@Awson
Saw it this morning. I enjoyed it.

I imagine people who are super familiar with the source material wouldn't enjoy it, though. The film doesn't add anything new to any of the content that's already been created, intellectually and otherwise - it really just cobbles together what was interesting and memorable from the anime series and film. Sometimes, this is done very well, beautifully. But a lot of times the film incorporates something that in the source material is quite profound, but doesn't spend enough time to make the material feel meaningful.

For instance, the film includes a recurring thread of dialogue about Major's consent: you're sort of beat over the head that entities such as Major deserve consent. When she reclaims her identity, this sort of line of dialogue doesn't change at all, and you're left with "consent is good". There are also other questions posed, for instance, about how someone like Major might view sexuality, with the inclusion of the scene where Major intimately touches a prostitute's face. But these kinds of scenes are just inserted into the film with no regard for the narrative flow/pacing. This sort of material is just thrown in alongside the gorgeous visuals which might be reasonably frustrating for diehard fans.

The 1995 film was really cinematographically wonderful and better incorporated some of the intellectual/philosophical material, but it had a lot of exposition which I think might bore a lot of people totally unfamiliar with the series. I think this film tried to introduce GITS to an audience totally unfamiliar with it through gorgeous visuals and a smattering of the other stuff that makes GITS successful within the span of 2 hours. I think it was successful in doing that, and I enjoyed it.

<Snipped quote by SleepingSilence>

He is exactly saying that...yes. He says he doesn't want to hear things you've heard from other people without having seen the movie. It doesn't make your opinion mean anything when you say "I heard...I read...I thought..." with no actual knowledge or opinion formed from having seen the thing you're talking about.

<Snipped quote by SleepingSilence>

Yes, that would be a very stimulating discussion.

@BrobyDDark

Correct me if I'm wrong but, I sense a hint of sarcasm in his desire to discuss it if I have any negative opinions...

And it's not a blind opinion, I know the directors previous work. But I have a sneaking suspicion he DOESN'T want ANY conversation. If I saw the movie or not...because the very post itself is talking about "people who don't know what they're talking about" <-those people that saw the movie.

Also I really don't see a fucking point in posting something, and then bite back at people who comments...seems really, really dumb.

Maybe not the person to ask here. But why are so many people seemly so antisocial on this forum? :P The whole point of forums is to socialize...

Didn't the director say that the original source material was too philosophical?

MDK'S VERDICT: NOT BAD

New GiTS is decidedly NOT a terrible movie. It's also a let-down, but not for the obvious reasons..... yes, it readily departs from all the established universe, yes it changes like a BUNCH of characters.... all that basically makes sense in the movie, even (especially) the whitewashing aspect. I really wanted to hate Batou, but couldn't. Anyway, it's none of the expected stuff that makes the movie suck, I guess, is the point of this intro -- suck is a strong word. It's got weaknesses. Let's dive in.

THE GOOD:

First, the movie sounded fucking brilliant. They're getting a lot of props for the visuals -- those were great, sure, most of the time, but the sound was outstanding. Major props to Clint Mansel, the soundtrack guru you should all know better than you think you do. He nailed this shit.

Second, the visuals. They were cool. The coolness was suitably pervasive too -- background floating fish, holobilboards, etc. It looked slick. They even handled most of the legacy shots well -- the spherical hacking, the robogeisha, all that shit. Visuals were nicely done.

Third (and arbitrarily last), they cast this shit right. Based on the script I just watched, Japanese is the only think Kusanagi couldn't be -- her cover was a refugee killed in a terrorist attack on a boat into the country, so that wouldn't, you know. How would a Japanese refugee be sailing to.... w/e. Yeah they could've written it differently and preserved stuff, but Scarlet nailed it, and so did (almost) everybody else. Had my doubts with Aramaki off the bat, but he turned out to be perfect too. Really, the only people who didn't seem like a perfect cast were evil-white-corporate-villain and the random-third-world-rep (who performed just fine, really, but just could not capture the gravity of his role or dialogue and it's purely an aesthetic thing -- his acting was fine, he just wasn't cast in the right part).

