By Matthew Moorcroft

Weak Recommendation

• Directed by Jon M. Chu
• Starring Cynthia Erivo, Ariana Grande, Jonathan Bailey, Jeff Goldblum
• PG

The biggest challenge of adapting Wicked was always going to that pesky second act, wasn’t it?

I’m not really sure how to review or look at Wicked: For Good (which should really be called Wicked: Part II frankly but that’s neither here nor there), which is a film that ultimately exists seemingly as an obligation. The first Wicked, with it’s light, bubbly attitude, great music, and spot on performances, used it’s mammoth runtime to mostly cover the bits everyone wanted to see adapted; the school segments, the growing friendship between Elphaba and Glinda, “Defying Gravity”, the works. But it’s an incomplete story that has to be finished, and Act II of Wicked, with it’s shorter length in the original Broadway musical and condensed story structure, always felt like a genuine challenge. Making it it’s own picture and expanding on it is certainly an idea, but that begs the question then… what do you add?

Wicked: For Good‘s answer in this case, much to it’s own detriment, is to stuff as many references to The Wizard of Oz as it can and pad out the runtime to an acceptable length before it can get to the next big song number. If bloat was a small problem in the first film, Wicked: For Good is bloated to all sin and makes it a much bigger problem, with every sequence going on far longer then it likely should and two new original songs that don’t add much of anything to the overall experience. The final outcome is that Wicked: For Good, despite good intentions and some clearly great stuff, is ultimately a bit of a letdown in comparison to it’s first installment, and lacks the same electric chemistry between cast, crew, and music that made the first part so engaging in the first place.

Most of that aforementioned great stuff is carry over from the original film, particularly the duo of Erivo and Grande, who continue to be utterly transfixing in their portrayals of the close female friends-turned-reluctant enemies. Both of them are more on their own this time around due to plot machinations, but the movie really comes alive in the times they are together. It’s clear that Chu and company realized that their chemistry was the real heart of the story and most of the extended sequences are here to make sure they get as much screentime as possible together in spite of the story needing to keep them apart for as long as possible. But even alone the two of them manage to have their standout sequences, particularly Erivo whose rendition of “No Good Deed” is the clear highlight of the entire affair.

But so much of Wicked: For Good is unfournately pre-occupied with busy work and needing to try to weld things together with the aforementioned Wizard of Oz that it sometimes feels like it loses sight of what made this anti-fascist, revisionist tale so interesting in the first place. Wicked: For Good‘s darker tone is appreciated, and it commits to having a bittersweet ending that really leans on the bitter, but it’s cameo-fest style presentation brings to mind much of the worse blockbuster fare of the past several years and not in a good way, and that unfournately also highlights Chu’s weaker aspects as a director. He goes for bombast and loud on every opportunity, and while it worked with the poppier, more candy flavoured vibes of the first film, Wicked: For Good needed a more subtle touch and Chu just doesn’t have it.

Wicked: For Good at least is never particularly boring or even insufferable, which is a plus, but throughout it there is a general sense of wanting to get it over with. Even when it does finally reach Dorothy and the legendary trek down the Yellow Brick Road it almost rushes through it like an afterthought, with interesting ideas squandered almost as often as Glinda twirls her wand around. The idea of Dorothy as an unwilling pawn in not just the Wizard’s games and manipulations but also eventually Elphaba and Glinda’s petty squabbles is never explored, and feels like an angle that could have given some complexation to a story that feels like it really wants to be complex but doesn’t wanna commit. The closest it comes to this is a brief new scene involving fleeing animals and the decision to stay and fight or protect one’s self and while it’s a little clunky in execution it asks some interesting questions that a greater movie likely would have talked about.

But mostly, Wicked: For Good is perfectly content with being “the lesser half of a two part story” which is disappointing but then again, maybe this is was the fate of Act II of Wicked all along. Musical fans knew it had issues, and those issues aren’t easily fixed by simply re-ordering scenes or adding stuff, they are structurally ingrained in the text. As such, I can’t really blame too much of this on Chu, Holzman, and Fox, all of whom are clearly trying to elevate material they likely know is broken at it’s core. There is only so much you can do here.

And that’s maybe the real tragedy of Wicked as a whole. It’s a story, like the in-universe perception of it’s lead character, is one that starts strong and with promise but ultimately drops the ball before fading into obscurity as people just beg you to be over and done with. And I don’t think Wicked: For Good is a particularly terrible film – hell it’s good parts frequently reach very good to excellent – but it’s also a film that loses much of the whimsy, the electricity, and the entertainment of it’s first half in favor of exposition and quick resolutions to a supporting cast that really needed more time to shine. Easy to call Wicked: For Good the biggest disappointment of the year, but it most certainly feels that way to some extent.