Unfocused Wicked: For Good Lacks the Magic of its Predecessor
It’s rare that a picture has me as perplexed as Wicked: For Good does. Even though it was filmed back-to-back with its Academy Award-winning predecessor, Wicked: Part One, the one looks a lot better. There’s less digital sludge, the backgrounds have additional tactile pop (and aren’t nearly as intentionally blurry), and the still-impressive sets have a noticeable physicality. All of this and more was lacking from the initial chapter of this revisionist journey to the merry old land of Oz, adapted from the smash Broadway musical and based on the best-selling book by Gregory Maguire.
Additionally, stars Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande are as terrific as ever as, respectively, the not-so-wicked Wicked Witch of the West Elphaba and Glinda the Good. The final musical number, with the two characters coming back together in total harmony after spending the majority of the sequel on opposite sides, is beautifully staged (even if the song, “For Good,” is only a bit better than so-so). For me, this was the sequel’s definitive high-water mark and, for a brief moment, left an authentically earned smile firmly planted upon my face.
So, what’s the problem? The truth is that this second half of the story isn’t engaging. It is horribly paced. It brings up interesting ideas involving fascism, gender, sexism, racism, friendship, and found family and then does almost nothing of consequence with any of them. Director Jon M. Chu can’t seem to generate anything resembling forward momentum. Elphaba is pushed into the background of a story that is by all accounts supposed to be focused on her, letting Glinda to come barnstorming into the pink-bubbled spotlight instead. Secondary characters and subplots are tossed around like glittery confetti and almost instantly forgotten about.
Granted, these were all issues that plagued the Broadway production as well. The best songs were all in the first act. So were many of the more intriguing story beats. But that show, barely running 150 or so minutes (a good ten minutes shorter than Wicked: Part One was), didn’t allow audiences the time to dwell on the narrative inadequacies. Instead, it was a full-on sprint to the finish, one filled with several gigantic L. Frank Baum The Wizard of Oz tie-ins that had audience members gasping and pointing at the stage as if they were reenacting the Leonardo DiCaprio Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood meme.
Here, however, the second half of this jaunt down the yellow brick road is a seat-numbing 138 minutes. Two new songs are added, one for each of the witches, and neither of them is anything special (Elphaba’s is by far the stronger of the two, but Glinda’s is more interestingly staged). Aspects from the book that couldn’t make it into the Broadway production are added, but not as many as I thought there possibly could have been (especially considering the running time). Instead, Chu filters in frequent momentum-killing flashbacks to the previous film, almost all of which are tediously unnecessary.
If not for Erivo and Grande it would almost be impossible to believe that the same team that crafted the first half of this epic musical was also responsible for its concluding installment. Precious little of any of this is fun, and even less showcases anything remotely close to imagination. The best bits, such as Elphaba confronting her sister Nessarose (Marissa Bode) — now the hardhearted mayor of Munchkin Town — with her selfish hypocrisy and both of them getting disastrously caught up in the perilous limitations of magical incantations, are rushed through so quickly they become frustratingly meaningless. Others, like the talking animals potentially leaving Oz for the perils of an interdimensional wasteland or the flying monkeys learning who it was that really betrayed them, barely register at all.
Thankfully, Erivo and Grande are still here, and they are marvelous, the latter in particular. The two actors have beguiling chemistry, and the few times the plot brings Elphaba and Glinda together are unquestionably its best moments. The sheer joy they bring to their song and dance routine alongside Jeff Goldblum (returning to yuck it up as the not-so-magical Wizard of Oz) is infectious, while the intimately affecting power they bring to “For Good” during the climax is undeniable.
Yet, even this facet of the production is vexing. This is Elphaba’s tale. She’s at the center of it. She’s the one who is fighting for Oz, the one attempting to show the Wizard and his propaganda-creating right-hand woman, Madame Morrible (Michelle Yeoh), for the despots they are. Elphaba is the witch who must deal with tragedy first-hand, whether it be the unfortunate transformations of some of those dearest to her into tin figures or beings made entirely of straw, or in seeing the animals she’s trying to protect turn their backs on her in fear. She is the one who has to suffer through the agonizing aftermath of a farmhouse falling from the sky and landing smackdab in the middle of Munchkin Town.
But while all of that is part of the story, it’s hard not to exit the theater after the picture has concluded and feel like Chu, along with screenwriters Winnie Holzman (who wrote the book of the Broadway production) and Dana Fox, could have cared less about their primary protagonist. Instead, all of the best visual and dramatic moments are given to Glinda and Grande. While she is more than up to the challenge, showcasing a physicality and internalized dexterity that’s sensational, it’s still a bewildering turn of events. Glinda slowly becomes the main character, stealing Elphaba’s thunder and oftentimes relegating her to the sidelines. It’s annoying.
I’m not going to go into the ins and outs of the plot of this sequel. It should be clear where everything is going, and by the time Dorothy (and her little dog, too) show up, even those completely unfamiliar with the Broadway showcase or with Maguire’s source material should still have a strong idea of what is going to happen and how things will turn out. Chu, to his credit, isn’t concealing anything on that front, and while I know this may sound counterintuitive, this is one instance where being conscious of the outcome helps increase the overall emotional stakes, not diminish them.
All of this only leads me back to where I started when I sat down to write this review — a state of disgruntled bafflement. The technical aspects are too strong, and the performances from Erivo and Grande are much too sublime for me to be able to dismiss this sequel outright. Still, much like the con man Wizard hiding behind the curtain, utilizing sleight of hand and subterfuge to convince the easily fooled that his powers are beyond all imagining, Wicked: For Good has precious little in the way of any actual magic. One might even go so far as to call it a bona fide dud.
Film Rating: 1½ (out of 4)