POINT OF THIS SECTION BEING, there's plenty to like. It was paced well (enough), the action was good, various other elements were good.

THE NOT-SO-GOOD:

First and foremost, this was a really simple film -- nothing wrong with that, I guess, if we don't hold it to source-material standards -- but it managed to still do a really terrible job introducing its elements. We never saw (cringe) Major Major's shell as anything particularly special -- the old shit always has a shot of her crashing into some concrete or talks about how she'd sink in water or whatever. This one she just broke on literally every single mission until magically she's ripping apart a tank with her bare hands? It was rough. This was surprising because they started out, like, super good at this -- that African negotiation, where he plays the french lullaby and says "in the time it took her to sing that song, she learned French." PERFECT! They coulda done that level of exposition the whole way through and it woulda been great. But sadly no -- ten minutes later we reverted to sixty fucking lines of trialogue to explain what 'diving' means, and that still didn't turn out to mean anything because at the end of it Major Major just magically knows where the signal was coming from and handwave it just you know hacking or something fuckit let's go shoot Yakuzas. See they tricked me into thinking they were gonna write it well, and then they didn't write it well at all.

Second, the characters were generally awful with some great exceptions. I mentioned Aramaki already -- thought he was gonna be in the awful camp, he wound up in the good camp. Also in that camp: Togusa, Oulet, British agent whose name I never fully registered. Awful camp: pretty much everyone else. Motivations (if they surfaced at all) never made much sense for anyone else, which you can forgive in the random drones I guess, but not in the main characters, so let's focus on them. Major Major swallowing magic plot-suppression juice until she no longer swallows magic plot-suppression juice because random guy she's so bent on killing has a funky tattoo and then I mean shit man do I really have to go on, and all this supposedly after going from zero to ultraterminator in a year? Meh. It was a sad fucking excuse for an arc, summarized nicely by the clumsy Schwarenegger punchline they spent half her scenes building towards. How about White Corporate Villain though? Honestly can't remember if he literally said it out loud, but that was the full depth of his character -- well, that, plus a tedious coward-reveal at the end just to help the audience feel better about Major Major's punchline (it didn't work). Batou, I'm struggling to put into either camp.... On the one hand I thought they generally handled him fine, but then on the other, I can't decide whether he makes any sense at all as less than a full cyborg. I keep going back to the Yakuza Disco, and wondering how he can be both Cyber-Noob and also unit strongman who recklessly throws his measly organics into actual human carjacks and come out on top. He made sense when he was full-cyborg. He didn't make sense here. They didn't have a choice, based on the way they took the script -- but maybe that's a reason they shouldn't have gone that way.

Third, the whole big thing was overly personalized at the expense of nuance. There was one heroine and one villain and everything else was a smokescreen. By doing that, the movie precluded the asking of any significant questions -- "Are cyborgs still human?" "Well you're the main character, so I guess yup, checkmark, done." "How does the team differentiate itself into their different roles -- and how can a guy like Togusa contribute? What even is diversity when every part of you is in a catalogue somewhere?" "You, uh.... I think you said something about a team? What's that?" "Are the structures that govern human society prepared to deal with changes to the way we perceive and experience the universe?" "RAAAAAAH I'M A RAGING CORRUPTED CUNTBAG, RAAAAAAAAAARRRRRGHHH!!!" "But...." "RAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRGH!!!!" You get the idea. Dumb.

But still......

I could go on for a while on either good/bad, but this is the fucking spam section, so naw. Look, I was entertained. It was not a waste of money. The theater where I watched was empty -- that's a damn shame. More people are gonna see Baywatch. GiTS: the Whitening 3D doesn't deserve that bad a reaction. It was fine. They choked the life out of it with Hollywood bullshit, but hey, that's every damn movie. Is it an affront to GiTS God? I mean..... yeah....... but who gives a shit what that guy thinks? This is America. Freedom of Religion bitch, that's the fourth amendment.

