarJo is a pretty good fit actually for the more recent Arise adaptation of the character;
I know many had issue with her not being quite the amazon she is in SAC and the films, but fundamentally she was the same character and no less bad ass so I'll give ScarJo her go.
EDIT: And of course, the Major's body is fully prosthetic. They could always change the actor at will (even multiple times in one film) because there's really nothing that stops her from having more than one body at her disposal.
spiralingcadaver wrote: Wow. She's like 20 years too young to play Kusanagi, and I can only expect an american take would be pretty painful. Hope this disappears like the various idiotic attempts to make Akira in live action.
The Major has plasticated skin and should be played by someone younger than her recorded age.
As much of a fan as I am of Ghost in the Shell, I just can't take Scarlett Johanson seriously as The Major thus far. She'd be great for any number of characters, but I just don't see her fitting this particular role. Hopefully I'm proven wrong. I'd have gone for someone a little older, a little more "worn", and more heavily built personally.
Orlanth wrote: The Major has plasticated skin and should be played by someone younger than her recorded age.
No memory how old she's supposed to be, I'm talking about how old she looks. Johanson is way too young and white for the part. They could have done something badass with an older actress and instead went with some typecast dreck.
Eh it's gotta be hard to find someone to play a huge tank of a man like Batou. The Mountain would never work. After playing Gregor Clegane, you just don't come back and play a hero. Not gonna work. I honestly can't think of many actors with the stature to pull off the role.
Orlanth wrote: The Major has plasticated skin and should be played by someone younger than her recorded age.
No memory how old she's supposed to be, I'm talking about how old she looks. Johanson is way too young and white for the part. They could have done something badass with an older actress and instead went with some typecast dreck.
Sinful Hero wrote: To chime in with Live Action Anime, whatever happened to Neon Genesis Evangelion? I'd think Cowboy Bebop could translate well to the screen.
Both fell apart. Apparently that was a good thing with the Cowboy Bebop that Keano was trying to get made, given some of the decisions such as Ed being a computer.
I suspect any effort to try and judge this as faithful to the source material will just end up with frustration. It won’t be completely faithful, and it shouldn’t be. Lots of things work in anime that don’t really work in live action. And there’s also the basic reality that this is a commercial venture, not a fanwork aiming purely for a faithful interpretation. Hoping that they’d cast an aged female lead in a big budget sci fi film is just not very sensible.
I think if we look at this is as a new sci-fi work, and hope it does a decent job of exploring the same themes as Ghost in the Shell, and we might be somewhat happy with the final result.
sebster wrote: I suspect any effort to try and judge this as faithful to the source material will just end up with frustration. It won’t be completely faithful, and it shouldn’t be. Lots of things work in anime that don’t really work in live action. And there’s also the basic reality that this is a commercial venture, not a fanwork aiming purely for a faithful interpretation. Hoping that they’d cast an aged female lead in a big budget sci fi film is just not very sensible.
I think if we look at this is as a new sci-fi work, and hope it does a decent job of exploring the same themes as Ghost in the Shell, and we might be somewhat happy with the final result.
I agree. What would be the point of a film being faithful to a film and TV series that already have been made very well and got high acclaim?
It needs to be a thing of itself.
(I saw the original GITS in the cinema in London in about 1996.)
sebster wrote: I suspect any effort to try and judge this as faithful to the source material will just end up with frustration. It won’t be completely faithful, and it shouldn’t be. Lots of things work in anime that don’t really work in live action. And there’s also the basic reality that this is a commercial venture, not a fanwork aiming purely for a faithful interpretation. Hoping that they’d cast an aged female lead in a big budget sci fi film is just not very sensible.
I think if we look at this is as a new sci-fi work, and hope it does a decent job of exploring the same themes as Ghost in the Shell, and we might be somewhat happy with the final result.
The they should have written their own story featuring the cast rather than copying one of the stories from the animated series.
AduroT wrote: The they should have written their own story featuring the cast rather than copying one of the stories from the animated series.
Why? They're taking the story to a new medium. That in itself is potentially a big enough change, and the original story is still the archetypal Ghost in the Shell story, the best one to address in a new medium.
I'm not really holding my breath that this will be good.
I think that by casting Johansson they are trying to appeal to the Avengers audience and use her "star power" rather than get the best person to portray the character. However GitS is not the Avengers. It is slower and a lot more philosophical, often without clearly defined villains and heroes.
Now, they could change it to be more like Avengers, with just lots of big flashy fight scenes and no philosophical angle but that will just butcher the source material, at which point why bother?
I think that by casting Johansson they are trying to appeal to the Avengers audience and use her "star power" rather than get the best person to portray the character. However GitS is not the Avengers. It is slower and a lot more philosophical, often without clearly defined villains and heroes.
Now, they could change it to be more like Avengers, with just lots of big flashy fight scenes and no philosophical angle but that will just butcher the source material, at which point why bother?
But oh well, I'll just have to wait and see.
Who do you think would be the best choice for the character?
ScarJo is not a terrible actress, IMO. With the right director, this *could* be good.
It's like people assume people who are mainstream can't act. ScarJo isn't a bad actresses. Her role as Black Widow probably helped set her up for this role more than anything. There's more than a few similarities in the characters. Really all she has to do is turn up the enigmatic and turn down that textbook Whedon snarkiness from her BW role, and she's well on her way.
Really it's going to come down to the story. While I think many people get too worked up about changes in source material to a ridiculous level, it would be very disappointing for this to be dumbed down into a simple action thriller. That won't mean it'll be bad, but it certainly won't have that moral greyness and philosophizing about "being alive" that really makes GitS so good.
A Town Called Malus wrote: Now, they could change it to be more like Avengers, with just lots of big flashy fight scenes and no philosophical angle but that will just butcher the source material
You say this like it's not a certainty?
