The film's marketing promised that:

...1. The new film would be true to the source material.

Somehow they even recruited Oshii himself to parrot this line, saying that live-action offers a different medium -- not a different story altogether. Note also that Oshii calls the film a "remake" in his comments.

What we actually have: a film that imitates certain scenes from the source material nearly shot-for-shot, with no regard for the reasons why those scenes mattered (i.e. the story world itself, which has been completely watered down and changed).

• Review: ‘Ghost in the Shell’ remake is beautiful but hollow -- a shallow remake of a classic film

...2. The cast was "one of the most diverse in history"

In order to silence those who pointed out the oddity of replacing Kusanagi (Japanese) with Johannsson (white), the cast was assembled to be called "international". Now Sanders and friends could pretend that diversity was part of the plan all along. Again, somehow they enlisted Oshii to complain about "politics in art" to divert from the issues at hand.

What we actually have: a white lead actress playing a Japanese woman, a white secondary character, and a Japanese supporting character. Kuze is white. Dr. Ouelet is white. Cutter is white. The rest of the "diverse" cast barely feature in the film at all, except as mostly disposable/interchangeable background players.

• Review: 'Ghost in the Shell' has nothing to say about technology or humanity

...3. GitS2017 makes up for whitewashing by having a "feminist" main character.

Scarlett Johansson gave a "tell-all" interview on March, 28th 2017 to market the new Gits2017 film. In the interview, she claimed that Ghost in the Shell is about feminism, not race. In addition to making a false choice between supporting women versus supporting diversity, her character in the film betrays her.

What we actually have: an "emotional", often-confused Kusanagi (I mean, "Mira Killian") who has none of the toughness, ability and strength of Kusanagi Motoko. Instead, she's a pretty, "special" robot woman who is the "chosen one". If only she could learn how to walk like a real human being instead of the Tin Man from Wizard of Oz.

• Review: Ghost In The Shell Is Everything Wrong With Hollywood Remakes

Notice that most of the 2017 film's problems arise from the need to build a new character around Scarlett Johannsson. Her character walks like the Tin Man because her entire backstory has been changed. She's confused and "emotional" because, again, her fabricated past prevents her from being a competent, skillful operator.

The film's stereotypical, "cyberpunk" corporation-driven world is equally robotic, a mass-produced set of tropes that eviscerate the nuance and intrigue of a futuristic political espionage-driven plot.

Yet, for some reason, some people feel like this is a worthwhile Ghost in the Shell film -- even one that "needs" sequels. That would be a profoundly confusing notion, if the reasons weren't so obvious.

• Ghost in the Shell Review: Has a Movie Ever Owned Itself So Hard?

Take note of the ways that the film's marketing tried to sell you a product that it purposely didn't deliver.

If you like Scarlett Johansson in action roles, she could do perfectly well as a standalone Black Widow in the Marvel universe. Hopefully she finds success there -- maybe her Black Widow spin-offs can create indefinite scheduling conflicts -- so that a Japanese actress can at least give the next GitS live-action film a more authentic face. Otherwise (and in any case), it's just a second round of Rupert Sanders Presents: Ghost on the Shell.

Be careful about rooting for films that blatantly lie to you about what they're selling. You might like the end product, but you'll have fallen for a train that's all steam, creaky characters, robotic plots, and worst of all, blatantly false advertising better known as "hype".

I'm not going to support this film in theatres. Well-deserved negative press from the start, combined with scathing reviews and an abysmal 41% Tomatometer score are all I need to know. "You didn't watch the movie" doesn't change the facts about the rewritten characters, mangled plot, deviation from source material and intentionally dishonest marketing.