Ghost in the Shell remains the most challenging film about technology

Discussion in 'SciFi & Fantasy' started by Plazma Inferno!, Mar 3, 2016.

  1. Plazma Inferno! Ding Ding Ding Ding Administrator

    The first questions about the loss of human identity in a tech-filled world were raised in Mamoru Oshii’s 1995 hit film Ghost in the Shell. The release of this classic over 20 years ago drove the genre both upwards by reaching adults, and outwards, reaching the West’s mainstream unlike other previous efforts. It did this while blending sci-fi elements, cyberpunk visuals and deals explicitly with mature themes and ideas.
    This movie had a lot of today's interests from hacking, science of ageing, Internet of Things, neurological implants and many more. The story deals with concepts of identity, the ubiquity of technology and its uses, and the political and societal implications of a technologically advanced society.
    That's why Ghost in the Shell, over two decades old, remains our most challenging film about technology.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    You seriously think that was the first?
    Not only did his manga predate the film by some 8 years, questions about loss of human identity to tech can be seen throughout literature, TV and films, with the first (albeit rather loosely) possibly being Frankenstein back in 1818.
    In literature you have numerous golden age authors (Clarke, Asimov, van Vogt, Heinlein et al) all raising the question, and transhumanism in general has been around for quote a while. Star Trek dealt with the loss of personal identity most notably with the Borg in 1989, and the reversal of the situation (are machines capable of being "human") has also been around for quite a while before GitS (blade runner etc).
    So first? I don't think so.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Plazma, a word of advice: while you have provided a link to the source, you should be more explicit in where you have merely copied the text from that source, and which words are your own.
    I erroneously thought that the words you posted were your own rather than them all being merely a copy/paste of those within the article.
    As such, rather than just copy/paste, perhaps also add your own comments to what has been said in the article, critique it, add to it, show where you disagree etc.

    So, now that I know none of those thoughts are actually your own: what question are you raising? What point do you wish to make?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.

Share This Page