Wicked: For Good might not be technically terrible, but much like the last film, considering the amount of talent and everything else involved with these movies, they should have been better. Wicked: For Good already had a difficult task of adapting the weaker second act of the musical, but despite an over two-hour running time, everything is somehow both rushed and also drags the pacing to a slog. Director: Jon M. Chu Summary: Elphaba, the future Wicked Witch of the West and her relationship with Glinda, the Good Witch of the North. The second of a two-part feature film adaptation of the Broadway musical. Wicked: For Good Struggles To Adapt A Flawed Act Two It seems that the pink and green glasses have finally come off some people’s eyes. Wicked: Part One, released last year, was far from a perfect film, but what stood out the most was how it completely failed to justify not only splitting this into two films, but two films with over two-hour runtimes. However, the second act of the musical is dense as hell, with a ton going on. Going into it, the thought was that perhaps that second half was going to show why this film had to be split into two. A whole movie that would give that dense act room to breathe and maybe even add something to it that would make the adaptation from stage to screen make sense. Unfortunately, Wicked: For Good is just as weak as the second half of the musical is, but it is much slower and was released a year later than the first film. The second act of the musical is supposed to be a jarring change, but this works on stage because the second half almost immediately follows the first. With movies, there is a lot more time between the parts when you’re doing a true part one and two, so you have to work twice as hard to make the films work in that original context, but also still work as standalone pieces. Wicked: For Good picks up not long after the events of the first film, but despite part one ending on a big moment, it takes Wicked: For Good a half hour to find any sort of balance. This sort of pacing flows a lot better on stage, with just an intermission between the two parts. By the time Wicked: For Good finds its footing, you’re twenty minutes in and already going a bit cross-eyed because there is so much going on and almost no time is spent exploring it. One would think that with all of this extra time, the story would feel less rushed since what is usually half of the show has a full movie’s worth of time to breathe, but not every character involved with Wicked: For Good took advantage of the extra runtime in the best ways. So many character beats seem like they come out of nowhere, and some of the interesting changes they do make are only undercut when the film fails to address them by the end. To be as vague as possible, they give a character who has a very good reason to be mad the microphone to express said anger. But that character then vanishes from the final reveals of the film, drawing extra attention to their emotional state, which is more jarring than if they had just faded into the background. All of the other relationships, aside from the one between Elphaba and Glinda, are also given the short stick. Wicked: For Good might be giving Jobathan Bailey plenty to do, but his romance with Elphaba and his complicated relationship with Glinda aren’t given the time they need. These dynamics matter, and one way this film could have improved upon the play is by making them feel more fleshed out. The film also makes the decision to add two more songs to the mix. In theory, this isn’t a bad idea since songs are where characters go through emotional development in musicals. However, the songs are given to Elphaba and Glinda, which makes sense since they are the stars of the show, but they are the last two who need more emotional arcs. The two songs aren’t bad, but they are also forgettable and don’t really add much to the narrative, relying instead on songs for “show, don’t tell.” Again, this is not uncommon for musicals, but the entire show is uses songs to subvert the “show don’t tell” aspect, and two more songs about these two singing about their journeys isn’t the bandage that Act Two or Wicked: For Good needed to get itself out of mediocrity. Failing To Learn From The Musical And The First Film’s Mistakes The things that didn’t work in the first film also apply to Wicked: For Good. The sets are undercut by strange cinematography and lighting choices that still make them look oddly fake. It’s such a strange decision that would be awesome if it were intentional [some sort of nod to the stage roots], but it’s just distracting. Our two leading ladies are doing their damndest in these roles, but the second half of the film is not exactly kind to Glinda. Ariana Grande is playing a character who essentially turns a blind eye to many terrible things and believes she’s doing the right thing. The film and Grande’s performance never really have her come to terms with what is happening around her. She is horrified by what the Wizards and Madame Morrible are doing to Elphaba, but Glinda never really accepts responsibility for the discrimination that she was essentially condoning by aligning with the Wizard. Her new song, The Girl in the Bubble, alludes to someone staying wilfully ignorant, but again, the film has only focused on the Elphaba element and how all of this has impacted Glinda’s life and self-perception, when there is so much else going on. Cynthia Erivo has a tough role this time around because there are several character arcs she needs to move through at lightning speed. Both her relationships with Fiyero and her half-sister, Nessarose, are given a lot of weight and importance in her story, but in both aspects, it feels like we skipped a chapter or two between the end of Wicked and the beginning of Wicked: For Good. The romance between Fiyero and Elphaba was barely alluded to in the first one, so the rush to true love is jarring even by musical standards. Elphaba’s relationship, or lack thereof, with her half-sister has also completely broken down off-screen. This film has over two hours to flesh out all of this, yet it repeats all the mistakes that the musical did. Wicked: For Good might not be technically terrible, but much like the last film, considering the amount of talent and everything else involved with these movies, they should have been better. Universal hasn’t shown why this musical needed to move from stage to screen, because it doesn’t take advantage of any of the benefits gained from filmmaking over stage production. Everything looks cheap and fake instead of real and immersive, thanks to strange lighting and cinematography choices. They didn’t take advantage of the extra runtime in either film to really expand anything in a real and meaningful way, though the consequences of that decision are very much magnified in the second film. Nearly all of the talent involved have done stagework in some way, so if you aren’t going to take advantage of your change of medium, why not just do a stage run and film it Hamilton style? Wicked is already a story that has changed mediums, going from book to musical. However, the musical took the source material and adapted it for the stage, while taking advantage of both the strengths and weaknesses of that medium. Then again, nothing I write here will dissuade the stans, and anyone who hasn’t seen the first one is unlikely to check Wicked: For Good out. If you’re worried about the weird pacing issues and want to get the most out of the musical experience, wait for the inevitable sing-along double feature showings. That is, without a doubt, the best way to experience both of these films.
https://bleedingcool.com/movies/wicked-for-good-fails-to-stick-an-already-very-flawed-ending/