Re: mainstream can't act, not at all. I think she's a perfectly fine, if not amazing, actress. I just think it was a terrible casting choice for any reasons other than money- she's typecast, has recently been in similar roles, and is IMHO completely wrong for this part.
Yeah, I don't think people are really allowed to complain about this being a bastardization or poor adaptation of the source material because the versions of GITS most people are familiar with are in fact bastardizations and poor adaptations of the source material. For some reason, most people seem to forget that GITS was a manga first, not the Mamoru Oshii movie. The original manga had a very different tone from everything that came after it. Hell, Kusanagi herself is very different. Her character was more lighthearted in the comic, not the stoic, almost emotionless character she's become. The original comic was more of a mystery, with quite a bit more action (and sex scenes) than what we got in the Oshii film.
Now, I'm not saying that the movies and shows are bad, just that they're really bad adaptations of the comic that spawned them. So, don't be upset if this also changes a lot of stuff.
IDK, depends on what you consider a good adaptation. I think they're fantastic adaptations, since they took something kinda' shallow and gave it some life. I consider a bad adaptation one that doesn't add anything and/or generally superficially apes the source material while missing the point (such as Watchmen). Regarding her lack of emotion, I'd highly recommend watching the 2.0 cut of the movie, it's a much better performance (interestingly, by the same actors).
Vampire Huntrr D could be cool. There's a lot of really cool fluff in the books that the movies never touch on, like the interstellar war the vampires fought. Pilgrimage Of The Sacred And The Profane could make for a really cool movie.
As a huge fan of the original GitS movie and the one series Stand Alone Complex, I have to say I am not excited for this. Scarjo, while I think she does an awesome job as an action star is not who I'd want to play Motoko. Honestly I am pretty bored with Hollywood white washing and I think it will probably play a role in the sinking of this movie. It is something that audiences are not as "receptive" to anymore like say that Gods of Egypt crapfest. I'm pretty confident they could have found a strong female lead of Japanese decent to play the role.
Then there is Batou.... :( ..... just why...why even bother if your going to go with that kind of choice. Batou is my favorite of the GitS characters and having him poorly casted pretty much guarantees I won't want to see the movie.Oh well I guess on my part.
About the only thing that could probably get me to purchase a ticket at this point is how they approach the setting itself. If they go with Stand Alone Complex's clean look of slightly in the future I doubt I will see it in theaters. However, if they go with the dirty cyber-punk of the original movie then I may see the movie just to marvel at the setting.
Other things that will make or break me seeing this movie over the acting choices are if they even include the things that make GitS...well GitS. So, how much will it emphasize partial and full body prosthetics versus a life with no prosthetics, to include tackling the medical problems that arise with it? Will there be walker tanks, power armor, military grade cyborgs, optical camouflage and highly advanced concepts of the internet and hacking? Will this be a political thriller, bland action movie, techno mystery or ask meaningful questions and resemble a Blomkamp movie? Will there be a section 9 and what will its purpose be?
Basically the only thing that can save this movie for me is if despite its already awful casting choices, it looks and feels like GitS. I already suspect that the only GitS about this movie will be the names, vague impressions of the costumes and the movie's actual title. But, I am happy to be proven wrong.
I would've suggested Rila Fukushima for the lead, but the problem is Asian actresses tend towards being waifs and are less than believable as action stars. Scarlett has the full figure of Kusanagi, but her facial structure is far off. Surely there's a female Asian action star that could've played the role? Of course that wouldn't draw as much attention as Scarlett...
It's really a pity that Americans are so openly racist against Asians, particularly the youth.
trexmeyer wrote: I would've suggested Rila Fukushima for the lead, but the problem is Asian actresses tend towards being waifs and are less than believable as action stars. Scarlett has the full figure of Kusanagi, but her facial structure is far off. Surely there's a female Asian action star that could've played the role? Of course that wouldn't draw as much attention as Scarlett...
It's really a pity that Americans are so openly racist against Asians, particularly the youth.
The thing is people who do casting have much better resources than say you or I. So they probably have much better abilities to find people that are faithful to the role. GitS is probably only seen as a Scarjo vehicle and suspect it will only be superficially related to the source material. I bet it doesn't take place in Japan but somewhere obnoxious like New York or LA.
trexmeyer wrote: I would've suggested Rila Fukushima for the lead, but the problem is Asian actresses tend towards being waifs and are less than believable as action stars. Scarlett has the full figure of Kusanagi, but her facial structure is far off. Surely there's a female Asian action star that could've played the role? Of course that wouldn't draw as much attention as Scarlett...
It's really a pity that Americans are so openly racist against Asians, particularly the youth.
The thing is people who do casting have much better resources than say you or I. So they probably have much better abilities to find people that are faithful to the role. GitS is probably only seen as a Scarjo vehicle and suspect it will only be superficially related to the source material. I bet it doesn't take place in Japan but somewhere obnoxious like New York or LA.
This. It wouldn't even need to be someone well known in the part, as long as they're good.
Sadly, I agree with BG that it's probably going to only be tangentially related to the source material, especially if they're aiming it at the mass US market. I mean the US was a behind the scenes antagonistic force in quite a few of the plotlines in the series (culminating in their actions at the end of the second series) and weren't they also at least partly responsible for creating the Puppet Master in the film/manga? How well would that kind of portrayal of America in the future go over with mass markets in the US?
How is a western adaptation using western actors for a western audience whitewashing? Was Ken Watanabe playing Clint Eastwood's character in the Japanese version of The Unforgiven an unforgivable affront to ethnic swapping as well? Or was it a Japanese adaptation of an American film starring Japanese characters? If this version still took place in Japan and all the other characters were Japanese and she was also supposed to be Japanese there might be a case but that isn't what is happening. What I keep seeing is anime fans who can't seem to tell the difference between adapting source material and yellowface, which seems pretty problematic in itself as there are real issues in casting and this isn't one of them.
