Wicked: Part One (2024) (1 Viewer)

[Sam Favate]

Date Change... In Theaters Nov. 27, 2024

Oh, moving it up? You don't see that much these days.

 

[Alex...]

First Look

 

[Noel Aguirre]

I hope this fares better than The Phantom Of The Opera transition to film did. That was horrendous. As was Cats, Chorus Line, Dear Evan Hansen, etc etc

 

[Aaron Silverman]

The Cats movie was better than the original Broadway show (which I saw in NYC around 1987). I've seen dozens of Broadway shows, and Cats was the only one where I literally dozed off. The movie was completely ridiculous, but so am I and I had very low expectations.

I just hope I live long enough to see both Wicked movies. Sigh. . .

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

I’m glad I saw it but it wasn’t my favorite show ever. It’s the kind of thing where I might watch a single movie for family movie night but I’m just not into it enough to see two movies. The story has a beginning, middle and end and there’s nothing in my recollection of the show to suggest splitting it in two would improve it in any way.

Yeah, I'm still not crazy about seeing this as a 2-parter a year apart... and will probably just end up waiting for both to be released on disc or something instead... unless part 1 really surprises us...

I just came across this (older article) w/ more of their rationale for splitting it into 2 parts, which hadn't been mentioned here so far, but yeah, now, I can understand (somewhat) better... but still think it probably would be better to just do an intermission (like the old days w/ roadshow runs) instead although I get why Universal, movie theaters, et al would be extremely reluctant about that...

‘Wicked’ Songwriter Stephen Schwartz on Why the Movie Must Be a Two-Parter: Nothing Can Follow ‘Defying Gravity’

'Wicked' songwriter Stephen Schwartz, discussing why the film will be split in half, says nothing can follow Act 1 closer 'Defying Gravity.'

variety.com

Defying Gravity (at the end of Act 1?) probably does need at least an intermission... or some other kind of added transition. But a year-long "intermission" would seem ridiculous unless they really beef up both parts somehow, which I guess they're sorta planning to do (by going "additive" w/ changes)...

In general, I think I would even be willing to pay a higher admission price to see a much longer single film version of properties like these rather than seeing a half a film just come to a stop and being asked to come back a year or two later to see the rest. I think I’ve just reached a point between all of these two part films (and TV seasons with “mid season finales” and months or years between the first and second halves) that I’m just over it. It’s not dramatically satisfying.

Agreed. I too would certainly be willing to pay the premium for such (and may even be more willing to go see it in a theater than usual)... but I guess the Hollywood execs and beancounters just don't think that'd work at all w/ today's mainstream audience, which may well be true, if unfortunate...

There’s a difference between a film that has a complete beginning, middle and ending that includes unresolved elements to be addressed in a later work (like “The Empire Strikes Back”) and a film that just stops (like the recent “Dune”), and it seems that is a distinction that studios and filmmakers don’t quite understand in this present moment.

I didn't find the recent Dune to be too lacking in that way though... and even went to see it 2x at the Lincoln Sq IMAX (plus 2 more times in between on HBO Max), which is very rare for me. But yes, I'd certainly (much) rather pay extra to see both parts together... though a brief intermission would definitely be desirable as part 1 ran ~2.5hour as it was... OR maybe they should've (made and) released the 2 parts in a much shorter span than 2 years apart... but then again, surprisingly, this 2-year wait seems to have zipped by faster than I thought...

_Man_

PS: My apologies if it seems like I'm picking on you or something, Josh, w/ this follow-up so many months later. I was just looking to see if that article (or the included rationale) was shared here before, and then, just ended up following up from there...

 

[Alex...]

Cinemacon footage descript

Spoiler

Exclusive Footage Description: Although still very early in production, Universal Pictures ended their CinemaCon 2023 presentation with the first behind-the-scenes sizzle reel of director John M. Chu’s cinematic adaptation of the hit Broadway musical Wicked. The reel gave attendees a sense of the film’s humongous scale, with large immersive practical sets and stages being used in full force. This take on Oz carries the same technicolor feel as past adaptations, with the saturated color palette popping off from the screen. In terms of the production design, Wicked looks accurate to the classic The Wizard of Oz.

