Beetlejuice Beetlejuice Review: Convoluted Family Film Retraces Its Steps

Tim Burton is a director I’ve been conflicted about ever since I became a film fan. There’s no doubting his incredible imaginative capabilities, his distinct knack for worldbuilding, unique sense of style, and his wacky gothic imagery. I’ve never personally been impressed by his storytelling, save for a few special cases (Batman Returns is a genuine masterclass in filmmaking). But, His work can at times feel simple, and infantilizing. I don’t like to throw around the word pretentious, because it seems like a word people just use nowadays when they get bored of well made, interesting films. I think the word can be applicable to him though, because the way he writes his characters (as an extension of himself), they come across as so special and different when in reality they’re just an emo kid that grew up in the suburbs. In fact, I lied. I’m not conflicted on him, I’ve always thought he’s overrated. 

Something about this movie breaks my heart though, as a lover of original film. It’s just, it doesn’t even feel like he tried. Even if he’s never been my cup of tea, Tim Burton was wholly himself in whatever project he jumped into. The original Beetlejuice is a testament to this, as even if it was an early film of his it has his style written all over it. It’s energetic, original, fun, well stylized. It has some of the most random expressionist set design you could find at the time of its release. Now, I wasn’t even a massive fan of the original. I think it’s dated, and runs out of steam. But it was exciting. And it tried, it really tried. I’m not even sure Burton wanted to make this one, as much as this was the only film the studio would allow him to make. 

I can’t think of any new set design from this film. There’s no exploration here. Sure, they kept a few of the classics. The waiting room, the hallways and whatnot. But at the heart of the original is two things; the performance of the titular character, and painstakingly thoughtful set design. Why not dive further into the world? Check out something new? It could’ve allowed them to shed away a few unnecessary plotlines, in favor of moving the story forward. Instead, what little they did add they added without flair. 

Speaking of the titular character, I want to get into Beetlejuice, and specifically, his entrance into the film. I’m a big believer in first impressions. Not in life, I mean that’s true I guess. But in film, especially film made as entertainment, an entrance can make or break a character. Beetlejuice’s entrance was so bad it legitimately pissed me off. I mean, what the hell?! Did they even try? Was there something cut, something that was missing? I don’t get it, I really don’t get it. They just cut to him, and he’s there, and that’s it. The first movie, it’s a really big deal, as it should be! He’s a powerful charismatic character. They built him up, slowly and patiently. They do the same here too, but then they just undercut it. It’s a seemingly minor detail that to me feels like a domino set to knock down a house. It’s about how they treat the character. And when the film doesn’t treat him with respect, why would the audience do so? 

Michael Keaton has gone on to mention multiple times during his press tour that he only wanted to return to the project if Beetlejuice was given the same amount of screentime as the previous film. That is, very little screentime. I think he had the right idea, because with a character so crazy and chaotic, you want to treat him like a looming threat. The more you keep him in, the less threatening he becomes. He’s like the shark from Jaws, or Anthony Hopkins from Silence of the Lambs, but more Halloweeny. When you undercut his entrance like that, and you don’t treat him like a real threat, all the sudden he’s just a guy who’s not in the film enough. 

When we talk about specifics, maybe the character wouldn’t’ve worked anyway. I’m a huge fan of Michael Keaton, and the last ten years have been a wonderful late-career resurgence for him. Birdman was fantastic, one of the best films of the decade. Spotlight might’ve been even better. It’s a film I turn to when I think about perfectly made films, where the director takes a back seat and allows the story to develop without interference. Keaton’s performance in both of those films marks two very different interpretations, and yet two brilliant pieces of work in their own right. He was also really quite wonderful in The Founder, a smaller and underrated film. All this buttering up is to say I thought he was quite disappointing here.

Keaton’s performance in the original Beetlejuice had a palpable energy, a fun and deeply cynical bite that gave the film exactly what it needed. Now, when I say the original film is dated, that character is the reason why. He’s wildly inappropriate, and the dialogue that comes out of his mouth could in no way make it in today’s day and age. That doesn’t change the kinetic energy in which he brought to the character. Here, he doesn’t seem to have the same kind of bite. The animation isn’t there, and his heart isn’t fully in it. It’s like when they tried to make the character more appropriate, they took away what makes the character good. There are ways to maintain his cynicism, all that matters is you point it in the right direction. They didn’t though, and because of it, Keaton felt to me more of an impression of himself.

