Chances are you have seen the various Wicked collabs lining your grocery store shelves, taking over online ads, and seemingly popping up anywhere. From collaborations with water bottles to cleaning supplies, Wicked is a popular book-turned-musical-turned-movie that has left audiences with a tingly, lingering feeling in their hearts. The first movie had done incredibly well, so it is easy to assume that the sequel, Wicked: For Good, would also face the same kind of success. However, comparing the statistics of both movies revealed otherwise.
With a quick Google search, I’ve found that Wicked, the first movie that told the story of Elphaba and Glinda’s school days, had a rating of 88 percent Rotten Tomatoes. Despite all the hype that surrounded the movie when it was released, the score was lower than I had anticipated, but very positive nonetheless. But when I checked the Rotten Tomatoes rating for Wicked: For Good, they were certainly shocking. Again, this movie was incredibly promoted not just by the studio that produced it, but also by social media influencers, diehard Wicked fans, and even by regular civilians who enjoyed the first movie. However, it seemed as though this movie was not all that was advertised, because it got merely a 68% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. That number is way too low for a film that was eagerly anticipated by fans worldwide!
Now, the question to ask is: Does the rating of 68% on Rotten Tomatoes truly reflect the movie’s quality? There are many ways that people would go about answering this question, but where I stand, I give the albeit unexciting answer, kind of.
Let’s start with the positive aspects of the movie. There is no doubt that the music was enchanting. Ariana Grande’s graceful, yet powerful voice, combined with Cynthia Erivo’s striking and commanding tone, resulted in a beautiful, contrasting blend of elegance and influence. It was overwhelming, electrifying, yet impossible to escape. To say I was blown away by the music would be an understatement; I don’t even have a word that could describe the beauty of it. It was truly something that I wish I could hear for the first time again.
Alongside that, the film was also beautifully produced. The scenes, costume design, and backgrounds were truly exceptional. Everything was bright, bubbly, and of course, magical. It was like Oz had come to life and I was experiencing it too.
In contrast, while the acting wasn’t too bad, it almost felt too censored. Comparing the first and second movies, Wicked: For Good leaned too heavily into a younger audience, losing the edge that made Wicked so strong. What exactly does this mean? Well, in the first movie, it had darker, more unsettling imagery. A more gritty tone was emphasized. However, in the second movie, they chose to use a lighter, more family-friendly approach, which doesn’t align with the original musical.
They diluted the dramatic weight of the story, which sacrificed the intensity that made the first movie resonate with the audience. I definitely noticed this while watching the film. As I looked for the unsettling themes in the story, I found myself only being teased with the slightest bit of grit. I was disappointed at this detail. The decision to trade grit for accessibility only led to a weaker impact, resulting in me leaving the theater with shattered hopes of a more mature movie. I understand why the film’s intensity was lessened; the official age rating is 10 and up, but for older viewers like me, it was sad to see the potential of something never come.
