Is it just us, or is the Wicked movie starting to look pretty good?
A new Wicked featurette shows a promising glimpse behind the scenes of the film, premiering Thanksgiving 2024
Film News Wicked
“This is a very cinematic show. This should be on the big screen,” director John M. Chu recalls thinking after the first time he saw Wicked. It’s true he was handed all the ingredients for success with the theatrical version: the Broadway show is colorful, comedic, dramatic, and diva-focused, with big set pieces, stunt work, and show-stopping tunes. But fans have approached this production with caution. Why are they splitting the movie into two films, some asked, especially when Wicked’s second act is narratively weaker than the first? Are the actors too old to play “college students”? A teaser released in February was met with mixed reactions, some skeptical of the muted colors, some rolling their eyes at the recent trend of trailers trying to hide that a musical is a musical. (We don’t actually see any singing or dancing in that teaser, just hear some disembodied vocals.) These are small qualms, perhaps, but enough to give real Wicked-heads pause.
Well, a new featurette for the film—released ahead of the first full trailer, due Wednesday—might set some of those fans’ minds at ease. The sets look massive and magical. There appears to be a lot of practical effects work, as evidenced by a snippet of Elphaba’s (Cynthia Erivo) sister Nessarose (Marissa Bode) being elevated into the air on her wheelchair by wires. And the dancing! There’s a lot of big, choreographed moments with lots of dancers—we only get to see the behind-the-scenes, but it’s certainly promising.
Of course it’s not a shock that the film would look good, given Chu’s track record with 2021’s In The Heights, but Wicked is way bigger in scale, with the fantastical fantasy setting. It’s also bigger in scope—Wicked is one of the top-grossing Broadway musicals of all time, so there are way more eyes on this one. In The Heights also went straight to streaming at the same time as theatrical, so the box office performance was dicey. With Wicked, Universal is clearly banking on name recognition (of the show and its stars, namely Ariana Grande) to make this two-part movie a holiday hit, given the major, early PR push the studio has put behind this movie.
There’s never been any doubt that everyone involved with the Wicked film cares a lot about the show, and that’s reiterated in the featurette, appropriately titled “A Passion Project.” John M. Chu says it’s the one movie he always told people he wanted to direct; Erivo says she treated herself to see the stage version on her 25th birthday, and weeps with gratitude to be part of such a huge project. Grande has long been known as the world’s preeminent Wicked fan, emphasized by a clip of a years-old interview in which she affirms she’d love to play Galinda. Passion alone can’t always sell a project, especially given the mixed record of musicals at the box office in the last decade-plus. But done right, Wicked could mark a major musical success. Hopefully, the positive signs in this featurette prove correct on the big screen.
70 Comments
Yeah, the jury’s still out on the two parter question. No matter how good it is, if part one ends with ‘Defying Gravity’, no one’s showing up for part two.
I’m genuinely wondering if they are just going to straight up remake the Wizard of Oz because I don’t know what will be weirder: Wizard of Oz happening off camera or having to watch them try to recreate it. I also think the balance of music to plot is going to be super weird.
I imagine they’ll just do bits and pieces, the way “Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead” includes parts of scenes from Hamlet.
That’s what they do in the stage show, but the difference is the movie is presumably going to be 2 hours long. The second act of Wicked is about an hour shorter. So if they want to make Part 2 of the movie longer, they’re going to have to show more of Wizard of Oz because one of the main characters would literally be making the journey with Dorothy. I don’t want to spoil it for anyone who cares, but the characters are far more intertwined in some ways than Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead.
One of the most successful things about the musical is how tight the writing is. From curtain up until down, not a second is wasted, it’s positively breathless. Which isn’t to say it’s rushed, it just adapts the parts that it needs and leaves the rest on the cutting room floor. The two-parter thing really worries me. Are they gonna go mining the book for filler material? Because the book is really just… okay, at best, and it’s going to be a dour time indeed if they do.
I just saw this last week and it DOES end with Defying Gravity.
That’s unfortunate. I was hoping Part 1 would be the story told from Galinda’s point of view, and Part 2 would be the entire story but told from Elphaba’s.
Yeah, not that at all. For this part at least, it was extremely faithful to the musical SPOILER It ended with Elphaba flying away after Defying Gravity and Michelle Yeoh declaring her a wicked witch.
So you just want it to be totally different from the musical? That would take so much rewriting and reordering that I can’t imagine that ever happenening. But I’d rather they did that then try to drag the existing work out to two movies.
Yeah they’ve really over-pokered their hand making this into a goddamn two parter. What if part 1 flops? What the hell are they going to do then?
Why would it flop? The good will of the stage musical will make Part 1 a hit no matter what. If either of them flops, it can only be Part 2. But I sure wouldn’t put any money on it.
