Entertainment
All of your questions about the 'Wicked' movie, answered
This article contains spoilers for the movie “Wicked.”
“To be continued.”
“Wicked” ends with these three words, leaving audiences to wait a year for resolution. And with a projected opening weekend domestic box office haul of $120 million, that adds up to quite a bit of patience.
Until then, there’s much to discuss about Universal’s ambitious adaptation of the blockbuster stage show, especially its more narratively daring moments — likely affecting both devout fan and casual “Wizard of Oz” aficionados. So whether you left the theater crying or confused, The Times is here to share some clarity on “Wicked.”
Why is ‘Wicked’ split into two movies?
While not uncommon for fantasy flicks and sci-fi entries, it’s never been done before with the film adaptation of a stage musical. And this one in particular — based on Gregory Maguire’s 1995 novel “Wicked: The Life and Times of the Wicked Witch of the West,” which draws from Frank L. Baum’s 1900 fantasy novel “The Wonderful Wizard of Oz” and the 1939 film adaptation — “comes heaped high with a century’s worth of heritage, in the traditions of literature, screen and stage, plus the massive expectations that come with that,” wrote Katie Walsh in her review.
After months of detailed discussions between director Jon M. Chu, composer Stephen Schwartz and book writer Winnie Holzman about potentially sacrificing songs or subplots, “it became very clear that you cannot tell this story in one movie, and if you did, you’d have to literally transform it into something very different, and that’s not something I was interested in doing,” Chu told The Times.
While split at the stage show’s intermission point, “these are two movies with integrity, and they can stand on their own,” said Holzman. And according to producer Marc Platt, each act — and therefore, each film — has a point of view that’s distinct to the witches played by Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande.
“‘Wicked’ is very much about the human experience — having preconceived notions, seeing the world a different way and changing your point of view,” he said. “Yes, this is the story of two girls, but the motor of the first film is really Elphaba’s journey of how she finds her voice to speak truth to power. And the second film is very much Glinda coming to see the world differently and changing in her way. Once we laid it out emotionally and narratively, and committed to it, things really fell in place.”
The movie’s running time is as long as the stage show but only tells half the story. What changes were made from stage to screen?
Recent musical adaptations have included rethought subplots or freshly written songs (sometimes resulting in misguided trims). But longtime “Wicked” fans will notice that the movie doesn’t drastically shoehorn any part of the narrative. Instead, it thoughtfully elaborates on the stage show, which opened on Broadway in 2003.
New scenes better cement some character dynamics, like when Elphaba and Glinda first meet in their shared dorm room. “When we were first writing the show, we wrote 30 versions of that scene before ‘What Is This Feeling?’” said Schwartz. “Ultimately, we just didn’t have the time.”
The same is true when the two best friends first come face-to-face with the Wonderful Wizard of Oz (Jeff Goldblum). “There’s so much more time that he can take to delicately win them over and bring them into his world, and you get to see the girls get really won over by him,” said Holzman.
The introduction to Elphaba as a child, shunned by other kids and scorned by her father, was also abandoned in the making of the stage show, said Holzman: “To do that onstage is a whole thing, she’d be painted green for a one-minute-long part! But film is the perfect medium to finally do it.”
The movie also features a few slightly sharpened characters — a more independent Nessarose (Marissa Bode), a seemingly more maternal Madame Morrible (Michelle Yeoh) as “the mother Elphaba always wanted and never had,” said Platt — and a lot of new jokes, many of which were improvised by the cast. Plus, an extended “One Short Day” section explains the Wizard’s magical abilities, complete with cameos from original stars Idina Menzel and Kristin Chenoweth, as well as creators Schwartz and Holzman.
“It felt like we let the story and the characters breathe,” said Schwartz, who wrote a new song that didn’t make the cut. That discernment is thanks to Chu, said Platt: “Very frequently, Jon stopped us from changing things or turning them into something else. Because of his love for the material and his great sense of purpose and legacy, he protected us against ourselves.”
What did that silent ‘Dancing Through Life’ section mean?
One expanded sequence is “Dancing Through Life” — specifically, the section at the Ozdust Ballroom. Elphaba arrives alone, outfitted in the pointy black hat that Glinda has tricked her into wearing, and gets teased by all her classmates as she has been since arriving at Shiz University. Nevertheless, Elphaba begins to dance, executing every move as a woman boldly and unashamedly herself, even if it means remaining as lonely as ever.
