Why is Ghostbusters such an untouchable franchise?

So obviously i've seen Ghostbusters many times but only in the past few years have I started to truly digest movies. I decided to rewatch the first Ghostbusters recently and was genuinely wondering if I had seen a different version. Bill Murray is great, the effects hold up mostly, the jokes land and overall I found it to be a fun old time but that was it. Some story points were very weak, a few too many coincidences and the handling of time wasn't great. Also I didn't realise how little Ernie Hudson actually does in the film. He turns up for an interview, is instantly hired and then he is in the background of almost every scene after that. You could have cut him out completely and it wouldn't have changed anything.

Is it a nostalgia or a generational thing? Now we have the Ghostbusters remake, which I am in no way defending as it looks like garbage, but there has been this huge backlash as if the original film is a classic. There is plenty of silly humour in the original so that can't be the issue. I honestly feel like the orginal premise and characters are not too iconic to be remade.

Anyway, I don't mean to shit on the original Ghostbusters, I just want to know why it appears to be untouchable in the eyes of most of the internet because all I saw was a decent fun movie, add to that a mediocre sequel and i'm genuinely confused. Please enlighten me.

Submitted July 04, 2016 at 06:24PM by UlyssesKlaw http://ift.tt/29oeh6o