Therefore, when there is an episode of violence caused by a female action hero it is not the same as what we see when there is an episode of the same kind originated by a male one. Like it was implied before, in the latter type there is usually more gore, more blood, more brutality, whereas in the former there is usually not so much of any of that. Gina Arnold explains it very nicely in her article “Bad Ass Girls on Film - Is it a Good Thing When Women Beat the Crap Out of Men at the Movies,” by saying that the violence that we find in a female action hero movie “lacks the viciousness we tend to associate with fighting [and it is] stripped of danger and cruelty and the ugly and mean competitiveness that taints the violent actions of the male world.” What is more, male action heroes happen to get hurt more often and more seriously than female ones: Bruce Willis' character in “Die Hard” lacerates his feet severely after having to walk barefooted over broken glass; Mel Gibson's one is tortured in “Lethal Weapon”; Brendan Fraser's one in “The Mummy” is sentenced to death by hanging and just as he is being hanged they revoke the sentence so they cut the rope and he lives, but he still went through the torture. We practically never see any of these severe wounds or acts of brutal aggression happening to female action heroes, but we do see it happening often to vulnerable or fragile female victims in many movies. However, when we do see things like these happening to female action heroes, the movies which includes them do not seem to receive the acceptance of the audience. Such was the case of the movie previously mentioned “The Long Kiss Goodnight,” in which Geena Davis' character, Charly, is tortured and also receives one too many punches which covered her in bruises and blood. We must wonder what the reason for this lack of acceptance is. Perhaps it is that we are still not ready to see a woman who appears to be so strong and fearless in such a vulnerable position, since this is exactly what we have seen for years in movies where women were the victims. The audience wants something new, and that is why they like female action heroes.

What we can conclude from this is that there is a noteworthy importance placed on the hero's body. Susan Jeffords claims in her book Hard Bodies: Hollywood Masculinity in the Reagan Era that “what determines a hero is the possession of a hard body. Though other characters may be quick-witted, charming, experienced, or clever, without the hard body to go with, they cannot be heroes.” Notwithstanding, this may be true for male action heroes, but it is certainly not the case for female ones, as has been already analyzed and explained. Female action heroes are all of what Jeffords mentions, plus they have the hard body. Moreover, they have the beauty and sex appeal that women naturally possess and they make it work to their advantage. And this beauty and their well shaped bodies are probably the equivalent to the focus on the body that we see occurring in male action heroes: the latter get hurt, and the former look pretty.

They think that ratings are everything. They have become preys to their illusions of winning the competition for the top ratings. Competition has gotten too much of them, causing them to create a vision of the media practitioners as wild animals in the hunt.

Moreover, out of too much professionalism, the media practitioners in the movie took the scope of their reports seriously without being mindful of their subject's emotional being. This was best exposed to us in the first parts of the film, when a business executive was trying to jump from a building. Gayley and her camera operator were able to capture the whole ordeal, but they did not do anything to save the poor man's life. They were only after the ratings they would be receiving, which show us that they are too greedy for fame and success. Gayley's uncompassionate remark after the man's suicide even tops it all - that “her job was not to save people's lives, but to bring the news to the public.

We then realize that their eagerness to attract the public and to get the most out of everything is not ethical anymore. Their race fro the best has caused them to step into people's lives and they are becoming an insult to people along the way.

True, they get what they want, but they gain it because they have the money and the power. In addition, because of the power that the media have, they could easily influence people with their scope, even if there is no truth behind everything.

The downside was a few loose ends, like wondering how Sarah played by Geena Davis, possessed the power to let the sandworm in, to swallow Beetlejuice when the ghosts were weaker than the worm. Another loose end was how the dead couple got siphoned back to the world of lost souls, although one could figure that something was needed to inform the couple that a mortal had stolen the “Book of the Deceased”.

The imaginative loopholes where the actors like Alec Baldwin and Geena Davis went in an out of the after world, added to the momentum and tension of the film. One suspected that the deceased couple would try to make an attempt to get the new owners out of the house but there had to be complications like the hazard of reverting to the help of Beetlejuice or the additional plague on the already deceased couple because of a meddlesome Otho.

An early performance by Winona Ryder crowned the film. She played a convincing gothic suicidal teenager with a special ability to communicate with the dead couple and acted also to inform her parents that the ghosts were unwilling to be used for show. She interacts with Beetle juice in order to have him remove a ghastly curse on the ghosts but had to sacrifice her celibacy to marry him.

The wedding is comical in the way it is dragged out and ended before it is sealed and so is the combination of special effects and comedy with scenes such as one of he final ones where Beetle Juice has his head shrunk because he switched numbers for some other freak waiting dogs ages to get into the after world.