Onstage, these dance moves are played for laughs, but “Cynthia came in and said, ‘I’m not a joke,’” Chu recalled of his early discussions with Erivo. “In the stage show, the audience has the same perspective as all the Ozians, but because of all the tools of cinema, we can flip it so the movie is from Elphaba’s perspective. Finding that really locked it in for me.”
Onscreen, the moment is deeply moving, with the sound of laughter muffled and the camera zooming in on Elphaba’s tears. Glinda, already feeling bad about the hat prank and ready to repay Elphaba for putting in a good word about her with the powerful Madame Morrible, joins her on the dance floor, echoing her movements with tears in her eyes as well. With this unspoken apology, the scene marks the beginning of their friendship.
“We’re in a massive musical, and Jon has the bravery to take sound out completely,” said cinematographer Alice Brooks of the scene. “The heart of the movie is in these very static, still and silent moments, where these two women have nonverbal communication with each other.”
It’s a moment that means a lot to Chu, who watched the stage show during its pre-Broadway run in San Francisco in 2003, and it’s safe to say it left a handprint on his heart. “I remember sitting in that theater and feeling like it was made for me,” he said. “Every word speaks to something so much deeper than just a song you hear and know the words to. Making this movie, I wanted people to feel what I felt in that seat.”
What happened during that ‘Defying Gravity’ scene?
The entire film builds up to Elphaba’s signature song, which gloriously closes the first act onstage with the newly named “Wicked Witch” flying for the first time. “It doesn’t actually plug all the holes that you need, but we’re rooting for the whole movie for her to do it,” said Chu of the beloved number. “But when we storyboarded it, what we found was, she didn’t earn this flight.”
Therefore, “Defying Gravity” is presented in sections onscreen. After a fiery, action-packed sequence in which flying monkeys chase after Glinda and Elphaba, the two find themselves at a crossroads: Glinda wants to please Madame Morrible and the renowned Wizard — even if they do want to cast powerful spells to ostracize the talking animals of Oz — while Elphaba would rather flee the scene than align with these lying leaders.
Elphaba asks her best friend to come with her, but Glinda silently decides not to, instead handing her a black cape to stay warm. Though they’re splitting up, there’s no bitterness between them: “I hope it brings you bliss, I really hope you get it and you don’t live to regret it,” they sing to each other. “I hope you’re happy in the end, I hope you’re happy, my friend.”
Bewitched broom in hand, Elphaba then tries to fly, but instead starts falling straight toward the ground. “When she jumps out that window, she thinks she’s ready, but she’s not,” explained Chu. “She doesn’t know why she’s doing it. Is this just because she’s angry? Or is it just for vengeance?”
Elphaba then sees the younger version of herself (Karis Musongole) in the Emerald City castle’s reflection. “I’ve known Jon for 25 years, and thematically, there’s always a connection with your younger self that he’s so passionate about,” said Brooks. “He desperately wants to know what your younger self would say to you.”
As they’re both in freefall, young Elphaba reaches out to the adult witch, who reaches back. “It’s that arc of connecting to this person you’ve always been, and discovering that the power and strength you’ve been looking for has always been inside of you,” said Brooks of the dialogue-free moment.
“She grabs that broomstick, flies up and sings, ‘It’s me’ because she’s realized she’s doing it to heal herself and save herself,” added Chu. Elphaba then delivers the final declaration of the song, not just to Glinda and all the Ozians who are now hunting her down, as done onstage, but also to Madame Morrible and the Wizard, who colluded to deceive her.
So what does the ending mean for the second ‘Wicked’ movie?
“Part 2” is scheduled for release Nov. 21, 2025, and a yearlong intermission between films is fitting — the second movie, like the second act of the stage show, will probably begin with a time jump. Consider how “Part 1’s” last scene checks on the other characters: Fiyero appearing concerned by Elphaba’s categorization as “evil” by authorities and leaping into action, or Madame Morrible finally embracing Glinda, who’s tried to be in the professor’s good graces but was constantly eclipsed by Elphaba’s potential.
One thing you can count on is for “Wicked” to confront the Dorothy of it all. (And her little dog too.)
For his part, Chu, who filmed both parts of “Wicked” concurrently, is deep in the process of finalizing the edit on “Part 2.” “Last year, I cut both so that I could finish movie one to understand it,” he said. “I let it go and, just recently, opened it up again.”
By this time next year, fans will likely be able to refresh their memories with back-to-back screenings of both parts in theaters. “I have done it,” said Chu of his own “Wicked” marathon. “It is so fun, it is great. I’m excited for everyone to do it.”
