The success of the original is unusual from today’s perspective. Beetlejuice is not so much a single piece as it is a series of individual scenes. Yes, in most cases, the scenes are created by extremely volatile imagination, but the narrative that binds them is still missing.
It is precisely this feature that the sequel undertakes to correct from the shoulder. It would not be easy to catch all the ends of the plot of the second part. The main one is the relationship between Lydia (actress Winona Ryder), who almost became Beetlejuice’s bride in the first part, and her daughter Astrid (actress Jenna Ortega). The teenager does not believe in ghosts and blames her mother for the loss of her father. After the women find signs of a terrible demon from the past in the old house, Lydia fears that only Beetlejuice (played by Michael Keaton) will attack the family again.
Each of the three main characters in the film has their own love line that turns into a headache. Lidia is being chased around by a money-hungry fiance producer. Astrid falls in love with a gloomy teenage philosopher who reads philosophy books. And Beetlejuice is being chased by a murderous ex-wife played by Monica Bellucci. In a word, trouble does not walk one by one.
If in the original the characters simply loved or did not love each other and that was enough, then in <a href=”https://www.archyde.com/trailer-and-tim-burton-resurrects-beetlejuice-beetlejuice/” title=”[Trailer]And Tim Burton resurrects “Beetlejuice Beetlejuice””>Beetlejuice Beetlejuice the questions of feelings have already gained much more importance. In some cases, the attempt to give the characters more depth feels redundant. Still others, such as Ms. Bellucci’s baddie Delores, simply fail, because in the end, this storyline has no significant impact and is rather boring to watch. It would seem that this character is recorded for the film only to show Ms. Bellucci in some way.
In the age of belated nostalgic sequels, it’s a favorite to weave more explanation about the first part into the plot, ostensibly deepening the original. Here’s why making a movie about Han Solo from Star Wars requires an explanation of how he got the nickname “Solo” and where he got his iconic jacket. Although it really doesn’t matter at all. It destroys magic, not expands it.
Beetlejuice Beetlejuice also posts answers to questions that weren’t necessarily asked by anyone. Beetlejuice this time not only hits the heroines, but also acts as an independent character. He makes plans, has a job, even some friends. He tells the stories himself. For a while, the change seems to have taken place – the demon is the funnest part of both films anyway, so it makes sense to give it as much attention as possible.
But the main character is iconic in part precisely because we’ve seen him in small doses. Like Heath Ledger’s Joker, Beetlejuice knew how to stay put. He is not a complete character. He is an energy of chaos that does not yield to rationalization. This time the chaos is framed a bit too much.
Like the original, the strength of the second part is humor and surprises of the afterlife. One of the characters remarks aloud how “unconnected” the film’s reality is. random). The description is quite apt. No one fully explains to us the rules of the game in this universe: why everything is crooked, what is the sand planet, who manages all the accounting, who has and who does not have magical powers, etc.
That makes it more fun. Watching the game play out in the afterlife sometimes feels like almost anything can happen. This feeling was immediately followed by another feeling that no, that dead beloved father must appear after all, without clarifying his feelings. The way of the real “no connection” becomes increasingly less intriguing story and lessons that the characters have to learn, although it is easy for the viewer to predict them in the beginning of the film.
One of the nicest additions to the old story is Willem Dafoe’s detective with a brain sticking out of his skull. The detective appears for the sole purpose of making fun, and fulfills these purposes to the best of his ability. It is precisely here that there is a pleasant ambiguity that makes you feel the world of Beetlejuice Beetlejuice is not limited to the story of one family. The very idea that there is a dead action actor who played a detective in the movies, and somehow turned into a real detective in the afterlife, is very grateful for humor.
The director Tim Burton had to shoot the first part for a relatively poor million US dollars. When solving the problem, he deliberately decided to choose cheap, obviously unrealistic effects. And it worked.
In T. Burton’s career, there are more than one films supplemented with much more expensive and much more visually disgusting effects. Which makes it nice to see that at least some of the environments in Beetlejuice Beetlejuice are recreated without trying to mimic reality. A giant puppet theater worm attacking the hero is far funnier than any CGI phantasmagoria.
Is the second part equal to the original? The answer depends on the ruler we are measuring with. The film’s mere desire to tell a story with clear character arcs (perhaps motivated by the desire to attract more viewers) precludes a true match. At the same time, I have no doubt that fans who actually remember the original, and not just a vague vision of it, will find quite a few similar notes here.
If “Beetlejuice Beetlejuice Beetlejuice” happens (which the last shots of the second part promise) – you want to wish for even less connection. Don’t explain where this demon came from or what gives it its powers. The audience doesn’t need it. The viewer wants to be lost in the vision. This time there is little space to get lost, but you can walk around.
#Beetlejuice #Beetlejuice #Touch #Cheers #Culture
2024-09-16 23:58:31
**Is the sequel “Beetlejuice Beetlejuice” better than the original film?**
Table of Contents
The Unpredictable Delight of Beetlejuice: A Comprehensive Review of the Sequel
The original Beetlejuice, released in 1988, was a beloved cult classic that defied conventional storytelling and delighted audiences with its offbeat humor and eccentric characters. The sequel, aptly titled Beetlejuice Beetlejuice, attempts to recapture the magic of the original while adding new depths to the characters and their relationships. But does it succeed?
