“Wicked”ly Overhyped: A stage-to-screen slump

A+E

Jon M. Chu’s long-awaited adaptation of the Broadway musical “Wicked” was supposed to be a dream come true for fantasy fans everywhere. While the film had a few redeeming qualities– the set design and vocal talent were certainly impressive–the movie was a major disappointment. Clocking in at nearly three hours and with a budget of $150 million, “Wicked” was oversaturated with color and misplaced energy. The film was poorly executed as a whole; Ariana Grande’s performance as Glinda felt as artificial and overdone as the special effects, the plot derivations were confusingly political and not well elaborated upon. The best part of my movie watching experience was leaving the theater.

Set in the pretext Victor Fleming’s “Wizard of Oz”, “Wicked” brings a nearly 20-year production run of a beloved musical to the big screen. While anticipated by theater enthusiasts everywhere, from a critical perspective, the movie was as bumpy and forever-winding as the yellow-brick road. The movie added seemingly random plot points to the already fabricated prequel that “Wicked” is. While the original musical was at least based off books, the movie takes the setting and characters and adds obscene elements such as classism against animals; essentially giving more depth to a musical about two friends fighting over a boy. Rather than coming across as intellectually stimulating, it adds corny controversy to a fantastical land takes away from the ditsy aspects of “Wicked” fans have grown to adore. “Wicked” should have taken an approach more similar to “Hamilton”, simply recording a Broadway performance and putting it on streaming platforms; the dignity the franchise once had would still be prevalent, and there still would be some $145 million dollars to fund genuine creatively-capable films. 

This film was a perfect example of why films should have a cap on budgets. A major aspect of both the original “Wizard of Oz” and stage-products is the creative use of space and sets; with the original movie being filmed in the 1930s and theater everywhere not having the advantage of movie “magic”. Yet, “Wicked” took the world of Oz by storm, dare I say tornado, sweeping the nostalgia and understated beauty and leaving nothing but a grotesque overuse of CGI and not-so-special effects. With the entire movie looking like a color wheel on steroids, the supernatural feel was almost as visually unsetting as the unnatural state of Ariana Granda and Cynthia Erivo’s bodies. 

The “Wicked” press tour left almost everyone who followed it at an uncomfortable loss for words. With both co-stars bursting into tears at conversation starters, viewers everywhere are left wondering what exactly happened during the filming process of “Wicked”. Grande and Erivo have undergone rapid weight loss since the beginning of production, now, rather than looking the part of wonderful witches, they’ve quickly become reminiscent of sickly scarecrows. Copious amounts of speculation on the matter have flooded the internet about a sort of competitive anorexia between the two. Both actresses are already tiny, both being 5’1, whatever is happening behind the scenes is extremely dangerous, making the watching experience as if I went to see a psychological horror film- not a heartwarming musical. 

Whether it was treacherous timing or the corny commercials, my hopes walking into the theater were as shockingly small as Grande and Erivo. Leaving the cinema was no better, having wasted a Saturday evening observing the speculation that was “Wicked”: comedic catastrophe, pitchy vocals, and what looked like a period piece about fantasy famine.

Previous
Previous

Festive fun…in the sun!

Next
Next

Finals week… or my final week?