Also, in the original movie, the Wicked Witch already had a reason to be pissed: a house fell on her sister. Why do people need more than that very simple reason?
To be fair, the original story of oz is weird and morally ambigous enough for people to make weird assumptions I mean, canonically , The wizard of Oz is a fraud who used a little girl to kill and steal from the witch. Don't tell me that doesn't sound weird as hell
To their credit, Wicked is based on a musical. It's not it's own spinoff story that Hollywood just invented. And Hollywood took the Wizard of Oz movie from Frank Baum's novels.
The reason most musicals don’t have a recording is because of some crazy copyright stuff. I don’t know the exact details, but getting the rights to a musical is a wild process.
No one is as much as annoying than someone who hates musicals but still watches them to criticize them. Next time, I'm gonna buy artichokes, which I hate, and I'll complain to the vendor about it lol 0 sense
All his videos are negative reviews. He’s embodying “hater” in 2024, and under the thin veneer of criticizing everything I’m sure there lies a very unimpressive man
6:14 about the whole “discrimination” thing, did bro remember that there’s a whole subplot about talking animals being scapegoated in Oz’s society and having both their rights and intelligence taken away?
I kind of dislike the casting, but I'm giving it a bit of a pass because of the green aspect. Then again, we know that she was only cast as black for ONE SINGLE REASON, and it wasn't "this woman was the best actor for the part."
@@SelrisitaiYall say that about literally every black person who is recognized for their talent, and hello white or black they would paint the actress GREEN. Stop making everything about race. It reads as insecure about your own lack of abilities. Her singing and control is otherworldly, and she has a top rate Broadway background, and movie experience. If anything Ariana, who has the celebrity name, was the less qualified lead for her role (not that she wasn’t qualified though)
I would argue Elphaba isn’t necessarily “good.” She does, indeed, set off with good intentions. She is trying to do the right thing. But, she’s also arrogant and naive and due to her lack of understanding of the potential consequences of her actions, she ends up hurting people she loves. So, she ends up using that hurt and anger as a reason for choosing to become what she’s already been accused of being. It’s the whole point of the song “No Good Deed.” It is in this song wherein she questions her own motives. Elphaba does eventually realize her own arrogance as reflected in the song “For Good.” It begins with her sadly singing “I’m limited,” a reference to the line “Unlimited. Together we’re unlimited,” which she sings earlier to Glinda in Defying Gravity. She begins with the belief that she, herself, can do anything and can also fix all the ills of the world. But, by the end, we see both Elphaba and Glinda suffer from arrogance and pride. The only difference was their motivations. Or, at least what they told themselves their motivations were. So, while I’m also not a fan of Disney’s obsession with taking evil villains and marking them relatable, I think Wicked has more nuance. It isn’t really excusing Elphaba. It is a tragedy partially due to Elphaba’s decisions even if she originally had good motivations behind them. And it is a reflection on arrogance.
Anti-fanfic, really. Apart from a little girl going to a fantasy realm, there's really no resemblance between Alice's adventure and Dorothy's ongoing adventures.
It's well known that Wicked (Musical) is a critique of the ASSOCIATIONS we/society/people makes about good and bad (especially aesthetically) versus what is ACTUALLY good and bad. Does evil in real life actually come in ugly wrapping? Is goodness always pretty?
There’s a thought process, that no matter how ugly a person is, if they have a kind heart and personality it’ll shine through and make them beautiful. While someone with a bad personality will always look ugly.
I usually don’t comment on stuff but it needs to be said: the notion that “re-context work from original authorship is inherently dishonest/creatively lacking/immoral” is bad take imo. Given how many creative works are made in the first place. For example: You like the Disney Renaissance movies? Those would be gone. No interpretations of beauty and the beast, no Hunchback, no Lion King since that’s based on Hamlet etc. The practice is not inherently wrong. It depends on how you use it. Is it blatantly lazy? A repainted copy in a new format to cash in? Or does it take the time and effort to craft something different through it with intent. It’s the standing on the shoulders of giants vs ripping-off argument, one is a common option of inspiration, the other just plain bad. I’m no musician, but I can admire how works build upon each other creatively this way. One can be wholly original, but will it be good? How can we tell what’s good or not with out looking back? Without looking at the great stories/songs/movies or art/history/culture that inspire/shaped us? Or will we just put them on a pedestal and never try to question them, never see what they missed, and never attempt something of similar or greater quality again.
Actually, the question is the one he harped on: moral inversion. Are you suggesting that the Lion King inverts Hamlet? Don't think so, in fact, it is rather too slavish an adaptation to be bothered with if it weren't that the score is so memorable (if not to my taste, overall). Beauty and the Beast is even better and one of the least Disneyfied musicals ever made. The live action remake is the one to push into the memory hole because it DOES invert the moral standing of the original fairy tale as well as the animated adaptation.
@@Larizard That's not the question here. ALL adaptations have to knead the soiurce, as it were. Re-reading LOTR, I am stunned at how thoroughly Petter & Co scrambled where events happen, what gets said and by whom. The point is rather is there any kind of fixed moral standard? There should be and in these wildly morally pluralistic times, such a consensus moral North Star does not exist and whole nations operate under moral rules entirely at odds with others in ways that cannot avoid eventual mutual conflict up to and including war. In the present case, Baum's universe had an odd moral take but it was vaguely consistent with the moral order of his day (and to which many people still subscribe). It turns out to be actually not well-constructed as a subcreated world and one can take much exception to a lot that is narrated in it. One could argue a lot with Alice in Wonderland for the same kind of reasons. However, the Wicked universe is literally the Baum universe turned inside out and reversed. That is a kind of vandalism, making characters who in the original represented one kind of moral order to have exactly the opposite orientation morally. Now, the Golden Compass universe was quite LOTR turned inside out, but in that case, the author went ahead and subcreated his own world, with his own characters doing their own thing. Wicked steals existing characters, so it has a poorer ground to stand on.
@@PaulSmall422I mean, Baum remixed and subverted his own stories all the time. He adapted "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz" into a stage musical where King Pastorius tries to retake the throne of the Emerald city from the Wizard. In that production, Dorothy and her friends side with the Wizard. But when he wrote the sequel books, he had Pastorius' daughter Ozma retake the throne and Dorothy's friends back her. She and Dorothy become best friends and remain so for the rest of the series. The Wizard is initially cast in a pretty villainous role in the second book, conspiring with Mombi to get rid of the rightful heir, but the later books retcon this to make Mombi more responsible so the Wizard can get a redemption arc. In that stage musical he also has the Tin Man reunite with his lost love who has gone mad pining for him and their reunion is joyful. But in the books the Tin Man finds she had another lover after him who was also turned into tin. The two metal men track down their ex to find that she's cobbled together their lost body parts into a Frankenstein's Monster-like man who she has married. They leave her again, feeling slightly creeped out. Baum wasn't like Tolkein with a detailed and consistent world building. And he wasn't really trying to make broad moral or political points most of the time. He just had fun thinking up wacky characters and scenarios.
@@lucasoheyze4597 You tell me what other singer could handle the role of Elphaba when Cynthia can literally belt HIGHER than Elphaba’s notes and still be healthy and supported?? You know nothing about singing
Lmao! I never realized one little group of fans could be so weak minded that they were offended ppl didn't like some film that no one will gaf abiut next week.😂
I can say that, generally, stage shows are hesitant to do proshots because (particularly for shows still on broadway) they are terrified that it will drive ticket sales down significantly. People are dropping an absurd amount of money on Broadway tix, so if they know they can just see a proshot on Netflix or some other service, they'll spend their money on a show they CAN'T otherwise see. Others will maybe point to Hamilton as an exception, and rightfully so, but Hamilton was so absurdly popular that it would still sell out the stage despite a recording being available. There's also this attitude towards the "ephemoral" nature of theatre, and that performances should remain on the stage and that pro-shots dilute the performances to something less real. Personally, I think the culture is dumb and I think shows that have completed their runs should have proshots released. I'm surprised that more artists don't push for it. The most ridiculous thing is that proshots DO EXIST for most Broadway shows, but they are extremely hard to access and are only shown to specific people (I believe NYU theatre students are able to watch them for research, for example).
Pro shots can only be viewed by NYU theater students and the students can only view a show once. So even to the few people that have access it’s ridiculously difficult. It begs the question why record the show at all.
@@alansmithee5595 It's important to archive for future generations. You never know who will need to research an actor, staging, score, etc. for scholarly work. It's not being used for entertainment purposes. When people entertain you, they need to be compensated. Filming and distributing stage shows for entertainment purposes is probably a contractual nightmare. Film and theater unions are different and each would need to be involved. This would inflate a budget with no promises of a return on investment.
Pro shot are available for companies that buy the full rights, for example, partners in other countries, as they have the right to mount the show exactly like the original if they want to, and also to those doing revivals, who usually want to make something completely different. Also PBS, BBC and other TV stations used to show some plays and musicals, as cultural outreach, but i haven't seen that practice anymore, except during the pandemic that Android Lloyd Weber, and others put several of their shows online, for a limited engagement.
I think it is a genuine fear. I never saw Hamilton when it was out with the original cast because not only were the tickets expensive but super hard to come by. And I don't live near NYC so getting there would not be like going to a local show. However, since I saw the pro recording with the original cast on Disney, I don't really have a desire to see a live show on Broadway because I feel like whoever is in the show they cannot possibly compete with the original cast, so I will go see something else if I get a chance to visit Broadway. On the other hand, some people would nevler go to any Broadway show because it's either too expensive or too far so a recording is a great way to share with those people.
The funny thing is, the Wicked Witch of the West was barely in the first Oz book. Her role was expanded in the 1939 movie and that's where Gregory Macguire got his inspiration for his novel Wicked and Stephen Schwartz and Winnie Holzman for the musical. In the books, the reoccurring villain is actually the Nome King, who some of you may recognize from the 1985 "Return to Oz" movie.
@@michaelmahoney9364I don't know, it depends on how much of a snowflake childhood one might have. There are children that saw worst in real life like it was normal and became normal people.
I mean traumatizing in that a lot of people in my generation remember it, not sitting in a corner crying. All the good children's stories are upsetting in some way, otherwise they'd be boring and unremarkable.
Baum's own vision contradicted itself from book to book, and many different authors have added Oz books to the genre. It has a very loose canon, probably more so than any other fantasy world.
The Wicked books are no more fan fiction than the 1939 film… back then, it was about acquiring rights, but since 1954, The Wizard of Oz has been in the public domain. You you know how loose of an adaptation the ’39 film is of the 1900 original book? Here are a few spoilers… the Witch of the West isn’t at all green or even remotely similar in any way, and Glinda wasn’t the one to send Dorothy to see the Wizard. You’re so upset at this revisionist standpoint but lack basic understanding of the franchise in its entirety 😂 The books’ original author had no input in the ’39 film, and it completely reimagined his concept of Oz. The point Wicked is trying to make is how far of a reach political corruption and propaganda can have. And Wicked isn’t the only one to subvert expectations within the franchise… the ’39 film, The Wiz, Return to Oz, Tin Man, and Emerald City all take the source material and flip it on its head. Being upset about a 30 year old book and its 20 year old musical adaptation NOW is just you wanting to generate hate content and engagement farming 🙄 The movie is an excellent adaptation of the musical. It’s a 1:1 remake that expands scenes to allow for world building… if musical theater isn’t your thing, then go do something that is 🙄
Fun fact, all of the singing in the movie was all recorded live while recording the movie. They did that so they could feel more connected to the words they were singing while acting.
watching elphaba fly over the sky with monkeys chasing her was one hell of an experience in cinema, but stage show def convey emotions and singing more thoroughly so both are good no need to compare
You attribute too much good will to filmmakers 😂 the studio requested to make it into film to make MONEY They can care less of people see it on Bway or not 😂😂😂 their ultimate goal is cash not Art
No it is not. There are very well executed filmed stage productions all over PBS for example; it is easily doable. In fact the stage cast of the various Wicked productions undoubtedly themselves have a DVD; I have my own collection of plays and musicals I was in!