Movie Reviews
Film Review: The Fire Inside – SLUG Magazine
Film
The Fire Inside
Director: Rachel Morrison
Michael De Luca Productions, PASTEL
In Theaters: 12.25
I’m not a fan of combat sports in real life, yet I find that movies about them are nearly irresistible. Whether it’s Rocky, The Karate Kid, Warrior or the upcoming wrestling flick Unstoppable, the underdog who comes out swinging and bests their bigger, more experienced opponent always plays. It’s also nearly always the same movie, and that’s what makes The Fire Inside a knockout.
In this fact–based story, Claressa Shields (Ryan Destiny, A Girl Like Grace, Oracle) is a young woman from Flint, Michigan, who has one skill and one passion: boxing. Despite limited support from her family, Claressa is taken under the wing of Jason Crutchfield (Brian Tyree Henry, If Beale Street Could Talk, Godzilla vs. Kong), a coach at a local gym. As Jason becomes as much a surrogate father as a coach, Claressa trains with a ferocious determination and earns a spot on the 2012 Summer Olympic team — Claressa “T-Rex” Shields becomes the first American woman to take home the gold in the sport at age 16. From there, Claressa goes from being a poor inner city kid with nothing to … a poor inner city kid with a gold medal overnight. There are no endorsement deals, no professional career and seemingly no new worlds to conquer. As Claressa fights discouragement, she must find a path to lead her beyond a one time victory into a lasting better life.
Rachel Morrison, the first woman to be nominated for an Academy Award for her work on Black Panther, makes a strong directorial debut, coming out swinging. She’s ably assisted by a terrific script by Barry Jenkins (Moonlight). The Fire Inside transcends the tropes of the genre by reaching the rush of climactic fight and then daring not to end there, instead delving into the reality that in Shields’ life, one triumph in the sports world doesn’t change your circumstances, especially for an uncouth young woman with no interest in playing the public relations game and selling a softer, more traditionally feminine image. We’ve heard the cliche “this isn’t just a movie about sports, it’s about life,” but such a candid look at a life-changing moment that does nothing to change your life, and learning how to face this, was something refreshingly new and honest. The often bleak and at times stunningly beautiful cinematography by Rina Yang, along with the stirring score by Tamar-kali, lift the sensory experience and go a long way to making this one a winner.
Destiny shows potential as a breakout star, commanding the screen as effortlessly as Claressa commands the ring. Henry is the highlight of any film he’s in, and The Fire Inside is no exception, with his grounded performance keeping the film moving along and setting the tone for a story about learning that you can still lean on others while you’re believing in yourself. The sizzling chemistry between these two actors drives a poignant and entertaining story to a satisfying and believable conclusion that’s not the one you’re expecting.
The Fire Inside is a breath of fresh air in a genre that far too often settles for stale and dank. It provides enough inspirational warmth to fulfill its duties as an uplifting sports movie, but its got the stamina and the drive to go a few extra rounds and push its own limits. Unlike most boxing films, this champ doesn’t pull any punches. –Patrick Gibbs
Read more film reviews here:
Film Review: A Complete Unknown
Film Review: Babygirl
Entertainment
The 2024 Envelope Oscar Roundtables
The fear factor behind great art
Adrien Brody, Kieran Culkin, Colman Domingo, Peter Sarsgaard, Sebastian Stan and Jeremy Strong dive into their films, truth-telling and acting alongside your director. READ HERE
Doubts, sure. Compromise? Never
6 directors on doubt, compromise and Timothée Chalamet. READ HERE
Movie Reviews
Movie review: Reverence to source material drains life from ‘Nosferatu’
Passion projects are often lauded simply for their passion, for the sheer effort that it took to bring a dream to life. Sometimes, that celebration of energy expended can obfuscate the artistic merits of a film, as the blinkered vision of a dedicated auteur can be a film’s saving grace, or its death knell. This is one of the hazards of the passion project, which is satirically explored in the 2000 film “Shadow of the Vampire,” a fictionalized depiction of the making of F.W. Murnau’s 1922 silent horror film “Nosferatu: A Symphony of Horror,” in which John Malkovich plays the filmmaker obsessed with “authentic” horror.
This meta approach is a clever twist on the iconic early horror movie that looms large in our cultural memory. Inspired by Bram Stoker’s 1897 novel “Dracula” (with names and details changed in order to skirt the lack of rights to the book), “Nosferatu” is a landmark example of German Expressionism, and Max Schreck’s performance as the vampire is one of the genre’s unforgettable villains.
