Producer Tommy Harper is open to Beetlejuice 3

'Beetlejuice Beetlejuice' producer Tommy Harper has hinted that "the door is open" for Tim Burton to make a third movie in the comedy-horror franchise.

SHARE

SHARE

Beetlejuice Beetlejuice producer Tommy Harper says a third film is possible
Beetlejuice Beetlejuice producer Tommy Harper says a third film is possible

‘Beetlejuice Beetlejuice’ producer Tommy Harper has teased "the door is open" for another sequel with director Tim Burton.

The 66-year-old filmmaker returned to the franchise 36 years after the 1988 original with the new comedy-fantasy flick and the film's producer has revealed it's possible there could be more entries in the series with the 'Corpse Bride' director at the helm.

Speaking to Deadline, Harper said: "I think with Tim's love for the title and the characters, the door is open, but we'll see what happens next."

However, Burton had previously dismissed ideas of another sequel after ‘Beetlejuice Beetlejuice’.

Speaking on a panel at the Venice Film Festival recently, he said: "Let’s do the math. It took 35 years to do this one.

"For another, I’d be over 100 [years old]. It could be possible thanks to medical science. But I don’t think so."

The film sees Michael Keaton, 72, reprise his role as the titular ghost, though the actor had only agreed to return if Beetlejuice wasn’t the main driving force of the story.

He told GQ: "The idea was, no, no, no, you can’t load it up with Beetlejuice, that’ll kill it.

"I think the Beetlejuice character doesn’t drive the story as much as he did in the first one. He’s more part of the storyline in this one as opposed to the first one, which is a case of this thing comes in and drives the movie a little bit."

The ‘Batman’ actor - who stars opposite Winona Ryder, Catherine O’Hara, Monica Bellucci, Jenna Ortega and Willem Dafoe - added the character would remain a "sicko" in the new movie to ensure Beetlejuice felt exactly the same as his appearance in the 1988 original.

He said: "He’s a thing. He’s more of a thing than a he or a she, he’s more of an it.

"And I’m not saying ‘it’ to be politically correct. I just viewed it as a force more than anything. I mean, there’s definitely strong male energy, like stupid male energy, which I love.

"You don’t want to touch that because it’s not like you go, ‘Well, it’s a new year and this thing would now act like that.’"