Ghost in the Shell (2017)

[The Q]

The visuals and art direction actually make it worth seeing on a big screen. It LOOKS fabulous, even the bad reviews say that.

Interesting. I usually save the theatre for EPIC movie events.

Man of Steel.

Batman v. Superman

Justice League

Avengers

etc.

 

[Davis_Mike]

400 million to break even?
The production budget was 110 million.

Typically studios double the production budget for marketing.

Not sure where the 400M comes from, though. Production + marketing looks to be only about 220M (assuming your 110M is accurate)

Yes, in the $400 range. Revenue is split with theaters. Basically, a production company only gets back 50-60% of domestic revenue. Even less from the overseas split, rumored to be in the 20-30% range. That is why some movies that look like they made a good amount of money worldwide, are still considered a financial loss.

Open weekend, the split is higher for the production company. That is why big opening weekends are important. And having success domestically is also a necessity by non-blockbuster type movies which have large budgets, because the overseas revenue split is not in the production company's favor. Some blockbuster type movies can get away with under performing domestic numbers if they have very large overseas numbers.

Look at Warcraft & Pacific Rim. Both did terrible domestically but did great numbers in Asia. Both are considered flops that probably lost money even though they both made over $400 mil worldwide.

 

[GNG]

Will she be one of the nude cyborgs?

I'm not going to see this movie so I really don't care.

 

[Omar 382]

Interesting. I usually save the theatre for EPIC movie events.

Man of Steel.

Batman v. Superman

Justice League

Avengers

etc.

I haven't seen BvS, but Man of Steel is an "Epic" movie event?

 

[The Q]

I haven't seen BvS, but Man of Steel is an "Epic" movie event?

what Superman movie isn't?

He's the GOAT.

 

[SDGuy73]

what Superman movie isn't?

He's the GOAT.

The one played by Brandon Routh.

 

[The Q]

The one played by Brandon Routh.

When it came out....it was a HUGE event.

 

[anotheridiot]

I thought Scarlett was a good choice for this. I'm not a huge fan of her acting, but IMO she pulls off the stale/droid acting very well (not sure if that's a knock on her or not lol).

Ghost in the Shell was a really interesting concept, importing biological material into a technological device. I really hope they keep the film a little complicated. I was hoping for an R film but the original Ghost in the Shell animated version was pretty much PG-13... the violence wasn't bad, I think the only thing that made it 'risky' for some was nudity (few moments where the main character goes nude, outside of the suit), but it was a droid, so whatevs.

Yes she does, but thats because she is usually stiff. I am hoping ScarJo in spandex is better than naked in under the skin.

 

[OutlawImmortal]

I'm thinking that MANY of the reviews of this movie must have been from fans of the source material or something? I went in cold, not expecting much (read the tepid reviews), and quite enjoyed it.

I didn't get where it was dumbed down at all. The underlying premise of what a man/machine hybrid would face was I thought pretty well laid out given it was an action movie.

Her being changed into a caucasian body actually FIT the story better, imo. I won't go into detail on that at risk of spoiling stuff for those that haven't seen it.

So, if you're on the fence on this movie, I'd give it a chance, I felt like I got my money's worth.

Tens of hours of the source material were condensed for this single movie, shortcuts tend to get made with the plot in those types of situations.

That being said I try to look at the merits of the movie by itself, without comparing it to the source material and I'd say GitS isn't bad, but isn't groundbreaking or great either. I'd say it was average-good so I guess a 6/10 or 7/10.

It did get me more interested in the universe, since I've only ever seen the film from 1995. Having some plot points revealed to me a lot faster made me want to watch the anime more. Eh, after all the remakes and retreads, I'd say the more hollywood can take from anime, the better. The writing in a lot of anime is pretty great and much better than a lot of what hollywood comes up with.

My only complaints is that I was promised ScarJo ass and maybe some tits and I pretty much got neither.

 

[chf]

I watched a review that came out later, and the guy is a big anime fan (I'm not), and he pointed out that Speed Racer, and some other movie I'd never heard of were the only two other anime shows to get the big budget Hollywood treatment, and he claimed both were awful. I'd only seen S.Racer, and I agree with him, it was putrescent.

Having said that, I read a fair bit of sci-fi, and the ol' man/machine hybrid isn't exactly rare. Richard Morgan's 'Altered Carbon' series looks at a different variation of the idea, also connected with police/military. Movies from Blade Runner through Robocop and now this have examined the idea.