@@salvadorromero9712 that’s your experience. Not everyone has the opportunity to see it live. It’s the reason why people think we need to adapt video games into tv shows and movies. So it’s more accessible to the masses. Movies are undeniably more accessible to most people than stage productions
I happened upon this video to see an interesting take or differing opinion from my own, but disappointed to see that its so sloppy? Using 'turning your grandmother's house into a strip club" as a metaphor to describe Wicked being adapted is so lazy and so ignorant of the fact that art is very much referential and self-referential. It does not exist in a vacuum. All art is an inspiration or a reference!! Even in the most original of works. If you create art that is so damn good, it will inevitably spawn creations that grounds itself in it. Sure, some of it is derivative, but you will come across gems that remain faithful to the source material. Let's be real, expecting truly original stories from artists all the time is simply unrealistic.
There's a difference between "all art is inspired by something else, nothing exists in a vacuum" and "literally every blasted movie to come out in the last 10 years is either a sequel, a prequel, a remake, a reboot, an extended universe (psuedo-sequel), or otherwise SOMEHOW based on an existing beloved IP" or "this movie is based on a musical that was based on a series of fanfiction that was based on a film adaptation that was based on one book from a fiction series."
And I'm so grateful for that. Never been a fan of the original book... or the movie... or the book that inspired the musical... But I'm glad they exist so that I can enjoy Wicked the Musical and now the movie based on that. Art doesn't exist in a vacuum@@drawingdragon
The part where you said that Elphaba’s already a girl boss at the start making her seem shallow, but that’s what gives her depth? In this one idk about the stage (haven’t seen it yet) as Glinda said, “She acts like she doesn’t care but she does..” she acts like it doesn’t bother her and she puts walls up to protect herself.
You seem like a very shallow minded type of a guy. I don't think any of it is that deep, people find happiness in different things and if that's musicals then so be it. And it's okay that it didn't match up to your interests and your likes but this wasn't a review - this was criticism hidden as advice. Lastly, the generalising based off sex did not put you in a good light and it's a shame this was my first impression of you.
As someone who likes musicals (Wicked not being one of them though) yes, I don't understand why they never release pro shot plays. The footage exists for some, but apparently it's left to rot on a shelf somewhere. And then you have to be careful what you wish for, because then you get Jekyll and Hyde with Hasselhoff or a Phantom with a nuked set. A lot of performances would be lost to time were it not for bootlegs.
I think it has something to do with the price of rights and royalties. I do volunteer tech work for a theatre group and they have to pay thousands of dollars just to use a logo/rent scripts, and they are not allowed to stream the content on RUclips for more than a few days or they could get sued. I also wonder if theatre figured out: if we stream live performances or record them, we'll be shooting ourselves in foot financially the way orchestras did with recordings. People might stop going to the theatre. People are doing that even with films now bc of streaming.
@@jennowak3160 Oh, this is cool to know! Thanks! I remember they experimented with this for a while with operas at the Met. Not sure if it worked out though.
If you hate musical theatre then why did you see an almost 3hr movie based on a Broadway musical? Looking for content to complain about and record I guess.
Movies like The Hunger Games, The Lord of the Rings, The Twilight Saga, Harry Potter, and The Matrix keep us on the edge of our seats because we genuinely don’t know how things will unfold. The suspense, twists, and unanswered questions are what make waiting for the next part so exciting. But with Wicked, we already know how it ends thanks to the musical! Splitting it into two parts feels unnecessary when the story's resolution is no mystery. Hopefully, the extra time adds something new, but it feels like they’re stretching it out for no reason.
Except for the Matrix, all of your examples are adaptations of books. So people did know how they were going to end. I have no idea what you're on about.
also, I’ve never watched the wicked broadway, but my friends who have said they enjoyed it being stretched out, because they felt like in movie form they would want time to breathe
You know there was trouble on the horizon when they tried to remake the original theater poster as homage and you saw Cynthia Erivo’s scowl without lipstick instead of a smile.
@@danielt4479 And I guarantee that you're wrong. She's an easily-offended Hollywood actress. I'm not. She's in the epicentre of the dumpster fire that is social justice hysteria and narcissism.
As a theatre kid here is my take: yeah idk why theres no proshot or decent recording. there was a very good one on youtube a few months ago but ofc they copyright struck that. But hey, they shouldnt be surprised when people watch wicked themed slime tutorials or sail the seven seas. honestly i think the complaint about not liking the concept of wicked bc its essentially revisionism or whatever it is a very pretentious and unserious criticism. the original wicked (book version) was used for the author to explore themes of human nature, when writing he decided it would be effective to use the world of Oz as an allegory. It isnt just a lazy cheap rewrite, so much depth, lore, and characters are added that wasn't in the wizard of oz is that it might as well be its own thing entirely. honestly the only real issue i can think of in the same ballpark of that complaint is that wicked the stageshow sugarcoats or removes some of the depth in the original novel. in regards to the runtime. i was initially worried, however the movie flew by in the theater. and after having watched the movie i understood what jon chu meant when he said it could only work as 2 parts. in the stage show act 2 felt very rushed due to time constraints and i think this will be fixed in the movies as i noticed in act 1 scenes had more time to breathe and develop more. i think this anti-woke bs has gone too far. i guess i sort of understood where it was coming from the beginning but now people just assume DEI if an actor is a poc, as if they didn't audition like everyone else for the role, and did better than them which is why they were chosen. To deliberately choose not to acknowledge this, is frankly racist and harmful to the actors and poc as a whole. cynthia wasn't "alternative casting" to be woke or whatever. in broadway black women and other women of color have played elphaba. shes green, all the actor needs is green facepaint, and singing talent and theyre good to go. plus imo she was the strongest actor in the movie, brought a refreshing new interpretation to the role of Elphaba, and has one of the best voices of this generation. the irony is yall will complain about the movie directors focusing too much on race if the main cast isnt 100% white, when it's yall who focus way too much on the ethnicity of actors than anyone else. also, gay actors cant be cast either?? wth overall i think the movie was a perfect adaptation, i also wish they kept some lines in from the stage show especially in dancing through life jonathan bailey didnt say "whats the most swankified place in town." and the plot hole in that same sequence when madam morrible wasnt upset that the whole school snuck to the ozdust which they rewrote to be some 'illicit place' but ive come up with my own headcanon to justify that.
To be fair, Madame Morrible is shown to be working directly with the Wizard and is an evil criminal, so I doubt she’d care about Ozdust and probably parties there with the rest of Shiz
It’s not “alternative casting” for Elphaba…there’s been black actresses playing that role over the past 20 years - as well as Hispanic and other ethnicities that are darker than “white”….. the character is *green* race of the actress has 0% to do with the casting. Cynthia killed the acting and singing - also her chemistry and voice blended well with her co-lead…that’s why she was cast.
I love hearing all the diffrent opinions people have of the movie. Thank you for taking time to make this video. Also a little tid bit on the mixing and sequencing it looked so great beacuse the did most of the singing live ❤💕
the whole video basically scream straight guy who thinks musicals will crushes his fragile masculinity, so he hate on musicals but even with so much hate he still go to watch it just so he can understand the story to talk shit on it without looking dumb. Honestly the moment you say you hate musicals I already know this video is not genuine facts and just your biased opinion as a hater. Also "alternative casting for elphaba" what does that even mean? Like is it because she's Black? Now we're crossing a certain territory here. I'm not going to get too into it but just know elphaba is green, she is green, she is a green women. Just saying... just saying...a black women playing doesn't change that she's green... just saying...so idk where alternative casting came from...
As a musician too. There are lessons we can teach our students from musicals they want to learn. We can teach them to think critically. Encourage them to wisely discern lyrics. Ask them big questions about harmony and dissonance. I cant do that if I dont go see it. Plus we'll have a year to diss Part Two. I eould not reccomnend the Wicked books, nor anyone under 14 or 15 seeing this musical.
well since the same person who created the original soundtrack for the stage show was the same person who produced the movie version (stephen shwartz), i think it’s hus to change and alter
@ where’d u hear that? The Delusional Wire? Y’all just love to cry about movies. That’s all that y’all are good at lol Majority loves it. Like I said, I feel sorry for you as your brain obviously hasn’t evolved enough
@@andiotrebac6583 No, the majority of people hate it, and will never see it. Lol. Fortunately for the creators, that doesn't mean they won't make a profit.
@@destroymarxism2.0 The tickets are literally always sold out, the theaters are full the Broadway show is literally the longest running show on Broadway and u seriously think their fans wouldn’t watch the movie. Use your brain sometimes lol I feel bad for you being on an ongoing brainwash from The Delusional Wire Y’all keep creating lies but none of use will believe you lol
I’m a 36 year old guy who went to this movie with my kids. This movie is certainly not made for me, but it was fine, even good at times. I wouldn’t be so hard on the film, I think it would be A LOT harder to make a better Wicked than it would be to make a worse version
7:50 - "I'd respect it, if it came from the mind of Frank-" Yeah, it's like what if Ender's Shadow had been written by a totally different guy. (Ender's Game book but it's from the perspective of the Bean character _during_ the events of Ender's Game) Certain ideas can, practically, only be executed respectfully by the OG.
She was given a really miserable childhood, just because her skin was green, and her behaviour was rather 'strange'. But this was a baby and a young child. That was awful. That being said. I just can't get past the fact that The Wicked Witches in the Oz books weren't powerful and fighting injustice. The wizard in The Wizard of Oz is no saint. But he becomes a lot better in later books. The Wicked Witches though are evil! They enslave Munchkins and Winkies, and The Flying Monkeys aren't friends, they too are slaves. Looking at Elpheba in the musical. I just can't see her as that witch.
You hate musicals. Perfectly entitled to....so why bother reviewing one? Just ignore it. The movies you would love would probably be loathed by the millions who're going to make Wicked another success of Barbie proportions.
Why can't people do their research when they have the urge to do a review about something? This video is clearly biased and lacks basic knowledge on its main topics.
@seventycross0yt175 It's well known that Wicked is a critique of the ASSOCIATIONS we/society/people make about good and bad (especially aesthetically) versus what is ACTUALLY good and bad. Does evil in real life actually come in ugly wrapping? Is goodness always pretty?
The book that this based on was the first to re evaluate villans. However, it was a dark Orwellian political allegory that had lots of Ray Bradbury influence. The play and film isn't that.
The book _Wicked_ rotted. It was a half-literate re-imagining of an infamous female villain as the bland and hapless heroine of a murky American-civil-rights-era story... what a bore! The Wicked Witch of the West was portrayed as an insufferable, witless college student undergoing radicalisation, absolved of any and all wrongdoing because of -- her SKIN COLOUR. "Oh, she's not really wicked, she's just perceived that way because she's _green_ ...." But whatever her skin colour, as a reader I perceived her as an _idiot_ , and I was horrified to learn that the wretched book had been turned into a musical that people had apparently gone to see!
My wife watched a movie last night called Holiday in the Wild and thoroughly enjoyed it. I witnessed a clearly green screen scene where Rob Lowe said to a baby elephant "go make something of yourself", my wife didn't batter an eye, I immediately texted my mates.
