A year ago, Universal Pictures’ “Wicked” was everywhere – the film ran an intense and expensive global marketing campaign designed for maximum populist appeal.
From its legendary junket interviews with ‘holding space’ and naughty jokes galore from whichever genius paired Jonathan Bailey with Jeff Goldblum, to huge premieres and marketing tie-ins blending green and pink colour schemes – you couldn’t escape it.
That’s less so the case with “Wicked: For Good,” the film which adapts the back half, and widely agreed upon weaker half, of the stage musical. Marketing has been much less ubiquitous this time and is going for more prestige, possibly trying to chase the awards glory that evaded it last time. Not a bad bet, as a decidedly weaker line-up of films in contention this year means it has a shot.
Reviews for the new film are now in though and paint the picture that may not be the awards juggernaut Universal had hoped for. With 90 reviews counted, “Wicked: For Good” sits at 74% in Rotten Tomatoes – a large drop from the 88% of the first.
It’s a similar story on Metacritic where it landed a decidedly mixed 61/100, a bit of a drop from the pretty good 73/100 of the first. There’s still plenty of praise for the performances, particularly its two female leads, and the core emotional relationship of the two men which is the overall story’s beating heart.
But the overall film seems less well-received this time from the songs to the runtime to the maximalist approach, several of the reviews questioning the choice to split the film now in a way they weren’t with the first one. Here’s a sampling of reviews:
“The things that missed the mark the first time, well, they still do. The things that worked in “Wicked”? They still do, but only a clock-tick better.” – Kate Erbland, Indiewire
“The film fixes a common complaint of the show, giving the pair more scenes (and songs) together in this final stretch, which now feels like a robust tale unto itself.” – Peter DeBruge, Variety
“They’ve only gone and done it. The makers of this musical sequel have delivered a film that surpasses last year’s box-office smash in verve, ambition and emotional ache.” – Kevin Maher, The Times
“Wicked: For Good sticks the landing as best as it can. When Erivo and Grande are finally together, it does leave “a handprint on your heart” even if everything leading up to it is just drawing that out.” – Kristen Lopez, The Film Maven
“No doubt the fans will thrill to the music all over again, but the impact is lost when every song seems to be straining to be a showstopper.” – Sandra Hall, The Sydney Morning Herald
“What makes it so frustrating is that director Jon M Chu is an established musicals master; his In the Heights is a modern classic of the form. But the corporate stretch-it-out-and-wring-it-dry approach here has been deadening.” – Robbie Collin, The Daily Telegraph
“For Good has little sense of movement, literally or emotionally – no profound revelations, no wonder or spectacle. All that’s to be done now is for each character to process, via standardised ballad, what they’ve learned.” – Clarisse Loughrey, Independent
“Yet the sensation of a work that, in translation from one medium to another, no longer defies gravity but sort of roughly plummets back down to terra firma can’t easily be shaken off.” – David Fear, Rolling Stone
“There hasn’t been a pre-planned ‘Part Two’ this disappointing since the second half of Andy Muschietti’s ‘It.’ At least nobody projectile vomits on Jeff Goldblum to the tune of ‘Angel of the Morning.'” – William Bibbiani, The Wrap
Ariana Grande, Cynthia Erivo, Jonathan Bailey, Jeff Goldblum, Marissa Bode, Ethan Slater, Michelle Yeoh, Bowen Yang, and Colman Domingo star in “Wicked: For Good” which opens in cinemas Friday.
