No major spoilers of any kind in this review itself beyond a few minor details and many of the links lead to spoilers. If you don't want to know anything, like even the mention of a ghostly character that appears on screen then best avoid.
The Bad News First:
I personally can say that I enjoyed this flick on the big screen a few nights ago with my wifey after receiving some free tickets. That being said, those responsible for this production, meaning everyone from the studio, to the director, to the actors, do not in any way deserve your hard earned money. Why? Because of the disingenuous and agenda-driven way that they have all promoted the film. The decision by the studio execs to get involved in the the culture war and surrounding politics was quite possibly not driven by genuine ideological motives so much as financial ones, but the aftermath is the same either way. And the director Paul Feig quite obviously is a man who hating (male) Social Justice Warrior type. I recommend this positive review of the film that also attempts to psychoanalyze Feig, so as to, in the immortal words of Bill Murray, find out what makes him tick. As they state in the review video description, "paul feig is a lolcow. ghostbusters was cute. but is it worth giving money to someone who hates you (and himself)?"
I don't think the movie itself is anywhere nearly as tainted by an SJW agenda as Mundane Matt (below video) and others have made it out to be. Although some of those criticisms have merit, while other things are being understandably overly scrutinized leading to conclusions of an agenda where they likely was none.
Another downside is that there are noteworthy amounts of really corny (not funny corny) parts and failed attempts at humor.
Next up, is the majorly overused CGI special effects, which is not in keeping with the original films that by comparison took a less is more type of approach, which makes the viewer appreciate the razzle dazzle moments much more. Furthermore, a substantial amount of said effects are cartoonish, very Disney's Haunted Mansion-esque and were an actual major cause for the early heavy criticisms of the film trailer, earning it the title of most disliked video in YouTube history. This innocent critical observation was among the things viciously and ignorantly spun into unfounded allegations of misogyny, see first link above. Case in point on the bad effects, is that Slimer and the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man look better in the 1984 version. I recently rewatched the 1984 original and the special effects hold up quite well and are overall better than this film. The one exception in the original is the goofy looking claymation part where the demon dog is running around, when it's stationary the animatronic version of the dog looks great. Now don't get me wrong, there are also some great modern effects that surpass anything in the older film as well, some of which I'll get to in a sec. However, better visuals should be expected with the advancements in the tech available. This is why I say overall the effects are better in the old film, because they didn't use a lot vs this incarnation and what they did use always aimed and largely succeeded in coming off as realistic.
The Good News:
Overall I give it a solid 2 1/2 stars. It's at least as good if not better than Ghostbusters 2. The material that misses the mark in the laugh department is countered by a fair share of smile inducing and lol worthy material from some very funny ladies. I think they all did a great job and I particularly liked Kristin Wigg's performance, which includes a hip-hop dance performance that I found impressive and due to the situation it occurs in it got me chucking. I also thought Kate McKinnon's character was great, much wilder but reminiscent of the beloved Dr. Egon Spangler in her eccentricity and role as the brains of the brainy crew. Actor Harold Ramis, who is now decreased, gave life to Dr. Spangler and there is an Easter egg in the new film that pays him tribute. The cameos from the former Ghostbusters stars I also thought were great and did not seem out of place and forced as some have argued. I also left the theater with the opinion that the criticism that Leslie Jones is playing a black woman stereotype is unwarranted. It was not the over-the-top cringe fest I was told so often to expect. She herself has rejected this notion saying that "if I'm stereotype, so be it." This was in reference to her character being an average Joe in comparison to the 3 other genius scientist Ghostbusters. I'd go one step further and say that from what I can tell she talks very much like her character in real life, so she's not playing a stereotype, but rather proof that stereotypes don't materialize out of thin air as do the ghosts in the movie.
One thing nobody has mentioned that I've come across, is that the 3D version of the movie makes the best use of that technology that I have seen and I'm a huge 3D fan. The film masterfully uses the trick of adding a letterbox to create the illusion of things literally coming out of the screen and the 3D is just really good in general. And contrary to appearances from the trailer, the film does respect the subject matter of the paranormal. They do a pretty good damn job with that aspect and made a pretty good damn film really.
I'm just one guy, but I bet I'm not alone in saying that if those involved in this film series can just keep the politics to a minimum, treat the fans with respect, and not turn a true misogynistic minority into a monolithic majority, that I'll pay to go see the planned sequel. I'll buy the Blu-Ray of this one when it comes out, but I think they deserved getting slimed at the box office.
In closing, another positive to come of this is having more movie heroes that don't exclude little girls having a Halloween costume option because the character dresses too sexy.