I’m not a musical theater person either but I thoroughly enjoyed the film and disagree with a lot of the points made in the video. Case in point: ratings complaints are point-blank superficial, but even within your own criticism you ignore the story’s overt themes of cultural genocide against animals (which certainly seem to fall under “discrimination” lol). Also, respectfully, Cynthia Erivo wasn’t “alternate casting” - she was brilliant and in my opinion completely stole the show. YOU are the one reducing her casting to her race, not the filmmakers. I actually think that you come across as the very “one insufferable contrarian” you complain about because you can’t handle art that draws on other people’s work. Having studied visual art, literature, and music, I can safely say that you’re missing a solid 95% of all great creative works if you cut out all stuff that isn’t “purely original.” Also, the whole “avoid musical theater” thing is dumb and makes you sound like an insecure boy who feels implicitly unsafe about his identity in female dominated spaces. I’m a straight dude but idgaf about whether watching this shit makes me masculine or not - art is art, and the themes of Wicked are timeless and nuanced in ways that make for a really rich viewing experience regardless of my gender identity. Engaging with the full complexities of the work rather than spouting bad faith rage-baiting might spare you the dogpile that is this comment section.
I'm simple, I'm enjoyed the input having not seen either or ever wanting to. Additional, I like a good dark or cheesy musical and did (abstract thought) watch Rings of Power (followed you from that). I think you did a good job.
I absolutely disagree with your take on the concept of Wicked. For context, I haven't seen the show and I have little interest in musical theatre so I have no horse in this race in that sense. As someone who is a fan of a lot of the things you have covered on your channel, I understand where you are coming from. Time and time again we have had our stories stolen from our fandoms by greedy corporations, maliciously transformed into something unrecognizable, thrown back in our face and told we are the problem for feeling disrespected. I absolutely hate the current remake culture too and I completely agree that these things are terrible and should have been stopped years ago. But the fact of the matter is Wicked does not fall under this category. There is nothing inherently wrong with exploring a universe wider than it's initial portrayal. There is nothing wrong with wishing to explore characters in different scenarios, or perhaps take a completely different spin on a character and see where the story goes from there. One could get into a legal discussion about rights and profits and whatever but that is not really what I'm here to talk about. The thing that separates the WIckeds from the Last Jedis and the Rings of power is the fact that this is clearly a project born of genuine love and passion for the original, which is also an answer to your question of "how come the musical fans are getting good adaptations and we aren't." This is a story clearly made by people who genuinely understand, love and respect the material and wish to create something in that universe and share it with existing fans along with a whole new generation, unlike something like the modern Star Wars which is made by people who dislike the source material and are only interested in using it as a platform for their diaries. Fandom culture, and I mean true fandom culture, not just Hollywood suits reading fandom twitter to find out the best way to bait money from fans, is an incredibly important cornerstone of good stories being able to exist in the first place. True fan works, made out of actual love are not the problem here, and I feel like you are conflating two completely different entities into one and demonizing the whole thing. Without these things existing, so many works of fiction would have never happened in the first place, whether that be potential authors never picking up the pen for the first time, a piece inspired by something else never having been made, etc. Going back to Star Wars again since I mentioned it so much in this post, the entire concept of it is just Lucas taking an already established formula and saying "What if it was in space instead", which according to the way I interpreted your take on these things sounds like something you would be against, no? I might have misunderstood your point, but what I'm trying to say is that I feel this is a topic more nuanced than the opinion you gave and these are two completely different things that have been lumped into one. One is a further exploration into a world/character/concept made out of genuine love and passion for something and a wish to share that with others, and another is a malicious lazy way to make money or tear down something you don't like and replace it with something you do. To me it is all about intention, and it is very clear when something is one or the other. Sorry for wall of text, hope I was able to make myself a little clear lol
You seem like someone with pretty horrendous opinions. You complain about it being PG for “discrimination” and say that besides “people being mean to her for her green skin is about it,” when there is a literal subplot of citizens being rounded up, silenced, and put in cages, kinda betrays pretty shit media literacy on your part.
Yeah, him completely skipping over the Animals sideplot is baffling. On top of that calling Cynthia's casting as Elpheba "alternate" casting? The hell? What makes her different than the "default" casting you'd be expecting, hmm? If there were any concerns about acting ability from the cast that I heard, it was people worried Ari wouldn't be able to pull it off and was cast solely for the singing.
@@andrewshirley9240 agreed, but what do you expect from someone who unironically uses the word "woke" to describe things? making that comment about cynthia and then another about bowen, completely disregarding their talent in favor of dividing people because of "wokism," it's truly insane
I don’t normally like musicals or want to watch them, especially after accidentally watching joker 2 this past year which I did not know was a musical. This one was surprisingly good, sure there was a slow burn being that the runtime was 2 hours and 40 minutes long. But the movie kept you interested in it the whole way through. Singing was top notch. I would recommend
I read the first of the Wicked books, which deals with Elpheba's birth and childhood. And it's true, she gets a rough ride, even as an innocent baby. But it wasn't the same Oz as L Frank Baum gave us, and I wasn't happy about that. Frankly. I think it would have been better to have it in a completely other world than Oz, because then the idea of this morally ambiguous young woman standing up to injustice would be very stirring. But those of us who know the Oz books can say that this is NOT the Wicked Witch of The West. She doesn't fight injustice, she and her sister are the injustice. The Wicked Witch of The East enslaved the Munchkins, the Wicked Witch of the West enslaved the Winkies. She certainly didn't rescue the flying monkeys. She had them as slaves too, and got them doing terrible things. Yes. The 'humbug' Wizard is something of an asshole when Dorothy and Friends come to him for help. But when Dorothy meets him again in a later story, he returns with her to Oz, having admitted that he knows no magic. He becomes a student of Glinda, who actually finds him a great student. And along with herself. He's one of the only people trusted to work magic in Oz, because they always use it for the Oz People's benefit. The Princess of Oz is a descendant of an ancient fairy queen and she's adored by everyone, because she genuinely takes care of them.
Every "authentic" idea or piece of work is essentially a person's unique adaptation of something they’ve seen or experienced. In my opinion, gatekeeping these creations or stories is limiting. Innovation and progress, whether in medicine, tech, or literature, stem from people building on existing ideas and infusing them with their own creativity. This process of adaptation and contribution is what drives evolution and improvement in our society.
@@jonny47988Bro they literally have behind the scenes footage of them singing on set. That’s why the soundtrack version and the film version sound completely different.
As i have not seen any comment on it I feel it necessary to give credit to your mighty moustache. I can only field a full beard well and my wife forbids me to only have the stashe. Keep it.
Won't it be something when they finally come out with Lord of the Rings the musical? Can you just imagine Frodo and Sam holding hands and singing their way up to Mount Doom?
Glad to see you branch out and review this. I didn't love it, I already have issues with Wicked's story, but it was enjoyable. I think the biggest miss was Elphaba, who spent the majority or her time looking like she's about to anime cry and didn't have the snark of her stage counter part.
This guy doesn't know how to critique. One of the worst youtubers. I don't even like wicked (the stage show as I haven't seen the movie) but you can tell this guy is leaning too far into his biases and not seperating the subjective from the objective enough.
8:00 by this logic, you would have to hate the original wizard of oz too, they changed several major plot points and the personality of a lot of the main characters. the wicked witch of the west is barely in the original books but she is the main villain for most of the movie
I’m baffled at how much of a simpleton you are. The moment you said that the only discrimination was towards elphaba, I had to stop watching. The discrimination towards the animals is the driving force behind elphaba’s biggest decisions. If it weren’t for that, she would have stayed with the wizard and would have never been labeled as wicked. Also, would it kill you to do some research on theater and why it’s against the craft to simply release life performances on blueray? Just because you have no respect for something doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t educate yourself before releasing commentary on the subject.
The reason the theatre kids got their relatively accurate reboot was because the thing being rebooted already is, as you pointed out, a deliberate subversion of a classic story. The things we love were still pure and original so we get repulsive bastardization reboots.
I give you a lot of credit for getting that line about Wicked being that “one insufferable contrarian you get on every online forum ever made” out with a straight face. Pot meet kettle lmao
@@pizzafreddaacolazione Your opinions on the Divine Comedy don't somehow make Wicked better so I don't get your point That's like saying Pride and Prejudice exists so Twilight can't be bad because it's also a love story
@@drawingdragon i just proved the point that fanfiction exists since the dawn of times and that is studied in school. not whether is good or bad. for me? the best. but I mainly said that to provoke lol Anyway, if you ask any student in Italy, they'll reply that they hate the Devine Comedy. mainly the difficult lexicon or how Dante resolves poorly some situations, like fainting at every end of every chapter or distorting the bible itself. I personally kind of like the Devine Comedy, and I recognize that something decent can come out of a fanfiction lol
@@baalgodofrain no right, because on broadway they use “blind casting” we’ve literally had Brittney Johnson on broadway as Glinda, like 😭they could literally casted whoever they wanted, the choice of having Cynthia as Elphaba was perfect because she was BORN to play this character, no such thing as “alternative casting” these clowns hate representation that isn’t for their demographic like
@@Julián-w1j I doubt that colourblind casting is truly occurring in most film productions. They are unlikely to pass up the opportunity to cast a minority for one of the leads to score points with part of the audience and drum up interest in production. Just the same as they wouldn’t want to cast 2 black women as the leads and risk alienating part of the audience in some way. I think that casting is more calculated than just a matter of meritocracy. Hamilton seems like it comes pretty close though. Maybe they went all the way.
@@chrishalliday748 Cynthia Erivo was in a Broadway musical and got rave reviews and a Tony award for it. She’s also been nominated for Oscars for acting and music. And won a Grammy. Anyone who looks at her casting as Elphaba and thinks “hmm… she’s black… this might not be a meritocracy” is racist idc idc idc
The Elphaba in this movie is not ‘less emotional’, quite the opposite. You can see her reactions and facial expressions are so emotionally driven, and just a ‘girl boss’ wannabe but not. She is emotionally affected by the opinions of others and her choices in the movie is emotionally driven, and not calculated. So no, she is very emotional and not in a good way. Especially her victim mindset.
One small rebuttle, if children and families watch the 1939 W.O.Z, and see Judy garland's performance as a result of Wicked, then I think that's a win !!! Wicked making the W.O.Z film relevant and prominent again is a huge cultural win!
Great point. Every Christmas I was on the edge of my seat terrified the wicked witch would get her claws on Toto. I loved all dogs with all of my little child heart. What a truly fantastic film. Who gives a fk why the wicked witch was wicked?? The musical was the very, very worst show I have ever seen.
@@automnejoy5308 I guess you haven't noticed the culture of erasure that has been growing these last few years in the culture. Fair enough. The passage of time alone is also a huge threat to the 39' film. The Wicked movie brings it back to prominence.
I watched Wicked with my family earlier this week and I thought it was a great movie. The musical itself seems like a shallow thematic mess with one of the weakest plots I have ever encountered in any piece of media, but that’s not the movie’s fault. The movie itself does a lot right for being a full-blown blockbuster in 2024. I haven’t seen a “full-budget” movie (or whatever the film equivalent of a “AAA game” is) this good probably since Everything, Everywhere. The casting, pacing, score, and set designs are the best parts. Despite the plot making no sense, and the relationship between Glinda and Elphaba being ridiculously shallow and based completely on misunderstandings, selfish desires, and unmerited passivity, the movie did a very good job at making the emotional moments feel powerful and real. For what it is I thought Wicked 2024 was successful.
This is exactly the product you get from a culture who has worshipped Youth to the point where imaturity becomes desirable and moral ambiguity serves as a placeholder for the concept of freedom that can't be understood.