<Snipped quote by BrobyDDark>

<Snipped quote by Awson>

@BrobyDDark

Correct me if I'm wrong but, I sense a hint of sarcasm in his desire to discuss it if I have any negative opinions...

And it's not a blind opinion, I know the directors previous work. But I have a sneaking suspicion he DOESN'T want ANY conversation. If I saw the movie or not...because the very post itself is talking about "people who don't know what they're talking about" <-those people that saw the movie.

Also I really don't see a fucking point in posting something, and then bite back at people who comments...seems really, really dumb.

Maybe not the person to ask here. But why are so many people seemly so antisocial on this forum? :P The whole point of forums is to socialize...

Well, he didn't say totally, for sure, or post it in italics, so I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say he's not being sarcastic.

It IS a blind opinion. You haven't seen the movie, yet you want to say its bad. It doesn't matter if you've seen the director's previous works- directors can change their style from movie to movie. M.Night Shyamalan usually makes really bad movies, but he also has plenty of well-received, well-directed movies, which are often different than his terrible movies. The same goes for writers, artists, actors, producers, so on and so forth.

If I went into a thread about a certain topic, then said the certain topic was shit, people would snap at me too. Why? Because it's a really stupid thing to do. Now, if I went into a thread about a certain topic, wrote something to spark further conversation about the negatives AND the positives about the topic, then conversed with people about how so and so could have been done better, but another thing was really well done, I can guarantee I wouldn't be snapped at. Why? Because I'm actually promoting the conversation with my opinion.

Not everyone here is anti-social. Maybe awkward and defensive, but not anti-social. We all come here to genuinely have fun. Sure, we shit on each-other a lot. If you go through my recent posts, I basically do nothing but bitch at Aaron, Vilage, and Keyguyperson for being commies. But it's for fun. Awson wanted to share his opinion about a movie, and asked people to share their opinion about it if they've ACTUALLY seen it, and pretty much everyone but YOU did.
And in other threads, people are sharing their opinions- both their negative and positive opinions- by having lots of conversations about different topics.
And in other threads, people are playing their games and telling jokes.
And in other threads people are talking about their lives lately.

If that's fucking anti-social, I'd love to see this place when it's being its most social, because it sounds like a damn good time.

I thought about it and now just feel thoroughly disappointed. :(

@BrobyDDark

I didn't just outright say it was bad at first...I just pointed out other people's opinions and shared my thoughts on why I was hesitant to watch it...I think I had a little bit more nuance. But his comments where pretty blunt and fairly mean spirited. M.Night's not the best example. But I get your point...I think outright ignoring those things is a bit foolish

Like I said I didn't outright attack him. I said, glad he enjoyed the movie. But I'm not sure if that really convinces me to see it...maybe if he explained why he liked it so much, that be more useful than saying my opinion is "regurgitated" while being as passive aggressive as possible. <.< (Also you can't guarantee saying positive and negatives won't lead to people being assholes, you vastly under predict the assholishness of others...and I'd argue I already did that...still snapped at...)

I did edit myself there, in fact you have the edited version. I said a lot, doesn't mean everyone. I didn't mean to generalize, hell maybe not even targeted at this forum specifically. A lot of forums, seem to miss the purpose of what it's suppose to be.

You really, really don't have the numbers right on "everyone saw it but you." Literally at beginning five other people mentioned not watching it or haven't seen it yet or didn't mention it. So, yeah...if I asked "Others seemed to dislike it, why did you like it?" I have a feeling I'd of gotten the same spiteful reaction. :/

And really, there's a lot of anti-social tendencies I've seen across this forum, but that was more of a joke than a discussion jumping off point, so I'll leave it at that.

