Is Beetlejuice Beetlejuice Actually Good? / Beetlejuice 1988 SPEED-ART
Hey guys I'm back, and with me another Speed-Art! This one is of Beetlejuice himself. So this year saw the release of “Beetlejuice Beetlejuice”, the eagerly anticipated sequel to the 1988 cult classic, “Beetlejuice”. But after many false starts and other scripts written, was this movie worth the wait? I’m gonna look at 5 aspects of the new film and compare it with the original to see if “Beetlejuice Beetlejuice” will become its own classic, or if it was maybe only good for a one-time watch.
5. Acting
At number 5 we have acting. Both films star Michael Keaton as the titular anti-hero, and co-star Winona Ryder and Catherine O’Hara as the co-leads. The first film’s plot revolves around Alec Baldwin and Geena Davis who play a young couple that have to navigate letting go of their former lives as they enter the afterlife while mentoring the young girl who has moved into their former house. The sequel adds Willem Dafoe, Justin Theroux, and Jenna Ortega to the cast, in a film which revolves around Jenna Ortega’s character falling for a local boy who brings her into the afterlife, and her mom, again played by Winona Ryder teams up with Beetlejuice to save her. Overall both casts do a great job in their respective roles, Alec Baldwin and Geena Davis are somewhat missed in the second film, but the passage of time obviously wouldn’t allow them to appear as age-less ghosts anymore. While the additions of Jenna Ortega and Willem Dafoe to the roster add a lot of spark to this new entry, I found Justin Theroux’s performance to be somewhat phoned in, although that may be because of a late film surprise reveal, but his parts seemed to drag the film down overall. But nonetheless, people are here for Beetlejuice, and Michel Keaton knocked it out of the park both times. While he’s obviously younger and more energetic in the original, he returns to the character perfectly and embodies it so well once again. So the acting in both is nearly on par.
4. Effects
Number 4 is something we were all looking forward to seeing in the new film, and that is how they planned on executing the special effects, and thankfully they delivered the goods. While the first film’s effects were largely practical sets or stop-motion, which gives the world a cosy handmade feel, the new film blends modern CGI with the practical and stop-motion effects, still giving this film a cosy feel, although, with the higher budget and passage of time, the effects look even more seamless and clearly more high-def for this latest film. Because of this attention to detail, the film will probably stand the test of time along with the original film.
3. Direction and Cinematography
Number 3 is direction and cinematography. While both films are directed by Tim Burton, the original film was one of the director’s first films and this latest entry comes long after his heyday, but does he still have the steady hand to put this film together, and well the answer is yes. While the first film has a steady direction throughout and Burton clearly loves the weirdness of the afterlife, which he amps up the inclusions in the newest film. But the best-directed scene in both films is probably the flashback scene in the latest entry about Beetlejuice’s pre-ghost life, directed almost like an avant-garde black-and-white film. I sort of wish the new film had a little more of that, but both films are wonderfully shot. The first film’s cinematographer, Thomas E. Ackerman, also shot Jumanji, Christmas Vacation, and Moonwalker, so he had an eye for comedic and dynamic shots, especially noticeable in the last half of the first film. The newer film’s cinematographer, Haris Zambarloukos, has a more cinematic style, shooting previously The Meg 2, Cinderella, and Murder on the Orient Express. These more sweeping shots are much more complicated in the new film, although still feel like they fit in style with the previous. So, really you can’t go wrong with the direction and compositions in either film.
2. Story
Number 2 is the story. Now the plot of the first film is a pretty simple story told through the lens of two recently deceased, who accidentally entangle themselves with Beetlejuice as he uses their unwanted new house owner’s daughter to try to leave the afterlife through a forced marriage. The new film has a few different plots going on, the first one involves the family coming back to bury their recently deceased family member. Winona Ryder’s character has since had a daughter, lost a husband, and is dating a new person who happens to be her producer on her haunted television show. She accepts a proposal, all the while her daughter runs off and gets tangled up with a ghost, who plans to use her to leave the afterlife. While this is happening, Beetlejucie’s ex-wife is hunting him and leaving many souls sucked in her wake, leading to Willem Dafoe’s detective character tracking her throughout the film. Eventually, Beetlejuice agrees to help get Winona Ryder’s daughter out of the afterlife, if she’ll go through with a new marriage. So the second movie’s plot is a little bit of a mess. While the first film allows you to breathe and just live in this world, the second film seems much more rushed, and multiple plots could probably have been cut and others fleshed out more to make a more cohesive story. The 2024 film’s writers were much more used to writing for TV, and their bloated script shows this, as this could have been a 6 part mini-series if each part was given more time, but as is this is probably the weakest part of the new film, especially in comparison to the original film.
1. Humor
But the most important part of any comedy film is the humour, and thankfully both entries are actually pretty funny. While the first film’s humour is maybe a little raunchy or inappropriate by today’s standards, it’s still really funny and all the actors play their parts well. The new film has probably more jokes than the first, and while not all the jokes land, the ones that do work well. While the film itself is bloated, the humour helps to hold it together and make sure I’m never bored when watching it. Michael Keaton delivers his lines and his slapstick physical humour in a way only he could do, and the deadpan delivery of the supporting cast in both films help to sell and ground this world as genuine despite its wackiness.
So, overall does the new film hold a candle to the original, well yes. It’s an enjoyable, although messy film, that falls apart somewhat with a loose script, but the things that work well and help to elevate it above other franchise sequel-reboots. Will it become an enduring all-time cult classic? Well, that remains to be seen, but if you rewatch the first film every year, you could make it a double-feature with this new film and have a good time. There’s clearly still a little magic left in Tim Burton’s strange and odd afterlife.
What are your thoughts on the new Beetlejuice film? Let me know down below. Before I sign off I want to thank Henry Granberg for supporting the Patreon recently, as well as all my other supporters, and until next time, I've been Aaron, and I'll tell you something later!