|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:It already came out, years ago. The only reason it's not called 'Superman' is because of intellectual property rights and presumable nerd outcry. Hancock is narratively identical to half of Batman V Superman. There were a lot of differences from Superman to Hancock. That would be like calling Chappie a complete copy of Short Circuit 2. LOS LOCOS KICK YOUR rear end
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2017 21:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 14:29 |
|
|
Taintrunner posted:A Fistful of Dollars is a remake of the Samurai film Yojimbo, retold in an American Wild West setting .... and as I mentioned in the other thread, Kurosawa has gone on record saying that he lifted a whole bunch of Yojimbo from Dashiell Hammett novels which means that A Fistful of Dollars is pretty much re-Westernizing the material.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2017 21:51
|
|
|
Mithaldu posted:If the wikipedia synopsis of the story of the original comic is to be believed it's not white-washing, it's 100% pure white savior bullshit. It falls in line with the greater theme of "unfairness against POC", however "white savior" is a very distinct and different thing from "white-washing". Indicting Hollywood is easier when you use less words, not more. Unfortunately, we live in a climate where calling something racist racist shuts down the brains of people you're trying to get into. Unfortunately, getting all tvtropes.txt also shuts down people. That's why I downplay calling white savior stuff white savior stuff. Intentional racism fueled by malice or cynicism, though not the only way racism manifests, is still a type of racism that white people understand. That's why I always try to emphasize the intentions of creators, and the sausage making process of the entertainment industry, rather than go all Film Studies 101. Especially when it's mass marketed commercial cinema. Getting back to GITS, getting a white person to play the lead role is an intentional decision made in a climate where Hollywood knew its casting choice will be scrutinized. The film itself exercises gymnastics to justify this decision.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2017 00:24
|
|
|
Echo Chamber posted:Indicting Hollywood is easier when you use less words, not more. Unfortunately, we live in a climate where calling something racist racist shuts down the brains of people you're trying to get into. Unfortunately, getting all tvtropes.txt also shuts down people. That's why I downplay calling white savior stuff white savior stuff. This is a very, very bad approach. Deploying antiracist terminology as an insult is an abuse of that terminology. The same way people abuse 'fascist'. In your view, the film is 'just racist' because it was the product of some racist person's racist intentions. You then deem it unnecessary to actually read the film, because both its form and its content are mere 'justifications' for the racist person's racist intentions. You emphasize the unimportance of the actual film with your insistence on its status as 'low art'. So with the same breath that you decry cynicism, you insist that the artwork is meaningless because, like, they're just trying to make money, man. In truth, purely ideology is impossible. There are always traces of authenticity in the texture of a given film. If your goal is to 'get into white racist brains', you need to actually engage in critique. You're not 'indicting' anything, otherwise. You need to be truthful and accurate.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2017 01:41
|
|
|
Whitewashing, whitewashing whitewashing whitewashing whitewashing, whitewashing whitewashing whitewashing whitewashing whitewashing. Whitewashing whitewashing. Whitewashing. Whitewashing whitewashing. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2017 03:35
|
|
|
Tenzarin posted:There were a lot of differences from Superman to Hancock. That would be like calling Chappie a complete copy of Short Circuit 2. You're talking to the person who argued in earnest that The Watchmen is a remake of Jurassic Park.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2017 04:19
|
|
|
It's equally likely that none of the Asian actresses they could have hired possessed the requisite huge tits that are the most important part of the Major's character.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2017 04:20
|
|
Turns out my post two pages ago was completely right. 