Things get adapted frequently across borders and changes are made. It could be a terrible movie but it has nothing to do with yellowface at all, unless one really doesn't understand what yellowface is.
Ahtman wrote: How is a western adaptation using western actors for a western audience whitewashing? Was Ken Watanabe playing Clint Eastwood's character in the Japanese version of The Unforgiven an unforgivable affront to ethnic swapping as well? Or was it a Japanese adaptation of an American film starring Japanese characters? If this version still took place in Japan and all the other characters were Japanese and she was also supposed to be Japanese there might be a case but that isn't what is happening. What I keep seeing is anime fans who can't seem to tell the difference between adapting source material and yellowface, which seems pretty problematic in itself as there are real issues in casting and this isn't one of them.
Things get adapted frequently across borders and changes are made. It could be a terrible movie but it has nothing to do with yellowface at all, unless one really doesn't understand what yellowface is.
Well for one the Japanese movie was actually an adaption of a Clinton Eastwood movie in plot and point that carried the same name. It's not taking a movie about white people and just making them Japanese. So I don't see your point. Second, this might be new to you but while the US is a western country, Western =/= equal white. Especially in a country like the US which isn't a homogeneous ethnicity. You may also note that Japanese does actually refer to a country and an ethnicity were the US does not. So yes, taking a Japanese show and only changing the skin colors of the characters would be white washing.
As a non fan of anime , GitS being the end of my anime watching, what are the serious problems you see in casting outside of Hollywood going out of its way to ensure that no non-whites play non-white characters? I suppose something like Gods of Egypt was just a western adaption of Egyptian mythology then and was okay that they just left out brown skin. This way I'd feel comfortable with what I'm seeing.
If Scarjo's character's name is Major Motoko Kusanagi wouldn't that be yellow face? If Pilou Asbæk plays a character name Batou how is that not yellow face? Or is it required that eyes and skin be altered?
*edit: I really need to turn off my phone's autocorrect. I'm about done with my phone altering grammar and words incomprehensible for no understandable reason.
Except the major inhabits a fully prosthetic body and her origins are completly shrouded in mystery. Not only that but here body is portrayed as ethnically neutral in every such way.
I pointed this out at the beginning, but ScarJoe fits very well the appearance of the Major in the Arise OVA series and its for TV spin off Alternate Architecture. So while I have no idea if the film will take place in Japan, the actress picked is not a completely out there suggestion for the role.
The OP article actually makes it sound like Section 9 works for a corporation (Hanka Robotics, which at least sounds Japanese) rather than the government, and the villains are targeting the company itself. It might be set in the US, but I don't think that in itself is going to kill anything cause futuristic city is futuristic city. Probably won't get any of the shady government grayness from SAC though.
It isn't rocket science to figure out. The assumption being played out is that because the character was Asian in the anime she has to be Asian in the adapted version, which is a silly assumption.
Thanks Captain Obvious. The fact there are lots of actors that aren't white is why I didn't single them out. Denzel Washington is about to play the same character also played by Yul Brenner and Takashi Shimua, npne of which ar Caucasian. Would you also like to point out that in most of the world it is football but in the US it is called soccer.
BrotherGecko wrote: As a non fan of anime , GitS being the end of my anime watching
And since I said fans of the anime and not anime in general still falls into line of people being thoughtless in regards to this.
BrotherGecko wrote: If Scarjo's character's name is Major Motoko Kusanagi wouldn't that be yellow face?
That is a pretty big if there. I've said before if they say she is supposed to be Japanese and give her a Japanese name then that is indeed problematic, but we don't know that so pretending it is true and then using that hypothetical to get upset is fairly asinine. If they keep everything
BrotherGecko wrote: If Pilou Asbæk plays a character name Batou how is that not yellow face?
I only studied Japanese language for a few yeatrs but nothing about the name Batou is screaming that it has to be Japanese only.
The wikipedia page is fairly awful in that is says she is playing Motoko Kusanagi but then says they don't know her name will be in the live action movie. Same on some others. If they try to give people Japansese names and set it in Japan then people have a right to be upset but at this point there are other issues we absolutely knw about but are ignored or downplayed because they aren't adaptation of a popular anime series. When we know actual information then we she get upset, not based on half-information or feelings.
As for real problems the most recent would be having Tilda Swinton playing a Himalayan and Emma Stone playing a Chinese/Hawaiian. Having the chance to make Iron Fist an Asian American instead of a Caucasian super martial artist trained in ancient Asian secrets and saving a bunch of Asians is certainly also a bit of an issue, but not the same one.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
trexmeyer wrote: I agree that it is a notorious case of Yellow Face.
The OP article actually makes it sound like Section 9 works for a corporation (Hanka Robotics, which at least sounds Japanese) rather than the government, and the villains are targeting the company itself. It might be set in the US, but I don't think that in itself is going to kill anything cause futuristic city is futuristic city. Probably won't get any of the shady government grayness from SAC though.
That's how it read to me as well, which I found a bit disconcerting. The world of Ghost in the Shell was one of very strict government oversight and control. In that scenario I really don't see the government allowing a corporation to have its own private security force which employs black-ops veterans with such dangerous capabilities, such as those found in Section 9.
Also, that shady government grayness was in the original film, too. Don't forget that Section 6 created the Puppet Master and attempted to assassinate the Major
The most asian/japanese looking person in this group is far left...
Spoiler:
Not seeing that either look Japanese to me here...
Spoiler:
This girl looks more Japanese to me...
Spoiler:
This guy....looks Japanese....
