There are a few issues that, as a science fiction fan, keep bugging me every time I see an attempt at "legitimising" the 2017 Ghost in the Shell film. Most recently, there was a post about "the science behind Ghost in the Shell" that was literally just an advertorial for Hewlett-Packard, yet it strangely received over 300 upvotes.

Science

Imagine a scientific breakthrough that allows technicians to implant a human brain into a cybernetic body, and integrate the nervous system (nerves) and vascular system (blood vessels). The science behind it must take into account a seamless interface between biological matter (brain) and non-biological parts (cyber-body). If that's possible, it would be technologically trivial to implant a system to mimic an endocrine system (hormones/chemicals) that could release drugs into the brain's bloodstream. There would be no need to manually take a "memory suppression drug", or any other drug. In order to experience emotion at all, the brain depends on chemicals (neurotransmitters). Kusanagi has emotions in the 2017 film, therefore she already has a brain that is receiving signals from an artificial neuroendocrine system. The idea of taking "memory-loss pills" makes no sense if you think about it at all.

In the original source material, the "cyberbrain" isn't just a brain in a case. It may even be unknown how much, if any, original brain tissue is left. Simply dumping a brain into a cyber-container (as is done in the 2017 film) makes the entire concept unbelievable without careful consideration of the implications. As a fan of 'hard sci-fi", I can't turn my brain off for a concept that doesn't even try to answer simple questions about how it could work.

Characters and Culture

It's often said: "Kusanagi is a cyborg and has no ethnicity." Well, in the 2017 film, she is a Japanese woman whose brain is implanted into a white woman's cybernetic body. Whitewashing (and Mamoru Oshii's odd endorsement of Scarlett Johannson) aside, it doesn't make any sense if you think about it for yourself.

Japan is an extremely xenophobic, homogeneous country. Only 1.5% of the population is non-Japanese. How is the viewer supposed to accept that suddenly Japan has become a melting pot to the extent that a white woman named "Mira Killian" would blend in and not be seen as foreign?

If the film were set in a more immigration-friendly location like Hong Kong, perhaps it would make sense. Japan? No way. Japan is literally building robots to help its aging population -- in order to avoid immigration. If anything, the cyborgs (which would look and act like Japanese people) would replace immigrants, not look or act like foreigners.

You can tell that Rupert Sanders anticipated the issue with a Japanese woman (named Kusanagi Motoko) being played by a white actress. Hence, the name change to "Mira Killian" -- but the whole idea doesn't make any sense. Japan is a homogeneous Asian country. Kusanagi Motoko is a Japanese woman's name. There was no reason to give her a white woman's body and a different (presumably Irish?) alias.

Technology

Japan is also a world leader in robotic technology. There is no practical future scenario in which Japan would need to import robotics from a European country. It just doesn't make sense unless you construct a fantasy reality in which the entire country of Japan suddenly forgets their own decades of expertise as a world leader in robotics.

Practicality

"Rupert Sanders had to cast Scarlett Johannson in order to justify a $110 million budget." Did they really need such a massive budget in order to tell a Ghost in the Shell origin story?

Holograms the size of buildings? Neon everywhere? The original anime had very few of those visuals. The director, Rupert Sanders, seemed to sacrifice the story for the sake of beautiful-yet-not-innovative special effects. The effects were expensive and perhaps pretty in 3D, but no one has mentioned them as groundbreaking or pushing cinematic boundaries in any way. What was the point of asking for failure -- building such a massive budget for a decades-old anime/manga series that most film audiences have never heard of?

It didn't make sense to produce a $110 million film that would almost certainly flop -- and yes, it was a financial disaster -- while clearly hoping to launch a franchise for Scarlett Johannson. With a smaller budget and a Japanese actress (Kikuchi Rinko or Fukushima Rila, perhaps) as Kusanagi, the awkwardly rewritten backstory about a white cyborg woman in Japan would have been unnecessary. Global audiences at least wouldn't have had to deal with the protests about whitewashing that caused many to perceive the film as racist. (This is not an invitation to complain about "SJWs", by the way.)

Anime/manga fans who wanted a white Kusanagi clearly didn't save the film from flopping, so what was the point in asking for a public relations nightmare by casting yet another white woman in a Japanese character's role (or at least, a role that could have just as well have been played by a Japanese actress)?

Ultimately, it seems like unless you're a die-hard Scarlett Johannson fan, or you can completely turn your brain off while viewing a movie, there's no reason to throw away an hour and a half of your life watching Ghost in the Shell 2017. You might as well re-watch the anime films, the series, or even The Matrix (1999).

In the back of my mind, part of me still feels a grudging responsibility to see the visuals for myself; some great artists worked on the film. But then, there's an artbook for the 2017 film; I'd be glad to support the art without giving any pretense of wanting a sequel for a sloppily-constructed, generic story by paying to see Ghost in the Shell 2017.

In case anyone has thoughts that can fill the technological, scientific, plot, character and cultural holes that I've outlined here, I'd be glad to hear them. Otherwise, there's plenty of existing Ghost in the Shell to enjoy, along with a new anime film being developed that should be worth waiting for.