A Series of Unconnected Scenes
The original Beetlejuice was known for its lack of a cohesive narrative, instead presenting a series of individual scenes that were held together by the volatile imagination of its characters. While this approach worked for the first film, the sequel attempts to correct this by providing a more structured storyline. Unfortunately, this leads to a narrative that feels overly complicated and convoluted.
Love Lines and Headaches
The sequel introduces new love lines for each of the three main characters: Lydia, Astrid, and Beetlejuice. While these attempts to add depth to the characters are appreciated, they often feel redundant and unnecessary. In particular, the storyline involving Beetlejuice’s ex-wife, Delores, played by Monica Bellucci, falls flat and feels like a wasted opportunity.
Over-Explaining the Original
In an era of belated nostalgic sequels, it’s become common to weave more explanation about the first part into the plot, ostensibly deepening the original. However, this approach often destroys the magic of the original rather than expanding it. Beetlejuice Beetlejuice falls victim to this trap, providing answers to questions that weren’t necessarily asked by anyone.
The Iconic Character of Beetlejuice
One of the highlights of the original Beetlejuice was the character’s enigmatic nature. However, in the sequel, Beetlejuice is given too much attention, and his chaotic energy is framed a bit too much. The character is iconic precisely because we’ve seen him in small doses; he is an energy of chaos that does not yield to rationalization.
Humor and Surprises of the Afterlife
Despite its flaws, Beetlejuice Beetlejuice still delivers on its humor and surprises of the afterlife. The film’s reality is delightfully unconnected, and the lack of explanation for its rules makes it all the more enjoyable. Watching the characters navigate the afterlife is a wild ride, and the addition of Willem Dafoe’s detective with a brain sticking out of his skull is a welcome one.
A Plea for Less Connection
Ultimately, the success of Beetlejuice Beetlejuice depends on the ruler we are measuring with. While it may not be equal to the original in terms of its storytelling, it still contains enough nods to the first film to delight fans. If a third installment is to be made, one can only hope that the creators will resist the urge to explain too much and instead let the audience get lost in the vision.
Optimization Notes
Keywords: Beetlejuice, movie review, sequel, comedy, horror, Tim Burton, Michael Keaton, Winona Ryder, Jenna Ortega, Monica Bellucci, Willem Dafoe
Meta description: Read our comprehensive review of
– What are the main differences between the original Beetlejuice and its sequel, Beetlejuice Beetlejuice?
The Unsettling Success of Beetlejuice: A Tale of Two Films
When Tim Burton’s original Beetlejuice was released in 1988, it defied expectations with its offbeat humor, bizarre characters, and hauntingly beautiful visuals. The film’s success was as unexpected as it was well-deserved, cementing Burton’s status as a visionary director. However, in the era of belated nostalgic sequels, the question remains: can a sequel live up to the original’s eccentric charm?
A Series of Scenes
Beetlejuice (1988) is often described as a series of individual scenes rather than a cohesive narrative. This feature, while unorthodox, contributed to the film’s magic, allowing Burton to experiment with innovative storytelling techniques. The sequel, Beetlejuice Beetlejuice, seeks to correct this by providing a more structured narrative, but in doing so, sacrifices some of the original’s whimsical charm.
Love, Loss, and Chaos
The sequel focuses on the complex relationships between Lydia (Winona Ryder), her daughter Astrid (Jenna Ortega), and the mischievous Beetlejuice (Michael Keaton). Each character has their own love line, adding to the chaos that ensues. While this increased focus on character development is welcomed, it sometimes feels redundant, particularly with the inclusion of a new villain, Delores (Monica Bellucci), whose storyline adds little to the overall narrative.
The Magic of Mystery
One of the original’s greatest strengths was its refusal to overexplain the mysteries of the afterlife. The sequel, however, falls into the trap of providing unnecessary answers, detracting from the magic of the unknown. By giving Beetlejuice more screen time and backstory, the film loses some of the character’s enigmatic appeal.
The Power of Humor
Despite its missteps, Beetlejuice Beetlejuice still manages to deliver humor and surprises aplenty. The addition of Willem Dafoe’s detective with a brain sticking out of his skull is a particular highlight, bringing much-needed levity to the film. The afterlife world remains delightfully unpredictable, making for an entertaining, if not entirely satisfying, viewing experience.
Lessons from the Original
The first Beetlejuice film was made on a shoestring budget, forcing Burton to rely on cheap, practical effects. This constraint actually became a blessing in disguise, adding to the film’s charm. In contrast, the sequel’s increased budget has led to more polished, but less memorable, visuals.
A Tale of Two Films
Beetlejuice Beetlejuice is a mixed bag, offering both delightful surprises and frustrating missteps. While it may not live up to the original’s eccentric genius, it still manages to capture some of the magic that made Beetlejuice a cult classic. Fans of the original will find plenty to enjoy, even if the sequel doesn’t quite recapture the same level of mayhem and mystique.
SEO Keywords: Beetlejuice, Tim Burton, sequel, nostalgia, film review, Michael Keaton, Winona Ryder, Jenna Ortega, Monica Bellucci, Willem Dafoe, humor, afterlife, practical effects, cult classic.