I think the very fact that they’re stretching what should be a single movie into two parts, could be a big liability. You’re stretching that goodwill by asking fans of Wicked to effectively pay twice, and to have to wait to see the second part. You run a greater risk of disappointing them, and if you don’t really nail part one, why will they come for part 2?
The Hobbit movies were all hot garbage from the jump, and yet audiences barely fell off – they all made close to a billion dollars worldwide. And that one they split into THREE. So I’m not too worried about a two-part adaptation of the most popular modern musical. Paying for two films is nothing compared to the insane price of tickets to the live show.
Its fascinating how some musicals have that effect with their intermission song. When I starred in Into The Woods in HS people totally walked out during the intermission, mistaking it for the ending.
Maybe they can do “Let it Go” in part 2.
It looks like some brave, important casting I can tell you that much.
So Brave.
I agree. Thank you.
Meaning what, exactly?
Please don’t encourage trolls.
Oh because she’s Black? Oh come on is this 1940 Jesus christ. My mind didn’t even go there because that’s straight up silly. Elphaba’s skin color has zero to do with plot here.
Well, her skin color is actually vital to the plot, but she’s green, not black or white. So it’s not like she’s taking the role away from a native green actor.
You’re a really good person. Congrats
I just think studio enforced diversity quotas are important and brave that’s all. The best art is always created by committee with political aims in mind.
Yeah, must be diversity quota. No way a Black woman would be able to play a character that’s constantly descriminated against becasue of the color of her skin.
I didn’t say there was “no way” she’d be able to play the character. I said that there are explicit diversity quotas in place that force filmmakers to fill main roles with black actors.It’s why every single movie, tv show and commercial that comes out has black actors awkwardly shoehorned in. It’s to show how brave and important they are.
And how is it “awkwardly shoehorned in” in this case?
No idea. Haven’t seen it. But I guarantee it sucks ass. I wouldn’t have a problem with it if it was actually directors making these casting decisions.
Yes, very brave to actually cast a Tony Award winning musical theatre star as one of the leads, even though she’s not a big name I’m sure that’s what you were implying.
It blows my mind that they were referring to her skin color. I don’t know this factually but there’s definitely been at least one stage production of Wicked where Elphaba was a Black actress. There is no doubt in my mind that there’s been at least 2 north American actresses that have played this role. Again I don’t know these actual numbers but that’s just gotta be true between all the high-school and community productions that have been produced. If anything Broadway musicals have been more inclined to race swap than Hollywood films. I’m sorry but someone complaining that Elphaba is Black in this film is utterly absurd and has no place is discussion about this film.
Because she’s Black? Black people exist idiot. Fuck off.
BRAVE
All of that is well and good but there’s still absolutely no good reason why this should’ve been a two parter.
I enjoy musicals and I make a couple of trips to NY every year to see shows (both musicals and plays). I think Wicked is fine. I would probably go see it if it were one part. But I’ll probably pass on two, or wait for it to come to a streaming service. I just can’t imagine how they’re going to take a 2.5 hr stage show and make two full feature films out of it. Is the whole thing going to end up being 4+ hours long, with at least 90 minutes of filler/bloat? Or is the second installment going to be a brisk 67 minutes long LOL.
Yah I’m a musicals nerd, honestly, if Into The Woods was one film (pretty sure it’s a slightly longer stage show) then I’m just straight confused by this. Cuz yah if act 1/film 1 is totally faithful what is part 2 gonna be because Act 2 isn’t feature length in the way act 1 is. Act 2 is all payoff for Act 1s setup how will this work?
Yeah, I cannot conceive of how you would split Wicked into two parts, each with their own satisfying arc and payoffs. If, as suggested, part 1 ends with “Defying Gravity,” that’s not a particularly satisfying “end” to a movie.
I keep hearing that they’re going to bring in book material, which is just the most pants-on-head crazy thing they could do. As a person who reread the book and saw the show again just last fall (and thoroughly enjoyed both!), they are VERY DIFFERENT BEASTS. The book is a political/spy thriller. The musical is an ugly duckling story (with some hints at political thriller, if you squint). Not to mention that the timelines don’t even match.
Yes, they should bring Peter Jackson in and make it a three parter! He’s great at adding pointless subplots to drag a story out!
He’s great at being contractually obligated to add pointless subplots to drag a story out.
Yes, yes, ok, yes, but – hear me out:CGI Billy Connolly riding a pig.
Money!
I said good reason!
For some it’s the only reason.
It’s just you.
I’m with you. No, you. Not the writer.
Yeah that image above doesn’t look like a Hollywood production. It’s looks like a decent cosplay groups instagram.