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2017 09:48
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:I'm not so convinced of that. If anything, it's the opposite. If you shoot for making a movie for the low-numbered fan base, you're going to suck poo poo at the BO even if you max out that fanbase. The real value is in the Everybody Else, because they are the numbers you need to be successful. Well there you had Steven Spielberg attached, and some awareness of the brand amongst all the kids that grew up with it (in the millions, I would say). For something that is way less known, I'd still argue good word of mouth still matters, and I think the studios recognize that, since they are usually so intent on courting the nerd film websites and writers. e: And More posted:I agree with this sentiment. This definition is taking it a bit far. Surely, adapting great stories to a different cultural background isn't inherently whitewashing. I think you're thinking too much about it. The question is not what a thing is doing, but the harm it causes. Reinterpreting foreign stories for domestic consumption doesn't harm per se, but it's a clear case of appropriation when the creators go out of their way to make sure ethnic actors don't get starring roles in those vehiceles. Reinterpreting for domestic consumption doesn't bar minorities from participating, or stop them from leading the movies. That's the producers/money men going out of their way to do so. And its especially blatant when they try to lean on another society's exoticizing to get more money, while stripping them of the actors from that culture. That's downright exploitation. So for me its a range more than a set definition. Shageletic fucked around with this message at 23:02 on Apr 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2017 22:51
|
|
|
FuturePastNow posted:It's equally likely that none of the Asian actresses they could have hired possessed the requisite huge tits that are the most important part of the Major's character. They only have 1 chance to make a GITS live action movie and they didn't recreate the classic "titty android being repaired" shoot it piss me off to no end. http://www.mangago.me/read-manga/ghost_in_the_shell/an/ghost-in-the-shell-chapter-9.html/10/
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2017 23:54
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:They only have 1 chance to make a GITS live action movie and they didn't recreate the classic "titty android being repaired" shoot it piss me off to no end. Also they missed out on their opportunity to cast a muppet as Aramaki 
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2017 00:11
|
|
|
Echo Chamber posted:Getting back to GITS, getting a white person to play the lead role is an intentional decision made in a climate where Hollywood knew its casting choice will be scrutinized. The film itself exercises gymnastics to justify this decision. People were pointing out the whitewashing from the minute Scarlett Johansson was announced for the role so Paramount had been trying to figure out a fix for that right from the get go. There were also really persistent rumours that they commissioned some visual effects tests to make Johansson look more Asian but I guess we'll never know if they actully did unless someone hacks their emails. Another issue here is that someone higher up in the chain might have greenlit the project on the proviso that they attach a big star like Johansson as lead so it could have been the case that the filmmakers were stuck with the whitewashing and had to make do.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2017 05:05
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:The question is not what a thing is doing, but the harm it causes. [...] it's a clear case of appropriation when the creators go out of their way to make sure ethnic actors don't get starring roles in those vehiceles. These sentences are contradictory. And, on top of that, the bulk of your post concerns neither actions nor their end results, but intentionality: "the creators go out of their way to make sure... That's the producers/money men going out of their way to... its especially blatant when they try to..." If you are actually concerned about end results and not actions, then your post is reduced to one line: "Ethnic actors don't get starring roles." The error in your thought is that you have begun with the phrase "ethnic actors don't get starring roles" and then presumed that the thing that is causing this harm is 'money men with bad intentions'. So we must simply eliminate 'money men with bad intentions' so that jobs will flow. "That's downright exploitation." Your post has nothing to do with fighting exploitation. You are fighting to make exploitation more palatable. To put authentic Asians in authentic Asian narratives and then exploit the everloving poo poo out of them. You are pushing for the exploitation to be conducted by money-men with good intentions. To be clear: if you purchase a blu-ray copy of the 1995 Ghost In The Shell that you watch unsubbed because you speak fluent Japanese, because you live in Japan, because you are Japanese, that is still not ethical consumption. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 08:35 on Apr 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2017 14:20
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:To be clear: if you purchase a blu-ray copy of the 1995 Ghost In The Shell that you watch unsubbed because you speak fluent Japanese, because you live in Japan, because you are Japanese, that is still not ethical consumption. Correct, unless you're Ainu.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 07:20
|
|
|
porfiria posted:Correct, unless you're Ainu. Nah, that's just stolkhom syndroming an oppressive culture! 
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
Unless Masamune Shirow is Ainu or something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 17:50
|
|
|
I checked, he does not seem to be anything but a son of the Yamato opressors
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 17:51
|
|
|
OWLS! posted:Unless Masamune Shirow is Ainu or something. He's not.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 01:28
|
|
|
Midjack posted:He's not. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 04:24
|
|
|
So, this movie. Well, it's not Ghost in the Shell. The characters are completely different. They have different origins, different personalities, different motivations. They and the world they inhabit are only cosmetically similar to the original. The quieter shots they took from the original movie are out of context and no longer plays a broader thematic part in the story. The pure action scenes they took lack the impact of the animation. The lighting lacks the contrasts between different times of day and mental states that the original had. The ending is nonsense. I might write a longer post with specifics, but basically go into this movie knowing that they bought the brand and style and none of the substance. In light of it's source material, it's a terrible film. Ccs fucked around with this message at 03:53 on May 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 02:51
|
|
|