The entire cast ensemble was seen in their various whimsical costumes and make-up, including Cynthia Erivo as Elphaba Thropp, Ariana Grande as Glinda Upland, Jonathan Bailey as Fiyero Tigelaar, Jeff Goldblum as The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, Michelle Yeoh as Madame Morrible, and Bowen Yang as Pfannee. Throughout most of the reel, Ariana Grande and Cynthia Erivo’s rendition of “Defying Gravity” can be heard and it sounds as powerful as fans would expect. The dynamic between Glinda and Elphaba was heavily talked about, with the two main stars having a blast bouncing off each other with their differing personalities.

John M. Chu spoke highly of the film’s practicality, claiming that the crew planted 9 million real multi-colored tulips in one set that featured the expansive landscape of Oz. Early VFX of the flying monkeys was shown as well.

CinemaCon 2023: All Universal Pictures Updates

All new movie announcements and exclusive footage descriptions from Universal Pictures and Focus Features live from CinemaCon 2023.

discussingfilm.net

 

[Alex...]

 

[DaveF]

I completely for about this movie -- if I even knew about it. What happened to it the past decade?!?!

 

[cinerama10]

I hope this fares better than The Phantom Of The Opera transition to film did. That was horrendous. As was Cats, Chorus Line, Dear Evan Hansen, etc etc

I agree with you re the filmed musicals that you mentioned. A CHORUS LINE should never have been filmed.It is my all time favorite stage musical.I saw it originally in NYC twice during it very long run. Regarding CATS - it was filmed in a studio in London many years ago especially for DVD.It was John Mills final performance. A true rarity of filming a classic musical.

 

[TJPC]

Why are people so hard on these movie adaptations. I saw all of those on stage and my wife and I agreed that they were all better as movies (Except “9”!).
We saw “Cats” in New York and thought it was terrible and boring. I was actually trapped into seeing it again, and did not change my opinion. When we left the theatre after seeing the movie version, we agreed that it was terrible, but about the best that could be done with the source material.

 

[Sam Favate]

Isn't this a two-part movie? So, what wrapped? Part one (coming out this December)? Or the whole thing?

 

[Jake Lipson]

Or the whole thing?

I think the latter. They were shooting it simultaneously as one production.

 

[darkrock17]

Isn't this a two-part movie? So, what wrapped? Part one (coming out this December)? Or the whole thing?

It was shot back to back, the whole movie has now been shot.

Part 1 is Dec of this year and Part 2 most likely in 2025.

 

[cinerama10]

Why would anyone want to see half of a musical film and then wait 12 months in order to see the second half? This must be the most stupid, braindead and idiotic idea in cinema history.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Why would anyone want to see half of a musical film and then wait 12 months in order to see the second half? This must be the most stupid, braindead and idiotic idea in cinema history.

Why does the fact it's a musical make the idea more "stupid, braindead and idiotic" than making any movie span 2 or more parts?

 

[Chris Will]

Why would anyone want to see half of a musical film and then wait 12 months in order to see the second half? This must be the most stupid, braindead and idiotic idea in cinema history.

100% agree! Their reasoning that "nothing should follow "Defying Gravity" is silly". It's not like this is the greatest act 1 closing number ever and plenty of musical movies work just fine, with and without intermissions. I'm glad stage productions don't make you leave and come back 12 months later for act 2, making you buy another ticket in the process.

Why does the fact it's a musical make the idea more "stupid, braindead and idiotic" than making any movie span 2 or more parts?

I'm sorry but there is not enough material for 2 movies and I have criticized other adaptations for doing the same. The final 2 Harry Potter movies are my least favorite because the pacing is ruined by dragging it out over 2 movies. Same goes for Mockingjay parts 1 and 2. The Hobbit trilogy should have stuck to their original 2 movie plan, it would have been a tighter more evenly paced experience.

Wicked, the stage version, is somewhere around 2 and 45 minutes long (Act 1 is about 90 minutes, Act 2 about 75 minutes). So this is either going to be 2 short movies or they are also adding a bunch of junk not in the show. Both scenarios disappoint me as a fan of the stage show. A short movie that is only half the story, then a year long wait for the rest is going to suck. A 2 hour movie with crap not from the show added as filler will just be a repeat of the movies I mentioned above. Then we get to suffer the same a year later with part 2.

Give me one 3 hour movie with an intermission and I'm a happy camper. Or no intermission, we the audience can survive a scene immediately after "Defying Gravity".

 

[Alex...]

 

[Alex...]

First poster

 

[darkrock17]

Glinda in pink, trying to tie it into the classic film I see

 

[Tino]

I LOVED Wicked when I saw it on Broadway 4 years ago. A worthy expansion of the Oz universe imo. Can’t wait to see this. It looks great.