Tim Burton is back with a bang with Beetlejuice Beetlejuice (2024). The sequel for his cult feature Beetlejuice (1988) has undergone some major changes to adapt to current times. Has this been enough? Is this for the better or for worse?

Below, you’ll find a comparative of both films, highlighting key differences and similarities that will help you decide which, if any, of the two is more your jam, and whether you want to spend your money in the cinema this weekend or not.

Without further ado, let’s get into it!

Context

As a 90s baby, I did not grow up with Beetlejuice. In fact, it wasn’t even a big thing where I’m from. Plus, Halloween wasn’t celebrated at home, so this feature never really came up at all until later on, during my teenage years. As a pretty awkward, intense, and depressing teenager, I was naturally attracted to Tim Burton’s work like I was to Edgar Allan Poe’s. Gothic themes and aesthetic aside, his creativity has had me in awe ever since I saw my first Burton: Sleepy Hollow (1999).

Judging by the hoards of fans that his latest work has risen, millions of people feel the same about his work. Nonetheless, one can’t help but wonder, is Beetlejuice Beetlejuice any better than the original? Will you, as a somewhat interested potential spectator, have a good time if you don’t know much about Burton’s work? We are here to find out!

Addressing the predator in the room

If one were to list all that is wrong with Beetlejuice, surely the first item on the list would, ironically, be Beetlejuice (Michael Keaton) himself. Despite only appearing 17 minutes out of a 90-minute film, he manages to make you substantially nauseous and uncomfortable. Nowadays, one needs to be very aware of the decade where this was made. A decade when, sadly, sexist behaviour and sexual harassment were seen as comedic themes rather than the horrible plague they are.

The attempt to present force-kissing, lifting skirts and perving over a minor as fun, harmless jokes is a very telling proof of the mentality back in the days. Despite Geena Davis’ character, Barbara, constantly highlighting the intolerable and disgusting nature of Beetlejuice’ behaviour, the comedic tone of the film drowns her outrage in favour of more noise, jokes and colours, effectively diminishing the importance of her comments. A disappointing mindset that only gets worse when you take into consideration the fact that Beetlejuice was rated PG. Meaning kids could be taught to think of these actions as funny from very early on.

Times are a-changing

Luckily, Beetlejuice Beetlejuice has managed to keep the roguish behaviour of the homonymous evil spirit, minus the sexual harassment bit. In a society that, for the most part, won’t tolerate that sort of conduct any more, films and series have been forced to evolve and become more respectful. As a result, the sequel is a lot funnier. That’s what happens when you don’t resort to objectifying and bullying women to amuse your audience.

Additionally, the sequel has avoided the presence of sex offender Jeffrey Jones (Charles Deetz in Beetlejuice). While the actor is understandably completely off the project, Burton’s bewildering animation and some great CGI and makeup make his exit whimsical. The director’s creativity manages to cleverly avoid any need for the actor while giving his character a well-deserved Burtonian closure.

Like mother, like daughter

Mother-daughter relationships are in the middle of both films. Yet, the complexity of the dynamics involved in this type of relationship are not addressed in the same manner.

The 80s feature showcases a very classic take on a teenager-stepmother. Lydia Deetz (Winona Ryder) is a goth girl whose existence is completely ignored by her parents. As such, she is perpetually depressed and uninterested in life and its possibilities. Her mental health is not only disregarded, but worsened by a shrilling, self-absorbed stepmother, Delia (Catherine O’Hara), who is hilariously out of touch with reality.

The exaggerated nature of these characters was very much in fashion in comedies during the 80s and 90s. Themes like mental health and toxic behaviours seen as gags rather than serious issues. Curiously, this dysfunctional relationship is the reason why, almost forty years later, their bond is more wholesome and endearing than ever. The audience can see how both of them have grown into imperfect adults who are finally able to understand each other and communicate. In its own excentric way, their relationship is a reminder that, at the end of the day, family will always be there for you.

Naturally, the addition of Astrid Deetz (Jenna Ortega) is also a great catalyst for Lydia and Delia’s relationship to move forward. This next generation means that Lydia is now forced to see intergenerational relationships from the other side. This helps her empathise with Delia and her motherhood. Despite Astrid and Lydia’s relationship being different, the communication issues are still there. Hence, you get to see Delia as a sassy, but wise, advisor to Lydia, which is a beautiful full-circle moment.

Intense teenagerism

If there is something that both features revolve around, that is not Beetlejuice, but insomniac teenagers. Pale faces and under-eyes as black as their hair, both Lydia and Astrid live in the most negative plane of existence. They are both intense, sensitive girls who have no friends and make of nihilism their whole personality. Nevertheless, that’s as far as their similarities go, and their differences are actually quite relevant for your film experience.

First, we have Lydia in 1988. She’s a teenager so in love with death and unsatisfied by her life that she tries to kill herself in order to be with her new ghost friends, a couple much more loving and attentive than her own parents. Her behaviour is very relatable for anyone who has had a complicated coming of age. The world suddenly starts looking a lot uglier, and it is hard to figure out how to deal with that.

Doom is upon us!

A few decades later, we have Astrid. She is teenager in a similar position, but with the added trauma of losing her father in an “accident” that is arguably anything but if we go by his afterlife fate. But that’s another story altogether. Unlike her predecessor, Astrid doesn’t toy with the idea of death, probably to keep up with modern sensibilities.