Spoiler:
I guess what I am trying to say, and to echo, is that while the main character may have a Japanese inspired name...her look is not that of a Japanese or, in my opinion, even Asian, person.
I get that GitS is an Anime styled movie...but even within anime movies you can have characters that look like a specific ethnicity...or..you can have a more generalized looking character (which is what I feel is going on with GitS).
Arguably, the kind of state that existed in GitS wouldn't play well in the US. I think anyone watching SAC for the first time is in for some serious culture shock, because that stuff is kind of standard in lots of countries not America. Here though that level of government surveillance would be decried. It would be hard to convince an American mainstream audience to accept the traditional Section 9 as heroes imo.
In that scenario I really don't see the government allowing a corporation to have its own private security force which employs black-ops veterans with such dangerous capabilities, such as those found in Section 9.
Black Water wasn't that long ago was it?
Beyond that, to an American audience especially If we're going with the kind of Bladerunner/Neuromancer cyberpunk Americans in particular are very used to, a corporation wielding ludicrous amounts of power and having a private army is pretty standard.
LordofHats wrote: Arguably, the kind of state that existed in GitS wouldn't play well in the US. I think anyone watching SAC for the first time is in for some serious culture shock, because that stuff is kind of standard in lots of countries not America.
Maybe it isn't standard now but after two (more) world wars, one of which was a nuclear war? I think that would change a lot of things and I think viewers would realise that.
I mean WW2 was enough for the US government of the time to round up some of its citizens and put them into camps, and in that war there wasn't really any substantial threat to the US homeland. So I can see the kind of future that Ghost in the Shell is set in coming to pass.
Maybe it isn't standard now but after two (more) world wars, one of which was a nuclear war? I think that would change a lot of things and I think viewers would realise that.
Not what I'm talking about. I'm getting at what an audience here and now will accept as heroic. Unless you're doing it as a maverick whose fighting red tape and paper pushers looking out for themselves (i.e. Jack Bauer), those kinds of things get decried this side of the Pacific. I don't think a mainstream American audience would accept heroes who embrace that kind of law and order without a second thought.
Maybe it isn't standard now but after two (more) world wars, one of which was a nuclear war? I think that would change a lot of things and I think viewers would realise that.
Not what I'm talking about. I'm getting at what an audience here and now will accept as heroic. Unless you're doing it as a maverick whose fighting red tape and paper pushers looking out for themselves (i.e. Jack Bauer), those kinds of things get decried this side of the Pacific. I don't think a mainstream American audience would accept heroes who embrace that kind of law and order without a second thought.
Ah, I see. Sorry, I misunderstood.
Though at the end of the day, Section 9 isn't bound by a lot of the red tape, as they are a secret organization. I mean, they've even assassinated people under the protection of foreign diplomats (opening of the first film, end of the second series) where it was apparent that the conventional police force was unable to act. Though they are actively working to keep the status quo of government surveillance and that kind of thing so, yeah...
Maybe Ghost in the Shell just won't be these people's cup of tea?
Maybe it isn't standard now but after two (more) world wars, one of which was a nuclear war? I think that would change a lot of things and I think viewers would realise that.
Not what I'm talking about. I'm getting at what an audience here and now will accept as heroic. Unless you're doing it as a maverick whose fighting red tape and paper pushers looking out for themselves (i.e. Jack Bauer), those kinds of things get decried this side of the Pacific. I don't think a mainstream American audience would accept heroes who embrace that kind of law and order without a second thought.
Ah, I see. Sorry, I misunderstood.
Though at the end of the day, Section 9 isn't bound by a lot of the red tape, as they are a secret organization. I mean, they've even assassinated people under the protection of foreign diplomats (opening of the first film, end of the second series) where it was apparent that the conventional police force was unable to act. Though they are actively working to keep the status quo of government surveillance and that kind of thing so, yeah...
Maybe Ghost in the Shell just won't be these people's cup of tea?
It was never my "cup of tea" since cyberpunk, as a genre was dead when the first film was released in 1995. It was just another attempt to cash in on the Western "3rd Wave" anime explosion by Production I.G.. And the films/OVAs were not good adaptations of the manga (which was very relevant in it's time, and released at the waning days of cyberpunk's popularity), and not among Mamoru Oshii's best stuff.
I personally am enjoying the butt hurt by 'progressives' over ScarJo being cast. Every time a character gets altered from the original source material I hear how race (or even gender) shouldn't matter. This seems like the inevitable consequence of this argument.
Personally, I am a stickler for the original material and it'd be my preference to see that on screen. But after being told so many times that such preferences we're 'non progressive' or 'wrong' or just outright racist, this amuses me no end.
Only in America do people complain about more ScarJo. My mother works in theater. It's acceptable for an originally white character to be played by someone else, but if a white person is cast in a previously non-white role people lose their minds. If Jada Smith was playing the lead role nobody would say a thing.
Monkey Tamer wrote: Only in America do people complain about more ScarJo. My mother works in theater. It's acceptable for an originally white character to be played by someone else, but if a white person is cast in a previously non-white role people lose their minds. If Jada Smith was playing the lead role nobody would say a thing.
That's a disingenuous assessment to make. I'd still be complaining. Primarily because I'm an advocate for Native American and Asian rights. They endure racism that is oft ignored in light of the overblown claims of racism against African-Americans and Arabs. Asians are horribly underrepresented in Hollywood and when they do appear it's all too frequently in a comic role as a male or femme fatale Dragon Lady. Even that stupid recent TV show, Fresh off the Boat I think, portrays them as being ignorant of basic American culture.
At least a few flicks, ie the Last Samurai (only Americans complained about this, the Japanese greatly applauded the representation of their culture and language), The Wolverine (aside from the idiocy of having Wolverine feth the Japanese female lead), and Letters from Iwo Jima have shewn Asians in a positive light.
