After seeing the difference between in-depth review by a "purist" versus notes by a "casual", I wondered:

• how do you judge the moment when you say, "this is pretty and cyberpunk-ish, but it's not Ghost in the Shell anymore"?

In the "rather harsh 'purist' critique/review of Ghost in the Shell 2017 ", /u/ShallowDAWN makes the following points (direct quotations unless otherwise stated):

• The story is Robocop.
• The film's main message is "opposite of the message from Ghost in the Shell..."
• Every other Ghost in the Shell makes a strong commentary on (political) ideas but this (2017 live-action film) seemed to play the same ‘Who am I’ story line (as every other Hollywood movie of its type).
• (In the source material, Kusanagi) was a super wizard class hacker who was 4 steps ahead... in this (2017 film) she needs a lot of saving and falls for the oldest ones in the book. So, this isn’t Motoko Kusanagi...
• (Aramaki was given) the power of a gun... rather than... political and charisma power...
• (Togusa) does what Ishikawa should be doing – the technobabble and the technical work which is odd for a technophobe which they set up in a very cringy exposition line "I'm all human and I like it that way"...
• Everyone else (Ishikawa, Saito, Borma, Paz) basically isn’t in the movie.

The review contains pages of critique on how the 2017 film completely misses the mark as a Ghost in the Shell story.

The "casual" perspective essentially made the following points:

• The 2017 Hollywood film is an adaptation, not a remake, so...
• the film is dumbed-down because it's a Hollywood blockbuster, therefore...
• it's Scarlett Johansson in an action flick, so...
• some people might become fans of the anime and manga because...
• the Ghost in the Shell franchise needs revenue in order to "breathe life into it in the West", because...
• watching the film will let the creators know that their work is appreciated, so...
• the film isn't as bad as Dragon Ball Evolution, and that means...

The sentences are unfinished because they don't answer the question of how it's relevant to the main issue. The main issue is to find out whether or not GitS2017 is a worthwhile Ghost in the Shell film.

Now that we know what the 2017 film is about, what's the moment when you say, "this isn't Ghost in the Shell anymore"?