Ccs posted:So, this movie. I've only seen Stand Alone Complex. My problem wasn't the drastic changes to the characters, it was more that it had to be a superhero origin story because that's what people want. There's a weird disconnect between Major being the "first of her kind" and only existing for a year to her being important and treated as though she had earned respect through years of service. The cyber-terrorism parts and Major's-identity parts felt like two different movies.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 05:33
|
|
|
Ccs posted:So, this movie. I agree, the movie was Ghost in the Shell in name only.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 08:43
|
|
|
Back when this film opened opposite Boss Baby and stumbled right out of the gate (Boss Baby brought in more than double the box office that opening weekend) the trade papers were predicting that thanks to the huge advertising campaign it would lose between $60m to $100m based on a global B.O. projection of $200m ($50m domestic, $150m international). Well it did way worse than that, bringing in a global BO of $166m ($40m domestic, $126m international). It bombed haaaard. I guess we shouldn't be holding our breath for a sequel.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 13:21
|
|
|
in the sequel the ghost will be mlk and the shell will be white and a boss baby
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 13:37
|
|
|
Tenzarin posted:I agree, the movie was Ghost in the Shell in name only. probably why i like it so much
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 21:38
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:Back when this film opened opposite Boss Baby and stumbled right out of the gate drat, Boss Baby won? Maybe this movie will be fiendishly remembered like Dredd and kept alive with dvd sales. hahahaha
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 23:38
|
|
|
Tenzarin posted:drat, Boss Baby won? Maybe this movie will be fiendishly remembered like Dredd and kept alive with dvd sales. hahahaha Dredd was made with care. Snarkiness aside, Dredd loving owns. This...this exists.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 01:08
|
|
|
Eh, the tragedy of this movie is that it's so obviously made with care. They made some bad decisions, but nothing in the movie is lazy. The production design alone speaks to the attention to detail.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 02:04
|
|
|
It was designed as good as a Twinkie, in my book. Nice clean factory produced. I'm sure people will look back on this movie and say they sure used their computers good.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 07:13
|
|
|
100%, this is gonna be the movie people only remember for the aesthetics. Probably a decent choice for testing out a new TV / Sound System
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 10:01
|
|
|
If dvd 2-packs were still a thing, this would get bundled with Aeon Flux so hard.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 11:15
|
|
|
Snak posted:If dvd 2-packs were still a thing, this would get bundled with Aeon Flux so hard. I'd pay $7.50 for that at Walmart
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 13:50
|
|
|
Tenzarin posted:It was designed as good as a Twinkie, in my book. Nice clean factory produced. I'm sure people will look back on this movie and say they sure used their computers good. Yeah, you're loving crazy. In no way is this a run of the mill kind of effects movie. The visuals are some of the best put to film and while the story is a little weak, it gets by and makes sense.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 14:25
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:Eh, the tragedy of this movie is that it's so obviously made with care. They made some bad decisions, but nothing in the movie is lazy. I think the way they decided to end the film was creatively lazy. Some guy was talking about how he went to an early test screening and it had an ending which was pretty much the same as the 95 film but apparently test audiences weren't fond of it so the it looks like the producers went "Welp, chuck out all that touchy feely crap, just shoot all the bad guys and have the Major decide she doesn't care that she was kidnapped and brainwashed and her boyfriend was turned into a crazed frankenstein monster and she actually likes being a kickass robot assassin CUT TO BLACK, ROLL CREDITS" Sir Kodiak posted:The production design alone speaks to the attention to detail. There's a whole bunch of stories of technical/design staff pouring hundreds of manhours of work into films only to have it all thrown away on a whim by the higher ups, like the infamous story of the team of illustrators creating aliens for the doomed Superman Lives! production only to have the producer wander through with his family and let his kids pick the designs they liked and the rest were rejected.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 15:42
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:So yeah, there were lots of people paying a ton of attention to the details but in this instance they were working under people who obviously valued the financial aspects of the project over the artistic aspects. Isn't that the movie industry in general? You've got the below people concerning themselves with art, but the folks running the show better understand that the financial aspects are the actual lifeblood of the thing. Hell, this movie shows it off note than most. You can make a movie that is elaborately detailed like the anime that inspired it, but what matters is that nobody in the audience wanted an anime movie.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 17:39
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:Isn't that the movie industry in general? Seriously. Dredd didn't get funded purely out of some love of film. They expected it to turn a profit. There's this tendency to work backwards from liking or not liking a movie to the creators being well or ill intentioned, but that's a fantasy.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 17:54
|
|
|
Vintersorg posted:Yeah, you're loving crazy. In no way is this a run of the mill kind of effects movie. The visuals are some of the best put to film and while the story is a little weak, it gets by and makes sense. They should put that on the DVD cover! "The story gets by!" "It makes sense!"
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 19:15
|
|
|
Alan_Shore posted:They should put that on the DVD cover! Instead, it'll say "The visuals will blow you away!"
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 19:31
|
|
|
The visuals were Hollywood quality, but they didn't impress me that much on a conceptual level. "Here is a city that we covered in holograms. That's how you know it's the future." The art from the anime movies impressed me a lot more.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 22:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 14:29 |
|
|
Vintersorg posted:Yeah, you're loving crazy. In no way is this a run of the mill kind of effects movie. The visuals are some of the best put to film and while the story is a little weak, it gets by and makes sense. This seems like a massive overstatement. It's not even the prettiest cyberpunk film.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2017 05:54
|
|