Well done critique, good points made. I am a fan of musical theatre, but then I'm old, I've seen many professional productions which were well done & true to their sources; most were original & not copies or adaptations of other material. Your point that _Wicked_ is an inversion of the _Wizard of Oz_ is well founded, and for that reason alone I won't bother seeing this show in either its stage version or the film version. By most accounts the stage version is the superior, and I agree that there should be films of stage shows. I've also heard many accounts that the actress playing the Witch is insufferable & a girl-boss with attitude; that's another good reason not to see the film. As an American, I grew up with Rogers & Hammerstein and Lerner & Lowe; very American musicals, and I miss the America that they celebrated... which in many ways no longer exists, just like the England of 50 years ago- forever gone but fondly remembered, and better than the chaotic present we now inhabit. Cheers!
I refuse to be forced to have an opinion on Wicked, so I just want to note that your distaste for the rejuvenation of old stories, old motifs, etc, must make it difficult to appreciate Shakespeare, right? And Chaucer. And Edgar Allen Poe. And ...
What’s funny is how common certain critiques you made, seem to be among creators who make similar content to yours. Just a quick scroll through your thumbnails and their titles pretty much says it all.. A certain content creator comes to mind who also reviews films and shows with a very . . . . . . . . How should I say “modern male” perspective lol
It’s kind of sad that you spent so much time and money on the musical and the film just to hate it. I don’t think Wicked subverts the Wizard of Oz at all… In The Wizard of Oz The Wizard is still a con man- he tells a small girl go kill a witch because he has no real power. In Wicked, he tells Elphaba to read the grimmerie because he has no real power. The moral of the story in The wizard Of Oz is that through helping others, friendships and believing in yourself, you can do anything. Wicked the musical, has the exact same moral and message. To millions of people Wicked is a symbol of resistance, self actualization and a desire to uplift those who are marginalized and beat down by society. I hope the next film you watch is something you enjoy.
He's not really hating here just expressing a different experience and opinion than yours. Your whole social justice warrior commentary here is hilarious. Are you always this preachy and giving lectures to people?
@@grosbeak6130 I'm sorry that "social justice warrior commentary" was what you got from that. It's unfortunate because he spent a LOT of money seeing a stage musical that he didn't like and then spent more money seeing a movie based on it that musical he ALSO didn't like. Clearly it wasn't his cup of tea and he doesn't really value plays or musicals as a form of entertainment. And that's okay, he doesn't have to. Just as he's allowed to have his opinion, millions of others (including myself) are allowed to have ours. I was simply giving the counter argument that it doesn't subvert the message of The Wizard of Oz like he was accusing Wicked of doing. And explaining what millions of other people love about it and why it's important and applicable to our world today. If you have a valid counter argument, I'm all ears.
@@notenoughtreble here are your own words: "To millions of people Wicked is a symbol of resistance, self actualization and a desire to uplift those who are marginalized and beat down by society." Yep, "social justice warrior" lingo and talking points if I ever heard any. You're probably more deeply influenced by today's zeitgeist then you are aware of. And then you imply that this is exactly the same thing with the original Wizard of Oz movie in 1939 saying that that's the moral of it. Also you make condescending remarks about how unfortunate it is that he really didn't appreciate or enjoy the movie because he spent so much money on it. Do you see how you sound here in all of this? Your problem is that you reduce the original film to some kind of moral or moralizing it. Turning it into a morality tale. And then you went from there. But the original wizard of Oz didn't have all of those talking points in mind. To me fairy tales are what they are, beyond the moralizing within today's lingo, sensibilities and mentality of the current zeitgeist of which you seem totally caught up in. Now I do agree that the movie Wicked today does indeed reflect that i.e. the social justice warrior mentality that you expressed in the quotation I gave of you at the beginning here. So I don't disagree with you there. But that's the very reason I don't like the reimagining and interpretation and morality play of Wicked has on the original Wizard of Oz movie for our modern contemporary audience. And on top of that, the whole idea of the wicked witch and the good witch are just really in the beginning and in the end just besties. They're just really buddies. You know, it's all good with them really. But If you ever read the original Grimm's fairy tales and the original Wizard of Oz along with the 1939 movie this is far from that kind of mentality and sensibility. But you are altogether free to interpret it that way, and I'm sure maybe some others do too. But that's not how I look at the nature of true fairy tales especially of the past. I don't reduce those to that kind of thing - only that kind of level of vision. True and original fairy tales are dark and deep in many ways beyond merely our kind of reimagining and superficial moralizing vision of today's Wicked. The original 1939 wicked witch in Wizard of the Oz really has nothing to do with this navel gazing version and story of Wicked, and the redemptive vision that this new movie gives to her. No, the wicked witch in The Wizard of Oz is wicked, but in today's zeitgeist that is not acceptable and will not do as your statement again declares: "To millions of people Wicked is a symbol of resistance, self actualization and a desire to uplift those who are marginalized and beat down by society." That's not the witch in The Wizard of Oz in 1939, nor in the book. That only exists in today's social justice warrior sensibilities and mentality.
@@grosbeak6130 So. You said a lot of word salad and The only rebuttal you seem to have is that Fairytales SHOULDN'T have morals? Grimm's Fairytales, stories and parables have ALWAYS had moral messaging behind them since the beginning of time. Suggesting that writing, poetry and art are supposed to be consumed at face value and that's it, is crazy. You can't use "The current zeitgeist of today" in an argument about a book that came out 30 years ago. The problems of our current society are not new. And just like L. Frank Baum, Gregory Maguire used World of Oz to convey a message about friendship, society, critical thinking and being true to yourself. Gregory just looked at it through a more mature, detailed and nuanced lens. You clearly don't have an argument here other than "I don't like it because I don't like it."
@notenoughtreble of course you would respond that way to my analysis and commentary on your comment. It goes along with your superficial and two-dimensional reading of the subject matter at hand. You're hilarious. 😆 But consistent.
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
Also, in the original movie, the Wicked Witch already had a reason to be pissed: a house fell on her sister. Why do people need more than that very simple reason?
What's funny is she seemed to get over her sister's murder pretty quick when glinda mentioned those Ruby slippers, then it was like what sister who? 😆
The original, the book and the play are vastly different beasts
To be fair, the original story of oz is weird and morally ambigous enough for people to make weird assumptions
I mean, canonically , The wizard of Oz is a fraud who used a little girl to kill and steal from the witch. Don't tell me that doesn't sound weird as hell
To their credit, Wicked is based on a musical. It's not it's own spinoff story that Hollywood just invented. And Hollywood took the Wizard of Oz movie from Frank Baum's novels.
@@darkthrone7201 Well, I guess when you're called the Wicked Witch, sentimentality isn't really a concern. LOL!
The reason most musicals don’t have a recording is because of some crazy copyright stuff. I don’t know the exact details, but getting the rights to a musical is a wild process.
Also why did he frame that question as if the fans ahem excuse me “prancing ninnies” are the fault for why there aren’t more procasts of musicals?
Just watch Southpark
lol the episode about wicked is hilarious and promotes you know what on football Sundays lol
The "prancing ninnies" would be the people oing all that singing and dancing. But still, it's not even them making those rules.@@scoopityboop
@@JaylaStarr 🎶Take me away to that special place (that blow*** place!)🎶
It's funny that you bring up Howl's moving Castle because that was also based on The wizard of Oz.
lol
In what way?
Not really it was a book and original source material
No one is as much as annoying than someone who hates musicals but still watches them to criticize them.
Next time, I'm gonna buy artichokes, which I hate, and I'll complain to the vendor about it lol
0 sense
All his videos are negative reviews. He’s embodying “hater” in 2024, and under the thin veneer of criticizing everything I’m sure there lies a very unimpressive man
It's not about that. The movie is just bad and boring, simple
@@Sla123-t5k ok buddy.
@@Sla123-t5kBro has not watched the movie
@Mailmao I watched, and if it wasn't for the screaming, it would be a nice 3 hour nap
I am honestly impressed that you watched the live show one night and then the movie the next morning. VERY thorough, and I, for one, appreciate that.
The Oz books are incredibly subversive.. in the same way Alice in Wonderland is.
They are also surprisingly funny especially the 3rd one.
I felt the same way about the Remus stories. The animals are complete a-holes to each other. It's basically South Park in 1870s Georgia
Ozma of Oz was great, I agree.
I like TikTok of Oz the best though because it had so many levels of weird.
Exactly, if you look at Baum's female characters, he's clearly an early feminist. Oz is almost exclusively populated with powerful baddies.
I loved all of my Oz books. Not this movie. We left after an hour. Done!
"Subversive?" How on earth do you work that out?
6:14 about the whole “discrimination” thing, did bro remember that there’s a whole subplot about talking animals being scapegoated in Oz’s society and having both their rights and intelligence taken away?
No he didn't because obviously he doesn't actually think critically ☠️
Animals in our society don't have rights...
@@carolinem5515 You missed the point
that'd require thinking skills, which clearly he doesn't have
@@carolinem5515This is supposed to be a different world though, where animals have the intellectual ability of humans
“Alternate casting” and the character is green
I kind of dislike the casting, but I'm giving it a bit of a pass because of the green aspect. Then again, we know that she was only cast as black for ONE SINGLE REASON, and it wasn't "this woman was the best actor for the part."
@@Selrisitaiwhy wasn’t she the best actor for the part? She played the role phenomenally.
@@SelrisitaiYall say that about literally every black person who is recognized for their talent, and hello white or black they would paint the actress GREEN. Stop making everything about race. It reads as insecure about your own lack of abilities. Her singing and control is otherworldly, and she has a top rate Broadway background, and movie experience. If anything Ariana, who has the celebrity name, was the less qualified lead for her role (not that she wasn’t qualified though)
@@Selrisitailiterally what 😭 she’s better than idina
@@jungwonfan-i3wshe isn't in my opinion. Idina was better. Vocally and otherwise.
I would argue Elphaba isn’t necessarily “good.” She does, indeed, set off with good intentions. She is trying to do the right thing. But, she’s also arrogant and naive and due to her lack of understanding of the potential consequences of her actions, she ends up hurting people she loves. So, she ends up using that hurt and anger as a reason for choosing to become what she’s already been accused of being. It’s the whole point of the song “No Good Deed.” It is in this song wherein she questions her own motives.
Elphaba does eventually realize her own arrogance as reflected in the song “For Good.” It begins with her sadly singing “I’m limited,” a reference to the line “Unlimited. Together we’re unlimited,” which she sings earlier to Glinda in Defying Gravity. She begins with the belief that she, herself, can do anything and can also fix all the ills of the world.
But, by the end, we see both Elphaba and Glinda suffer from arrogance and pride. The only difference was their motivations. Or, at least what they told themselves their motivations were.
So, while I’m also not a fan of Disney’s obsession with taking evil villains and marking them relatable, I think Wicked has more nuance. It isn’t really excusing Elphaba. It is a tragedy partially due to Elphaba’s decisions even if she originally had good motivations behind them. And it is a reflection on arrogance.
Bs, gross manipulation into perversion
I see the book as a fan-fiction of the original. I always thought the Wizard of Oz was the American version of Alice in Wonderland.
Anti-fanfic, really. Apart from a little girl going to a fantasy realm, there's really no resemblance between Alice's adventure and Dorothy's ongoing adventures.
Which book? Wicked or the Wizard of Oz?
@@saoirse2963 The OP sees "Wicked" as a fanfic of "The Wizard of Oz." It's more of an anti-fanfic, really.
...The discrimination in Wicked isn't talking about Elphaba as much as the Animals who are literally having their right to speak and work taken away
Which happened in exactly none of the Oz books.
