Author Spotlight
Lucy Wolf
After 36 years, the long-awaited sequel to the iconic “Beetlejuice” movie, “Beetlejuice Beetlejuice” was released on Sep. 6. This time, with new characters, chaotic storylines and the return of fan-favorite Michael Keaton.
From the looks of the trailer constantly popping up on my TikTok For You page, the plot centered around three generations of the Deetz family returning to Winter River, while Lydia’s daughter Astrid, accidentally opens the portal to the Afterlife. I was immediately intrigued. So I went into watching “Beetlejuice Beetlejuice” with high expectations.
While the original “Beetlejuice” remains a Tim Burton classic — a married couple dies, turns into ghosts, then tries to scare away their new homeowners — the second installment left me feeling overwhelmed and confused at times due to the over-detailed plotlines.
The sequel featured characters Beetlejuice, Delia Deetz and Lydia Deetz, that were all in the original. Yet, Burton added new characters, Astrid Deetz, Delores and Wolf Jackson, to replace Adam and Barbara Maitland from the first movie who sadly don’t return.
While Jenna Ortega — who plays Astrid Deetz — brought the brooding teenager touch with her sardonic personality, Monica Belluci and Willem Dafoe — who play Delores and Wolf Jackson — had storylines that felt unnecessary and irrelevant, dragging the movie on longer than it needed to.
As Belluci played Delores — a soul-sucking villain — and Dafoe played Wolf Jackson — the ghost detective — the movie would’ve been easier to follow and more enjoyable without these new additions. The constant switching between Delores obsessing over her ex-husband, Beetlejuice, and Wolf Jackson sneaking around graveyards as a detective made me uninterested in their plotlines.
Since so many years have passed since the 1988 film, I was worried that “Beetlejuice Beetlejuice” would be drastically different from the original with the new technology and improved animations. But it wasn’t.
As I watched anxiously, I was comforted by the familiarity of the movie’s overall execution — the dark, striped costumes and ghost makeup resembled the first movie — and production as the sequel relies heavily on practical affects and minimal CGI to make the digital affects similar to the original.
When it came to seeing Beetlejuice and other underworld character’s faces expand and shape shift like they did in the first film, I felt the classic Burton touch that the old movie was so jam-packed with.
At times when I was bored by Wolf Jackson interrogating Beetlejuice or Delores sucking the souls out of many characters, I did however enjoy the connections Tim Burton made between the two movies.
When Beetlejuice stretched his wedding guest’s faces into their phones, I was reminded of Adam Mailand’s stretched-out face scene in the original. Or even the second movie, I noticed the small detail of Delia Deetz having the same sculpture placed in the front of her house as it was in the original.
When it came time for the wedding scene the officiant broke out into song. I was cringing at the singing, along with the additional dancing aspect, as I watched the characters dramatically twirl and throw themselves around.
However, getting to see two of my favorite actresses — Winona Ryder and Ortega — in the wedding scene made the unbearable theatrics slightly more enjoyable. While the weird dance moves were a hard-watch, they surprisingly fit the scene.
While the storyline of the first movie is about a couple who dies, turns to ghosts and tries to scare away their new home inhabitants was easier to follow, I’ll give credit where it’s due. The second movie was productionally creative through its usage of costumes and special affects, but overcomplicated through its storylines.
If you’re a diehard fan of the original “Beetlejuice” movie and are looking for a new storyline, “Beetlejuice Beetlejuice” may be for you. But personally, I’ll just stick with the original, more simplistic version.
Leave a Reply