@BrobyDDark

I didn't just outright say it was bad at first...I just pointed out other people's opinions and shared my thoughts on why I was hesitant to watch it...I think I had a little bit more nuance. But his comments where pretty blunt and fairly mean spirited. M.Night's not the best example. But I get your point...I think outright ignoring those things is a bit foolish

Like I said I didn't outright attack him. I said, glad he enjoyed the movie. But I'm not sure if that really convinces me to see it...maybe if he explained why he liked it so much, that be more useful than saying my opinion is "regurgitated" while being as passive aggressive as possible. <.< (Also you can't guarantee saying positive and negatives won't lead to people being assholes, you vastly under predict the assholishness of others...and I'd argue I already did that...still snapped at...)

I did edit myself there, in fact you have the edited version. I said a lot, doesn't mean everyone. I didn't mean to generalize, hell maybe not even targeted at this forum specifically. A lot of forums, seem to miss the purpose of what it's suppose to be.

You really, really don't have the numbers right on "everyone saw it but you." Literally at beginning five other people mentioned not watching it or haven't seen it yet or didn't mention it. So, yeah...if I asked "Others seemed to dislike it, why did you like it?" I have a feeling I'd of gotten the same spiteful reaction. :/

And really, there's a lot of anti-social tendencies I've seen across this forum, but that was more of a joke than a discussion jumping off point, so I'll leave it at that.

why are you still here

@mdk Hmm...I honestly can't tell if that statement is suppose to be ironic. :P I'll probably watch it eventually, I know my other friend wants to see it. So if I see it, it probably won't be alone.

You really, really don't have the numbers right on "everyone saw it but you." Literally at beginning five other people mentioned not watching it or haven't seen it yet or didn't mention it. So, yeah...if I asked "Others seemed to dislike it, why did you like it?" I have a feeling I'd of gotten the same spiteful reaction. :/

Not what I said, but fair enough. Some people at least said they were going to watch it and form their own opinions on it, someone even came back to post what they thought of the movie.

Generally, you don't start a discussion with a question framed in a way that could be construed as snide. A normal person- or, even not a normal person- would say, even if they hadn't seen it, "What were the parts of the movie that made you enjoy it?" or something to that effect. Or single out things. "What did you think of the movie's special effects?" "What were the similarities and differences between the movie and the anime?" "How many boners did you pop while looking at Scarlett Johansson in a skintight body suit?" "What was your favorite character? What about your least favorite?" And if you really think you would have gotten yelled at for asking a question...then you clearly don't have a high-opinion of the people on this forum. Why strike up a conversation with them at all?

Awson wanted to share his opinion about a movie, and asked people to share their opinion about it if they've ACTUALLY seen it, and pretty much everyone but YOU did.

Not what I said, but fair enough.

You did say that...it also appears edited from the last time I looked at it. (But it was late when I read it.) And not really, his first post was more about shutting people up and expressing he wanted discussion. And if the next question is "why have a discussion then?" My answer is. "Why make a bloody post then?"

Some people at least said they were going to watch it and form their own opinions on it, someone even came back to post what they thought of the movie.

I did that too. Beforehand as well. -.-

I have loads of counter points, but I'm not going to engage someone who hasn't actually seen it.

Explain to me, how does that help? If I thought something was bad, and wanted someone to present and argument otherwise...or hell, if I was unconvinced and neutral. Why wouldn't you just say what you enjoyed about the movie? Like you tell me, why that wasn't something he could of done.

Generally, you don't start a discussion with a question framed in a way that could be construed as snide. A normal person- or, even not a normal person- would say, even if they hadn't seen it, "What were the parts of the movie that made you enjoy it?" or something to that effect. Or single out things. "What did you think of the movie's special effects?" "What were the similarities and differences between the movie and the anime?" "How many boners did you pop while looking at Scarlett Johansson in a skintight body suit?" "What was your favorite character? What about your least favorite?" And if you really think you would have gotten yelled at for asking a question...then you clearly don't have a high-opinion of the people on this forum. Why strike up a conversation with them at all?

