Disclaimer: I have not seen the original Broadway production of Wicked. I will attempt to reserve judgment for aspects the filmmakers had more control over.
Few things have taken the world by storm like Wicked has. Despite debuting on Broadway all the way back in 2003, it may be more popular than ever right now. Last year, when Wicked released on Nov 22nd, 2024, it was absolutely everywhere. Commercials, songs, press tours, merch, drinks, food, and so much more. The green and pink color combination arguably became more iconic than the original green silhouette poster from the Broadway show. Wicked ended its theatrical run, grossing just under $800 million worldwide, and more notably received 10 Oscar nominations, bringing home the wins in production and costume design.
The global phenomenon returns a year later to finish out the story. When it was revealed that Wicked would be split into two movies, fans raised concerns about the second half. The latter half of the original Broadway show has a major tone shift, leaving behind the ensemble musical numbers and instead diving deeper into the two leads and how opposite their lives have become. Sequels can be very hit or miss, and after the praise from audiences and critics last year, Wicked: For Good has a lot to live up to. Director Jon M. Chu had a plan for this though. He opted to shoot both movies back to back, which should have allowed them more creative freedom, but this approach wasn’t a walk down the yellow brick road.
Releasing a movie sequel a year after its predecessor is almost unheard of in modern Hollywood. Chu and his production team have created something amazing in the world of Oz. After winning the Oscars last year, some teams might feel pressure to one-up themselves, but since they did both movies back to back, the work was already done. The quick turnaround is undoubtedly impressive, but this meant they were committed to a style. Once again, the lighting is very flat, a technique that gives the team more options in post, but limits how natural the image can look. To the team’s credit, this time around, it was much more colorful, but it looked artificial. Unfortunately, there’s a stark contrast between the vibrant large-scale set pieces and the computer-generated background behind them. This was most prevalent in the few new locations, where the sets the actors were interacting with were a joy to look at, but behind them, much less so. Wicked took a stage production and fully brought the world to life; Wicked: For Good takes a step back.
Many of the problems with Wicked: For Good stem from poor translation of the source material. After an unknown time jump, there’s a tone shift that the script doesn’t justify. At 2 hours and 17 minutes, the film had more than enough runtime to ease this tonal shift, but instead, it relies on exposition-filled dialogue that fails to sell the transition. Ariana and Cynthia are acting their butts off to try and remedy this, and to an extent, they succeed. There were times the story would gain momentum, only to be overshadowed by the introduction of characters from The Wizard of Oz. As someone who hasn’t seen the musical, this was fun to see, but the clumsy implementation did more bad than good. This results in such an interesting premise stumbling to the finish.
Chu’s approach to directing, which worked incredibly well in the first Wicked, feels like a mismatch for the tone of this story. His style brought so much life to the world of Oz, but despite the major tone shift, it stays relatively the same. Instead of trying to reinforce the faulty foundation, he puts his efforts into decorating the walls. Scenes that were clearly supposed to be big emotional beats instead felt somewhat awkward due to some dramatic pauses that lingered much too long. Luckily, the musical numbers go above and beyond to make up for it.
While the songs aren’t as grand or catchy as the first half, they are still some of the best performances you’ll find on screen. It’s hard not to think that if the storytelling had been more tight-knit, the payoff from these power ballads would be even more memorable. With Wicked, the story and music worked side-by-side, like filling a dam to its breaking point before smashing it open with a musical wrecking ball. Wicked for Good lacks that buildup, so when the wrecking ball hits, it’s more of a trickle than a flood.
The best part about Wicked continues to be the best part about Wicked: For Good – its cast. Once again, Cythia Eryvo and Ariana Grande are breathtaking. The story allows the actresses to expand into their range more, which all but secures them Oscar nominations. Without these two, this story would have felt so empty, but they do such an amazing job that it’s hard not to be entertained. Each got to perform a new original song from Steven Schwartz, and they both take full advantage of it. The supporting cast around them is largely the same, yet they all seem to play second fiddle. Jonathan Bailey’s character finds himself in a position that should let his acting chops shine, but the dialogue, or lack thereof, heavily restricts him. Without getting into spoilers, the entire supporting cast feels heavily focused on where their characters need to end up, and not how they get there.
Wicked: For Good attempts the almost impossible task of living up to one of the biggest movies of the past decade. At its core, Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande are giving performances that are second to none and worth the price of admission alone. The music takes a less flashy approach, which allows the cast to showcase their incredible range. What should be flying through the air in a bubble instead sinks under the weight of mismatched tone and direction. With a story that hinges on nuance, this disconnection leaves it feeling unfocused. Wicked: For Good settles for good when it had the chance to be great.
