I wrote a long response but most of it got deleted, so I’ll give the shorter version.
The article seems to be conflating two things — whether Ghostbusters deserves a franchise (debatable) and whether women can carry a blockbuster (in my opinion, they can).
The reality is, Ghostbusters was a good, but not great movie. Wiig and McCarthy, who I usually like, felt a bit straight jacketed, and were mostly doing cookie-cutter jokes rather than playing to their own comic sensibilities. I agree with many that Kate Mckinnon stole the show, and Leslie Jones was okay (although, I don’t know much about her otherwise, so it’s hard to put her performance in context).
So, yeah, it was ok. But, the reality is, it’s not the first attempt at a franchise that hasn’t worked out, so I’m not sure it means anything (or, should mean anything) for the future of women in comedy. It was a pretty good movie — not great, not terrible.
As for the franchise issue in Hollywood, it’s hard to say, mainly because the superhero model is relatively unique. These were phenomenal stories that combined universal significance with entertainment, and, importantly for the franchise model, had been serialized for decades before they got turned into movies. They basically had the foundation for sprawling franchises already settled.