There's not a lot of depth they left out of this, I don't think, given that it's an action movie, and not a slower moving drama.

Anyway, I was engaged with the characters, and liked it quite a bit despite ScarJo's clothed state (she's too big a star to be naked anymore).

Check out 'Under the Skin' and you can get her in all her glory, PLUS she's not all angsty about being different.

 

[anotheridiot]

Check out 'Under the Skin' and you can get her in all her glory, PLUS she's not all angsty about being different.

Honest guys, dont watch Under the skin. Her cleavage and peek a boo cleavage is 1000% better that seeing it all. She needs clothes on to get in my spank bank.

 

[calsnowskier]

Honest guys, dont watch Under the skin. Her cleavage and peek a boo cleavage is 1000% better that seeing it all. She needs clothes on to get in my spank bank.

Who hasn't seen the screen caps of this already anyway? I haven't seen the movie, but I have seen everything that needs to be seen...

 

[chf]

An interesting movie with or without her naughty bits. VERRRY glacially slow, but tried to do something different. Kinda funny when everyone moans and groans about formula Hollywood, but when something like 'Under' comes out, nobody watches it.

 

[calsnowskier]

An interesting movie with or without her naughty bits. VERRRY glacially slow, but tried to do something different. Kinda funny when everyone moans and groans about formula Hollywood, but when something like 'Under' comes out, nobody watches it.

Maybe nobody watches it because there isn't much marketing for it? Or they aren't release wide enough to get the asses in seats?

I hardly remember even hearing about Under the Skin when it was in the theaters and it was not at main theaters (or at least not for long).

I am not attacking Hollywood for this though. I get it. "Color-by-number Movie #1" is a proven money maker. Of course Hollywood would invest more in that. But to then say "Color-by-number Movie #1 did better than "Original Movie A, therefore nobody wants original fare" is a false conclusion.

 

[chf]

Maybe nobody watches it because there isn't much marketing for it? Or they aren't release wide enough to get the asses in seats?

I hardly remember even hearing about Under the Skin when it was in the theaters and it was not at main theaters (or at least not for long).

I am not attacking Hollywood for this though. I get it. "Color-by-number Movie #1" is a proven money maker. Of course Hollywood would invest more in that. But to then say "Color-by-number Movie #1 did better than "Original Movie A, therefore nobody wants original fare" is a false conclusion.

Well sure, they didn't go full court 'Transformers version XII' presskit with it, but it got a shvt ton of buzz, mainly because Johanson was nude (don't think the I phone photos had been hacked at that point).

At any rate, the reason that Hollywood gives us remakes and shit like that is because people watch them.

Am I being overly simplistic? Sure, but nobody wants to read an essay.

 

[calsnowskier]

Well sure, they didn't go full court 'Transformers version XII' presskit with it, but it got a shvt ton of buzz, mainly because Johanson was nude (don't think the I phone photos had been hacked at that point).

At any rate, the reason that Hollywood gives us remakes and shit like that is because people watch them.

Am I being overly simplistic? Sure, but nobody wants to read an essay.

I think we are in agreement. Hollywood churns our unoriginal swill because the masses consume ungodly amounts of unoriginal swill. There is a chicken/egg question here, but when they are "guaranteed" to make a small fortune with the tried and true, why try anything different?

 

[anotheridiot]

I think we are in agreement. Hollywood churns our unoriginal swill because the masses consume ungodly amounts of unoriginal swill. There is a chicken/egg question here, but when they are "guaranteed" to make a small fortune with the tried and true, why try anything different?

I dont think you can blame Hollywood for Under the skin, it was an indy movie wasnt it? BFI and A24 distribution.

 

[OutlawImmortal]

I'd never even heard of Under the Skin until this thread.

 

[The Q]

I'd never even heard of Under the Skin until this thread.

Same.

No idea it ever existed before this thread.

 

[chf]

I dont think you can blame Hollywood for Under the skin, it was an indy movie wasnt it? BFI and A24 distribution.

Sure, but that's the point. You don't think the people who made the movie would have liked to have had 10 million to make it rather than the shoestring budget they did have?

Hollywood won't finance those kind of pictures.

Because people (for the most part) won't watch those kinds of pictures.