[MENTION=7]Totenkindly[/MENTION]
It's not as high in my 80s favorites as Back to the Future or The Naked Gun. I probably would be more meh if not for Venkman.
That said, there's some great writing in the original. Great comedic writing that ensured plenty of sharp, witty lines and retorts for multiple characters and not just the leads; most of the jokes aren't contextual or dated to that time period. It looks like the new one is more or less just riffing on jokes from the original, and/or delivering jokes that are dependent on some understanding of 2010s culture, fashion, politics, etc--I think it's a sign of poor writing if you have to rely too much on current trends and tropes to carry your movie--that's why Epic Movie and Scary Movie haven't aged well...you have to have some memory or knowledge of early and mid 2000s popular culture to understand half of the jokes and references, although to be fair, those movies were already pretty sucky when they were released.
Time period wise, aside from the obvious details like the clothing, music, and vehicles, it is a fairly timeless film (the humor and story seem to hold up well after 32 years, enough that my son who tends to avoid "old" movies found it thoroughly entertaining) and I would say less dated to the era than Animal House or Caddyshack. Those films are also a bit more niche and rely on more "mature" humor (unless you count the Ghost BJ Ackroyd gets, but I imagine that went over most younger kids' heads at the time) , so comparing them is odd. A more fair comparison would be to similar family-oriented comedy adventures from the mid eighties. So, compare it to Back to the Future and the Goonies (both more entertaining, IMO) before you compare it to adolescent shock comedy from the late 70s and early 80s. I think they're of completely different sub-genres so it's like comparing Argento's slasher films to his supernatural films--yeah, it can be done, but they're so different that ultimately it's coming down to personal opinion rather than any comparison on the technical or narrative merits of the work.