I guess part of this is dear to me because I have and have had many Chinese or Korean friends, to include a former lover. I'm sick and tired of seeing them typecast as two dimensional characters or flat out ignored. They're people for feth's sake and deserve to be represented in the media.
TheMeanDM wrote: How was The Wolverine a positive movie for asians?
The silver samurai tried to kill the hero.
The minister guy was into that underwear..fetish...thing...with two girls (lucky dog).
All the ninjas trying to kill Hugh....
Not really seeing anything positive.....
Both female leads were relatively decent compared to most fare. The fact some were villains doesn't necessarily make the casting or characterization poor.
Monkey Tamer wrote: Only in America do people complain about more ScarJo. My mother works in theater. It's acceptable for an originally white character to be played by someone else, but if a white person is cast in a previously non-white role people lose their minds. If Jada Smith was playing the lead role nobody would say a thing.
For a lot of people, it's not really an ethnicity thing, but rather Johannsen just doesn't seem to fit the character. As I noted earlier, I'd have preferred someone a little older, more gruff, and more heavily built, with less of the wandering "staring off into space" that Johannsen does so much. She has like...a perpetual thousand yard stare in everything she does.
For everyone complaining about Scarlett Johansson being the lead.
Hollywood doesn't make films for the enjoyment of people who are into the source material. The majority of people who see films have no intrest in the book/comic/anime that the material was based off. I had no idea there was more than one Spiderman, but I've seen Spider-Man so on so forth.
I would not be surprised if this film has nothing to do with the source material, because 90% of the people who will watch the film will have no idea what the anime is about.
Thanks Captain Obvious. The fact there are lots of actors that aren't white is why I didn't single them out. Denzel Washington is about to play the same character also played by Yul Brenner and Takashi Shimua, npne of which ar Caucasian. Would you also like to point out that in most of the world it is football but in the US it is called soccer.
Yul Brynner was born in Vladivostock from a father with Swiss roots and a Russian mother. He had exotic look because his paternal grandmother was half Russian half Siberian native and he played that exoticism in many roles. I guess that the "one drop" rule must be going quite strong around where you live if he is not Caucasian, but in this day an age I will agree I no longer know what Caucasian means since I heard that the Khardashians were not Caucasian because their father had Armenian roots or that Greeks do not count either.
trexmeyer wrote: I would've suggested Rila Fukushima for the lead, but the problem is Asian actresses tend towards being waifs and are less than believable as action stars. Scarlett has the full figure of Kusanagi, but her facial structure is far off. Surely there's a female Asian action star that could've played the role? Of course that wouldn't draw as much attention as Scarlett...
It's really a pity that Americans are so openly racist against Asians, particularly the youth.
To call that racist is asinine. Hollywood movies are made to make money. Hiring a current action movie star is good business.
Or is it racist that Kurosawa didn't use British actors when he made Ran?
Nick Fury would also like to chime in. He went from being played by David Hasselhoff (who looked a LOT like classic Fury) to Samuel L. Jackson. Now, Jackson is one of my favorite actors. He's awesome. And I don't mind the switch. I don't see anyone minding the switch. But somehow it matters for ScarJo's nationality not being Asian when she's playing a robot? Get over it. The character is an android. Could be a totally different body, remade, etc. and Batou never looked Asian. So again, people need to get over it. The butt-hurt is alive and well.
Monkey Tamer wrote: Only in America do people complain about more ScarJo. My mother works in theater. It's acceptable for an originally white character to be played by someone else, but if a white person is cast in a previously non-white role people lose their minds. If Jada Smith was playing the lead role nobody would say a thing.
For a lot of people, it's not really an ethnicity thing, but rather Johannsen just doesn't seem to fit the character. As I noted earlier, I'd have preferred someone a little older, more gruff, and more heavily built, with less of the wandering "staring off into space" that Johannsen does so much. She has like...a perpetual thousand yard stare in everything she does.
That's a legitimate criticism. My facebook feed was screaming for blood because she's white, not her inability to act.
If the film is set in Japan, and the characters are all Japanese, but they convert two of the main leads into White roles, then it is really dubious - that is close to Mighty Whitey territory, as well as being whitewashed. If, however, the film is set in New York or Mega City One or whatever - it is an adaptation that transposes the setting - then this is fine, in the same way that West Side Story is a good adaptation of Romeo and Juliet. The difference is in the manner of adaptation. If you take the story and characters, and adapt the entire work to a different setting, with casting and dialogue that suits the new setting, then that is fine. But if you simply shove a white character on top of the adapted material, but keep the work in the original setting, then it is definitely a bit crap. Either go the whole way, and make it a work that doesn't rely upon whitewashing one character but instead does an appropriate update of the whole cast, or don't bother at all.
A few random remarks, that I cannot be bothered putting into full paragraphs:
- Saying that it is an android body so why does it matter if it is white: because you are saying that if, given the choice, this Japanese protagonist would prefer to be white. Is that racist? I don't know for certain. It certainly seems to border on racism, especially if white people are doing the adapting.
- The Wolverine film doesn't adapt a Japanese story, so I wouldn't consider that to fall into this problem. It isn't a very faithful adaptation of the original comic, but then none of the X-Men films have been.
- Whitewashing is more of a problem than, say, making a white character into a black one, for the simple reason that we already get all of the roles as a base assumption. White people can play anything; but Asian (or whatever) thespians can't do the same, not even here, in a role that is custom-built for a Japanese actress! Not to mention that universally white protagonists increasingly doesn't reflect the diversity of the audience.
- A lot of people already raised this issue with Tilda Swinton in Dr Strange, but that one doesn't bother me so much. Not entirely sure why.