Sadly, the nihilist teenager is an archetype that can be found in most products with characters of this age. With the rise of social media and the humungous amount of information accessible to anyone with Wi-Fi, kids learn about the ever-growing ugliness of the world that awaits them at incredible speed. This results in a depressed, uninspired youth. Obviously, this is not the case for everyone, but it is common enough that characters like Lydia and Astrid have become increasingly relatable, which is why their archetype is featured in every show and film.

As a result of this, Astrid is nothing new. In fact, the same actress has played Astrid before, only she had a fringe and her name was Wednesday. Will you still enjoy her character? Probably, but don’t expect to be surprised at all by her, nor her character arc. Just be thankful that she’s not as much of a try-hard as her hipster love interest.

Pumpkin heads and Halloween goddesses

Let’s be real, Beetlejuice is barely the bad guy of the first film, and 100% not the sequel’s villain. Yes, he is a horrible spirit that came from a horrible person (as we learn in the sequel), but he’s not the bad guy of the stories, just the leech that takes advantage of other’s misfortunes.

In Beetlejuice, the real bad guy is Otho (Glenn Shadix). He is a man who makes a living out of scamming idiots like Delia, who know nothing of art, but like to put on airs. The “expert on everything, but good for nothing” Otho steals a book of the dead for selfish purposes. Then, his ineptitude and ignorance has deadly consequences, which is where Beetlejuice comes in. The critique on hypocrisy and social leeches is quite strong, although ultimately Otho gets shamed by Beetlejuice for his… weight? Wait, what?

The new and improved Otho is named Rory (Justin Theroux) in Beetlejuice Beetlejuice. He’s even more fake and avaricious, but worry not, he doesn’t commit Otho’s worst crime: being fat. No, he only manipulates rich, vulnerable women into marrying him to get rich at their expense. All the while never missing the chance to mansplain women how they are actually feeling and giving lessons of kindness and fake new-age clichés. But hey, at least he’s not fat, right?

Thank Burton for the other 50%

Fortunately, you can always count on a strong female presence to balance the enraging effects of opportunist bastards like them. For every Otho, there is a Barbara; and for every Rory, a Delores (Monica Bellucci).

Barbara is, like most Geena Davis characters, an kind, admirable woman who doesn’t hesitate to make her feelings known… unless, of course, she can get her husband to do it for her. Still, she’s the only one to call out Beetlejuice on his disgusting, slimy behaviour towards women. While all the other female characters react badly towards him, she’s the only one who actually confronts him.

Barbara 2.0

As for Delores, she is the dark, upgraded version of Barbara. Despite most outlets painting her as the villain of the film, this statement can be easily argued. Sure, she sucks a few souls, but looking closer into her behaviour, she’s far from the bad guy.

Click here to avoid spoilers!

She resurrects by accident and sucks the soul of: a janitor who wanted to put her back in a box for all eternity, an incredibly rude dry cleaner, and Bob, who has been turned into a decoy by Beetlejuice. Sure, RIP poor Bob, but at least she goes face first. She doesn’t use other people to take the fall for her like Beetlejuice, nor does she manipulate like Rory. At the end of the day, her biggest crime is sucking souls, a deadly hobby that gets her killed. Overall, is she “the villain of the film”? Doubtful.

Welcome back!

Ultimately, what both women have in common is the disappointing finales. Astrid is all of us when she replies “how convenient” to her mother’s boring explanation of why Tim Burton didn’t want to invest in antiaging effects for a cameo. As for Delores, she’s essentially defeated by rushed, lazy writing, an ending way beneath her character.

Visual effects and other shenanigans

Burton is well known for his particular style, aesthetics that not only seep into his characters but paint the whole reality of his films with a thick coat of fever-dream-looking fantasy that is highly addictive for some and at least hypnotising for most.

Beetlejuice features some of the most creative animation ever made with stop-motion. Using rudimentary techniques, Burton managed to create different planes of existence and original creatures that give life to, well, the afterlife.

Following the tradition, its sequel mantains this universe, albeit making it slightly creepier at times, and takes advantage of the latest in CGI while keeping the stop-motion aesthetic visuals. It is such a fun blend that one feels almost scammed when Dafoe’s character, Wolf Jackson, appears. His makeup looks gas-station bought. In comparison to the makeup of everyone else around him, it looks almost as lame as his insistance to make “keep it real” happen.

Music for your ears (Danny Elfman score)

At this point of his career, little else can be said about Danny Elfman. He’s a genius at his job, and singlehandedly elevates every single one of Burton’s films with his pieces.

Both movies feature his work, which is a big win. However, the main tracks do make a difference. While the church-choir callback to Harry Belafonte’s Banana Boat (Day-O) song is as masterful as the appearance of THE red wedding dress, little else can be said in favour of the main themes picked for the sequel. Beetlejuice has of hilarious, upbeat, catchy themes, Beetlejuice Beetlejuice takes a turn towards more generic, completely forgettable tracks. The lyrics are still fun, but they are not as unique.

Advice to take from these movies:

• CGI can do wonders, but at the end of the day it is nothing without imagination.
• Red weeding dresses could be a thing.
• Don’t trust the first d*ckhead that shows interest in you.

What’s your take? Have you watched one or both of them? Would you add anything to the comparison? Don’t hesitate to let me know your opinion on them in the comments section below, or leave a message in my contact page! For more reviews and cinema-related articles, check out the rest of my blog! 😀

For more updates, chatting and additional content, don’t be shy! Take a peek at my social media and connect!