Say his name three times and apparently Warner Bros. really does come calling.

After Beetlejuice Beetlejuice brought Tim Burton’s wonderfully strange afterlife back to cinemas in 2024, Warner Bros. moved surprisingly quickly towards a third film. Studio co-chair Mike De Luca confirmed in April 2025 that development on another Beetlejuice sequel was expected to begin imminently, although he also made it clear that the deals were not yet fully signed at that stage.

Since then, the project has progressed enough to appear on an industry production listing as Beetlejuice 3, with the film currently marked as being in pre-production and London listed as the shoot location. The listing also includes Tim Burton Productions among the companies attached. There is, however, one very important detail: Tim Burton is still listed as TBC, and no shooting date has been announced.

So yes, Beetlejuice 3 is real.

But the biggest question is still unanswered.

Watch here.

Warner Bros. clearly wants more Beetlejuice

It is not difficult to understand why.

Beetlejuice Beetlejuice arrived in September 2024, an astonishing 36 years after the original film, and proved that audiences had not lost their appetite for Michael Keaton’s chaotic bio-exorcist.

The sequel opened with more than $111 million in North America and eventually earned approximately $452 million worldwide.

That is an extraordinary result for a sequel to a film that began life in 1988 as one of Tim Burton’s strangest early projects.

The 2024 movie brought Michael Keaton back as Beetlejuice, Winona Ryder as Lydia Deetz and Catherine O’Hara as Delia Deetz, while introducing Jenna Ortega as Lydia’s daughter, Astrid. Tim Burton returned to direct, with Alfred Gough and Miles Millar writing the screenplay from a story they developed with Seth Grahame-Smith.

For Warner Bros., the commercial argument for another trip to the Netherworld is therefore fairly obvious.

The creative argument is more complicated.

Tim Burton did not seem to know Beetlejuice 3 was happening

This is where the story becomes considerably more interesting than a normal sequel announcement.

A few months after Warner Bros. publicly discussed developing a third film, Burton was asked about it while promoting Wednesday.

His response was essentially surprise.

Burton said nobody had told him and jokingly wondered whether he had been replaced. He then pointed out that it took around 35 years to make the second film and said that while he loved the characters, he did not necessarily see another film in his future.

That is a fairly significant statement when discussing Beetlejuice.

The franchise does not simply contain Tim Burton’s style.

It is almost impossible to separate the two.

The warped production design, stop-motion creatures, bizarre bureaucracy of the afterlife, Danny Elfman music, grotesque comedy and deliberate artificiality are all deeply tied to Burton’s filmmaking identity.

Without him, what exactly is Beetlejuice?

Jenna Ortega seems to have asked the same question.

Jenna Ortega says she would not do it without Burton

Ortega has been much more direct.

When asked whether she would return for a third film without Burton, she said she would not, arguing that Beetlejuice is what it is because of him and that continuing the series without him would feel wrong.

That does not mean Ortega is officially signed for Beetlejuice 3.

She is not.

Neither is Michael Keaton.

Neither is Winona Ryder.

At this stage, Warner Bros. has not publicly announced the returning cast, director, screenplay, plot or release date.

The production listing showing the film in pre-production is a meaningful sign that the project has progressed, but it is not the same thing as Warner Bros. unveiling a finished creative team.

And that distinction matters.

The first Beetlejuice was not designed to become a franchise

Part of what makes all of this rather funny is that the original Beetlejuice hardly felt like the beginning of a carefully planned cinematic universe.

Released in 1988, the film followed recently deceased couple Adam and Barbara Maitland, played by Alec Baldwin and Geena Davis, as they attempted to remove the unbearable new owners of their home.

Their terrible solution was Beetlejuice.

Michael Keaton appears for a surprisingly limited amount of screen time, but his manic performance completely dominates the film’s reputation.

The movie also introduced a teenage Winona Ryder as Lydia Deetz and featured Catherine O’Hara as her magnificently theatrical stepmother, Delia.

Produced for around $15 million, the movie became a box-office success and won the Academy Award for Best Makeup.

