Ghost in the Shell 2 - L'attacco dei cyborg

This sequel doesn't come anywhere near the original in either story, atmosphere, artwork, or provocativeness. From the onset, the viewer is slammed with a philosophical quandary, this is given by the cyber- coroner and feels so out of context that it appears forced. Whereas, in the original, it was subtly woven throughout the film and its context. You just don't get that here.

I don't know if this is Disney's influence at work... The first film was a little convoluted, though, with a little brain power you could figure it out. For "Innocence" they give it to the audience in black and white.

Then you have the appearance of digital artwork, fused and mixed with the more original. For most of the time, this works, though it does have less effect on building atmosphere, as does the setting and direction of the scene. The worst scenes containing digital art are the cars driving down the street. The street backgrounds are dark with a mat lustre, howbeit, the cars are ultra shiny bright metallic. The reflections flowing over the surface of the car doesn't tally with their surroundings. This draws the viewer out of the story to register the imperfection of the scene, this hurts the movie as you want your viewer to feel as though they are apart of the story and not a third party just watching.

The story was a nice follow-up, even though I don't think is was told all that well. Something is happening to the sex-bots! For some reason, they are malfunctioning and killing their owners and whoever's in the vicinity before committing suicide. Section Nine is called in as this could be an act of terrorism since robots cannot kill humans or themselves.

Under better hands, this could have been as great as the original film had they decided to entwine the philosophy, the mystery and thriller elements, and mood and ambiance into the story and artwork instead of segregating them and lessening the power of the piece.

Worth watching if you've seen the original but be warned it's not as good.

Ghost in the Shell 2: Innocence. I went to this movie worried that it would end up like just about every Peter Framptom Album after Frampton Comes Alive; they were all pitiful albums only because Frampton comes alive did not leave much room for improvement. The original Ghost in The Shell is a classic. It was a good action film that had some deep undertones. Well made to say the least, full of memorable characters.

Ghost in the Shell 2 was so different that there could be no comparison. As opposed to an Action film with deep undercurrents, this is a philosophical film that occasionally had some action sequences. The basic plot is very simple: Android created for pleasure killing their owners. Cyborg cops trying to get to the bottom of these strange crimes. The cops, section nine operatives Batou and Togusa spend more time quoting everything from Bazooka Joe to Milton as long as it serves a purpose. This is not Ghost in the Shell. This is a Mamorou Oshii original, with his own ideas and philosophies not being bound by the original manga.

I venture to say that I actually prefer Innocence to the first one, because it struck chords in me the first one did not. Somebody who has a different outlook on everything, however, would disagree. If you have seen the first one, remember how there is more or less a quest for humanity? THis one takes an opposite spin on things. As well as takes a look at how humans feel this need to immortalize their own image.

The animation was enough to prove that traditional and computer animation could work together and create a beautiful picture. However, the underwater and in air scenes seemed to rely too heavily on the computers, which then completely made up the world. The world itself was not the world I remember from Ghost in the Shell. THis was a whole new futuristic world as opposed to a slightly more advanced modern setting. This film also focused a lot on the relationship between Batou and the now 'missing' Kusanagi.

This film seemed to be lost on many. There are many scenes of complete silence, which are intended as 'breathing time' and and other points really to build tension. The film also slows down at a few points so that the audience can absorb the scenery, and gives extra time for the audience to catch the symbolism. The film ended with so many angry groans. It would seen that the film was lost upon those who wanted to see a sequel to Ghost in the Shell with the same themes and ideas. The only similarity to the first film would be that most of the story is superficial, and what the film is really about is the deeper meanings.

This was an excellent film, and though it can be seen as superior, it will never be as well known and recognized as the first film. Though this is not just a sequel: This is a whole new Ghost in the Shell altogether.

**** out of ****

A new Japanese cyberpunk masterpiece that makes the original GiTS look primitive by comparison. Mamoru Oshii and his crew did a masterful job creating a worthy successor to their 1995 adaptation of Masamune Shirow's original manga.

As in the original movie – as well as in that other quintessential proto-cyberpunk movie, Blade Runner – the movie explores human nature in a world that is becoming more technological all the time, to a point where people ARE technology, the boundaries are rapidly fading away. What does it mean to be human? If we join with technology, would we become something else? Should we welcome it, or fear it? Will humanity lose or gain from the changes?

After the events of the first movie, Major Motoko Kusanagi has seemingly disappeared; focus of the second movie has shifted to Bateau, who is still working for the secret government "Section 9". This is by no means a bad thing, since Bateau is at least as interesting a character as Kusanagi ever was. Going beyond your basic cyberpunk cyborg tough guy with attitude, he is very intelligent, and has some nice human touches (like the dog he loves taking care of). At various points he and other characters routinely indulge in philosophical debate, often quoting literature, from Milton to biblical psalm verses. Just to say this isn't your typical sci-fi action movie, although there is some action, and when it comes, it's fast, brutal & violent.

