Riot’s Reviews
Beetlejuice Beetlejuice: Anyone that knows me knows of my love affair with the works of Tim Burton, along with his constant team-ups with the genius that is Danny Elfman. What might be shocking to many of you is that on the spectrum of Burton films, I’ve never been the biggest fan of one of his most well-known works, Beetlejuice. Maybe it was the fact that it was released in 1988 when I was a whole two years old. Or maybe it was a previously mentioned culture issue where the concept of a foul-mouthed demon didn’t exactly jive in my social groups. Either way, after seeing the movie a handful of times during my childhood/young adulthood, I never really gave it much more thought.
With the sequel’s release, I still felt compelled to check it out and the intrigue of having Michael Keaton reprise his role was much stronger than (what felt like) the soulless cash grab that was his Batman reprisal in The Flash. The teasers and trailers, as I saw it, didn’t really offer a whole lot of information to go off of outside of letting audiences know that 1) Keaton wasn’t the only original character coming back and 2) it was going to keep plotlines close to the chest, relying on its fan base to return to the theaters for round two. I had little to no expectations going into this one and while that might have helped me lean to a positive outlook, I have to say Beetlejuice Beetlejuice was some of the most fun I’ve had in a theater in a very long time.
From the beginning, the film’s greatest strength shines: playing up and leaning into the nostalgia factor. The title card, complete with its signature Burton style, is boosted on first note by Elfman’s music. I felt instantly transported back to the 80s/90s by the signature stylings of films during that time. The energy of fun/entertainment held up through nearly the entire movie, creating an “edge of your seat” feeling that wasn’t suspense but was more like a breath away from laughter at any moment. Burton relied on a number of his usual tricks that were executed as well as any of his other works including overly dramatic flashbacks, Claymation exposition, and wacky costume/set design. He relied on practical effects as much as he could, something you just don’t see properly executed anymore. And while some of those effects can admittedly be regarded as too silly/unserious (like what happens to victims of newcomer character Delores (Monica Bellucci)), I found it endearing and true to his original film’s vision.
Keaton was phenomenal, picking up with the character like he never took off the wig/makeup since the 80s. Surprisingly, I found myself laughing the most at Justin Theroux’s character, Rory, who did a fantastic job playing the “liberal douche/soy boy” role. His commitment to the melodrama was admirable even for a character you heavily dislike throughout. Revisiting the town, throwing in set pieces from the original and keeping connected to members of the first cast were incredibly effective ways to keep the nostalgia factor at +10. Sprinkle in old characters like The Sandworm, new comedic relief like Beetlejuice’s cadre of shrunken-headed “employees,” hysterical lip-synced musical numbers and a surprise cameo, you got the makings of a real hit.
Now to be fair and as unbiased as I can be, Beetlejuice Beetlejuice has more than a few problems. For one, the cast expanded outside of the realm of what was manageable storytelling, ensuring that the subsequent plotlines were thinned out because of this. It seemed like there weren’t enough people around helping to reign Burton’s wild imagination in, which could have helped to streamline the story. I liken it to a kid in an ice cream/candy/toy store who doesn’t have a parent around to say, “You have to choose one.” Not that you can’t have multiple sub plotlines, but there needs to be time to flesh them out properly. The two biggest examples of this issue are the newcomers to the story, Monica Bellucci and Willem Dafoe. A significant amount of effort is put into tying Bellucci’s character (Delores) into the main storyline, including a full flashback and multiple scenes to establish her as a threat. But once the final confrontation comes to a head, her character is quickly and unceremoniously cast away, leaving no satisfactory resolution to that conflict.
Dafoe’s character is probably the most head scratching and it’s difficult for me to say that. His involvement in the story is so inconsequential one could argue that he shouldn’t have been there at all. That being said, I still loved every scene he was in and his natural charisma and willingness to dive headfirst into the wackiness of the character was something I enjoyed. Similar to what I remember about the first film, it seems like the “rules” regarding life, death, and the afterlife in these films are kind of poorly defined. Granted, this hurts the movie the least and I think things like uneven performances from Winona Ryder and Catherine O’Hara to be bigger negative factors. When it comes to Winona, she had more than a few shaky deliveries of her dialogue and for Catherine, I would have preferred less of her character. Her antics were more conducive to Schitt’s Creek than in this movie. And finally, there was a strong sense of predictability that I couldn’t shake as a negative aspect, but again, on the spectrum of things that hurt the film, that one is very low.
Riot’s Rating: 9.3/10: Beetlejuice Beetlejuice is an excellent sequel and is a laugh riot nearly the whole way through. Negative aspects are easily forgiven because of how much fun you’re having and I think fans of the first film simply won’t be let down.
コメント