“I liked it,” was my 8 year-old daughter’s immediate assessment as the credits rolled in the theater, “but the first was one was better. I liked the songs more.”
That’s a succinct, accurate 15-word review of Wicked: For Good, that doesn’t really need anything added to it. But I’m going to, because I’m a writer and I have this blog and decades worth of Wicked opinions piled up.
I’ve never been the biggest Wicked fan, even though I enjoy Broadway musicals more than most people I know. Years ago, when Wicked first made its way through Houston, my wife and I bit on getting tickets. There was so much hype, and the radio commercials (yes, we listened to the radio… with an antenna!) were incessant. Also, even though Kristin Chenoweth wasn’t in the touring cast, Glinda was a role that she originated, and I think she’s great.
It was… good. Not great. Both my wife and I came away feeling like it was more than a “meh”, but less than a “wow”. The story (and I never read the original novel) seemed forced. Like a mad dash to make everything fit into the framework of the 1939 movie (or 1900 novel). It came off like conspiracy theory fan fiction, with too much emphasis on trying to make sure everything had an explanation, and not enough on the story itself, overreaching to make sure there were no plot holes that might compromise credibility (and there are still tons of plot holes, anyways).
Any of that could be forgiven though. It’s a stage musical, and the driving force behind any stage musical is the music. A musical with great music and a mediocre story will still hit. One with a great story and mediocre story never will. I know I’ll upset many an “Ozian” here (actually probably not, because readership here just isn’t that large… yet), but the songs weren’t that memorable. More than a “meh”, but less than a “wow.” “Defying Gravity” is a really good song, but I never thought it was strong enough to bat cleanup as the showstopper. The only other song that stuck with me was “Popular”, and I think that’s mostly because of how prominent it was on those radio commercials.
Wicked came back a few more times to Houston, but we didn’t go again. That was as much as we did with Wicked until last year’s movie came out. Again, the hype was again out of this world, and caught up in it was my then 7-year old daughter. She dressed up as Elphaba for Halloween (which doubles very well as a Professor McGonagall costume for Harry Potter).
We even got Betty Crocker Wicked cupcake mix, where you don’t know if you have green Elphaba or pink Glinda batter until you mix it. We had the green mix. My daughter was delighted, but her brothers weren’t as excited about eating green cupcakes. They probably wouldn’t have wanted pink cupcakes either, so it was a no win situation from the start. (Also, it turned out my daughter’s delight went away quickly after she tried the cupcakes. They’re just not that great. But hey, it was the journey, not the destination.)
So when the first movie came out, she had to see it, and I had to take her, in her Elphaba hat and dress, since “you’re the one who likes musicals the most,” my wife reasoned.
I did not learn until earlier in the day we saw the movie that the Wicked movie was only a part one. It was nearly a three hour movie, and it only covered Act 1 of a stage musical that performed both acts in 2 hours and 45 minutes, and that includes a 15 minute intermission. More surprised than me was my daughter, who didn’t realize it until “To Be Continued” came across the screen.
“Can we watch the next one?”
“Okay, but it doesn’t come out until next year.”
“NEXT YEAR?! WHEN?”
“Probably around Thanksgiving.”
“THAT’S FOREVER!!!”
I also brought my younger son, who was 5 at the time, not because he was interested like his sister, but more of a “I can’t leave you at home by yourself, so you need to come with us to this movie” situation. He thought it was long, and he didn’t like the flying monkeys part. So when it came time to go see part two, it was a hard pass from him.
I will say: I enjoyed the first movie. I certainly enjoyed it more than the stage musical. It wasn’t mind-blowing, but it was very well done. The set design, the costumes, and the cinematography were amazing. Cynthia Erivo, Michelle Yeoh, and Jeff Goldblum were fantastic, and Ariana Grande’s performance surprised me. Because there are more opportunities to immerse the viewer into world-building in film media, and because there needed to be more attention paid to character depth than in a stage musical, it made sense that a film adaptation of Act 1 might be longer than its stage counterpart.
Separating the stage musical into two movies left a dilemma though. It left the weaker half of the musical and the story to stand alone as its own film. This doomed the second movie.
Most stories, especially world building ones, follow a typical pattern. You are introduced to the setting, introduced to the characters, exciting stuff begins to happen and everything seems great. Then something bad happens that disrupts everything the story has just built, and the rest of the story is the struggle for the characters to resolve the problem and then get it to a happy ending. (Or not a happy ending, if it’s Steinbeck or whoever.)
The point is that most of the good feelings a story generates with an audience happens in that first half. It’s why the beginnings of movies are so often people’s favorite parts. It’s why when I rewatch movies (and I do it a lot these days with so many movies available on demand), I find I only watch the first half or two-thirds and then I’m good. I’m not interested in watching the parts when it all goes awry. Sure, there’s the good feelings of a happy ending on the other side, but I’m just content to stop before the troubles begin in the first place. I recognize this isn’t always the case, but it happens so much with movies I rewatch, it’s at least frequently the case. I have watched the first half of Goodfellas dozens of times. The second half, I’ve seen maybe twice, three times.
Well, that’s Act 1 and Act 2 of Wicked. Part 1 is where all best things happen for the audience.
Directly related to that, Act 1 also where all the best songs happen too. Even though I’ve never been head over heels over the Wicked soundtrack, I remembered a lot of the Act 1 songs. “Defying Gravity”, “Popular”, “Dancing Through Life” all stuck with me. The Act 2 songs, I barely remembered any of them.
That’s not something specific to Wicked either. I find that most Broadway musicals have their best songs in Act 1. There’s usually more songs in the first act too. The tone of Act 1’s in general lends itself to catchier tunes. Second acts of Broadway musicals always feel rushed, as if the writers blew too much of their time in Act 1 with all the great songs they came up with and now they have to hurry through rest of the plot in Act 2, so they won’t test the audience’s patience.
Act 2 of Wicked is also where the plot has to integrate with the events of The Wizard of Oz, as well. These are the parts of Wicked that seem “fan-fiction forced” the most. Yes, I understand that the concept of Wicked is that the Wicked Witch of the West was not the bad guy at all, but the good guy. But the fact remains that she actually does evil things in the 1939 movie. So it’s kind of weird that you have a movie and a half of Elphaba being a good person, and now suddenly she’s engaging in human trafficking of an innocent 12 year old girl (Yes, Dorothy is innocent. It’s not like she aimed her house at the Wicked Witch of the East.) who just wants to go home, and abuses her verbally while locking her in a pit. The whole story feels like the furthest it should have gone is a Cracked article entitled “Top 5 fan theories that make you rethink the whole movie.”
Add all that up, and now you have a movie that features the worse and more problematic half of the Wicked story and it’s accompanied by the worse selection of songs. On top of that, Michelle Yeoh sings more in this second movie than I remember her doing in the first, and nobody wants that. Cynthia Erivo’s singing performances are as incredible, but acting-wise, there’s only so much she can do with a character that’s all over the map in Act 2. I do want to note that Arianna Grande continued to impress.
The set design, costumes and cinematography were just as stunning as they were last year, but that will only take you so far.
So I guess what I’m saying is: I liked it, but the first one was better. I liked the songs more.
Leave a Reply