Rob Field
From the Scream series to Tim Burton’s Wednesday series, Jay Puccini’s editing career has often blended horror with humor.
But his latest collaboration with Burton, Beetlejuice Beetlejuice , really brings it all home. “Original [‘Beetlejuice’ in 1988] It was my favorite movie as a kid,” he said. “I was obsessed with it for two years.”
In the sequel, Lydia Dietz (Winona Ryder), now the host of the supernatural talk show The Haunting of Hill House, reunites with her daughter Astrid (Jane) after the death of her husband Richard. Naordega) is estranged. While mourning the death of her father, Charles, Lydia is pressured by producer Rory (Justin Theroux) to propose to her on Halloween. In the afterlife, Beetlejuice (Michael Keaton) offers to help Lydia rescue Astrid from danger in exchange for marriage.
The trick is to respect the original film and the supernatural world by avoiding too much exposition and finding a delicate balance between horror and humor. Puccini relied on all of his past experiences to achieve this goal, but still learned some new lessons along the way.
CineMontage: You’re deeply immersed in Tim Burton’s world. Have you heard talk of a Beetlejuice sequel?
Jay Prychidny: The way Tim works is that he doesn’t talk too much about the project in advance. At the time, I was watching Scream VI and heard that the writers were adapting a sequel to Beetlejuice, but many writers had been adapting it for decades. So I kept in touch when I heard something was going on, but Tim never confirmed that something was going on. He would say, “People say they want it, but until it’s approved, you never know.” When it finally was approved, I was delighted that they asked me to be a part of it.
CineMontage: What approaches were discussed with Tim from the beginning? Did you reference the original or did you bring a new aesthetic to today?
Prychidny: Tim doesn’t discuss things ahead of time. His process is very organic and gradual, so it’s not a big discussion beforehand. It’s more about being on set and seeing what happens – what the actors, the art department and the cinematographer bring to the table. Editing is an important part of his workflow. We talked every day, often multiple times, during breaks. He would come to the editing room and we would look at dailies and go over the scenes I had cut the day before. He’s very responsive – he likes to see something, react to it, and then move on.
CineMontage: So, what did you start to realize as these discussions progressed in real time? Have you discovered a way to express yourself clearly?
Prychidny: One thing I asked about was the “Looney Tunes” vibe of the original Beetlejuice. I was wondering if this would be part of the editing language for the sequel, and Tim said yes, absolutely. This gave me the freedom to be wild and crazy, especially in the afterlife scenes. I let Beetlejuice’s characters guide the editing style, aiming to enhance the cartoon feel at times while keeping the horror factor intact. Beetlejuice snaps her fingers and morphs, so I used that energy in the edit—sudden transitions, loud music or vocal moments—just to give the afterlife a chaotic, wild feel.
CineMontage: Do you have an example of a time when you struggled not to “lose fear”? How do you maintain that balance while maintaining the “Looney Tunes” edge?
Prychidny: Tim always emphasizes the dark, demonic side of Beetlejuice when we look at the camera or talk about it. It is important for him not to lose this aspect. He would react violently to shots of Beetlejuice looking evil. I’ll focus on enhancing and protecting these moments because, overall, Beetlejuice is more of a comedy than a villain in the movie. My job is to preserve these moments, to focus on them as much as possible when he has that evil, demonic glint in his eye, to remind the audience that Beetlejuice is more than just a comedic supporting character—he’s still a scary, evil character.
CineMontage: What allowed you to change the perspective but still stay within the editing language of Beetlejuice?
Prychidny: I’ve done a lot of mixed-genre shows, and I love the transition between comedy and horror. That was obviously the case with Scream, and I did a lot of genre mixing on Orphan Black. The tone changes when you’re with different characters – just like the genre changes depending on the character. I love letting the characters narrate the world of the film. It makes it more engaging, more exciting, more surprising for the audience because you never know whether it’s going to be a comedy scene, a horror scene, or something completely different.
CineMontage: Can you give me an example of a scene where you made it work?
Prychidny: Editing is all about playing with emotions on screen and eliciting emotions from the audience. Horror movies and comedies are similar in that they both create tension—either tension that leads to laughs or tension that induces scares. When you play a pitch, you give the audience time to breathe and think, “What’s going to happen next?” It’s a game, it’s interaction with the audience. You can’t do everything – you have to invite them along. There’s a moment when Beetlejuice and his staff are in his boiler room, pushing tables against the door to hide from his ex-wife – a very comedic scene. But then he opened a newspaper and saw Lydia’s picture. With a change in tone, he suddenly became dark and evil. The camera zoomed in, an evil light flashed in his eyes, and his mood completely changed. I remember the sound design was tricky there too. They wanted to keep the comedic tone with the flickering sounds as Beetlejuice winks, but I felt like it needed to veer into something sinister. In that moment we emphasized the dark side of the character and instantly changed the tone.
CineMontage: Any moment can turn into a shocking or comedic moment. Detail how you use sound to signal to your audience.
Prychidny: For me, sound is an integral part of everything, whether it’s tone or rhythm. I always notice little moments – whether it’s closing a door or opening a piece of paper – where simple sounds are integrated into the rhythm of a scene. We focused a lot on sound in this movie, and Tim really pushed that. He likes sudden sound transitions, so we use those a lot. When we transition between scenes, the sound almost always changes suddenly. It’s not just music; sometimes it’s a sonic moment, like someone dropping a box. Each scene transition has a loud, palpable change in atmosphere—like when we cut to the streets of New York, filled with honking cars. This is something Tim tracks carefully. From the beginning, I work with my assistants to create soundscapes – whether they are realistic, abstract or cartoonish. It’s important to establish this early on, as sound can tell the audience how to read the scene. Music is equally important. The tone of the music can affect one’s interpretation of a scene or an entire film.
CineMontage: The same goes for the rhythm of editing.
Puccini: Of course. Cut and sound are completely connected. When I’m editing, I’m always looking for moments of sound between dialogue to enhance the action on screen. This became the template for the sound designers, who did an amazing job on this film. They retained more of the ad hoc sound than I expected and enhanced it. I worked closely with them throughout the mixing process – it’s a key part of the job.
CineMontage: What did you take away from this experience?
Prychidny: The most important takeaway for me is understanding how much trust you can give your audience and how much you need to spoon-feed them. Tim is allergic to exposure – he can’t stand it. On set, a lot of the dialogue that was meant to explain things wasn’t executed, so we didn’t even choose to include it in the edit. Sometimes we get stressed out because we wonder, “Is this understandable?” Sometimes things aren’t clear because key conversations are missing. But in the end, Tim felt strongly that the visuals and action took up so much, leaving the audience to fill in the rest with their own interpretations. The more you try to explain it, the less sense it makes – especially in a movie like this. If you start explaining everything, the audience will freeze. I learned that audiences understand stories better than I thought. They bring their own experiences and assumptions to the film, sometimes creating a story that works for them. That was a huge lesson for me – realizing that the audience doesn’t really need to have everything told.