@MaskedMan66 It's the core of the book Wicked
@@MaskedMan66 Embarrassing
@@MrsRen I mean the real Oz books.
@@MaskedMan66 The movie is based on the musical based on Wicked by Gregory Maguire though so what you're talking about doesn't fucking matter.
It's well known that Wicked (Musical) is a critique of the ASSOCIATIONS we/society/people makes about good and bad (especially aesthetically) versus what is ACTUALLY good and bad. Does evil in real life actually come in ugly wrapping? Is goodness always pretty?
Yes and yes. Duh.
@@Falconer22Just saying, Josef Stalin was kind of a handsome chap
still dumb
There’s a thought process, that no matter how ugly a person is, if they have a kind heart and personality it’ll shine through and make them beautiful. While someone with a bad personality will always look ugly.
@@Falconer22 wrong lmao
I usually don’t comment on stuff but it needs to be said: the notion that “re-context work from original authorship is inherently dishonest/creatively lacking/immoral” is bad take imo. Given how many creative works are made in the first place. For example: You like the Disney Renaissance movies? Those would be gone. No interpretations of beauty and the beast, no Hunchback, no Lion King since that’s based on Hamlet etc. The practice is not inherently wrong. It depends on how you use it. Is it blatantly lazy? A repainted copy in a new format to cash in? Or does it take the time and effort to craft something different through it with intent. It’s the standing on the shoulders of giants vs ripping-off argument, one is a common option of inspiration, the other just plain bad. I’m no musician, but I can admire how works build upon each other creatively this way. One can be wholly original, but will it be good? How can we tell what’s good or not with out looking back? Without looking at the great stories/songs/movies or art/history/culture that inspire/shaped us? Or will we just put them on a pedestal and never try to question them, never see what they missed, and never attempt something of similar or greater quality again.
Actually, the question is the one he harped on: moral inversion. Are you suggesting that the Lion King inverts Hamlet? Don't think so, in fact, it is rather too slavish an adaptation to be bothered with if it weren't that the score is so memorable (if not to my taste, overall). Beauty and the Beast is even better and one of the least Disneyfied musicals ever made. The live action remake is the one to push into the memory hole because it DOES invert the moral standing of the original fairy tale as well as the animated adaptation.
"Everything is a remix." That's how creativity works.
@@Larizard That's not the question here. ALL adaptations have to knead the soiurce, as it were. Re-reading LOTR, I am stunned at how thoroughly Petter & Co scrambled where events happen, what gets said and by whom. The point is rather is there any kind of fixed moral standard? There should be and in these wildly morally pluralistic times, such a consensus moral North Star does not exist and whole nations operate under moral rules entirely at odds with others in ways that cannot avoid eventual mutual conflict up to and including war.
In the present case, Baum's universe had an odd moral take but it was vaguely consistent with the moral order of his day (and to which many people still subscribe). It turns out to be actually not well-constructed as a subcreated world and one can take much exception to a lot that is narrated in it. One could argue a lot with Alice in Wonderland for the same kind of reasons. However, the Wicked universe is literally the Baum universe turned inside out and reversed. That is a kind of vandalism, making characters who in the original represented one kind of moral order to have exactly the opposite orientation morally. Now, the Golden Compass universe was quite LOTR turned inside out, but in that case, the author went ahead and subcreated his own world, with his own characters doing their own thing. Wicked steals existing characters, so it has a poorer ground to stand on.
@@PaulSmall422I mean, Baum remixed and subverted his own stories all the time.
He adapted "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz" into a stage musical where King Pastorius tries to retake the throne of the Emerald city from the Wizard. In that production, Dorothy and her friends side with the Wizard. But when he wrote the sequel books, he had Pastorius' daughter Ozma retake the throne and Dorothy's friends back her. She and Dorothy become best friends and remain so for the rest of the series. The Wizard is initially cast in a pretty villainous role in the second book, conspiring with Mombi to get rid of the rightful heir, but the later books retcon this to make Mombi more responsible so the Wizard can get a redemption arc.
In that stage musical he also has the Tin Man reunite with his lost love who has gone mad pining for him and their reunion is joyful. But in the books the Tin Man finds she had another lover after him who was also turned into tin. The two metal men track down their ex to find that she's cobbled together their lost body parts into a Frankenstein's Monster-like man who she has married. They leave her again, feeling slightly creeped out.
Baum wasn't like Tolkein with a detailed and consistent world building. And he wasn't really trying to make broad moral or political points most of the time. He just had fun thinking up wacky characters and scenarios.
well put
There was no bad casting in Wicked. Cynthia got the role because she has the vocal stamina REQUIRED for this role.
Delusional
@@lucasoheyze4597 You tell me what other singer could handle the role of Elphaba when Cynthia can literally belt HIGHER than Elphaba’s notes and still be healthy and supported?? You know nothing about singing
Lmao! I never realized one little group of fans could be so weak minded that they were offended ppl didn't like some film that no one will gaf abiut next week.😂
@LCTmusic683 talking out your a$$
She’s creepy
I can say that, generally, stage shows are hesitant to do proshots because (particularly for shows still on broadway) they are terrified that it will drive ticket sales down significantly. People are dropping an absurd amount of money on Broadway tix, so if they know they can just see a proshot on Netflix or some other service, they'll spend their money on a show they CAN'T otherwise see.
Others will maybe point to Hamilton as an exception, and rightfully so, but Hamilton was so absurdly popular that it would still sell out the stage despite a recording being available.
There's also this attitude towards the "ephemoral" nature of theatre, and that performances should remain on the stage and that pro-shots dilute the performances to something less real. Personally, I think the culture is dumb and I think shows that have completed their runs should have proshots released. I'm surprised that more artists don't push for it. The most ridiculous thing is that proshots DO EXIST for most Broadway shows, but they are extremely hard to access and are only shown to specific people (I believe NYU theatre students are able to watch them for research, for example).
Pro shots can only be viewed by NYU theater students and the students can only view a show once. So even to the few people that have access it’s ridiculously difficult. It begs the question why record the show at all.
@@alansmithee5595 It's important to archive for future generations. You never know who will need to research an actor, staging, score, etc. for scholarly work. It's not being used for entertainment purposes. When people entertain you, they need to be compensated. Filming and distributing stage shows for entertainment purposes is probably a contractual nightmare. Film and theater unions are different and each would need to be involved. This would inflate a budget with no promises of a return on investment.
@@alansmithee5595you can stream them now.
Pro shot are available for companies that buy the full rights, for example, partners in other countries, as they have the right to mount the show exactly like the original if they want to, and also to those doing revivals, who usually want to make something completely different. Also PBS, BBC and other TV stations used to show some plays and musicals, as cultural outreach, but i haven't seen that practice anymore, except during the pandemic that Android Lloyd Weber, and others put several of their shows online, for a limited engagement.
I think it is a genuine fear. I never saw Hamilton when it was out with the original cast because not only were the tickets expensive but super hard to come by. And I don't live near NYC so getting there would not be like going to a local show. However, since I saw the pro recording with the original cast on Disney, I don't really have a desire to see a live show on Broadway because I feel like whoever is in the show they cannot possibly compete with the original cast, so I will go see something else if I get a chance to visit Broadway. On the other hand, some people would nevler go to any Broadway show because it's either too expensive or too far so a recording is a great way to share with those people.
The funny thing is, the Wicked Witch of the West was barely in the first Oz book. Her role was expanded in the 1939 movie and that's where Gregory Macguire got his inspiration for his novel Wicked and Stephen Schwartz and Winnie Holzman for the musical. In the books, the reoccurring villain is actually the Nome King, who some of you may recognize from the 1985 "Return to Oz" movie.
Also Known As the movie, along with The Neverending Story, that traumatized a generation!
@@michaelmahoney9364 neverending story was traumatizing!? i loved it as a kid.
@@bluelunarmonkeytarot8533 Yeah, great film. But there's a moment there that's pretty rough for a kid, just like Bridge to Tabitha.
@@michaelmahoney9364I don't know, it depends on how much of a snowflake childhood one might have. There are children that saw worst in real life like it was normal and became normal people.
I mean traumatizing in that a lot of people in my generation remember it, not sitting in a corner crying. All the good children's stories are upsetting in some way, otherwise they'd be boring and unremarkable.
For someone hating musicals, you criticize the movie for not having enough singing. Interesting.
Very suspicious
So I can't criticise a wine bar for not selling wine unless I like wine?
and it's a dumb take, because this is all the songs in Act 1. Bro is being a reactionary.
@@GeoffInfield I'd be extremely suspicious of any self-professed wine haters having any sort of knowledge of wine vintages.
The film is filled with singing, like every few minutes, so he's daft saying that!
Baum's own vision contradicted itself from book to book, and many different authors have added Oz books to the genre. It has a very loose canon, probably more so than any other fantasy world.
6:35 um... the entire plot with the animals???
The guy barely paid attention lmao
That plot made no sense and lacked any good reasoning
@@laziestmonk6289how did it not make any sense? It’s very straightforward
The Wicked books are no more fan fiction than the 1939 film… back then, it was about acquiring rights, but since 1954, The Wizard of Oz has been in the public domain. You you know how loose of an adaptation the ’39 film is of the 1900 original book? Here are a few spoilers… the Witch of the West isn’t at all green or even remotely similar in any way, and Glinda wasn’t the one to send Dorothy to see the Wizard. You’re so upset at this revisionist standpoint but lack basic understanding of the franchise in its entirety 😂 The books’ original author had no input in the ’39 film, and it completely reimagined his concept of Oz. The point Wicked is trying to make is how far of a reach political corruption and propaganda can have. And Wicked isn’t the only one to subvert expectations within the franchise… the ’39 film, The Wiz, Return to Oz, Tin Man, and Emerald City all take the source material and flip it on its head. Being upset about a 30 year old book and its 20 year old musical adaptation NOW is just you wanting to generate hate content and engagement farming 🙄 The movie is an excellent adaptation of the musical. It’s a 1:1 remake that expands scenes to allow for world building… if musical theater isn’t your thing, then go do something that is 🙄
As a theatre kid I wish I could just get a blu-ray of every musical
Fun fact, all of the singing in the movie was all recorded live while recording the movie. They did that so they could feel more connected to the words they were singing while acting.
Must have wrecked their larynxes depending on how many takes were needed.
That all by itself is impressive, not to mention, the scores, the choreography, the director's talent. So much to observe! Critical eye or not.
Which seems impractical. The reason actors in movie musicals lipsynch is because shots usually require multiple takes.
As a theatre person, I would much prefer watching a recording of the actual stage show over a movie.
The movie still kept some of its theater elements.
watching elphaba fly over the sky with monkeys chasing her was one hell of an experience in cinema, but stage show def convey emotions and singing more thoroughly so both are good no need to compare
Your point about not being able to easily see the stage production IS why they made it a film...
Lol no it’s not. They just want money and to subvert our morals.
You attribute too much good will to filmmakers 😂 the studio requested to make it into film to make MONEY
They can care less of people see it on Bway or not 😂😂😂 their ultimate goal is cash not Art
No it is not. There are very well executed filmed stage productions all over PBS for example; it is easily doable. In fact the stage cast of the various Wicked productions undoubtedly themselves have a DVD; I have my own collection of plays and musicals I was in!
A film is very different from a stage production, and not a substitute.
