Regarding Wicked as a complete film, you can easily imagine its place on cable television, ten years from now, airing non-stop in the weeks leading up to the Christmas holiday. Both halves contain wildly repeatable sequences. Think “What Is This Feeling,” (the TikTok dance), “Popular,” “Dancing Through Life,” or the “Defying Gravity” sequence from Wicked. Think “No Good Dead” or “Thank Goodness” from Wicked: For Good. Even if you don’t take to the full five hours, there are undoubtedly moments that will catch you as you pass through a warmly lit room when it’s playing again. As I sat down to consider my Wicked: For Good review, the image, the near certainty of it, permeates my thoughts. May not consider Wicked a classic, but it’s difficult to deny that, one day, younger audiences growing up on it will embrace it as strongly as my generation did A Christmas Story.
That said, Wicked: For Good is not as “good” as Wicked. That is of no surprise. The original stage production struggled with its tone, and some of those same flaws inevitably transfer to the big screen. Given the intoxicating “Defying Gravity” sequence that closed the first film, it would be impossible to fashion as high of a follow-up act. But director Jon M. Chu and company certainly give it their all to enliven an at times flat narrative.
Five years have passed since the events of the first film, and Cynthia Erivo’s Elphaba, now branded the Wicked Witch of the West, seemingly terrorizes the “good” citizens of Oz. In reality, she’s fighting against what she sees as an evil Wizard of Oz and his campaign to enslave animals, many of whom are leveraged to build the iconic yellow brick road. Yet, she cannot fight bad PR, something at which the Wizard (Jeff Goldblum) and press secretary Madame Morrible (Michelle Yeoh) excel in creating. At the center of this plot is their reimagining of Ga-linda (Ariana Grande) as Glinda the Good, the shiny object they use to distract the people of Oz from the trauma around them. The rest of the film moves its players into positions that align with the ultimate destination: the events of the original The Wizard of Oz.
So, what’s good about Wicked: For Good? Primarily, the film revolves around Grande’s Glinda the Good and her journey from thoughtless, bubbly cheerleader to eventual leader. Awards prospects aside, Grande provides nicely shaded moments of understanding, disappointment, pain, and sorrow throughout the film. She elegantly takes us on a fully realized character arc and gives scenes of unexpected depth, particularly in her moments with Erivo. As Elphaba, Erivo doesn’t have as dramatic a character arc of her own, I would argue, but she still gives a commanding performance. She makes Elphaba fully sympathetic, especially in her anguish over seemingly making things far worse through acts intended to be good (“No Good Deed”). Both actresses work together beautifully, and their chemistry underscores the sense that Glinda and Elphaba have truly changed each other for good.
Of the new music, “The Girl in the Bubble” works best thanks to Chu’s lovely direction of the sequence. And the crafts are outstanding. Going into the film, I wondered how different things could be over the first film and if the Academy would embrace what could be seen as a retread of locations or costumes already experienced in the first film. But, somehow, they manage to top themselves stylistically. The production design alters what we’ve already seen of Oz and gives us fascinating and hugely cinematic new locales. Paul Tazewell’s costumes remain unparalleled and, yes, magical. Even the cinematography by the much-maligned Alice Brooks feels more assured, certainly less glare-y than the “Dancing Through Life” sequence.
Yet, all is not perfect in the land of Oz. I found the film oscillates painfully between moments of spontaneity and wooden sequences that never really worked on stage, primarily in the first hour or so. As crucial as she is to the plot, I was very happy for that house from Kansas to fall on Marissa Bode’s Nessarose / the Wicked Witch of the East. The character feels again underserved, only pushing plot moments along the yellow brick road toward Oz. I would have also preferred a moment of recasting with Yeoh’s Madame Morrible in the first Wicked, and it only goes downhill here in Wicked: For Good. At the end of the day, there really wasn’t a reason to split the film into two halves other than box office receipts. For Good rehashes themes and moments from the first film, padding an already tenuous running time.
But in the end, none of this will matter to those who truly love the material. My daughter loved the film and its Oz-focused twists and turns. And my wife, a passing admirer of the first film, surprised me by loving For Good, citing the bond between Grande and Erivo as the real reason to show up. Wicked: For Good will have many, many fans. They may all uniformly agree that it’s not as good as the first film, but it won’t really matter. For Good gives us an emotional conclusion between two actresses able to emotionally convey the magic of a profoundly deep friendship. And two characters whose lives were truly changed by their love for each other.
So, in ten years when I’m wrapping Christmas presents or chasing grandchildren around the house, will I stop them and share the overall experience of Wicked when it streams? Of course I will. Taken as a whole, it can be at times a magical experience.
Even if the yellow brick road has a few potholes along the way.
Wicked: For Good is now playing in theaters everywhere.