I asked about his opinions on off topic discussions, had nothing to do with the movie and my hesitant feelings about it. He shit on and dismissed those too...:/ And I asked him, what counter points would you have to my statements? And he didn't address them whatsoever...

If saying I'm glad you enjoyed it, is something derogatory or mocking. Please inform me how. Just because I was mostly critical, I don't think I was particularly rude. Him on the other hand.

I was answering this before reading everything, because I almost knew this would be brought up.

Why strike up a conversation with them at all?

"why have a discussion then?" My answer is. "Why make a bloody post then?"

Maybe if someone says, "Don't speak negatively about this movie evers!"

I can ask them about a different movie in a similar vein, and have that person go.

"I have an opinion on that, so allow me to share it with you, or I have no opinion on that unfortunately. But have you seen that movie? You should lemme tell you my thoughts about it."

Because that's what a social person would do. ^-^ Make a discussion even if it's not a direct subject to their particular topic. NOT get on a pedestal and be a high and mighty and call their opinions too low to discuss with.

I was being social, (granted not perfect, but when your rejected so bluntly at a start without a good reason. It happens.) I didn't see the movie, but I DID see reviews for it. Because I often do look at them first. Being honest and sincere about my unsure feelings, and since I was uninformed. Asked about something similar instead. Hoping (in vain) that I could still start a friendly informative discussion about something. See how social-ness/starting discussions with other people and how it works now? (or at least how I see the 101 guide on "How to be social online.") :D

<Snipped>

Why are you STILL still here?

@mdk If this is somehow a straight forward question. Want a serious answer? (Because people are talking to me?)

If it's rhetorical, a middle school-like jab basically meaning "I have nothing clever to say, but I want you to leave."

Why are so many people seemly so antisocial on this forum? :P

Not everyone here is anti-social. Maybe awkward and defensive, but not anti-social.

Why are you STILL still here?

Does anyone like not see the irony here? Certainly isn't proving me wrong...

I'm glad you guys liked the movie.

I was afraid that fans of the original would give it a far below average rating rather than the about average rating it deserves. Some are doing that.

@SleepingSilence

You seem to be completely missing some things.

Why post this thread if I didn't want to hear what you had to say? Because I posting this thread with specific instructions that I only wanted to hear viewpoints from people who have actually seen the movie. That's why you got an immediate dismissal. That SHOULD be enough for you to understand this situation.

Having a discussion with someone about something complex, when they've only heard someone else's views on it, is usually quite hollow and pointless.

I'm glad you guys liked the movie.

I was afraid that fans of the original would give it a far below average rating rather than the about average rating it deserves. Some are doing that.

It might honestly be above-average, but that's speaking more against average than it is speaking for GITS.

I know people keep comparing the city to Blade Runner, but honestly (and I'm surprised I haven't heard this anywhere else) all I could think about was Repo! the Genetic Opera. Which is again interesting, because that remake did about the same thing for its subject matter as GiTS.

<Snipped quote by BrobyDDark>

<Snipped quote by BrobyDDark>

You did say that...it also appears edited from the last time I looked at it. (But it was late when I read it.) And not really, his first post was more about shutting people up and expressing he wanted discussion. And if the next question is "why have a discussion then?" My answer is. "Why make a bloody post then?"

No, I did NOT say that. It is not edited- I rarely edit my posts unless I left something out. I said "PRETTY MUCH EVERYONE" but somehow, FOR SOME GOD FORSAKEN REASON, you somehow misconstrued that to "LITERALLY EVERYONE SAID THEY SAW THE MOVIE, AND GAVE THEIR OPINIONS ON IT, WHY COULDN'T YOU!?!" I said "PRETTY MUCH everyone" because I can acknowledge that there WERE some people that said they were going to regurgitate the popular opinion on the movie, without having seen it (which they NEVER DID, mind you, probably because they said that as a fucking joke.) His first post was about wanting to discuss a movie he liked with people who actually saw the movie. Stop putting words in people's mouths.