@@salvadorromero9712 that’s your experience. Not everyone has the opportunity to see it live. It’s the reason why people think we need to adapt video games into tv shows and movies. So it’s more accessible to the masses. Movies are undeniably more accessible to most people than stage productions
I happened upon this video to see an interesting take or differing opinion from my own, but disappointed to see that its so sloppy? Using 'turning your grandmother's house into a strip club" as a metaphor to describe Wicked being adapted is so lazy and so ignorant of the fact that art is very much referential and self-referential. It does not exist in a vacuum. All art is an inspiration or a reference!! Even in the most original of works. If you create art that is so damn good, it will inevitably spawn creations that grounds itself in it. Sure, some of it is derivative, but you will come across gems that remain faithful to the source material. Let's be real, expecting truly original stories from artists all the time is simply unrealistic.
No, he is describing the wizard of oz being adapted into wicked, which is adapted into a stage play, which is adapted into a two part movie.
There's a difference between "all art is inspired by something else, nothing exists in a vacuum" and "literally every blasted movie to come out in the last 10 years is either a sequel, a prequel, a remake, a reboot, an extended universe (psuedo-sequel), or otherwise SOMEHOW based on an existing beloved IP" or "this movie is based on a musical that was based on a series of fanfiction that was based on a film adaptation that was based on one book from a fiction series."
And I'm so grateful for that. Never been a fan of the original book... or the movie... or the book that inspired the musical... But I'm glad they exist so that I can enjoy Wicked the Musical and now the movie based on that. Art doesn't exist in a vacuum@@drawingdragon
Real question here....if Elphaba had been cast as a White Woman with the EXACT same storyline...would any of you care?
She's green. No one gives a shit about Cynthia Erivo's skin color but people like this reviewer.
The part where you said that Elphaba’s already a girl boss at the start making her seem shallow, but that’s what gives her depth? In this one idk about the stage (haven’t seen it yet) as Glinda said, “She acts like she doesn’t care but she does..”
she acts like it doesn’t bother her and she puts walls up to protect herself.
You seem like a very shallow minded type of a guy. I don't think any of it is that deep, people find happiness in different things and if that's musicals then so be it.
And it's okay that it didn't match up to your interests and your likes but this wasn't a review - this was criticism hidden as advice.
Lastly, the generalising based off sex did not put you in a good light and it's a shame this was my first impression of you.
I mean the book it’s based on is interested in the idea of inherent evil, and uses Oz and the Witch as a touchstone to discuss that
As someone who likes musicals (Wicked not being one of them though) yes, I don't understand why they never release pro shot plays.
The footage exists for some, but apparently it's left to rot on a shelf somewhere.
And then you have to be careful what you wish for, because then you get Jekyll and Hyde with Hasselhoff or a Phantom with a nuked set.
A lot of performances would be lost to time were it not for bootlegs.
I think it has something to do with the price of rights and royalties. I do volunteer tech work for a theatre group and they have to pay thousands of dollars just to use a logo/rent scripts, and they are not allowed to stream the content on RUclips for more than a few days or they could get sued.
I also wonder if theatre figured out: if we stream live performances or record them, we'll be shooting ourselves in foot financially the way orchestras did with recordings. People might stop going to the theatre. People are doing that even with films now bc of streaming.
They have a streaming website for broadway shows.
@@jennowak3160 Oh, this is cool to know! Thanks! I remember they experimented with this for a while with operas at the Met. Not sure if it worked out though.
I do agree, considering you can buy dvds of shakespeare plays, I think there's a real market there :/
How I wish there was an official HD release of Jekyll & Hyde with literally anyone else...
If you hate musical theatre then why did you see an almost 3hr movie based on a Broadway musical? Looking for content to complain about and record I guess.
Movies like The Hunger Games, The Lord of the Rings, The Twilight Saga, Harry Potter, and The Matrix keep us on the edge of our seats because we genuinely don’t know how things will unfold. The suspense, twists, and unanswered questions are what make waiting for the next part so exciting. But with Wicked, we already know how it ends thanks to the musical! Splitting it into two parts feels unnecessary when the story's resolution is no mystery. Hopefully, the extra time adds something new, but it feels like they’re stretching it out for no reason.
Except for the Matrix, all of your examples are adaptations of books. So people did know how they were going to end. I have no idea what you're on about.
What you on💀 they were all books, and people who are cultured read the books first… so yeah 90% of people knew what was gonna happen.
Nust have misses the book Empire Strikes Back...my bad...not sure I'm "on anything" a weird comment that you posted....haha
@@Mikesworldna You didn't list the Empire Strikes Back. But nice attempt to obfuscate.
also, I’ve never watched the wicked broadway, but my friends who have said they enjoyed it being stretched out, because they felt like in movie form they would want time to breathe
You know there was trouble on the horizon when they tried to remake the original theater poster as homage and you saw Cynthia Erivo’s scowl without lipstick instead of a smile.
I bet she introduce herself with her pronouns
@@IainFrameI guarantee you think about pronouns more than she does
@@danielt4479 And I guarantee that you're wrong. She's an easily-offended Hollywood actress. I'm not. She's in the epicentre of the dumpster fire that is social justice hysteria and narcissism.
As a theatre kid here is my take:
yeah idk why theres no proshot or decent recording. there was a very good one on youtube a few months ago but ofc they copyright struck that. But hey, they shouldnt be surprised when people watch wicked themed slime tutorials or sail the seven seas.
honestly i think the complaint about not liking the concept of wicked bc its essentially revisionism or whatever it is a very pretentious and unserious criticism. the original wicked (book version) was used for the author to explore themes of human nature, when writing he decided it would be effective to use the world of Oz as an allegory. It isnt just a lazy cheap rewrite, so much depth, lore, and characters are added that wasn't in the wizard of oz is that it might as well be its own thing entirely. honestly the only real issue i can think of in the same ballpark of that complaint is that wicked the stageshow sugarcoats or removes some of the depth in the original novel.
in regards to the runtime. i was initially worried, however the movie flew by in the theater. and after having watched the movie i understood what jon chu meant when he said it could only work as 2 parts. in the stage show act 2 felt very rushed due to time constraints and i think this will be fixed in the movies as i noticed in act 1 scenes had more time to breathe and develop more.
i think this anti-woke bs has gone too far. i guess i sort of understood where it was coming from the beginning but now people just assume DEI if an actor is a poc, as if they didn't audition like everyone else for the role, and did better than them which is why they were chosen. To deliberately choose not to acknowledge this, is frankly racist and harmful to the actors and poc as a whole. cynthia wasn't "alternative casting" to be woke or whatever. in broadway black women and other women of color have played elphaba. shes green, all the actor needs is green facepaint, and singing talent and theyre good to go. plus imo she was the strongest actor in the movie, brought a refreshing new interpretation to the role of Elphaba, and has one of the best voices of this generation. the irony is yall will complain about the movie directors focusing too much on race if the main cast isnt 100% white, when it's yall who focus way too much on the ethnicity of actors than anyone else. also, gay actors cant be cast either?? wth
overall i think the movie was a perfect adaptation, i also wish they kept some lines in from the stage show especially in dancing through life jonathan bailey didnt say "whats the most swankified place in town." and the plot hole in that same sequence when madam morrible wasnt upset that the whole school snuck to the ozdust which they rewrote to be some 'illicit place' but ive come up with my own headcanon to justify that.
Yup totally agree. You said everything I was feeling about this review
To be fair, Madame Morrible is shown to be working directly with the Wizard and is an evil criminal, so I doubt she’d care about Ozdust and probably parties there with the rest of Shiz
It’s not “alternative casting” for Elphaba…there’s been black actresses playing that role over the past 20 years - as well as Hispanic and other ethnicities that are darker than “white”….. the character is *green* race of the actress has 0% to do with the casting. Cynthia killed the acting and singing - also her chemistry and voice blended well with her co-lead…that’s why she was cast.
!!!and mind you the girl is green
Yeah it just sucks that she doesn't know what a publicist is
So why hire a black just to paint her makes no sense plus the wicked witch was white
@@claudeyaz if youre talking about that poster drama, she's already retracted her statement and apologized for it.
@@up-set1451 She said she should talk to her friends first, She still did the damage to her image, she still needs a better publicist.
I love hearing all the diffrent opinions people have of the movie. Thank you for taking time to make this video. Also a little tid bit on the mixing and sequencing it looked so great beacuse the did most of the singing live ❤💕
the whole video basically scream straight guy who thinks musicals will crushes his fragile masculinity, so he hate on musicals but even with so much hate he still go to watch it just so he can understand the story to talk shit on it without looking dumb.
Honestly the moment you say you hate musicals I already know this video is not genuine facts and just your biased opinion as a hater.
Also "alternative casting for elphaba" what does that even mean? Like is it because she's Black? Now we're crossing a certain territory here.
I'm not going to get too into it but just know elphaba is green, she is green, she is a green women.
Just saying... just saying...a black women playing doesn't change that she's green... just saying...so idk where alternative casting came from...
As a musician too. There are lessons we can teach our students from musicals they want to learn. We can teach them to think critically. Encourage them to wisely discern lyrics. Ask them big questions about harmony and dissonance. I cant do that if I dont go see it. Plus we'll have a year to diss Part Two. I eould not reccomnend the Wicked books, nor anyone under 14 or 15 seeing this musical.
For someone who hates musical theatre so much you know an awful lot about it.
well since the same person who created the original soundtrack for the stage show was the same person who produced the movie version (stephen shwartz), i think it’s hus to change and alter
Inception levels of "based on" lmao
The fact that people hate this movie is mind blowing to me
I almost feel sorry for people like you
Majority hate it.
@ where’d u hear that? The Delusional Wire? Y’all just love to cry about movies. That’s all that y’all are good at lol
Majority loves it. Like I said, I feel sorry for you as your brain obviously hasn’t evolved enough
@@andiotrebac6583 No, the majority of people hate it, and will never see it. Lol. Fortunately for the creators, that doesn't mean they won't make a profit.
@@destroymarxism2.0 The tickets are literally always sold out, the theaters are full
the Broadway show is literally the longest running show on Broadway and u seriously think their fans wouldn’t watch the movie.
Use your brain sometimes lol
I feel bad for you being on an ongoing brainwash from The Delusional Wire
Y’all keep creating lies but none of use will believe you lol
@@andiotrebac6583 His brain hasn't evolved enough because he didn't like a movie? You know people are allowed to have different opinions right?
I’m a 36 year old guy who went to this movie with my kids. This movie is certainly not made for me, but it was fine, even good at times.
I wouldn’t be so hard on the film, I think it would be A LOT harder to make a better Wicked than it would be to make a worse version
7:50 - "I'd respect it, if it came from the mind of Frank-"
Yeah, it's like what if Ender's Shadow had been written by a totally different guy.
(Ender's Game book but it's from the perspective of the Bean character _during_ the events of Ender's Game)
Certain ideas can, practically, only be executed respectfully by the OG.
She was discriminated against and the animals were as well
It’s fiction
She was given a really miserable childhood, just because her skin was green, and her behaviour was rather 'strange'. But this was a baby and a young child. That was awful.
That being said. I just can't get past the fact that The Wicked Witches in the Oz books weren't powerful and fighting injustice. The wizard in The Wizard of Oz is no saint. But he becomes a lot better in later books. The Wicked Witches though are evil! They enslave Munchkins and Winkies, and The Flying Monkeys aren't friends, they too are slaves. Looking at Elpheba in the musical. I just can't see her as that witch.
Poor woman.
You hate musicals. Perfectly entitled to....so why bother reviewing one? Just ignore it. The movies you would love would probably be loathed by the millions who're going to make Wicked another success of Barbie proportions.
Why can't people do their research when they have the urge to do a review about something? This video is clearly biased and lacks basic knowledge on its main topics.
Wrong
@@seventycross0yt175 you are such a loser go touch grass
@seventycross0yt175 It's well known that Wicked is a critique of the ASSOCIATIONS we/society/people make about good and bad (especially aesthetically) versus what is ACTUALLY good and bad. Does evil in real life actually come in ugly wrapping? Is goodness always pretty?
