Wicked: For Good

When last we left our friends in the Land of Oz (John Chu’s 2024 film “Wicked: Part One”), the green-skinned Elphaba had taker her broom and flown away into exile at the behest of the evil university headmistress Madame Morrible (who had branded her the Wicked Witch of the West).  Elphaba’s friend Glinda had become the Good Witch of the North, even though she possessed no real powers.  But her bubbly personality and her eternally sunny outlook made her useful to Madame Morrible (Michelle Yeoh) as the mouthpiece for the Wizard of Oz, the bumbling and unknowingly evil leader of the land.

A lot to remember

That’s a lot of backstory to remember from Part One, which hit theatres a full year ago.  One of my compliments of that outing was that Winnie Holzman’s and Dana Fox’s adapted screenplay was able to stand as its own entity.  Yes, we knew there was more to the story, but if we didn’t know, “Wicked: Part One” came to a logical conclusion; it didn’t beg a sequel the way Quentin Tarantino’s “Kill Bill: Volume 1” did.

But unlike “Kill Bill: Volume 2,” we didn’t have to wait an entire year for the sequel.  Now, too much time has passed for us to recall every nuance of the story.  And here I’m specifically thinking of those viewers not intimately familiar with the 2003 stage musical upon which the “Wicked” films are based.  When “Wicked: For Good” begins, we remember that Elphaba and Glinda were both infatuated with their handsome classmate Fiyero (British actor Jonathan Bailey), but too much time has passed for most of us to recall why he and Glinda were getting married – a seemingly arranged marriage at that.  Nor are most of us able to bring to mind why the two now don’t particularly like one another.

Can’t stand on its own

The same is true of Elphaba’s interest in the animal population of Oz.  We are reminded that the Oz animals originally had the ability to speak – and teach college-level classes – but that ability was taken away.  By whom?  And more importantly, why?  We recall Elphaba’s wheelchair-bound sister Nessa (Marissa Bode) from Part One, but why is she now evil?  What’s her angle in these proceedings?

There are simply too many characters and too much plot to carry over from the first installment, which opened Thanksgiving weekend of 2024.  And I even went back and re-read some reviews of Part One just to prepare myself for Part Two.  I did not re-watch Part One, deeming that an unnecessary requirement for enjoying Part Two.  And as a side note, I’m referring to “Wicked: For Good” as Part Two.  Since Part One was titled “Wicked: Part One,” the sequel should be named “Wicked: Part Two.”

What works?

Now, what works in “Wicked: For Good?”  Well for starters, I enjoy watching Dorothy and her friends enter the Land of Oz and go about their business we all know so well from the 1939 film “The Wizard of Oz,” while our story concentrates on the goings-on behind the scenes.  Here we learn the origins of the Tin Man, Scarecrow, and Cowardly Lion.  That’s a neat take on a classic story everybody loves.

Furthermore, the two leads are fabulous.  If we didn’t know Cynthia Erivo (Elphaba) was an excellent actress before, we certainly do now.  And my does she have some singing chops?  Same goes for Ariana Grande as Glinda.  Get her out of the pop-music recording studio, and this lady can sing!  I could listen to these two sing all day long.  But (and this is a big “but”), we already knew this from Part One!  The great vocalists are still great vocalists.  The Stephen Schwartz songs are wonderful.  But again, we knew that from Part One.  (We actually know Stephen Schwartz is an excellent musical theatre composer and lyricist from “Godspell” and “Pippin,” which pre-date the Broadway musical “Wicked” by a generation.)

Nothing is new

We know Jeff Goldblum will turn in another amusing cameo as the inept and blundering wizard (although he was funnier in Part One).  We know Grande’s Glinda will be humorously ditzy.  And Erivo’s Elphaba will be intense and serious, yet a loving and supportive confidant to her friends.  We know the world created by Chu and cinematographer Alice Brooks will be spellbinding, thanks to modern-day CGI special effects.  But none of this is new.  To those unfamiliar with the Broadway show, last year’s Part One was a revelation!  A brand new take on the behind-the-scenes innerworkings of the classic story of the Wonderful Wizard of Oz!  But it’s not new anymore.

How to save it?

So, how could “Wicked: For Good” have been saved?  Well for starters, it could have been released just six months after Part One, while many of the intricacies of the plot were still fresh in our minds.  That’s what Tarantino did with the two halves of “Kill Bill,” and not nearly so much information was lost.  But perhaps a better solution would have been to simply make just one movie.  Cut out the new songs written directly for the screen adaptations, cut a little of the slower-moving middle sections of each of the two acts, and make one mesmerizing three-hour cinematic production!  Problem solved, albeit too late now.  (Coincidentally, I wrote the exact same thing in 2004 regarding the two “Kill Bill” halves – it too would have benefited from cutting a lot of Volume 1 and simply making one longer film.)

Fans of the musical will love “Wicked: For Good.”  And while I can’t say it’s a bad film, my greatest disappointment upon leaving the theatre wasn’t that seeing Part Two made me want to revisit Part One.  It was that seeing Part Two made me want to revisit “The Wizard of Oz.”  Without all the special effects, brilliant singing, and excellent performances, “The Wizard of Oz” is simply a better motion picture than either half of the ”Wicked” franchise.

 

 

 

 

 

Andy Ray‘s reviews also appear on https://townepost.com/tag/film-reviews/