I asked about his opinions on off topic discussions, had nothing to do with the movie and my hesitant feelings about it. He shit on and dismissed those too...:/ And I asked him, what counter points would you have to my statements? And he didn't address them whatsoever...

If saying I'm glad you enjoyed it, is something derogatory or mocking. Please inform me how. Just because I was mostly critical, I don't think I was particularly rude. Him on the other hand.

If you think, FOR A SECOND, that I'm going to bring something like that out of the blue, then there's an issue. I was referring to this:

"Others seemed to dislike it, why did you like it?"

Your stupid version of what's supposed to be a nice, not-shitty way of starting an argument.

But you want to talk about your first post? Fine! More power to you! Lemme join in for a second here!

Not really that big of a fan, saw the show forever ago when it was on adult swim. But even cursory knowledge of the anime. I never thought this would be a good movie, I'm not even sure it could work with a good director...and not the guy who made Snow White & The Huntsman.

This is a strong beginning to a discussion. Talking about how you weren't a fan (someone who hadn't read the rest of this thread could think you actually SAW the movie), while talking about how you saw the show quite a bit ago. Fair enough. Fine. Not rude. Moving on to th NEXT part.

But if you saw it, and enjoyed it. Good. Nothing wrong with that. :3 But you certainly seem to be in the minority on that one, critics and IMDB users seem to all dislike it. The shitty remakes seem to be in full demand nowadays...just listening to a clip of Beauty and the Beast, the auto tuning was so, so bad.

But if you saw it, and enjoyed it. Good. Nothing wrong with that.

Could be snarky. Don't want to make assumptions.

:3

Right, fuck you for this one.

But you certainly seem to be in the minority on that one, critics and IMDB users seem to all dislike it.

It sounds like being in the minority here is a negative thing, and like you're looking down onto the people that liked the movie with a snide grin. "Oh, you liked that movie? I guess we all have your opinions, even if everyone else disliked it." But y'know what? Maybe that's unfair.

On a unrelated note, people defending netflix's death note...I'm not even really a "weeb" by any standard. But how can anyone expect that to be any good? Especially by that trailer...You know, maybe it's the cynic in me. But as much as people like to laugh at people for overreacting...(and granted, It's the internet, it's always overreacting in all circles.) But at the very same time, how many times does it actually turn out that the nerd rage was wrong? I swear more often than not, people are right on the money...maybe by the simple fact it's easier to cash grab and suck. Then to actually be good and put effort in something. But I can't remember of any video game and movie rage fest, that didn't turn out almost exactly as expected...at least recently.

Entirely off-topic...though at the end you started talking about how every-time there's been a bad remake recently, the nerds called it. Back on the topic at hand, you mentioned how critics disliked Ghost in the Shell, almost confirming what you said was correct. But that's not rude, is it? To bring up how a movie someone liked was bashed by critics, how they're the minority for liking it, how all the nerds called it would be terrible, and how they're almost always right. Driven right home by this shitty nail in the coffin:

*Shrug* Just a random thought. :P

Bull-fucking-shit "just a random thought." Even capped off by shrugging and posting that fucking rude-ass tongue-out emote.

Are we done here? Can we move on? Yes? Alright.

Maybe if someone says, "Don't speak negatively about this movie evers!"

Once again. You're putting words in Awson's mouth.

I can ask them about a different movie in a similar vein, and have that person go.

"I have an opinion on that, so allow me to share it with you, or I have no opinion on that unfortunately. But have you seen that movie? You should lemme tell you my thoughts about it."

Except you didn't do that. When told you were just spouting someone else's opinion you said "You make it sound like I care" with another one of those dumb-ass tongue-out emotes. You clearly didn't and still don't care about having an actual discussion about the movie. You then proceeded to call them a meany because they didn't want to talk to someone about a movie that person hasn't seen. How hard is that to understand? Where is the conversation with someone who's just read reviews or seen a plot synopsis on Wikipedia? What can you talk about if you haven't actually seen the movie? Well, besides the stuff you could have actually talked about that I mentioned up there.

