The bad reviews of Wicked: For Good proves why the film made one fatal mistake

It is no secret to say Wicked For Good has received a wash of much more negative views than the first film, and after watching it is also criticism that is very fair. Wicked is a musical I have seen many times, and it’s a well known fact that its second half is considerably worse than its very iconic first act. When you think of Wicked and the most famous aspects of the show that have crossed over into mainstream pop culture since its debut in the early 2000s, all of those moments are typically from the first act. Therefore, it was suitably nerve wracking when it was noted that Jon M Chu would be splitting the film adaptation, which people have wanted for YEARS, into two separate films. How would the second half fare on its own? Despite big box office success, the answer is – not as well. Here’s why the bad reviews critical failure of Wicked For Good proves one fatal flaw in Hollywood and its consistent determination to split stories up into two films.

The writing was on the wall

Wicked For Good has the harder job of making a film out of a plot that runs on stage at 70 odd minutes. Because of that, the film feels bloated – not really that it’s sluggish, but it just feels like jumping from scene to scene and wrapping things up. The first Wicked film was so successful because not only were the cast brilliant at it but because the songs in that half are inarguable. The school setting of Shiz keeps things light and full of exploration and wonderment and you enjoy Oz through the unlikely friendship that develops between Elphaba and Glinda.

Most Read

The actual reason Glinda can suddenly do magic in the ending of Wicked: For Good, spelled out

We FINALLY have juicy details about Rebecca and Bailey’s post-MAFS split – it sounds hella messy

Exactly what YouTuber Jack Doherty has been arrested for, and how long he faces in prison

Credit: Universal Pictures

It was declared by Chu that they had to have two films because Defying Gravity is such a curtain fall moment that you need a break to go anywhere after it. It is true that it’s a flaw of the musical that the end of act one is one of the best musical theatre songs ever made and one of the most visually striking moments. But that flaw is one you have to get on with when adapting the show for screen.

Whilst For Good has amazing songs too – notably the title track, No Good Deed and As Long As You’re Mine – the film had to add two new songs. This is standard fare for film versions of musicals as they clamber to hopefully bag an Oscar and a Grammy nom for best original song but the two tracks in For Good are not good at all. They slow proceedings down immensely.

Let’s be real…

Whilst it all is well and good saying Wicked For Good needed to be split into two films because of Defying Gravity, I think we can all assume more so this was done because of how much money this franchise has made and will continue to make. Why have one year of merch, press tours, brand collabs and general hype when you can have TWO years of it all and sold out screenings in cinemas! From a sales perspective, it’s understandable. Albeit tedious.

If Les Miserables can cope with being one long film and if the end of One Day More is not too much for audiences to deal with as “a curtain falls” moment – then Wicked would have been fine being one long movie. It would have been slicker, snappier and there would have just been space for us to all enjoy it as the big saga that it is.

Instead, the fate of Wicked For Good getting bad reviews is because of the fatal flaw to split it into two films. Now audiences less familiar with Wicked are going to realise what any fan of the show already knew: Act two just isn’t that good.

For more like this, like The Tab on Facebook.