“Nosferatu” has inspired many filmmakers over a century — Werner Herzog made his own bleak and lonely version with Klaus Kinski in 1979; Francis Ford Coppola went directly to the source material for his lushly Gothic “Bram Stoker’s Dracula” in 1992. Now, Robert Eggers, who gained auteur status with his colonial horror film “The Witch,” the Edgar Allen Poe-inspired two-hander “The Lighthouse,” and a Viking epic “The Northman,” delivers his ultimate passion project: a direct remake of Murnau’s film.
His first non-original screenplay, Eggers’ version isn’t a “take” on “Nosferatu,” so much as it is an overly faithful retelling, so indebted to its inspiration that it’s utterly hamstrung by its own reverence. If “Shadow of the Vampire” is a playful spin, Eggers’ “Nosferatu” is an utterly straight-faced and interminably dull retread of the 1922 film. It’s the exact same movie, just with more explicit violence and sex. And while Eggers loves to pay tribute to the style and form of cinema history in his work, the sexual politics of his “Nosferatu” feel at least 100 years old.
“Nosferatu” is a story about real estate and sexual obsession. A young newlywed, Thomas Hutter (Nicholas Hoult) is dispatched from his small German city to the Carpathian Mountains in order to execute the paperwork on the purchase of a rundown manor for a mysterious Count Orlok (an unrecognizable Bill Skarsgård), a tall, pale wraith with a rumbling voice that sounds like a beehive.
Thomas has a generally bad time with the terrifying Count Orlok, while his young bride at home, the seemingly clairvoyant Ellen (Lily-Rose Depp) is taken with terrifying nightmares and bouts of sleepwalking, consumed by psychic messages from the Count, who has become obsessed with her. He makes his way to his new home in a rat-infested ship, unleashing a plague; Ellen weighs whether she should sacrifice herself to the Count in order to save the town, which consists of essentially three men: her husband, a doctor (Ralph Ineson) and an occultist scientist (Willem Dafoe).
There’s a moment in the first hour of “Nosferatu” where it seems like Eggers’ film is going to be something new, imbued with anthropological folklore, rather than the expressionist interpretation of Murnau. Thomas arrives in a Romanian village, where he encounters a group of jolly gypsies who laugh at him, warn him, and whose blood rituals he encounters in the night. It’s fascinating, fresh, culturally specific, and a new entry point to this familiar tale. Orlok’s mustachioed visage could be seen as a nod to the real Vlad the Impaler, who likely inspired Stoker.
But Eggers abandons this tack and steers back toward leaden homage. The film is a feat of maximalist and moody production design and cinematography, but the tedious and overwrought script renders every character two-dimensional, despite the effortful acting, teary pronunciations and emphatically delivered declarations.
Depp whimpers and writhes with aplomb, but her enthusiastically physical performance never reaches her eyes — unless they’re rolling into the back of her head. Regardless of their energetic ministrations, she and Hoult are unconvincing. Dafoe, as well as Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Emma Corrin, as family friends who take in Ellen, bring a winking campiness, breathing life into the proceedings, while Simon McBurney devilishly goes for broke as the Count’s familiar. However, every actor seems to be in a different movie.
Despite the sex, nudity and declarations of desire, there’s no eroticism or sensuality; despite the blood and guts, there’s nothing scary about it either. This film is a whole lot of style in search of a better story, and without any metaphor or subtext, it’s a bore. Despite his passion for the project, or perhaps because of it, Eggers’ overwrought “Nosferatu” is dead on arrival, drained of all life and choked to death on its own worship.
‘Nosferatu’
GRADE: C
Rated R: for bloody violent content, graphic nudity and some sexual content
Running time: 135 minutes
In theaters Dec. 25
-
Business1 week ago
Freddie Freeman's World Series walk-off grand slam baseball sells at auction for $1.56 million
-
Technology1 week ago
Meta’s Instagram boss: who posted something matters more in the AI age
-
Technology4 days ago
Google’s counteroffer to the government trying to break it up is unbundling Android apps
-
News1 week ago
East’s wintry mix could make travel dicey. And yes, that was a tornado in Calif.
-
News5 days ago
Novo Nordisk shares tumble as weight-loss drug trial data disappoints
-
Politics5 days ago
Illegal immigrant sexually abused child in the U.S. after being removed from the country five times
-
Entertainment5 days ago
'It's a little holiday gift': Inside the Weeknd's free Santa Monica show for his biggest fans
-
Politics1 week ago
Trump taps Richard Grenell as presidential envoy for special missions, Edward S. Walsh as Ireland ambassador