I don't expect much from this new Ghostbusters.
Ghostbusters II in 1989 was not any good either, IMO.
It sure didn't catch the lightning in a bottle again like Ghostbusters did.
That's because Ghostbusters II used a tired, generic, paint-by-numbers plot with character exploitation but limited to no serious character development. It fell into the same typical plot trap of many 80s comedy films that weren't so good.
I remember leaving the theater with my brother after the film unfulfilled. Even the bad guy was the stereotypical abusive boss with semi-gay undertones. It was like they were trying to touch all the bases on a checklist without remembering what made the first film so strong--and frankly, trying to out do the first film was next to impossible without it being the first in a contiguous trilogy which it was not.
Maybe if they had tried to reintroduce Gozer... maybe.
Hell, even the baby was a generic 80s plot element by that time and did the film no favors whatsoever in how the implemented the tyke. This was two years after "Three Men and a Baby" and several months before "Look Who's Talking." The baby only made the film drag and added even more to the "routine" feeling.
The first film was full of world building. The second was a world drain.