Winona Ryder on the other hand, I think was a good choice to lead this project. She’s been going steady with her resurgence in the Stranger Things TV show, and I thought she was a real treat to watch in the original film. Here she’s a different character completely, not without her own sense of charm. Thirty-five years after the original events, her character’s now gotten famous selling out for a TV show.  While she doesn’t exactly get much to work with plot-wise, she does a good job of playing the straight man around all this chaos and her relationship with her daughter (Jenna Ortega) is one of the highlights of the film. In fact, I really wish the film would’ve slowed things down and focused specifically on the mother-daughter relationship between them two, as well as the one between her and Catherine O’Hara. As the film continues, it becomes increasingly clear that that’s where the heart of the film is, and an analysis of intergenerational trauma would be a fantastic tie-in to a story about mortality and what you leave behind when you go.

Jenna Ortega was fine in the film as well, but I don’t think she was given enough to do for me to be sold on her performance. She was relegated about halfway through the film to a side plot that felt out of left field, and generally, unnecessary. I haven’t seen her in Wednesday or in Scream, but I’ve heard pretty good things. Considering her obsession for film, I really hope that she makes the right decisions artistically and continues to get better at her craft. I love it when actors are students of film! It’s exciting to see someone responsible for creating the art that I love have so much respect for it. 

I’ve alluded to it previously in the review, but there are so many plots here worth cutting that I can’t believe it. Certain actors that I love, just didn’t have any reason to be in this movie. Willam DaFoe for example, maybe my favorite actor living today. Didn’t need to be here, and also, kinda phoned it in. Monica Belluci as well had a role I had a lot of excitement for, but didn’t end up panning out. She at least had a decent entrance though, so I know Burton’s capable of doing it. The most egregious insert though I’d say has to be Justin Theroux, who’s character always felt like he was on the outside looking in. He plays a TV producer looking to capitalize on Winona Ryder’s vulnerable state, and he has a difficult situation of being annoying in the film, and being annoying as a written character. Nothing against the actor, who did fine with what he was given. He just wasn’t given much to work with, and the character could’ve been cut. If all of these storylines would’ve been cut away, there would’ve been a chance to get to the meat of the story, and focus on what really matters. Instead, what we were left with was a little convoluted, and shallow. 

Despite the tone of this review, there are a few redeeming qualities to this movie though. I was excited when the opening credits rolled, and I thought to myself maybe this’ll be better than I thought! But I was tricked, tricked by the wonderful music. I looked at the end of the credits and of course, it was Danny Elfman. What a wonderful composer, and it’s nice to see him still working. He’s one of those guys where I’m just happy to be around while he’s making music. There was a musical number at the end too, which I thought was pretty well realized. It had a way of keeping up the tension while maintaining the entertainment factor, doing a service to finishing up the movie. Lastly, a scene with a baby in it felt like the only time the movie kept up with the shock value of the original. It worked in a way that was funny, disturbing, and provocative. I love that baby. That baby was a funny dude. 

Still, the film was mostly to me a bit of a jumbled mess. It wasn’t able to capture the magic of the original, and it lost sight of what could’ve been a genuinely touching story between three generations of women. Beetlejuice himself wasn’t properly handled, and it felt like they didn’t exactly know what to do with him. There wasn’t much passion in this project, and it felt like an excuse to get the band back together so everyone could hang out again. This film is a testament to why I don’t appreciate legacy sequels, because it allows a company to get away with below average material based on name brand alone. And if a movie like this were to fail? A studio exec could look to the board and at least say “I made the right move, if you look at the numbers”. It’s lazy, and eventually, we’re going to run out of material to revamp. It’s why the film industry is fading, and audiences are turning to international studios for their material. Hollywood is eating itself, and unless it changes direction soon, it will no longer be the premiere destination for entertainment. There are ways out of it, and they include allowing people like Tim Burton make whatever the hell he wants, even if they’re not my favorite projects. 

The more I write about this movie, the more I want to give it one star. But I would never do that. I would never give a movie with Catherine O’Hara in it one star. For the sake of her, let it be two.

Grade: ☀☀