Because that's what a social person would do. ^-^ Make a discussion even if it's not a direct subject to their particular topic. NOT get on a pedestal and be a high and mighty and call their opinions too low to discuss with.

They're not YOUR opinions your discussing with. They're someone else's Awson has probably already had plenty of discussions about.

I was being social, (granted not perfect, but when your rejected so bluntly at a start without a good reason. It happens.) I didn't see the movie, but I DID see reviews for it. Because I often do look at them first. Being honest and sincere about my unsure feelings, and since I was uninformed. Asked about something similar instead. Hoping (in vain) that I could still start a friendly informative discussion about something. See how social-ness/starting discussions with other people and how it works now? (or at least how I see the 101 guide on "How to be social online.") :D

See, now, half of that? Fair enough! You've got me there- you wanted to talk about the movie without having seen it. But don't feel offended when someone says they don't want to talk to you about a movie they've seen and you haven't.

And you didn't ask about something similar- you brought up something similar to prove a point, which is a right cunt thing to do. You even tried framing it as "off-topic."

If everyone went by your way of "starting a conversation online and being social", there'd be many, many more arguments.

And if you want an example of someone in this thread being perfectly social, here's fucking Awson doing a damn good job at it:

Ghost in the Shell is a good movie

false

@Raddum Have you seen it? Why do you think that?

A pretty good example of how to start a conversation with someone that has a different opinion than yours.

Finally, because I haven't tackled this one enough:

And if the next question is "why have a discussion then?" My answer is. "Why make a bloody post then?"

Because Awson wanted to discuss a movie he liked with people who's opinions he respects, or at least wants to hear. He has a higher opinion of the Spam than you do, clearly.

YOU, though, YOU think Spam is anti-social, and won't have your opinions at all...so

Why are you STILL still here?

Christ, it feels like I'm becoming Jorick.

I'm glad you guys liked the movie.

I was afraid that fans of the original would give it a far below average rating rather than the about average rating it deserves. Some are doing that.

@SleepingSilence

You seem to be completely missing some things.

Why post this thread if I didn't want to hear what you had to say? Because I posting this thread with specific instructions that I only wanted to hear viewpoints from people who have actually seen the movie. That's why you got an immediate dismissal. That SHOULD be enough for you to understand this situation.

Having a discussion with someone about something complex, when they've only heard someone else's views on it, is usually quite hollow and pointless.

I'm missing nothing, I wasn't the only one to post something without knowledge. I'm the only one you talked back to in such a way.

I didn't know about the movie, and gave another similar topic we could of discussed it would of been instantly preferable to talk about that with you. Or you could always of told me why you liked the movie and convince me to watch instead of telling me my opinions weren't welcome because of how hollow they were.

I suppose it's not particularly important, so I'll drop it. I'll come back when I see the movie, if I do and this post doesn't vanish.

@BrobyDDark TLDR. :P <-That emoticon means playful sarcasm.

You said pretty much everyone, but it wasn't nearly anyone at first. So...all of that rage comes from nothing. Almost everyone isn't 2/8 people...I didn't say you said everyone. I just said it seems, and I also mentioned how it was late. So okay, I didn't remember the CAPS words beforehand.

Calling me stupid, or at least telling me, please explain why the critics and users are wrong is somehow an extremely outlandish thing for a hesitant person to ask. Okee.

You don't want to assume, but tell me to go fuck myself. XD Just to clarify I'm not upset, and I really, really don't understand how you could be upset...didn't do anything to you...

Like what do you think the :3 emotion is? It's just a silly face. Isn't always imply straight sarcasm like the :P would...but ignoring an discussion about emoji's. Is it really sensible in the slightest to tell me to fuck myself over an emoji? Like not to continue my point but uh...the whole "anti-social" thing...and you just saying people might be defensive. I think you literally just crossed the line into exactly what I was talking about. (if the whole calling me stupid didn't do that before.)

