Honest review from someone who watched it without taking sides before
I am someone who enjoys watching movies. I've seen probably over 2000 films and shows and have over 1200 rated on IMDb. I've seen the original Ghostbusters and think they are hilarious and a good movie. However, I was never *that* much attached to it to be horrified by the idea of a remake. In general, I don't mind remakes, unless they are insulting the original or are just a bad movie by themselves. For instance, American remake or Martyrs was *beep* I've read some good reviews and some bad ones, entering this watching unbiased and without desire to see it be good or to suck.
The storyline resembles the first one a lot, except it feels somehow incomplete without the love story and Zuul. I understand the critique someone gave that it feels too much like it's setting-up the sequel instead of giving it's A-game in the first one. Actually, the whole first half'n hour were not as funny as I hoped. I mean, there were some good jokes now and then ('This worthless trash belongs to this institution'), but there was also some Sandler-level toilet humor between McCarthy and MacKinnon.
The first problem I saw was the casting of Wiig and McCarthy in this particular roles. Don't get me wrong, both are good comedians and can be funny, but somehow McCarthy being loud-mouthed Abby, while Wiig being the stuck-up protagonist Erin was very obvious casting. You know, been there-done that. I know some actors spend whole of their careers doing one thing and it can be funny, but sometimes you need to be surprised and shocked when watching a comedy. I was not surprised at all by Wiig and McCarthy. I think it would be much more funny if Wiig played Abby and McCarthy played Erin: That way both would surprise us in roles that were not something we already saw them in. This way, they were both good, but too safe to be outstanding.
Now, Kate McKinnon as Holtzman was a mixed bag... She had her moments of being really funny ('Great impersonation of an inflating balloon'), but there were times when she was just cringy and off. I get people's complains about her being obnoxious, although I can see she had fun with playing her.
Two outstands IMO are definitely Leslie Jones and Chris Hemsworth. Once they entered the film, it got a whole lot funnier. Jones was better used here than Ernie Hudson was in the first one, often being the highlight of the show. She had several good jokes and some personality. I hear complaints about her being a stereotype, but I think some funny archetypes are good for comedy. Besides being loud, she also shown some genuine knowledge of the city's architecture and history that was very much needed to get stuff done. Now I want to see more of Jones' work, because her comedic timing is great.
Chris Hemsworth was also hilarious, delivering several good jokes (Glasses taken out, speaking gibberish on the phone to appear smart, ect.). As a man, I wasn't insulted by his character. I never got an impression that Kevin was supposed to be representing all men. Other men in the film weren't as dumb. I think Kevin was a male twist on a classic dumb blonde character from the 60s/70s. Actually, he reminded me a lot of Mary Goodnight, Bond girl from Man with the Golden Gun. She was like him: nice, stupid as a ton of bricks and very attractive.
As for film being sexist; well-not really IMO. I am a guy who sometimes gets insulted by the modern representation of men being often cheaters and chauvinists and getting assaulted much harder than any woman would in the same comedy. But honestly, 2014's The Other Woman and several other films had that trope a lot, and I mean A LOT stronger than Ghostbusters. I don't think all men were dumb or evil. Dean of college (btw, awesome to see Charles Dance) wasn't evil, he only did what any respected scientist would do when seeing an underling embarrassing the institution that way. The museum curator and tour guide weren't bad or dumb. Neither was the mayor, who actually kind of helped them.
As for the villain - well, he is *a villain*, so it's expected for him to be kind of a douche. Actually a nice parallel with main heroines, since they were all looked down upon in life. What separated them was their decisions; GB decided to help the world who mistrusted them, while he decided to destroy it. Many stories have some parallels between their heroes and villains and it usually works.
The effects were good. Not mindblowingly awesome, next to BvS and Captain America, but still decent. I liked the design of the ghosts too. Female Slimer wasn't needed, though. Cameos were great, although I wish if they were playing their old characters and passed the mantle, so to speak. Also, the ending credits were actually innovative and held my attention through the end.
Overall, it was funny. Not great, but more good than not. Probably something I will watch again. Maybe before bedtime to hear in the background and get amused. It's not as good as the first, but I wasn't expecting it to be, to be honest. It isn't even Fieg's best film. But it is, more or less, a harmless fun flick; with cca 65% of humor hitting the target, and other 35% just leaving me indifferent, but not insulted. It was probably dragged down by the whole 'Feminist vs chauvinist' saga and filmmaker's poor attitude on trailer reception backfired. Still, the ending product is quite okay and if there is ever a sequel (doubtful, but who knows), I will watch it.
My honest opinion is 7/10 - Okay/nice movie. If you disagree, it is your right to do so and moreover, I would be delighted to hear a different opinion with constructive criticism. I am not pandering to anyone, I couldn't care less about the whole 'vs' thing going on this board. This is just my personal opinion, but it is 100% honest.