I won’t say I was kicking and screaming as my friend S and I settled into our seats for “Wicked, Part I,” but I was a reluctant attendee. I’d seen the stage play more than once, including a time on Broadway maybe fifteen years ago when we paid $300 a ticket for third-row seats. It was worth every penny.
The advance publicity for the production had put me off. First, the director, Jon M. Chu, split the work into two films with the first ending where the intermission is in the original production. Still, the first part rings in at almost three hours, the total length for the entire stage work.
I will say the movie was engaging, Elphaba and Galinda were appropriately cast, and the time passed quickly. There were at least three over-the-top ensemble numbers that remained true to the musical and a couple more quiet songs, like “I’m Not That Girl,” which charmed. The color of the work was beautiful, and the special effects were effectively special.
One reviewer noted that lengthening Part I enabled the relationship between Elphaba and Galinda to develop more fully than it does on stage. I could see that.
And who can argue with the success that, according to CBS News, “After fewer than ten days in theaters, the movie “Wicked” made more than $360 million worldwide, making it the highest grossing Broadway musical adaptation of all time.”
But as I thought about the movie since seeing it, I saw the same issues that are often present when a live-stage musical becomes a hot Hollywood property. There are nits to pick, quibbles to quib, and holes to poke.
Stay tuned for “Wicked, Part II” tomorrow.
Leave a Reply