“Wicked: For Good” falls Short of Oz’s magic, Critics Say
A new critique suggests the latest installment in the “Wicked” saga prioritizes spectacle over substance, resulting in a film that feels both overstuffed and curiously hollow. The film, intended to reframe the narrative of the classic “Wizard of Oz,” struggles with tonal inconsistencies, questionable character motivations, and a visual aesthetic that oscillates between blinding and murky.
A Political Smear Campaign and Tangled Romances
The film centers on an attempt to discredit Elphaba, but this political angle is just one layer of the film’s convoluted plot.
Production Values Questioned Amidst Narrative Chaos
Despite lavish set designs, the film’s visual presentation is heavily criticized.The reviewer questions the inconsistent lighting, stating that Oz appears either “under perpetual thermonuclear attack” or so dark that distinguishing characters is difficult. This visual discordance mirrors a broader concern: the film’s narrative feels less like a cohesive story and more like a drawn-out television soap opera, with production values that don’t surpass those of typical daytime dramas.
Disability and Bitterness: A troubling Portrayal
A particularly harsh critique is leveled at the portrayal of nessarose, Elphaba’s younger sister, who uses a wheelchair. The review condemns the film’s “conflation of physical disability and soul-crushing bitterness,” arguing that Nessarose is reduced to a one-dimensional character defined solely by her resentment and jealousy. She is depicted as “clingy, thwarted jealousy personified,” lacking any nuance beyond her perceived limitations. The reviewer points out the ominous foreshadowing surrounding Boq, whose surname, Woodsman, hints at a grim fate.
Retconning and a Lost Sense of Wonder
The film attempts to provide origin stories for characters from the original “Wizard of Oz,” but this narrative retconning is deemed “clumsy” and lacking in “brains or heart.” While the stage production managed to cleverly flesh out these backstories, the film presents them as an “abomination” that disrespects the established fairy-tale logic and pop-cultural memory. The reviewer suggests the film feels “cowed by its iconic predecessor,” resorting to a “petulant urge to destroy the classic it could never be.”
Weak Dialogue and Unearned Cynicism
Even the romantic elements of the film are criticized.The reviewer dismisses Elphaba and Fiyero’s seduction scene as “drippy,” and their pillow talk as painfully uninspired. A more compelling dynamic emerges in a confrontation between Elphaba and Glinda, described as a “wand-versus-broomstick smackdown,” showcasing genuine passion and defiance.
Though, the film’s broader cynicism feels unearned.Characters repeatedly reference the “idiot masses of Oz,” justifying their actions by claiming the public needs someone to be wicked. This sentiment, while potentially insightful, lacks the emotional weight necessary to resonate with the audience. The film fails to establish Oz as a believable, fantastical realm, treating its citizens as a disposable “monolith.”
Performances Offer Glimmers of Hope
Despite the film’s shortcomings, the performances of Cynthia Erivo as Elphaba and Ariana Grande as glinda are highlighted as strengths. Erivo imbues Elphaba with a compelling sense of defiance, while Grande demonstrates growth in portraying Glinda’s disillusionment. Two new songs written for the film by Stephen Schwartz are mentioned, but are deemed “neither memorable.”
Ultimately, the reviewer suggests that the film’s greatest success lies in its two leading actresses, who manage to salvage a “busy, confused, hopelessly mangled movie.” The film’s attempt to flatter the audience’s supposed moral superiority is ultimately seen as a form of contempt, leaving a lingering sense of dissatisfaction.
