Posts

1996, the best year in movie history, pt. 33: Ghost in the shell

This violent, disturbing cartoon for adults has the best soundtrack of 1996:


When I hear those drums, I think of a vast, hidden indoor swimming pool, or a great cistern in a derelict building. I visit such places in my dreams.

The main protagonist of Ghost in the Shell likes to go diving in a canal in the middle of a Japanese city. There are skyscrapers all around her, but hardly anyone is in sight. It’s a good place in which to introspect.

All movie long, this character philosophizes out loud, compulsively.

She works for a governmental agency that deals with cyber crime. Her assignment is to trace the source of a computer virus called the “Puppet Master.”

Indeed, she and her colleagues have been designed for this task. They are robot-human hybrids, or cyborgs (the year is 2029). They look like regular humans, except that they stare vacantly and are able to talk without moving their mouths.

And, sometimes, their limbs get torn off.

The limbs are artificial and can be replaced. Still, it’s unnerving to see humanoids conducting themselves matter-of-factly while they’re mutilated. They’re like sinewy, bloody china dolls.

I’ve watched movies with reanimated corpses, talking severed heads, and the like, but nothing else unsettles me just like Ghost in the Shell does.

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

I won’t go into detail about the metaphysics of personhood that underlies the combining of a human with a robot. Yes, the movie’s title evokes “The Ghost in the Machine,” the philosopher Gilbert Ryle’s derisive phrase for Cartesian substance-dualism. But whether or not the cyborgs have Cartesian souls is beside the point (as it happens, the movie opts for a thoroughly physicalist ontology).

What matters is that these beings have embodied selves. What kind of self the protagonist has – and, consequently, what her life means – can’t be separated from a physicality that she doesn’t embrace. It troubles her that she’s neither fully human nor fully robotic.

Nor is she fully female – she lacks genitalia. This is evident from scenes in which she fights in the nude.

And this takes us to the interpretation that I find most compelling. The movie meditates on transgenderism, on what it’s like to have a body that feels not just dysfunctional, not just awkward, but wounded.

Here is an excellent review that explores this theme.

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

I have little more to say. The movie’s dialog is sometimes flat, sometimes ponderous. This is not an artistic failing. It reflects how the characters struggle to come to terms with the strangeness of their existence.

The futuristic Japanese city is superbly conceived. Against this backdrop, the humanoid characters are drawn rather lifelessly, except when they seem most artificial. Then they become curiously expressive.

There is an extraordinary sequence near the end of the movie. Two cyborgs lie next to one another; below their chests, their bodies have been torn away. They communicate by thinking. One tries to persuade the other to join with himself (herself?) into a single being. When shown from a certain angle, their faces almost seem to merge. The scene could be an homage to Bergman’s Persona. One being combines with another; only, in Ghost in the Shell, it isn’t a nightmare or a colonization, it’s a longed-for realization. The movie isn’t pleasant, but it does plumb fascinating depths.

R.I.P. Diego Maradona

… arguably the greatest soccer player. A “great man,” I heard one commentator say. I wouldn’t go that far, but, clearly, very few players have been as naturally gifted as Maradona.

In terms of natural talent, who else is in his class? Puskás? Pelé? Probably. But I know them mostly by reputation. Maradona himself admired Mágico González.

Among those I’ve watched in real time, the two players who stand with Maradona are Ronaldo Nazário de Lima and Lionel Messi. Zinedine Zidane and Ronaldinho Gaúcho, I relegate to the next tier – far, far beneath the others.

It’s also worth mentioning that Romário and N’Golo Kanté have displayed genius in their circumscribed roles. (Kanté works hard, yes, but with an instinctive clarity.)

What, then of such a determinant player as Xavi Hernández – or Johan Cruyff, perhaps the greatest soccer figure of all time (for what he did in management as well as on the field)? They were obsessives, constantly working, constantly scheming to improve. Were they naturally gifted? Surely. But their place on the podium of naturalness is hard to ascertain. The natural ability of Andrés Iniesta is more apparent than that of Xavi. (Iniesta is less conspicuous than Ronaldinho or Zidane, but he might be in their class.)