Anyway, I'm hopeful that this will turn out to be a good film, and that the reports that the studio tried using CGI to make the cast members look Japanese - rather raising the question of why not just cast Japanese people in the first place - are not indications of dreadful times ahead. There are too few cyberpunk films to enjoy!
Frazzled wrote: To call that racist is asinine. Hollywood movies are made to make money. Hiring a current action movie star is good business.
I wish more people understood this.
It's good business unless it is a bad choice for the character, which can certainly contribute to a film not making as much money as it can.
I mean, John Wayne was a big star but that doesn't make casting him as Genghis Khan any better does it? Keanu Reeves in basically any film other than Bill and Ted and The Matrix?
TheMeanDM wrote: Nobody in the "this is racist" camp ever has refuted my visuals showing the character to be more "generic" in looks than specifically asian.
Considering purple hair and red eyes aren't exactly attributes of a specific race, I imagine you'll be waiting a long time for someone to take you up on that.
TheMeanDM wrote: Nobody in the "this is racist" camp ever has refuted my visuals showing the character to be more "generic" in looks than specifically asian.
Considering purple hair and red eyes aren't exactly attributes of a specific race, I imagine you'll be waiting a long time for someone to take you up on that.
This. Anime doesn't really portray "asian" characteristics, or at least what non-Japanese people may consider asian characteristics. You could show the same anime character to an american and a japanese person and they will give you different answers as to whether that character is white or japanese or whatever.
So what matters more in determining the race of the characters is their background and in-universe lore. Their names suggest that many of them are asian (Pazu, Aramaki, Kusanagi, Togusa, Saito, Ishikawa etc.). Their past employment, many as soldiers in the Japanese self defence force, also implies that they are asian.
A Town Called Malus wrote: [Keanu Reeves in basically any film other than Bill and Ted and The Matrix? Or John Wick, the best Reeves movie since Bill and Ted because the Matrix is lets face it, kind of overrated
I fixed that for you :p
As to this;
Nobody in the "this is racist" camp ever has refuted my visuals showing the character to be more "generic" in looks than specifically asian.
That's because the point you were making is kind of shallow and pedantic. Revy is Chinese-American, but does she really look much different from any other scantily clad anime character? Rin from Fate Stay?How about every single clone of Rei? Yin (top left corner) is from Norway. Does she look any different from Yuki (bottom left) who is Japanese? Anyone looking for non-American culture to codify race in the manner we do here is missing how specific America's brand of racism is to America. Japanese animators don't think in the way you suggested. A character's visual appearance in anime is more about encoding aspects of characterization via recognized visual ques, not about ensure the character is "race accurate."
A Town Called Malus wrote: Keanu Reeves in basically any film other than Bill and Ted and The Matrix? Or John Wick, the best Reeves movie since Bill and Ted because the Matrix is lets face it, kind of overrated
I fixed that for you :p
Haven't seen that but after reading about it briefly on its wikipedia page, I will definitely have to give it a watch.
Also realised that I forgot to put Point Break in the list of Reeves better films
A Town Called Malus wrote: Their names suggest that many of them are asian (Pazu, Aramaki, Kusanagi, Togusa, Saito, Ishikawa etc.). Their past employment, many as soldiers in the Japanese self defence force, also implies that they are asian.
Not necessarily meaningful either (for the Major). I think it was in the original manga where she says she doesn't know what her real name is. Motoko Kusanagi is a name she got in the SDF, and she was considered government property for most of her childhood and early adulthood (this is covered in Arise). Remember that the Major has been fully prosthetic save her brain since she was six years old. One of the major themes in the manga and the first movie was the question of whether or not she is more human or machine. This is brought up in 2nd Gig of the TV series as well, when other members of section 9 end up debating why the major uses the body she uses (because it's a standard commercial model, not a specialized military one like Batou's). EDIT: And I'll remind that's what the series title is all about. "Ghost" is in universe code for "soul." In both the original manga and the first feature film the title referred to Motoko; the ghost in the shell.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
A Town Called Malus wrote: Also realised that I forgot to put Point Break in the list of Reeves better films
That's two strikes Malus! One more and it's off to the camps
So what matters more in determining the race of the characters is their background and in-universe lore. Their names suggest that many of them are asian (Pazu, Aramaki, Kusanagi, Togusa, Saito, Ishikawa etc.). Their past employment, many as soldiers in the Japanese self defence force, also implies that they are asian.
Irrelevant. The movie setup will be all that counts.
TheMeanDM wrote: Nobody in the "this is racist" camp ever has refuted my visuals showing the character to be more "generic" in looks than specifically asian.
Thank you Lordofhats for that great explanation on GiTS. You did a great job of respectfully showing why Scarlett Johansson casting could work in this case.
But what is irritating is some of the disingenuous arguments people are using. Remakes are OK and happen all the time. The Departed was a western remake of Infernal Affairs, and that is OK. Remakes that tell a story in a new way or different setting, that is fun. What people were worried about is when there is a chance for an Asian actor/actress and they aren't given one because of "Marketability." Some people saw a GiTS movie as a chance for a western movie with an Asian or Asian-American lead. Asians in US media are still fighting for representation, and it stinks when roles that they could have are arbitrary filled by non-Asians. This also happens to Latinos as well (see Argo).
And on Nick Fury, is everyone ignoring the fact that the Ultimate Universe Nick Fury was based on Samuel Jackson? When they decided to make the MCU, casting him seemed a gimme.
