The Man with No Name inherits Ghost Dog's briefcase and years later leaves for Europe. Dog's soul has been transfered into de Bankole... who has travelled overseas and become another undercover agent. There are also similarities in their demeanors, philosophy, clothing, the Tai Chi and use of cryptic messages
shareIt occured to me during the movie as well, though I can't take the idea too seriously.
I liked how he ate the messages exactly as Ghost Dog did.
BTW, he would have to learn English and forget French =)
The blue suit he wears, is almost identical to the one Ghost Dog gives to Raymond.
" Look, there's two women fuc*ing a polar bear!" - Fear And Loathing in Las Vegas 1998
This seems unlikely to me, but glad it it got you thinking all the same. The protagonist's background does seems somewhat different, although it is true that there is little to no exposition; this I feel is largely unimportant.
What is important is what this film inherits spiritually from Jarmusch's earlier films. The problem with its reception seems to have been that it has been viewed almost as a rehashing of these themes and stylistic devices rather, than a distillation, which I believe is this films' true thrust. He uses settings and situations which often resonate immediately with a fan of his earlier work, but the real craftsmanship here its that he synthesises them into a much more mature feat of film-making with a reverence for the photographic medium in which he works.
The impression which I left the theatre with was that this film in many ways was an atonement to some extent. Of what, I am not sure, maybe for not giving certain ideas room to breathe in other works, for debasing sprawling metaphysical concepts into palatable fodder. I also felt that there was a larger exorcism at work, one of severing directorial instinct in terms of Jim's own raison d'être. The reiteration the theme of subjectivity and arbitrariness coupled with the eventuality of the plot seemed to me like a very necessary way for a man who naturally expresses himself through film to reconcile his own ideas about art and human expression with the more insidious sub-plot of the past three centuries - clandestine, fraternal political interest. (ie. Greed)
It seemed like this film was something he himself needed to do both personally and as a film-maker; more importantly it was something I needed to see.