The visuals are encouraging; I was expecting much worse. I’m not agreeing that it’s looking “pretty good”, but I’m a little more optimistic. It looks good enough, but I didn’t get the same feeling that I got when I saw the trailer for West Side Story. That one got me very excited, and that movie thankfully delivered. My main problem is that I’m much less confident that Jon M. Chu will deliver since I just wasn’t too impressed by Crazy Rich Asians or In The Heights. This movie also has the disadvantage of many Wicked fans being SUPERfans. People will have some strong opinions.
This is going to really suck.
It’s not the cast or Chu that worries people, it’s Universal, because their track record with Broadway adaptations the last 20 years, and the last five especially, has been spotty at best.Cats and Dear Evan Hansen were disasters, Les Mis was a big hit but people didn’t love it, The Producers was solid but Universal fucked it over by putting it out at the same time as King Kong and Munich, and there wasn’t any advertising money left over.Only Mamma Mia was a smash, and even then, it’s sequel is widely regarded as superior.
The movie version of Les Mis suffered from very uneven casting decisions. If you’re going to make a musical, ALL of your main characters need to be able to knock the songs out of the park, not just SOME of them
If you were able to get by the horrible, horrible decision to use Ben Platt, the movie was actually a pretty good adaptation.
Ben Platt was an okay decision, but the make-up/special effects, and most importantly, the wig, just made him look like play-doh.
Yeah, it would have been much better off if they just ignored the fact that he looked way too old, as opposed to trying to fix it.
Cynthia Erivo looks damn fine in green…
Why is the actor who seems to be playing a leather clad version of the Tin Man hideously ugly? That character’s flaw is supposed to be lacking a heart, not possessing the face of Alfred E Neuman. Also, the leather. Is this Tin Man a biker or perhaps a BDSM enthusiast?
It worked for Glinda. *various DJ air-horn noises*
Okay just stop with the unearned snark AV Club. Nobody thought this was gonna be a bad film everyone wants to see this. Honestly shut up.
Here’s my issue: I’ve been in 39 musicals in my life (took music theatre in college then changed career paths later). I love a good musical. What are my thoughts on the last dozen musicals-turned-to-films? I dunno cuz I missed most of them or don’t care. Why? Here it is right here: musicals are always better live.That just is what it is straight up.
I’d like to see more musicals get the Hamilton treatment: just film the stage show. No need to moviefy it. Give some thought to the camerawork to keep it from being static, but just let the stage players do their thing.
100% this. And if you happend to have Apple TV+, and you haven’t watched “Come from Away”, go immedietly. Great show.
^Exactly this. There is good reason that filmed live productions of Into the Woods (first one that comes to mind) et al. continue to be discussed and praised far more than their clumsy movie adaptations. Studios, know who your audience is and cater to them, and let the experts and professionals who made the stage shows a success in the first place do their thing! It’s also more democratic in terms of bringing stage shows to fans who want to see the live version but can’t, due to ticket price, location or a combo of the two.
There are a lot of reasons why this just isn’t feasible, but they mostly boil down to money. It actually costs a lot to film and edit a stage show, because you can’t just point a camera at the stage and call it a day. There’s also very specific language in BC/EFA contracts about paying the performers and other artists if a production is filmed and distributed. And despite some outlier successes, most Broadway productions just can’t afford to do that long-term.
Don’t give Hamilton credit for what Spike Lee did for Passing Strange and American Utopia. BTW: There’s a reason Passing Strange beat Hamilton for Best Book. It’s a better play! Both Strange and Utopia can be found streaming.
It wasn’t a judgement on the quality of the play, itself, but just a comment on how it was presented. I’ve never heard of Passing Strange, or American Utopia. Hamilton, on the other hand, was a big hit on Disney+. It demonstrated that the general public is perfectly happy to watch a filmed stage production, and I think they should do more of that.
True, but for the many people that don’t have access to Broadway quality theatre, this is the only way many will have a chance to see these musicals.
I definitely like the Hedwig movie more than the stage musical. But I mostly agree with you.
That image looks like one of those Marvel Comics ads for Secret Invasion where it showed a bunch of normal people except one was a Skrull.
Making this into two movies is such a shockingly horrible idea, that I don’t even know where to start.
I don’t think there’s ever been any doubt that it would be good. But there’s no way I’m seeing it as a two-parter. I’ll wait until both parts are on cable or streaming and watch it then. It’s shitty when studios make movies in two-parts just as a cash grab. Anyway, it still blows my mind that Ariana Grande risked it all for that dude.
I’m just disappointed they didn’t do it 20 years ago when Chenoweth and Menzel were still young enough to do it. I know Cheno was wanting to film it before it got too late for her.If I watch this at all, it will be on free streaming.