Some people saw a GiTS movie as a chance for a western movie with an Asian or Asian-American lead. Asians in US media are still fighting for representation,
Well to chime in more specifically (because I've kind of been dancing around it), yeah it is kind of problematic that they cast ScarJo rather than an Asian for the role from the perspective of racial inclusion. I think ScarJo can do the role, and I think she can do the character justice. It's really going to come down to the script there. I'm not going to complain about casting her as far as acting goes because this is something up her alley. But really. I mean, did they not even consider Rinko Kikuchi? She's got acting chops imo, and hell she fits the Arise variation of the character just as well as ScarJo. Even looked a bit like the major as Mako Mori;
Spoiler:
So yeah. It's a bit irksome that once again, non-White culture has been whitified for the convenience of a assumed white audience. As if the American viewing public has no Asians in it... and as if this film isn't going to be marketed outside America... I doubt Paramount is really thinking about that though. They want star power, and ScarJo brings it.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Not really. go look back at pacific rim, her english isnt that good, and neither is her acting.
Maybe not in Pacific Rim but she was good enough in Babel to get nominated for an Oscar. Now admittedly that role was in Japanese but still, it does show that she has talent.
She was also in 47 Ronin recently. Not a great film, it must be said, but I didn't notice her english to be a problem.
EDIT: In fact, going back and watching some clips, it is superb.
She can speak English clearly enough when she needs to;
In interviews you can see that her English isn't smooth, but that doesn't seem to carry into her acting. Things like accents can be adjusted with practice line by line for the role. She doesn't have to be able to recite perfect Shakespeare at the drop of a hat.
I think the biggest thing against her is that she's never played anyone like the Major on screen, as opposed to ScarJo who has. And actually, speaking of people who've played similar roles; Ming-Na Wen? She could pull off the more boistrous version of the character I'd bet. Regardless, I think the point being made is that there are Asian and Asian American actresses known to an American audience who could fill the role. The one thing they all lack is star power for the poster.
EDIT: And because it was brought up, this isn't yellowface. This is yellowface;
Monkey Tamer wrote: Only in America do people complain about more ScarJo. My mother works in theater. It's acceptable for an originally white character to be played by someone else, but if a white person is cast in a previously non-white role people lose their minds. If Jada Smith was playing the lead role nobody would say a thing.
That's a disingenuous assessment to make. I'd still be complaining. Primarily because I'm an advocate for Native American and Asian rights. They endure racism that is oft ignored in light of the overblown claims of racism against African-Americans and Arabs. Asians are horribly underrepresented in Hollywood and when they do appear it's all too frequently in a comic role as a male or femme fatale Dragon Lady. Even that stupid recent TV show, Fresh off the Boat I think, portrays them as being ignorant of basic American culture.
At least a few flicks, ie the Last Samurai (only Americans complained about this, the Japanese greatly applauded the representation of their culture and language), The Wolverine (aside from the idiocy of having Wolverine feth the Japanese female lead), and Letters from Iwo Jima have shewn Asians in a positive light.
I guess part of this is dear to me because I have and have had many Chinese or Korean friends, to include a former lover. I'm sick and tired of seeing them typecast as two dimensional characters or flat out ignored. They're people for feth's sake and deserve to be represented in the media.
Then explain all of the movies and television shows where Asians were positively portrayed either as part of the main cast, or as supporting actors/actresses.
I would say that supposed racism against Asians in Hollyweird is just as overblown as it is for black Americans.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
welshhoppo wrote: For everyone complaining about Scarlett Johansson being the lead.
Hollywood doesn't make films for the enjoyment of people who are into the source material. The majority of people who see films have no intrest in the book/comic/anime that the material was based off. I had no idea there was more than one Spiderman, but I've seen Spider-Man so on so forth.
I would not be surprised if this film has nothing to do with the source material, because 90% of the people who will watch the film will have no idea what the anime is about.
This times 1000
The same hubbub was stirred up when Star Trek: Into Darkness was released, with Cumberbatch playing Khan Noonian Singh. Fans and former Trek alumni accused J.J. Abrams of "whitewashing" the character. Nevermind the fact that Montalban was a white Spanish-born Mexican national in makeup playing a Sikh in the Original Series, and was sans the make-up in The Wrath of Khan (thus appearing white).
To be fair though, Cumberbatch was still a poor choice to replace Montalban. He's a great actor, and his acting in the role was great, but it just wasn't..."Khan", like...everyone else mostly matched up fairly well with their original characters, but they might as well have gone with a different villain entirely for as much as Cumberbatch's portrayal resembled anything of that portrayed by Montalban in the 60's and 80's. Even disregarding ethnic concerns, the body build, bearing, attitude, and presence of the Cumberbatch to Montalban was very different, similar in name only, unlike say, the two Scotty's or Bones's or Kirks. Cumberbatch would have made a stellar Vorta or Romulan however.
Vaktathi wrote: To be fair though, Cumberbatch was still a poor choice to replace Montalban. He's a great actor, and his acting in the role was great, but it just wasn't..."Khan", like...everyone else mostly matched up fairly well with their original characters, but they might as well have gone with a different villain entirely for as much as Cumberbatch's portrayal resembled anything of that portrayed by Montalban in the 60's and 80's. Even disregarding ethnic concerns, the body build, bearing, attitude, and presence of the Cumberbatch to Montalban was very different, similar in name only, unlike say, the two Scotty's or Bones's or Kirks. Cumberbatch would have made a stellar Vorta or Romulan however.
Yeah i found cumberbatch too British, to play a genetically engineered super race. I can understand the opposition against Scarlet Johanssen but the decision is made in the boardroom, as the big movie companies think that normal viewer needs to be held by the hand.
If they change the tachikoma's i would be more upset
Vaktathi wrote: To be fair though, Cumberbatch was still a poor choice to replace Montalban. He's a great actor, and his acting in the role was great, but it just wasn't..."Khan", like...everyone else mostly matched up fairly well with their original characters, but they might as well have gone with a different villain entirely for as much as Cumberbatch's portrayal resembled anything of that portrayed by Montalban in the 60's and 80's. Even disregarding ethnic concerns, the body build, bearing, attitude, and presence of the Cumberbatch to Montalban was very different, similar in name only, unlike say, the two Scotty's or Bones's or Kirks. Cumberbatch would have made a stellar Vorta or Romulan however.
