Last year, the first half of Jon M. Chu’s adaptation of “Wicked” emerged onto multiplex screens nationwide. It proceeded to make an obscene amount of money despite having the color palette of wet concrete streaked with dull green and the pacing of a child’s fan fiction. This November, it’s the story’s second half that has taken the world by storm.
“Wicked: For Good” is extremely bad. It’s been common knowledge since the musical’s premiere that the second act is noticeably worse than the first, and the film does little to contradict that notion. Its plot is insane, the musical numbers drag and the conclusion is underwhelming compared to the cathartic climax of “Defying Gravity” in the first half.
Chu’s film, unsurprisingly, does nothing to solve these problems. He is one of the least inspired visual stylists working in Hollywood today, which is especially obvious when he’s making a film that’s so indebted to one of the greatest visual spectacles in film history.
When the first “Wicked” came out, some argued that Chu’s unbelievably dull visuals were intended to reflect the film’s grounded tone compared to its antecedent. I was unconvinced by that argument then, and I feel confident in totally dismissing it now.
There is a difference between mundane realism and incompetent drabness, and Chu and his crew fall squarely on the latter side of the divide. It’s a shame, because there is truly incredible craft in the production design and costuming that bring the world of Oz to life, but it’s completely lost in the overlit, poorly framed mess of Alice Brooks’ cinematography.
The overall impression the film leaves is that of capable artisans limited by misguided or distasteful directorial oversight. Aside from the visuals, the film’s performances also feel limited by what I can only imagine is Chu’s direction.
Ariana Grande’s performance as Glinda was one of the best aspects of the first “Wicked” movie, but here her charm has been totally sanded away. Her performance in part one of “Wicked” was interesting because of how she balanced comically self-absorbed cheeriness with moments of uncomfortable introspection, but in “Wicked: For Good,” she’s much more subdued, displaying basically no evidence of internal struggle or emotion. It’s like watching a blank slate.
Jonathan Bailey is also frankly boring to watch here, in contrast to his magnetic screen presence as Fiyero in last year’s installment. As is the case for many of the film’s other characters, we are told about his personal dilemmas and subversive plans in boring expository dialogue, but Bailey doesn’t embody the emotions he discusses.
Cynthia Erivo is the only one of the main cast who escapes unscathed. The material that the cast as a whole has to work with is really quite bad, but Erivo manages to surpass it. I think it would be impossible to contain her exceptional voice, which shines in several of the film’s musical numbers.
While Erivo’s singing may be great, the same can not be said for the songs she performs. I saw the movie just a few days ago, and I’d be hard pressed to recall very many memorable lyrics or melodies from the film’s nearly two-and-a-half-hour runtime.
It’s always fascinated me that a musical featuring genuine pop hits like “Popular,” and “Defying Gravity” in its first act is burdened with such plodding, expository musical numbers in its second.
The biggest problem with “Wicked: For Good,” though, is its narrative. It’s a total mess, focusing on a million different threads that it picks up and drops at will. The film’s crew had every opportunity to streamline the narrative, emphasizing certain aspects of the story and themes to create a more satisfying conclusion to Elphaba and Glinda’s story, but they simply did not.
