Ghost in the Shell

The shell is there, but where is the ghost? Ghost in the Shell is a narrative action-packed summer blockbuster intended for an audience with the mentality of a 14-year-old boy raised on video games. However, its cyberpunk appearance does not hide the cyberpunk philosophy. The title invokes the idea of a great conspiracy, a mystery that will be surprisingly revealed in the end. But the plot is trivial and predictable. Furthermore - and I really don't like this - the creators try to evoke the feeling of something smarter, with a philosophical overlay. Fortunately for Sanders' film, both Matrix sequels, which are probably the most glaring example of this flaw, were two levels stupider than Ghost in the Shell. Even the visuals didn't impress me as much as the creative team intended. It is overdone and not darkly depressing enough, as befits cyberpunk. The action is too frenzied, simply tailored to the generation of computer kids. It will receive two stars from me only just barely, and they are mostly for Scarlett. Overall impression: 35%. (2018-04-22)

I was intrigued by the cast, which made me excited to see the film, but I was actually disappointed. There were a few interesting moments now and then, which is not enough for 107 minutes, so it ended up being average to below average. I liked Takeshi Kitano, who kept reminding me of a koala bear. But the special effects gave the whole film a cheap plastic feel to it, like a kind of action PVC theater. It's a shame because the theme had decent potential. 3*- (2017-08-27)

I assume that hardcore fans of the original will be grumbling, and sci-fi enthusiasts won't be completely thrilled either, but I can’t say that Ghost in the Shell is a dud. Though I wouldn't consider it a good film even by mistake, either. It looks great, the passages through the city full of giant holograms are beautiful, the makeup artists and the overall production designers did a great job, and that's probably the main reason to go to the cinema. Unfortunately, the rest is weaker. Scarlett Johansson stares weirdly and looks terribly serious most of the time, without any sex appeal or charm. The action is more average than interesting, and although it doesn't offend, I can't remember a single scene that I would want to see again a few hours after the screening. The main problem, however, lies in the woefully transparent and uninteresting plot, which is B-movie level and embarrassingly predictable. Overall, we have a visually attractive world, but with fairly boring characters doing not very entertaining things, and you'll always know what will happen fifteen minutes in advance. I didn't get bored, but I wouldn't go again even by mistake. (2017-05-15)

First cinema disappointment this year. I only know Ghost in the Shell as a game, I haven't come into contact with the anime and I have no idea what the film benefits from more, anyway it's rather bland. This is hardcore sci-fi with a cyberpunk twist that won't be very appealing to many viewers, I think the film is aimed at a very narrow audience, i.e. to the average viewer who is unfamiliar with both the game and the anime, it doesn't have much to say. Scarlett Johansson was surprisingly good here, visually the fictional world has something to it, the action scenes are rather average except for the opening one (which was flawless) and the finale is unfortunately the weakest part of the film. In some places I was a bit bored, so there is no question of great fun. It was watchable, but I would skip the cinema. 60% (2017-03-31)

A bit of a weaker combination of Robocop and Blade Runner... Especially when I think of the latter film, I'm struck by how dated and unsurprising Ghost in the Shell feels, while Blade Runner is still a great philosophical spectacle to ponder and still has something to say about people, humanity and other values. I quite liked the special effects, Scarlett Johansson had one and a half expressions from start to finish, but the role didn't give her more options, so okay. The action scenes weren't completely bad (maybe only the one against the walking tank or whatever it was, was terribly boring) and the music sounded interestingly atmospheric (it also wanted to remind me of Vangelis' Blade Runner), but I didn't take away any great experience from the movie theatre this time. In addition, it seemed to me that the film lasted about two and a half hours. (2017-04-03)