Do you like your “Wicked” sweet or sour?
How you answer may be the key in how much you enjoy the sequel, “Wicked: For Good,” which opens today and is on track to sell more tickets in its first weekend than its predecessor.
Will the new movie once again cast a spell at the Oscars? The answer, for the moment, is confusifying.
I’m Glenn Whipp, columnist for the Los Angeles Times, host of The Envelope newsletter and someone hoping to see a movie at the Village before the Olympics land in L.A. in 2028. Which film should they book to kick off its revival?
‘Wicked’ can’t defy gravity this time
Cynthia Erivo, left, and Ariana Grande perform at the 97th Academy Awards in March.
(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)
Who wasn’t charmed by the first “Wicked” movie last year? Film critics gave it more than a pass, with reviews scoring a respectable 73 grade on aggregator site Metacritic. Audiences loved it, powering the film to a $758 million worldwide box office haul. And Oscar voters fell in line, rewarding “Wicked” with 10 nominations and wins for production design and costumes. Gratitution abounded.
Repeating success is a taller order, our beloved Dodgers notwithstanding. As noted, multiplexes should be full this first weekend and, you’d expect, the lucrative Thanksgiving weekend as well. But the reviews haven’t been as kind this time around. “Wicked: For Good” sits at a 60 on Metacritic. Empire magazine’s review sums up the sentiment: “‘Wicked: For Good,’ sure — but not quite Wicked: For Great.”
Sequels rarely land as well as the original film, so the drop-off isn’t surprising. And, if you’ve seen the Broadway musical, you already knew this was coming. All the best songs are packed into the show’s first act, culminating in the soaring, sustaining final notes of “Defying Gravity.” But you can only beat that gravitational force for so long before you fall flat on the ground.
That splat you hear is “Wicked: For Good.”
Not everyone feels that way. The Vulture review sports the grabby headline: “‘Wicked: For Good’ is actually better than the first.” Times film critic Amy Nicholson agrees in her write-up titled: “The first one was a candy-colored slog, but ‘Wicked: For Good’ is pleasantly sour.”
Which brings me back to the question I first asked you: What are you looking for in a “Wicked” movie? I enjoyed all the spirited dancing and singing and, yes, the bright, candy colors of the first movie. You want a slog? The sequel takes almost an hour to bring together the two characters you truly care about — Elphaba and Glinda.
To get to that moment, you have endure a lot of filler, as if the musical doesn’t have enough material to sustain two movies totaling nearly five hours. (It doesn’t.)
The so-so critical reaction shouldn’t keep “Wicked: For Good” from picking up a best picture nomination, provided the movie’s fans keep showing up at theaters through the end of the year. With so many high-profile festival films — “The Smashing Machine,” “After the Hunt,” “Die My Love” among them — failing to connect with audiences and critics, there’s room at the inn. Academy voters will likely keep the light on.
Equaling the first film’s 10 nominations will be difficult. Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande opened the Oscars ceremony last year in spectacular fashion, but a reunion might not be in the cards. The pair were arguably co-leads in the first movie. “For Good” belongs more to Glinda than Elphaba, charting the Good Witch’s journey from complacency and compliance to … less complacency and compliance. Maybe Glinda’s going to learn from all this and take principled stands moving forward, though the movie doesn’t do enough to convince me. Grande’s dimple has more depth.
Still, Grande figures to score another supporting actress nomination and, who knows, she may well win. Voters love big theater-kid energy in this category, giving Oscars to Jennifer Hudson (“Dreamgirls”), Anne Hathaway (“Les Misérables”), Ariana DeBose (“West Side Story”) and Zoe Saldaña (“Emilia Pérez”) in recent years.
Erivo, placed in the more competitive lead class, might not be as fortunate, as she no longer centers the movie. She still masterfully conveys Elphaba’s vulnerability and sadness, but she’s also saddled with a chemistry-free love story with Capt. Fiyero (Jonathan Bailey). I won’t count her out. But Erivo could well lead the “snubs” and surprises list come nominations morning.
Repeat nominations in production design and costume design, the two Oscars the first movie won, seem safe bets. Hair and makeup does too, as does sound since voters love movies heavy on music. “Wicked: For Good” might pick up another nomination in the newly created casting category, as it won’t be a spot where voters feel like they’re repeating themselves. And while the first movie didn’t have any new songs, “For Good” sports two. Look for “The Girl in the Bubble,” sung by Grande, to pop.
Eight nominations? That’d be a win. The loss would be if “Wicked: For Good” followed the path of the two “Black Panther” movies. The first, a critical, commercial and cultural sensation, earned seven nominations, including best picture, and won three Oscars. The less-regarded sequel picked up five nods, winning one. It was not nominated for best picture.
Sometimes being popular isn’t enough.