Defensive, doesn't mean attacking...Saying go fuck yourself after someone makes a point is a literal political meme...if only we we're discussing something remotely important... >.>

I think your making this a lot more important and angry than it needs to be...in a discussion you try to match others intensity...have I been particularly intense? Pretty sure the answer is no.

I used emotes a lot, doesn't make me secretly evil...I just do it as a tick. For the whole putting words in peoples mouths thing, I have a slight feeling your doing the same, except your example was me generalizing and not calling out anyone in particular. The "You make it sound like I care" was after I was attacked. And it's pretty much the ONLY passive aggresive thing I can give you. But it was just me being playfully sarcastic...which is usually what that emoticon means...

I guess I won't assume otherwise? (the Awson often talked to people critiquing the movie) but how can you really know that either?

Oh my god, is it bad I kind of find this kinda funny the more I read? Now you're calling me a cunt...I...I feel you may need to chill just a wee bit.

And why couldn't he have done the same for me? Is false any kinder, more sophisticated and new? I feel like that doesn't go in his favor, when my point was, why couldn't he just socialize with me, instead of shutting me out?

And no, If I started calling people stupid cunts who should go fuck themselves. That would probably more likely lead to arguments...

You say Awson want to hear opinions about "who's opinions he respects, or at least wants to hear." Isn't that ALSO putting words in someone's mouth...you kind of paint a bad picture of him, while trying to imply I'm not respected or not deserving to be heard...I don't think I've ever said something so nasty to anyone on this forum...especially ones I haven't conversed with before.

And yep, you proved to me that spam is actually pretty friendly overall...did you happen to re-read what you typed before you posted it?
<.<

So yeah that was a rage infilled clusterfuck. I'm going to apologize to you, for apparently just being 'the last straw' in whatever very bad day you had. And I'm going to assume you don't act this way to everyone who has minor, albeit unimportant grips. And I'm going to call it even...Seriously though, not mad, never called anyone anything, I'm not worth the very clear amount of vitriol you used to post this.

Because really isn't worth spiking your blood pressure over me having a slightest feeling that people online don't have filters before they speak, which leads to people getting called cunts and assholes without much provocation. Which if happened in real life, the average person would probably consider them anti-social. >.>

I haven't watched the Hollywood take on GitS since it's not out in my region yet, but I do plan on giving it a shot.

I've watched the 1995 movie, SAC and Arise (2015 reboot). GitS was one of the titles that piqued my interest in the cyberpunk genre, and I really enjoy it for the philosophical and psychological exploration of the characters and setting, of man versus computers. Even the director of Matrix cited GitS as one of the sources of inspiration to the trilogy.

So yep. I feel that I should give the live action a chance even if the "whitewashing" feels a bit odd to me, and the trailer shows numerous scenes similar the 1995 animated movie. It's going to be hard to watch it unbiased, but I know the CGI and actions won't disappoint at least.

<snip?

ffs why are you still here?

I haven't watched the Hollywood take on GitS since it's not out in my region yet, but I do plan on giving it a shot.

I've watched the 1995 movie, SAC and Arise (2015 reboot). GitS was one of the titles that piqued my interest in the cyberpunk genre, and I really enjoy it for the philosophical and psychological exploration of the characters and setting, of man versus computers. Even the director of Matrix cited GitS as one of the sources of inspiration to the trilogy.

So yep. I feel that I should give the live action a chance even if the "whitewashing" feels a bit odd to me, and the trailer shows numerous scenes similar the 1995 animated movie. It's going to be hard to watch it unbiased, but I know the CGI and actions won't disappoint at least.

Honestly it's on par with the 2015 reboot. They each have their own charms (2015 is better with the squad, Hollywood is better with the spectacle), and each is a Major diversion (2015 had Kusanagi "born" as a cyborg, 2017 has her as the first). If I had to give one of them an edge, I mean..... nothing beats some Section 9 tactical demos, so 2015 is cool and all, but the goddamn visual Hollywood can afford? Best Spider Tank scene since, well, the original.