Sammendrag
The original anime film adaptation Ghost in the Shell directed by Mamoru Oshii based on the original manga by Masamune Shirow was released in 1995 to much critical acclaim. It is widely acknowledged as an important contribution to the anime cyberpunk subgenre, addressing themes of high technology within a dystopian futuristic setting. In 2017, a live action Westernised remake directed by Rupert Sanders, was released. It failed to achieve the same positive reception of its anime counterpart and was viewed by many critics and audience members as mediocre.
Although marketed as a “reimagining” of the original anime film, with its own unique plotline, it seemingly borrowed heavily from the former, recreating a number of easily identifiable iconic scenes from the original anime production and presenting them in live action form.
The purpose of this thesis is to investigate whether there are any significant differences present in both versions of the film with regard to the presentation of the lead characters Motoko Kusanagi (anime version) and Mira Killian (live action version), the depiction of violence and sexuality, technology, and race. In order to achieve this, a semiotic analysis of the following mise-en-scène elements; location/setting, lighting, colour, props, characters/acting, costume and camera movements/shots, was utilised. This will be applied to three selected scenes that are present in both versions of the film. Additionally, a short comparison of the analysis of each of the scenes will be applies at the end of each analysis section with the aim of identifying and comparing differences in depictions and the meanings they present.
The analyses revealed that although visibly similar with regards to certain mise-en-scène elements, each of the scenes differ significantly from each other with regard to meanings. The characters offer much different interpretations to each other, and the meanings surrounding the depiction of violence, sexuality, technology, and race offer enough difference to suggest a clear distinction with interpretation of each of the scenes. Though the method is subjective due to the interpretative nature of the semiotic analysis, there is enough information derived from the analysis to make a strong argument for the interpretation of such differences between each of the scenes from both versions of the film.