You’re dumb as hell
@@seventycross0yt175 that's all you say lmao. You don't even have arguments
i didnt anticipate you being so vehemently anti-musical
My my, people can have a different experience and opinion than you!! Shocking.
Lots of people dislike musicals.
@@grosbeak6130 but to have such a hatred for musicals? And still reviewing one? Like atp you're just setting yourself up to not have a good time
@@grosbeak6130 but to have such a hatred for musicals? And still reviewing one? Like atp you're just setting yourself up to not have a good time
@@frediemelperenaxiii235 he gave it a shot. I don't see the big deal here why so many people are whining about his review. Again, he gave it a shot.
Thank you for sacrificing yourself on something i had no intention to see, very cool.
Maybe you'd like Matt Walsh's new film ?
@palmereldritch7777 You bet!
@@hispanicfarmboy Isn't it amazing how i can gauge someone's taste in movies :-)
@@palmereldritch7777 So clever of you!
Who tf is Matt Walsh XD
if comparing the movie to the stage show for 15:39 minutes was a video
The book that this based on was the first to re evaluate villans. However, it was a dark Orwellian political allegory that had lots of Ray Bradbury influence.
The play and film isn't that.
Yes but there is another half but next year and that's where the darker elements kick in.
And in the book, Elphaba wasn’t a hero like the play and movie make her out to be. She was merely the POV character.
The book _Wicked_ rotted. It was a half-literate re-imagining of an infamous female villain as the bland and hapless heroine of a murky American-civil-rights-era story... what a bore! The Wicked Witch of the West was portrayed as an insufferable, witless college student undergoing radicalisation, absolved of any and all wrongdoing because of -- her SKIN COLOUR. "Oh, she's not really wicked, she's just perceived that way because she's _green_ ...." But whatever her skin colour, as a reader I perceived her as an _idiot_ , and I was horrified to learn that the wretched book had been turned into a musical that people had apparently gone to see!
“Camera seemed to be attached to a startled arthritic jack hammer” - true artistry haha
My wife watched a movie last night called Holiday in the Wild and thoroughly enjoyed it. I witnessed a clearly green screen scene where Rob Lowe said to a baby elephant "go make something of yourself", my wife didn't batter an eye, I immediately texted my mates.
I’m not a musical theater person either but I thoroughly enjoyed the film and disagree with a lot of the points made in the video. Case in point: ratings complaints are point-blank superficial, but even within your own criticism you ignore the story’s overt themes of cultural genocide against animals (which certainly seem to fall under “discrimination” lol). Also, respectfully, Cynthia Erivo wasn’t “alternate casting” - she was brilliant and in my opinion completely stole the show. YOU are the one reducing her casting to her race, not the filmmakers.
I actually think that you come across as the very “one insufferable contrarian” you complain about because you can’t handle art that draws on other people’s work. Having studied visual art, literature, and music, I can safely say that you’re missing a solid 95% of all great creative works if you cut out all stuff that isn’t “purely original.”
Also, the whole “avoid musical theater” thing is dumb and makes you sound like an insecure boy who feels implicitly unsafe about his identity in female dominated spaces. I’m a straight dude but idgaf about whether watching this shit makes me masculine or not - art is art, and the themes of Wicked are timeless and nuanced in ways that make for a really rich viewing experience regardless of my gender identity. Engaging with the full complexities of the work rather than spouting bad faith rage-baiting might spare you the dogpile that is this comment section.
5:20 Like what amazon did with rings on power.
You remind me of Disparu! Very similar comedy style, both very funny. You deserve way more subscribers!
I'm simple, I'm enjoyed the input having not seen either or ever wanting to. Additional, I like a good dark or cheesy musical and did (abstract thought) watch Rings of Power (followed you from that). I think you did a good job.
I absolutely disagree with your take on the concept of Wicked. For context, I haven't seen the show and I have little interest in musical theatre so I have no horse in this race in that sense. As someone who is a fan of a lot of the things you have covered on your channel, I understand where you are coming from. Time and time again we have had our stories stolen from our fandoms by greedy corporations, maliciously transformed into something unrecognizable, thrown back in our face and told we are the problem for feeling disrespected. I absolutely hate the current remake culture too and I completely agree that these things are terrible and should have been stopped years ago. But the fact of the matter is Wicked does not fall under this category. There is nothing inherently wrong with exploring a universe wider than it's initial portrayal. There is nothing wrong with wishing to explore characters in different scenarios, or perhaps take a completely different spin on a character and see where the story goes from there. One could get into a legal discussion about rights and profits and whatever but that is not really what I'm here to talk about. The thing that separates the WIckeds from the Last Jedis and the Rings of power is the fact that this is clearly a project born of genuine love and passion for the original, which is also an answer to your question of "how come the musical fans are getting good adaptations and we aren't." This is a story clearly made by people who genuinely understand, love and respect the material and wish to create something in that universe and share it with existing fans along with a whole new generation, unlike something like the modern Star Wars which is made by people who dislike the source material and are only interested in using it as a platform for their diaries. Fandom culture, and I mean true fandom culture, not just Hollywood suits reading fandom twitter to find out the best way to bait money from fans, is an incredibly important cornerstone of good stories being able to exist in the first place. True fan works, made out of actual love are not the problem here, and I feel like you are conflating two completely different entities into one and demonizing the whole thing. Without these things existing, so many works of fiction would have never happened in the first place, whether that be potential authors never picking up the pen for the first time, a piece inspired by something else never having been made, etc. Going back to Star Wars again since I mentioned it so much in this post, the entire concept of it is just Lucas taking an already established formula and saying "What if it was in space instead", which according to the way I interpreted your take on these things sounds like something you would be against, no? I might have misunderstood your point, but what I'm trying to say is that I feel this is a topic more nuanced than the opinion you gave and these are two completely different things that have been lumped into one. One is a further exploration into a world/character/concept made out of genuine love and passion for something and a wish to share that with others, and another is a malicious lazy way to make money or tear down something you don't like and replace it with something you do. To me it is all about intention, and it is very clear when something is one or the other.
Sorry for wall of text, hope I was able to make myself a little clear lol
"Wicked" has no connection either to the Oz books or to the MGM version of the first of them.
It’s woke trash
You seem like someone with pretty horrendous opinions. You complain about it being PG for “discrimination” and say that besides “people being mean to her for her green skin is about it,” when there is a literal subplot of citizens being rounded up, silenced, and put in cages, kinda betrays pretty shit media literacy on your part.
Yeah, him completely skipping over the Animals sideplot is baffling. On top of that calling Cynthia's casting as Elpheba "alternate" casting? The hell? What makes her different than the "default" casting you'd be expecting, hmm? If there were any concerns about acting ability from the cast that I heard, it was people worried Ari wouldn't be able to pull it off and was cast solely for the singing.
@@andrewshirley9240 agreed, but what do you expect from someone who unironically uses the word "woke" to describe things? making that comment about cynthia and then another about bowen, completely disregarding their talent in favor of dividing people because of "wokism," it's truly insane
I don’t normally like musicals or want to watch them, especially after accidentally watching joker 2 this past year which I did not know was a musical. This one was surprisingly good, sure there was a slow burn being that the runtime was 2 hours and 40 minutes long. But the movie kept you interested in it the whole way through. Singing was top notch. I would recommend
Bro doesn’t even like musicals and go on reviewing a movie remake of a musical. Lol
I watched the wicked play on RUclips a while ago and it was great.
Wicked is a great way to identify people you should avoid
The most insecure man I've seen on youtube and that's saying something
I read the first of the Wicked books, which deals with Elpheba's birth and childhood. And it's true, she gets a rough ride, even as an innocent baby.
But it wasn't the same Oz as L Frank Baum gave us, and I wasn't happy about that.
Frankly. I think it would have been better to have it in a completely other world than Oz, because then the idea of this morally ambiguous young woman standing up to injustice would be very stirring.
But those of us who know the Oz books can say that this is NOT the Wicked Witch of The West. She doesn't fight injustice, she and her sister are the injustice.
The Wicked Witch of The East enslaved the Munchkins, the Wicked Witch of the West enslaved the Winkies. She certainly didn't rescue the flying monkeys. She had them as slaves too, and got them doing terrible things.
Yes. The 'humbug' Wizard is something of an asshole when Dorothy and Friends come to him for help.
But when Dorothy meets him again in a later story, he returns with her to Oz, having admitted that he knows no magic. He becomes a student of Glinda, who actually finds him a great student. And along with herself. He's one of the only people trusted to work magic in Oz, because they always use it for the Oz People's benefit.
The Princess of Oz is a descendant of an ancient fairy queen and she's adored by everyone, because she genuinely takes care of them.
I loved Les Miserables. musical or not God carrying a man through hell and fortune to find out who he really is was amazing to watch.
Every "authentic" idea or piece of work is essentially a person's unique adaptation of something they’ve seen or experienced. In my opinion, gatekeeping these creations or stories is limiting. Innovation and progress, whether in medicine, tech, or literature, stem from people building on existing ideas and infusing them with their own creativity. This process of adaptation and contribution is what drives evolution and improvement in our society.
All the songs were sung live on set. No studio.
Sure :)
@@jonny47988Bro they literally have behind the scenes footage of them singing on set. That’s why the soundtrack version and the film version sound completely different.
@@BozeDoesGodsWork So the on set recordings haven't been used in the movie. That's nothing special.
I ended up thinking it was a different movie. I just walked out 2hrs in
“The alternate casting” “fruity casting” both versions have hired different walks of life like…. You know nothing about wicked
Exactly!!! And she’s literally green ahahahah how is that alternate casting
@@Madalena-m2y Because it's a black woman playing the part that was played by a white woman.
As i have not seen any comment on it I feel it necessary to give credit to your mighty moustache. I can only field a full beard well and my wife forbids me to only have the stashe. Keep it.
just wait for the lord of the rings remake where sauron is really the good guy,.
@phloxie he's just misunderstood
Sauron was an incel
They already did that in Rings of Power! What a horrible sh*t-show that was
@@sentient_typewriter "Evil cannot create anything new, they can only corrupt and ruin what good forces have invented or made."
Won't it be something when they finally come out with Lord of the Rings the musical? Can you just imagine Frodo and Sam holding hands and singing their way up to Mount Doom?
Glad to see you branch out and review this. I didn't love it, I already have issues with Wicked's story, but it was enjoyable. I think the biggest miss was Elphaba, who spent the majority or her time looking like she's about to anime cry and didn't have the snark of her stage counter part.
Where did you get all that HD footage of the original stage show with Idina?
Arrrgh
A movie about two creepy skeletons that sing and dance!
So we bodyshaming now oh-
@@roseseatencandles8570 just goes to show how nasty she is
@@roseseatencandles8570 it tells you about the kind of person she is 💀
This guy doesn't know how to critique. One of the worst youtubers. I don't even like wicked (the stage show as I haven't seen the movie) but you can tell this guy is leaning too far into his biases and not seperating the subjective from the objective enough.
8:00 by this logic, you would have to hate the original wizard of oz too, they changed several major plot points and the personality of a lot of the main characters. the wicked witch of the west is barely in the original books but she is the main villain for most of the movie
I’m baffled at how much of a simpleton you are. The moment you said that the only discrimination was towards elphaba, I had to stop watching. The discrimination towards the animals is the driving force behind elphaba’s biggest decisions. If it weren’t for that, she would have stayed with the wizard and would have never been labeled as wicked. Also, would it kill you to do some research on theater and why it’s against the craft to simply release life performances on blueray? Just because you have no respect for something doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t educate yourself before releasing commentary on the subject.
