Stylus is looking for new writers!

Movie Review
Ghost in the Shell 2: Innocence


2004

Director: Mamoru Oshii
Cast: Akio Otsuka, Atsuko Tanaka, Koichi Yamadera
{2}


tís been nearly a decade since the original Ghost in the Shell movie came out, and a lot has changed between that film and this oneĺmost notably my perception of animť films in general. I donít want to say that Iíve outgrown them because I donít believe animation is something you necessarily outgrow. However, I no longer find the pop-philosophy of these films as profound as I did at age seventeen.

Therefore, the gaudy, pretentious sequel to Ghost in the Shell represents a new extreme in shallow philosophical science fiction. That being said, Iíd be willing to forgive it if it had been a mindless action film (the mistake most sequels make), but instead it attempts to be some sort of brooding psychological thriller with no thrills and very little actual psychology.

The film takes place in the year 2032. Bateau, a human who has undergone so many modifications that he is practically a cyborg, and his partner Togusa are investigating a series of brutal murders in which robots manufactured to service the sexual needs of their masters suddenly go berserk and begin killing at random.


Arnold Schwarzenegger chilling with one of the Thompson Twins.


Much like in the original film, these murders go far beyond a simple malfunctioning line of robots, and the plot screams conspiracy. Sure, the conspiracy plotline is a bit worn out (especially since I, Robot came out only a few months earlier), but at least it has the potential to be entertaining.

However, instead of devoting the majority of the film to unraveling said conspiracy, Oshii opts to digress into meaningless rhetoric for nearly 70 minutes of the filmís 100 minute runtime. If you recall, the first film was dialogue heavy, but there was a sense that it was charting out its own theories instead of simply regurgitating the words of others. Innocence quotes everything from Milton to Descartes to the Old Testament, but adds nothing to these quotes. Watching it is like attending a writerís workshop party and being the only one present who wants to engage in actual conversation.

I have no qualms with films that seek to be intelligent, even aggressively so. Take Godardĺhe was always quoting from various texts or other films, but it added something to his already unique style that made certain statements about the cinematic craft. Oshii, on the other hand, uses his quotes as a crutch to help lurch his clunking story forward.

When we finally do reach some sort of climactic showdown, itís no longer worth the wait, and even though Oshii has Bateau battling an army of psychotic sexbots, it never really becomes as amusing as it may sound.

What went wrong in the ten years between the two films? Maybe Oshii was too intent on making an unconventional sequel that he simply disregarded any notion of making an entertaining one. Iíve seen experimental films that I found less abrasive. Hell, Wavelength was more engaging than this. But those films were made with a specific audience in mind. Innocence has been released by a major studio which suggests that it was meant as some sort of crossover animť. Instead, many will walk out of this completely baffled and wanting their money back.


"Let's see if I can read this. Hmm...tuna roll, five dollars..."


Incidentally, seeing the original film offers little in the way of explaining this mess other than providing some back story to Major Kusanagiís disappearance and the nature of Section 9 (the organization under which Bateau operates) both of which are left virtually unexplained in this film.

The film is not without its moments though. I particularly liked the relationship between Bateau and his pet dog, which is perhaps the most accurately depicted dog to ever appear in an animated film. Though, I canít say that I entirely understood its purpose in this film.

In addition, the film is superbly animated; it contains some of the best integration of computer graphics and hand-drawn animation Iíve ever seen. And while thatís no small achievement, it does little to mask the fact that Innocence is ultimately a bad movie. The same thing occurred when the sequel to Vampire Hunter D came out over two decades after the original. The animation had obviously advanced well beyond its predecessorís, but the story somehow lost its edge. God help us if they ever try to release a sequel to Akira.



By: Dave Micevic
2004-10-08


Comments
Log In to Post Comments
Posted 10/09/2004 - 05:08:13 PM by christianbuia:
 I definitely need to see this one a second time. Nevertheless, I think giving this film two points out of ten may be a little harsh. Some of the images and animations are stunningly beautiful, and though I agree that the movie is cyber-"pop-philosophy", I was fairly satisfied by the science fiction elements of 2030 technology....yes, even the slightly silly visual hacking countermeasures analysis the ship engineers/robots used during Bateau's assault. I do however have to echo your observation of how the constant quoting was extremely tedious. Really, though, there is beautiful artwork in this effort.
 
Posted 10/10/2004 - 04:54:14 PM by dmicevic:
 I absolutely agree with you that the animation was superb. If only the film were silent.
 
Posted 10/16/2004 - 04:00:29 PM by gloden:
 This is one of those intensely meditative films where the actual narrative is progressively de-emphasized throughout the course of the film and replaced with a hallucinagenic existential weirdness. I just saw "Videodrome" again last week and it reminded me of GITS2... how it gradually shifts from a third person to first person perspective and intentionally tries to confuse the audience. The philosophy in GITS2, I feel, is hilariously bombastic by intent and works to the film's advantage. By not allowing the audience to concentrate on the narrative, the film demonstrates the illusion of chronological reality. It's a great film and superb follow-up.
 
all content copyright 2004 stylusmagazine.com