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

Maradona’s other distinction, besides the naturalness of his talent, is the role he played as the “conduit” of his teams’ successes. His teammates floundered badly when he was absent. This was true at the club level and at the 1994 World Cup. The same has happened again and again with Messi. (Cruyff and Xavi also were “conduits” through which play flowed, but, when they left, their teammates were not without recourse.)

Unlike the other forementioned players, Maradona and Messi have inspired cult-like devotion among their teams’ supporters – and in an entire nation. Maradona encouraged this sacrilege; Messi, as far as I can tell, has been indifferent to adulation (though, in other respects, he’s hardly been faultless). In such cases as theirs, talent rather than personality is what has inspired devotion. Fans and teammates will tether themselves even to such a wastrel as Neymar, who is gifted but ultimately rudderless.

One achievement of Maradona’s was that, for nearly two decades, he overcame the idolatry and dependency of his worshipers forcefully enough to deliver the goods.

Sherlock Hound

… or, in Japanese, Famous Detective Holmes, is a 1984 TV series of Hayao Miyazaki’s. I never thought I’d get to view it without having to shell out a lot of money. Last night, though, our Amazon Fire TV Stick suggested that we try the show for free using the HappyKids.tv app. (We haven’t watched much of Miyazaki with the Fire Stick, but it must know that we like our British period shows.)

On the basis of our first episode – “A Small Client,” a.k.a. “Little Martha’s Big Mystery,” which adapts Arthur Conan Doyle’s story “The Adventure of the Engineer’s Thumb” – I’d say the show is a great success. Miyazaki’s Sherlock is youthful and tousle-headed. Mrs. Hudson – also surprisingly young, and exuding kindness – is a Victorian beauty (or, rather, she is as beautiful as a talking cartoon dog could be). Moriarty is a flamboyant wolf, while Watson and Lestrade belong to portlier breeds. Transport, done by hansom cab in Doyle’s stories, is here performed in a nifty little motorcar upon which Holmes – or Hound – has doubtless tinkered. Another marvel is a machine that wheezes and gasps as it mints counterfeit coins bearing the image of Queen Victoria.


Alas, as the show was being made, its production team turned over. Some of its episodes failed to reach the highest standard – or so says one reviewer. But a half-dozen episodes do evince the master’s touch. (The reviewer lists them.)

Karin & I are delighted to have found this show. Samuel also watched with interest and didn’t howl as he did when we tried to watch Sanditon – a Jane Austen series in which the men do naked sea-bathing (but not with such courage as in the Merchant-Ivory Room with a View).

Update: What we watched tonight: “The Adventure of the Blue Carbuncle” (the link is to YouTube – this video was uploaded within the last day or so).

“Rawr” means I love you

Things that frighten Samuel:
  • The alarm in Karin’s car, which has been sounding without provocation
  • Gently saying the word “rawr” (one of Samuel’s shirts has a picture of a t-rex, along with the slogan: “Rawr” means I love you)
  • The Geico gecko
Many thanks to Stephen for the birthday gifts of one book and one new rice pot (my old rice pot had stopped stopping; I’d been having to watch it like a hawk so it wouldn’t burn the rice). Stephen’s birthday is this week.

David, whose birthday is tomorrow, also gave me a book.

To them: rawr.

Ecuador 6, Colombia 1

An historic victory against one of our toughest rivals, who beat us twice in the previous World Cup qualification cycle (3–1 and 2–0). I figured we’d lose or draw this time, especially since some of our players were sidelined due to COVID.

I needn’t have worried. We scored twice in the first ten minutes. By the end of the game, the Colombians had suffered their worst defeat in World Cup qualification since Brazil thrashed them, 6 to 0, in 1977.


Every goal was scored by a different player. Our precocious winger, Gonzalo Plata, was ejected for taking off his shirt after he scored goal number five.