Beetlejuice Beetlejuice, the sequel to Tim Buron’s 1988 cult classic Beetlejuice, arrives at a time when the main character’s popularity is at an all-time high. After the movie came a cartoon in the 1990s and an acclaimed Broadway musical in the 2010s. It is no secret that a sequel to the original film was going to be ordered eventually. However, waiting 36 years after the original, calling it a disappointment is an understatement. Beetlejuice Beetlejuice does have some positive aspects, but overall it is a mess in terms of storyline and the character and writing departments. Here’s what a couple of cinephiles had to say about the new movie.
Evan Mahanna: The film got off to a promising start when Danny Elfman’s musical score kicked in along with the opening titles, just like the original. This was similar to what the excellent Top Gun: Maverick did. Once that classic theme played, I was excited to see what wacky hijinks the cast and crew had for us. I felt the Autumn and Halloween vibes whereas the original was set against a more summer-like backdrop despite being a spooky season favorite.
Danielle Lugashi: While the aesthetics were there, the screenplay was nonsensical and entirely unfunny. The film’s focus on the Deetz family was underdeveloped, with miscellaneous, unsatisfying side plots being introduced to pad the runtime. A particularly egregious example of this is the single plot involving Lydia’s (Winona Ryder) daughter, Astrid (Jenna Ortega), which begins as what is seemingly the movie’s central plot but quickly ends with no confrontation or powerful resolution. Furthermore, any laughs earned during the movie were solely due to the charm and comedic abilities of the actors, mainly Catherine O’Hara (Delia) and Michael Keaton. (Beetlejuice)
Mahanna: I agree, the film had way too many subplots and most of them had no satisfying payoff. The film also introduces many characters in the afterlife such as Beetlejuice’s ex-wife Delores (Monica Belluci) and Wolf Jackson (Wilem Dafoe), a dead movie star who portrayed a detective when he was still alive and still thinks he is one. You can tell the actors had fun in their roles, however the script doesn’t let them or their characters affect the story that much. Having a tighter, more emotionally effective story centered around the Deetz family would have worked better.
Lugashi: Beyond the messy plot, the film was a visual disaster. The special effects are somehow worse than in the original movie, and not in an intentional kitschy way. The iconic sandworm is excusable, but any feature of the afterlife, including the beloved Bob, looks hideous. Furthermore, the more practical elements, such as the costuming and lighting, were significantly weaker than in the original movie. Both elements were critical in Lydia’s original story, but this sequel resorts to cheap imitation rather than being innovative, a criticism that I apply to the film in its entirety.
Mahnna: Finally, a sequel didn’t seem necessary in the first place. In an era where “legacy sequels” come out left and right a lot of them fail because they’re made just to bring in some money to the studios. Unfortunately, this is the same case here. Some had definitive endings including the original film yet feels like this was a modern remake without most of the charm and campiness of the original. It has been doing well financially, yet according to us, it’s not worth it.