Yeah i found cumberbatch too British, to play a genetically engineered super race. I can understand the opposition against Scarlet Johanssen but the decision is made in the boardroom, as the big movie companies think that normal viewer needs to be held by the hand. If they change the tachikoma's i would be more upset
They could have still made him an ubermensch, just not Khan. Could even have referenced how he was left behind when the Botany Bay left or something.
See, the Khan thing is a great example. It was so silly to cast Cumberbatch and it would have made more sense to cast a minority. They could not find a high profile Asian actor? When Hollywood does unforced errors like this, its hard to defend.
Or, they could have tried not to shoehorn Khan in the movie in the first place...Man, that was one of the most disappointing movies.
Hollywood definitely has a race and gender problem. There has been multiple studies supporting that there is an inbalance. Asian Americans have been poorly represented, and the younger generation is starting to speak out about it. I‘m glad that we got to a point where Master of None and Fresh off the Boat exists, but we still live in a world where Deadline thought the article referenced was a good idea: http://www.vulture.com/2015/03/13-worst-quotes-in-deadlines-awful-article.html. Please note that Deadline modified the article after the outcry.
I speak Japanese. Rinko Kikuchi was really good in Babel. She was of course playing the role of a Japanese girl doing Japanese girl things in Japanese in Japan. Not surprisingly, her speaking ability in a foreign language might be less natural.
Of course the new film doesn't necessarily portray a Japanese person in Japan, and certainly won't involve speaking Japanese, so a Japanese actress isn't automatically the first choice.
I was thinking of her too. I think she would make an awesome Major Kusanagi, but I suspect the studios would consider her too old to make a sexy enough leading lady.
Kilkrazy wrote: Nor me. Many a good tune is played on an old violin.
indeed. Indeed.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
hotsauceman1 wrote: She is malaysian though, not japanese. if Memoirs of a Geisha is any indication, have asians from another country play japanese can be even worse.
That assumes it has Japan as its location.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
hotsauceman1 wrote: My point still stand. Geisha had chinese play japanese, and that didnt go over well.
hotsauceman1 wrote: My point still stand. Geisha had chinese play japanese, and that didnt go over well.
Where did it not go over well?
Japan, I assume, and probably China. There is a mutual burning hatred between the two. Think England and France, back before Germany got her big ideas.
I'll say it again, ScarJo is a fine choice for the role. It's the story and script that will cause this project to sink or swim. I'm hopeful.
For some reason, the Japanese get touchy about casting a Chinese actress to play a Japanese character. Remember the controversy around Memoires of a Geisha?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oops. Ninja'ed. By a cChinese ninja.
hotsauceman1 wrote: My point still stand. Geisha had chinese play japanese, and that didnt go over well.
Where did it not go over well?
Japan, I assume, and probably China. There is a mutual burning hatred between the two. Think England and France, back before Germany got her big ideas.
I thought it was overblown racial politics, but didn't watch the movie 'cause I thought it sounded boring (not because of offense).
Then I saw it a few years later, and it was really, really idiotic. The accents were atrocious to the point where they distracted from the movie. Taking the Europe parallel, imagine watching some historical drama about france during WWII, where everyone's speaking english 'cause, well, hollywood, but half the "french" cast is speaking with german accents 'cause they couldn't bother to half-ass a french accent. Then imagine the politics behind that on top of the laziness
One movie blundering around and getting backlash from it isn't an excuse for another movie being stupid in a different way.
I thought it was overblown racial politics, but didn't watch the movie 'cause I thought it sounded boring (not because of offense).
Then I saw it a few years later, and it was really, really idiotic. The accents were atrocious to the point where they distracted from the movie. Taking the Europe parallel, imagine watching some historical drama about france during WWII, where everyone's speaking english 'cause, well, hollywood, but half the "french" cast is speaking with german accents 'cause they couldn't bother to half-ass a french accent. Then imagine the politics behind that on top of the laziness
One movie blundering around and getting backlash from it isn't an excuse for another movie being stupid in a different way.
And there was the distinct lack of any ninjas. Me and my brothers got sent out of the room when my mum was watching Memoirs of a Geisha. Apparently she didn't find our game of "Spot the Ninjas" as funny as we did. I believe it was during a scene in which it was raining and one of us said that the raindrops were actually ninjas that she finally had enough.
A similar thing happened when we noticed the similarity between the captain in Titanic and Captain Birdseye
As much as I like ScarJo in certain roles.. I just don't think she has the presence/impact for this kind of character.
The major in GiTS is an absolute hard-ass. Uncompromising, she is the school-mistress of your nightmares (but still can be soft of course). ScarJo is much to soft, vapid and doe-eyed to come even close to something like Linda Hamilton in T2, which I think is what this role needs if we're to take her seriously.
Hardly new in Hollywood, but this is a casting just based on looks and ScarJo's box office pull.
Or.. maybe I will be proven completely wrong, cause I would have said exactly the same thing about Keanu Reeves before I saw him in the Matrix.
Or.. you know, they could have chosen a fething oriental actress(!) Can't name any names, but a couple of years living in asia there is no shortage of people that would have worked. But, without a big name director on board that can produce and finance the films themselves and tell the suits in the studios to GTFO of the creative process, unfortunately that wasn't likely to happen.
Yeah, Scarjo doesn't look right to me. She's too soft looking. You can tell she was cast more for money than for fitting the role, much like Emilia Clarke as Sarah Connor in Terminator Genesis, or Matt Smith as Skynet.