The reason the theatre kids got their relatively accurate reboot was because the thing being rebooted already is, as you pointed out, a deliberate subversion of a classic story. The things we love were still pure and original so we get repulsive bastardization reboots.
I give you a lot of credit for getting that line about Wicked being that
“one insufferable contrarian you get on every online forum ever made” out with a straight face. Pot meet kettle lmao
Wicked sucks, and you fans are all gay.
@@BryceShamwow ok Bryce, go read The Devine Commedy, the best fanfiction out there
@@pizzafreddaacolazione Your opinions on the Divine Comedy don't somehow make Wicked better so I don't get your point
That's like saying Pride and Prejudice exists so Twilight can't be bad because it's also a love story
@@drawingdragon i just proved the point that fanfiction exists since the dawn of times and that is studied in school. not whether is good or bad. for me? the best. but I mainly said that to provoke lol
Anyway, if you ask any student in Italy, they'll reply that they hate the Devine Comedy. mainly the difficult lexicon or how Dante resolves poorly some situations, like fainting at every end of every chapter or distorting the bible itself. I personally kind of like the Devine Comedy, and I recognize that something decent can come out of a fanfiction lol
I always appreciate a good Windwaker Soundtrack.
Any of them.
"alternative Elphaba casting" oh boy....
Right… weird… idk
I feel like at that point, nothing is of worth in this review
@@baalgodofrain no right, because on broadway they use “blind casting” we’ve literally had Brittney Johnson on broadway as Glinda, like 😭they could literally casted whoever they wanted, the choice of having Cynthia as Elphaba was perfect because she was BORN to play this character, no such thing as “alternative casting” these clowns hate representation that isn’t for their demographic like
@@Julián-w1j I doubt that colourblind casting is truly occurring in most film productions. They are unlikely to pass up the opportunity to cast a minority for one of the leads to score points with part of the audience and drum up interest in production. Just the same as they wouldn’t want to cast 2 black women as the leads and risk alienating part of the audience in some way. I think that casting is more calculated than just a matter of meritocracy. Hamilton seems like it comes pretty close though. Maybe they went all the way.
@@chrishalliday748 Cynthia Erivo was in a Broadway musical and got rave reviews and a Tony award for it. She’s also been nominated for Oscars for acting and music. And won a Grammy. Anyone who looks at her casting as Elphaba and thinks “hmm… she’s black… this might not be a meritocracy” is racist idc idc idc
The point of "Wicked" is that good vs. evil narratives are overly simplistic.
The Elphaba in this movie is not ‘less emotional’, quite the opposite.
You can see her reactions and facial expressions are so emotionally driven, and just a ‘girl boss’ wannabe but not. She is emotionally affected by the opinions of others and her choices in the movie is emotionally driven, and not calculated. So no, she is very emotional and not in a good way. Especially her victim mindset.
My uncle gave me all of Baum's OZ books when I was nine. I adored them! Baum's vision will always be OZ to me. I find the rest to be garbage.
Media illiteracy in a nutshell
The munchkins weren't even munchkins.. This movie was a joke.
One small rebuttle, if children and families watch the 1939 W.O.Z, and see Judy garland's performance as a result of Wicked, then I think that's a win !!!
Wicked making the W.O.Z film relevant and prominent again is a huge cultural win!
Great point. Every Christmas I was on the edge of my seat terrified the wicked witch would get her claws on Toto. I loved all dogs with all of my little child heart. What a truly fantastic film. Who gives a fk why the wicked witch was wicked?? The musical was the very, very worst show I have ever seen.
When did the Wizard of Oz become irrelevant and not prominent? Am I missing something?
@@automnejoy5308 I guess you haven't noticed the culture of erasure that has been growing these last few years in the culture. Fair enough.
The passage of time alone is also a huge threat to the 39' film. The Wicked movie brings it back to prominence.
It wasn't that bad; however i have no nostalgic attachment to the other adaptions so, I understand 👍🏾.
This film is amazing
Wrong it’s a massive flop
@@seventycross0yt175it’s passed the 420M global mark. It’s very much not a flop
"the camera appeared to be attached to a startled, arthritic jackhammer..." you just earned a new sub.
I think that's another one that I disagree with, I feel like this channel is changing into winging whining rants.been here since you reviewed Velma
I watched Wicked with my family earlier this week and I thought it was a great movie. The musical itself seems like a shallow thematic mess with one of the weakest plots I have ever encountered in any piece of media, but that’s not the movie’s fault. The movie itself does a lot right for being a full-blown blockbuster in 2024. I haven’t seen a “full-budget” movie (or whatever the film equivalent of a “AAA game” is) this good probably since Everything, Everywhere. The casting, pacing, score, and set designs are the best parts. Despite the plot making no sense, and the relationship between Glinda and Elphaba being ridiculously shallow and based completely on misunderstandings, selfish desires, and unmerited passivity, the movie did a very good job at making the emotional moments feel powerful and real. For what it is I thought Wicked 2024 was successful.
This is exactly the product you get from a culture who has worshipped Youth to the point where imaturity becomes desirable and moral ambiguity serves as a placeholder for the concept of freedom that can't be understood.
Precisely!
Well done critique, good points made. I am a fan of musical theatre, but then I'm old, I've seen many professional productions which were well done & true to their sources; most were original & not copies or adaptations of other material. Your point that _Wicked_ is an inversion of the _Wizard of Oz_ is well founded, and for that reason alone I won't bother seeing this show in either its stage version or the film version. By most accounts the stage version is the superior, and I agree that there should be films of stage shows. I've also heard many accounts that the actress playing the Witch is insufferable & a girl-boss with attitude; that's another good reason not to see the film. As an American, I grew up with Rogers & Hammerstein and Lerner & Lowe; very American musicals, and I miss the America that they celebrated... which in many ways no longer exists, just like the England of 50 years ago- forever gone but fondly remembered, and better than the chaotic present we now inhabit. Cheers!
You’re going to give yourself an aneurism working your brain this hard to poke holes in Wicked.
I refuse to be forced to have an opinion on Wicked, so I just want to note that your distaste for the rejuvenation of old stories, old motifs, etc, must make it difficult to appreciate Shakespeare, right? And Chaucer. And Edgar Allen Poe. And ...
I don’t think from the way he speaks he has ever read any of those. Maybe Edgar Allan Poe..
S'awright. Pacing is a little slow for my tastes for one movie but maybe with the second part it'd be much less glaring. 7/10.
I’ll rewatch Return to Oz instead. That was the only Oz film true to the books’ dangerous ambience.
it does not hold up 😅
@_Dark222Angel_ 🤡
Wicked was incredible but go off queen 💅
Return to Oz is great. So underrated and overlooked.
@@ryanb4940weong
What’s funny is how common certain critiques you made, seem to be among creators who make similar content to yours.
Just a quick scroll through your thumbnails and their titles pretty much says it all..
A certain content creator comes to mind who also reviews films and shows with a very . . . . . . . . How should I say “modern male” perspective lol
It’s kind of sad that you spent so much time and money on the musical and the film just to hate it.
I don’t think Wicked subverts the Wizard of Oz at all…
In The Wizard of Oz The Wizard is still a con man- he tells a small girl go kill a witch because he has no real power.
In Wicked, he tells Elphaba to read the grimmerie because he has no real power.
The moral of the story in The wizard Of Oz is that through helping others, friendships and believing in yourself, you can do anything.
Wicked the musical, has the exact same moral and message.
To millions of people Wicked is a symbol of resistance, self actualization and a desire to uplift those who are marginalized and beat down by society.
I hope the next film you watch is something you enjoy.
He's not really hating here just expressing a different experience and opinion than yours. Your whole social justice warrior commentary here is hilarious. Are you always this preachy and giving lectures to people?
@@grosbeak6130 I'm sorry that "social justice warrior commentary" was what you got from that.
It's unfortunate because he spent a LOT of money seeing a stage musical that he didn't like and then spent more money seeing a movie based on it that musical he ALSO didn't like.
Clearly it wasn't his cup of tea and he doesn't really value plays or musicals as a form of entertainment.
And that's okay, he doesn't have to.
Just as he's allowed to have his opinion, millions of others (including myself) are allowed to have ours.
I was simply giving the counter argument that it doesn't subvert the message of The Wizard of Oz like he was accusing Wicked of doing. And explaining what millions of other people love about it and why it's important and applicable to our world today.
If you have a valid counter argument, I'm all ears.
@@notenoughtreble here are your own words: "To millions of people Wicked is a symbol of resistance, self actualization and a desire to uplift those who are marginalized and beat down by society."
Yep, "social justice warrior" lingo and talking points if I ever heard any. You're probably more deeply influenced by today's zeitgeist then you are aware of. And then you imply that this is exactly the same thing with the original Wizard of Oz movie in 1939 saying that that's the moral of it. Also you make condescending remarks about how unfortunate it is that he really didn't appreciate or enjoy the movie because he spent so much money on it. Do you see how you sound here in all of this?
Your problem is that you reduce the original film to some kind of moral or moralizing it. Turning it into a morality tale. And then you went from there. But the original wizard of Oz didn't have all of those talking points in mind. To me fairy tales are what they are, beyond the moralizing within today's lingo, sensibilities and mentality of the current zeitgeist of which you seem totally caught up in. Now I do agree that the movie Wicked today does indeed reflect that i.e. the social justice warrior mentality that you expressed in the quotation I gave of you at the beginning here. So I don't disagree with you there. But that's the very reason I don't like the reimagining and interpretation and morality play of Wicked has on the original Wizard of Oz movie for our modern contemporary audience. And on top of that, the whole idea of the wicked witch and the good witch are just really in the beginning and in the end just besties. They're just really buddies. You know, it's all good with them really. But If you ever read the original Grimm's fairy tales and the original Wizard of Oz along with the 1939 movie this is far from that kind of mentality and sensibility. But you are altogether free to interpret it that way, and I'm sure maybe some others do too. But that's not how I look at the nature of true fairy tales especially of the past. I don't reduce those to that kind of thing - only that kind of level of vision. True and original fairy tales are dark and deep in many ways beyond merely our kind of reimagining and superficial moralizing vision of today's Wicked. The original 1939 wicked witch in Wizard of the Oz really has nothing to do with this navel gazing version and story of Wicked, and the redemptive vision that this new movie gives to her. No, the wicked witch in The Wizard of Oz is wicked, but in today's zeitgeist that is not acceptable and will not do as your statement again declares:
"To millions of people Wicked is a symbol of resistance, self actualization and a desire to uplift those who are marginalized and beat down by society."
That's not the witch in The Wizard of Oz in 1939, nor in the book. That only exists in today's social justice warrior sensibilities and mentality.
@@grosbeak6130 So. You said a lot of word salad and The only rebuttal you seem to have is that Fairytales SHOULDN'T have morals?
Grimm's Fairytales, stories and parables have ALWAYS had moral messaging behind them since the beginning of time.
Suggesting that writing, poetry and art are supposed to be consumed at face value and that's it, is crazy.
You can't use "The current zeitgeist of today" in an argument about a book that came out 30 years ago.
The problems of our current society are not new. And just like L. Frank Baum, Gregory Maguire used World of Oz to convey a message about friendship, society, critical thinking and being true to yourself. Gregory just looked at it through a more mature, detailed and nuanced lens.
You clearly don't have an argument here other than "I don't like it because I don't like it."
@notenoughtreble of course you would respond that way to my analysis and commentary on your comment. It goes along with your superficial and two-dimensional reading of the subject matter at hand. You're hilarious. 😆 But consistent.