Its success led to an animated series, video games and eventually the Broadway musical.

But the movie sequel became almost legendary for not happening.

Beetlejuice Goes Hawaiian almost became real

One of the best-known abandoned sequel ideas was Beetlejuice Goes Hawaiian.

Yes, really.

The concept would have taken the franchise away from Winter River and put Beetlejuice in Hawaii, combining supernatural chaos with a tropical setting.

The project spent years in various stages of development but never reached production.

That is partly why Beetlejuice Beetlejuice felt so unexpected when it finally arrived.

For decades, a second film belonged in the same category as all those Hollywood sequels people continually discussed but never actually made.

Then Tim Burton, Michael Keaton and Winona Ryder really did come back.

Why Beetlejuice Beetlejuice worked as a return

The second film did not simply pretend that 36 years had not passed.

Lydia had grown older.

She had become a mother.

Her daughter Astrid had inherited some of her scepticism rather than her fascination with ghosts.

Delia was still unmistakably Delia.

And Beetlejuice had apparently spent decades being exactly as inappropriate as he had always been.

That generational structure gave the sequel a reason to exist beyond nostalgia.

It allowed younger characters into the story without pretending that the original cast members were still the people they had been in 1988.

It also gave Burton the opportunity to return to many of the practical-effects techniques, theatrical sets and deliberately handmade visual ideas that helped define the first film.

That is part of what makes a third film tricky.

The second movie already delivered the reunion.

What does the third one do?

We do not know the story yet

Warner Bros. has not released a synopsis for Beetlejuice 3.

Any supposed plot circulating online should therefore be treated cautiously.

The Production List entry currently repeats the synopsis of Beetlejuice Beetlejuice, describing the Deetz family’s return to Winter River and Astrid opening a portal to the afterlife. That should not be interpreted as the plot of the new film. It appears to be placeholder information associated with the previous sequel rather than a newly announced third-film storyline.

There is also no confirmation that the film will be called Beetlejuice Beetlejuice Beetlejuice, as wonderfully obvious as that title might seem.

Fans have been using it ever since a third film became a possibility.

Warner Bros. has not officially announced that title.

Could Michael Keaton return?

Again, nothing has been confirmed.

It would obviously be difficult to imagine a Beetlejuice film without Michael Keaton, but that is an expectation rather than an announcement.

The same applies to Winona Ryder and Jenna Ortega.

Ortega has indicated that Burton’s involvement would be essential for her, but that is not the same as confirming that she has signed a contract.

Until Warner Bros. actually announces the cast, it is better to leave the speculation where it belongs.

Beetlejuice now belongs to several generations

What makes the possible third film especially interesting is how much the audience for this franchise has changed.

Some fans saw the original in cinemas in 1988.

Others grew up watching the animated television series.

Another generation discovered the film through VHS, DVD, Halloween marathons or the Broadway musical.

Then Wednesday introduced Tim Burton and Jenna Ortega to a massive younger audience shortly before Beetlejuice Beetlejuice arrived.

The sequel managed to connect those audiences surprisingly well.

That makes Beetlejuice one of those unusual nostalgia properties that has actually gained new fans instead of surviving entirely on people remembering the original.

Warner Bros. clearly noticed.

But can Beetlejuice exist without Tim Burton?

That is the question hanging over the third movie.

The studio wants it.

An industry listing now has it in pre-production.

The second film made $452 million worldwide.

From a business perspective, another sequel makes perfect sense.

Creatively, however, the situation is less straightforward.

Burton has publicly expressed doubt.

Ortega has said she would not want to return without him.

And Warner Bros. has not yet announced who is actually directing.

That means the most interesting Beetlejuice 3 news may not be that the film exists.

It is what happens next.

If Tim Burton returns, Warner Bros. potentially has the core creative team needed to make another journey into this particular version of the afterlife feel legitimate.

If he does not, the studio faces a much more difficult question.

How do you make a Beetlejuice movie without the filmmaker whose fingerprints are on almost every strange corner of it?

For now, Beetlejuice has been summoned for a third time.

We are just waiting to find out who opens the door.