Critics on ‘Beetlejuice Beetlejuice’: Keaton in top form, but sequel lacks spark
The “Beetlejuice” sequel, now haunting theaters is taunting critics with the ghost of better films’ past.
Tim Burton’s hotly anticipated follow-up to his 1988 horror comedy reunites Winona Ryder, Catherine O’Hara and Michael Keaton as Lydia and Delia Deetz and the titular “trickster demon.”
After circumstances force the Deetz women back to the house, they call on Beetlejuice for help after Lydia’s angsty daughter, Astrid (Jenna Ortega), inadvertently opens a portal to the afterlife.
At the time of publication, the film boasted a 76% approval rating on review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes compared with the 82% rating boasted by the original film. But even the ostensibly positive reviews tended to grade the movie a 2 or 2.5 score, out of either 4 or 5, though many praised Oscar-nominee Keaton.
While the film “doesn’t push forward or attempt reinvention,” Bloody Disgusting appreciated it being “a cozy reunion” and said “Keaton hasn’t lost a step.”
ABC News felt similarly, acknowledging that “some rough plot patches” don’t cancel out Keaton’s performance, as he “returns in peak form to the funniest role of his career.”
“What’s missing is not simply surprise, or the pleasurable shock of a new kind of ghost comedy,” lamented the Daily News’ sister paper, Chicago Tribune, which graded the film a 1.5. “It’s the near-complete absence of verbal wit, all the more frustrating since Keaton is ready to play, and he’s hardly alone.”
While finding that, “on its own, it isn’t much of a movie,” Polygon also afforded the film a 1.5/5 rating, dubbing it “another tick mark on the seemingly endless list of 2020s franchise installments that serve as belated victory laps for comic triumphs, while blunting what was unique about those triumphs.”
Tribune News Service and The Washington Post agreed the film is “a mixed bag” with the former saying we should have left well-enough alone and the latter noting its “highs … are almost up there with the maniacal, macabre invention of the original and lows that are big-studio business as usual.”
“Maybe expectations were too high,” said Rolling Stone, which sought “something a bit less undead and a bit more alive” — a critique leveled against so many reboots, sequels and prequels.
Mashable meanwhile felt it to be “pure Burton, passionate, untethered, and indulgent,” and a surefire success for the original’s dedicated fanbase, adding they’ll “have plenty of reason to cheer, and even more to cackle.”
Wall Street Journal said that “Mr. Burton’s finest films appear to be behind him, but at his best he can still deliver dazzling madness.”
“Sometimes, the dead should just stay buried,” concluded the Austin Chronicle.
Slant Magazine felt the film “abounds in morbid, nauseating delights,” affording it a 3.5 out of 4.