The actual plot involves an incident with a sophisticated robotic "pleasure model", if you will, gone berserk. The investigation leads us through the darker parts of near-future Japanese society, including yakuza, companies with questionable ethics, and mysterious hackers.

Visually, the movie is stunningly beautiful, using a combination of traditional cell animation and state of the art CGI. Many of the movie's backgrounds are gorgeous to just look at; even dark and dirty back alleys are shown so rich in color and detail, you could gaze at them all day. Like in the first movie, Oshii lets the movie halt at times, immersing the viewer in the richly detailed world he created. Many of the computer screen readouts resemble those seen in Oshii's "Avalon" a lot – which again is not a bad thing, as they look both high-tech and yet elegant & artistic.

Last but not least, the music by Kenji Kawai is hauntingly beautiful, adding more layers to the sophisticated richness of it all.

I cannot recommend this movie highly enough. Anyone who likes science fiction, anyone who was blown away by movies such as Blade Runner and of course the first "Ghost in the Shell" (which you should see before watching this one) will enjoy this.

As the saying goes, "you don't have to have a degree in philosophy to enjoy Ghost In The Shell, but it helps". Well, I'm sure it's a saying in some circles anyway :) Mamoru Oshii has always been a pretentious director, but also a very talented one. The original Ghost In The Shell and his live-action Avalon in particular can be viewed as much as philosophical essays as they can action-driven films. However, in those two he is content to use the philosophical ideas as a foundation to build the film's story and aesthetics on, as layers to ponder if you are familiar with the ideas and inclined to ponder. In INNOCENCE, perhaps he was afraid people wouldn't understand the philosophical references, so he makes them very explicit - characters respond to almost every event that happens with a quote from Descartes or Milton or some other respected source. In the end one is forced to conclude that this is less to help the viewer understand the philosophical ideas in the film as to make sure everybody knows how well read Oshii is (I don't think the quotes would help anybody understand the ideas that wasn't already familiar with them). In other words, he lays it on a bit too thick for his own good... yet from a first viewing at least the film seems to have less of real substance to say than part 1 or AVALON. Neither of those films presented any real answers or new theories, but they were very effective artistic framings of the questions they addressed at least. INNOCENCE perhaps seems like it's trying to offer answers and explanations for issues that do not really amean themselves to answering, but more to a thorough considering of the questions and an abandoning of pre-conceptions based on a very narrow perspective (that of human existence).

But, criticisms aside, Oshii also knows that the audience is not really there to hear a lecture on philosophy - they want to be dazzled with the highest possible production values and animation standards, and he does not disappoint. The work from Production IG exceeds even their own incredibly high quality standards, and the soundtrack from Kenji Kawai complements the visuals perfectly. If the scene where the film's title is accompanies a surreal parade through a desolate high-tech urban landscape doesn't send chills down your spine then... well, that's your business, but I am surprised. It has absolutely nothing to do with the plot or any particularly clear point regarding the philosophy, but it's an aesthetic thrill of the highest order. Oshii knows that the viewer is expecting some action with his philosophy too, and the film offers a few scenes of shockingly powerful violence (especially with a big screen and modern cinema sound system). They're inserted almost arbitrarily though (there is an attempt to make one of the middle scenes more meaningful, but the climactic scenes especially have little point except the celebration of destruction). The first film's action scenes were a huge influence on THE MATRIX, and through that film were highly influential on world cinema in general - Oshii probably wanted to make sure his newest and costliest film would not go unremarked on this front too.

Conclusion: the film must be admitted as flawed, but what Oshii work isn't?

The first GITS was the closest to flawless he has come, and part 2 definitely doesn't put him any closer. It does raise the bar aesthetically though, and is the new benchmark for animators to beat.

On the same page, this movie is called both "Intellectually Weak," and "In love with its own intelligence" by different IMDb users. Clearly, that alone makes this film worth your time and worth forming your own opinion about.

The thing is, this is not a stupid film by any means. 'Visually stunning,' it is constantly called, but it's not just that: It's an assault on the senses (in a good way), both visually and aurally. The sound is incredible, the images stick with you. Even a simple, seemingly underthought image like the final two shots of the movie will stick with you long after the closing credits roll.

But how is the story? I haven't seen the original in years, but this one held my attention, and kept my brain engaged. I remember not liking the first one when I first saw it (too many scenes of nothing moving, while we listened to voice-over), but I give this one an enthusiastic thumbs up, plus a wink and a smile. It FEELS like the middle chapter in a story... there is too much left unresolved, and while seeing the first one isn't necessary to understanding this one, there ARE many references the original "Ghost in the Shell." It's not so much a continuation of the story, as it is a continuation of the characters. Which I think is the better call.

Constant quotes from literature is not a sign of intellectual weakness, I don't think. People accuse the movie of not having a brain of its own, but I think any movie that engages the brain of its audience needn't make apologies. This one remains interesting on all levels; I just hope it doesn't take them another nine years to produce part three.

10/10