New to Theaters: “Wicked”
The quintessential Broadway showstopper “Wicked” is now following a well-traveled yellow brick road by venturing onto the big screen. A “Wicked” adaptation remained a priority project for Hollywood studios over the last two decades, undergoing countless pre-production iterations before finally forming into a two-part final product.
For those like myself who rarely indulge in theater, “Wicked” is essentially a musical redux of “The Wizard of Oz.” The big twist here is audiences are instead embedded in the perspective of the social outcast Elphaba, better known as the Wicked Witch of the West. “Wicked” follows Elphaba’s formative years as she strikes up an unlikely friendship with goody two shoes, Glinda the Good, and discovers her magical abilities. Elphaba’s journey descends down a decidedly different path once in the presence of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, a charismatic yet aloof figurehead hiding his true intentions underneath his fantastical pageantry.
I may not be a “Wicked” stan, yet I found myself intrigued by the project’s potential. Reframing the “Wizard of Oz” story offers tantalizing opportunities to recontextualize a golden era classic through a thoughtful, modern lens. Sadly, “Wicked” lacks the courage, heart and brains to truly soar.
“Wicked” radiates a surprisingly beige aesthetic for a lavish blockbuster musical. Director Jon Chu and his talented team are adept at cultivating visual splendors in spurts, particularly in creating countless real-world sets that forgo an overabundance of special effects. The welcomed attention to detail still lacks true wonderment.
Between the pale color-grading and anti-climactic framing choices, “Wicked” never seizes the splendor of the magical world it exists in. The lifeless choices hurt the toe-tapping music numbers the most. Chu, who excelled at choreographing lively dance numbers across the “Step-Up” franchise, struggles to imbue vibrancy into the expensive setpieces. They are competent yet unimaginative numbers that never pulsate onscreen.
The great shame with “Wicked” is that Hollywood accounting may fail the film most. This part one of a two-film adaptation is just as long as the Broadway show, so what is all the extra time spent on? Unfortunately, the creative team struggles to justify this decision. The narrative meanders, spinning its wheels until finally reaching its inevitable conclusions. This leaves viewers stuck watching a three-hour act that only teases what may come.
I think the great promise in focusing on The Wicked Witch of the West is seeing how a person becomes a disenfranchised villain merely because they are different from their peers. The heartbreaking treatment of Elphaba showcases the dangers of conformity and mob mentalities, although the film only captures glimmers of this throughline. The characters and their relationships left me desperately wanting more nuance from the material.
“Wicked” casts a few whimsical spells. The star-studded cast, led by a powerhouse performance from Cynthia Erivo as Ephaba, are tailor-made for their spirited roles. Erivo’s subdued delivery exudes emotion, quietly masking the toiling pains from years of torment and hostility. Her stillness eventually builds into an emphatic force of nature, with Erivo’s third-act musical performances standing strong as the film’s highlight frames. Pop star Ariana Grande effectively portrays Glinda as an affable airhead, while Michelle Yeoh, Jeff Goldblum and Peter Dinklage add gravitas to their supporting turns. When the film finally gives its actors time to shine, they are always up for the task. It is just unfortunate those moments feel few and far between.
“Wicked” consistently left me wanting more. This story will require a more refined second act to right the wrongs of this well-intended yet superfluous big-screen adaption.
New to Theaters: “Moana 2”
In 2016, Disney surfed to the screen with “Moana,” a Polynesian-themed animated musical that redefined the House of Mouse formula with breathtaking results. The film manifested an arresting creative wavelength, with a heartfelt story, toe-tapping tracks and captivating animation winning over audiences of all ages. Fans were left wanting more, enduring an eight-year wait after a planned Disney+ TV show transitioned into a sequel feature film.
Is “Moana 2” worth the wait? I wish Disney had kept us waiting longer rather than dumping a wayward direct-to-video sequel on the big screen. “Moana 2” resonates as a dissident shadow of its beloved predecessor, forgoing any creative flourishes in favor of a limp, auto-pilot affair absent of any noteworthy traits.
Disney is on a roll with factory-assembling tired sequels (“Hocus Pocus 2,” and “Disenchanted” are other recent duds). The central force behind these failing films is that they are not created with artistic purpose. “Moana 2” does not present a unique or well-defined story; it instead cobbles together the broken shards of the previously-planned Disney+ show into a dysfunctional narrative hodgepodge. New characters only serve to sink the story, either arriving on screen before never being heard from again or personifying one-dimensional arcs across the runtime. As for Moana and her beloved Demigod partner Maui, both find themselves sentenced to steer a thankless fetch quest plotline. None of the introspection or warmth that made Moana shine as a well-realized character exists here.
It is not just the story that falls flat. Lin-Manuel Miranda’s songwriting prowess is sorely missed with this sequel. Instead of vibrant songs that reflect the traditions and style of the story’s cultural roots, “Moana 2” sings audiences to sleep through its tired medley of discount store music numbers. Even Disney’s typically crisp and detailed animation is noticeably absent here, as the film radiates the cheap aroma of a bargain-bin Disney+ title forced upon the big screen.
“Moana 2” provides no justifiable reason to exist outside of delivering boatloads of cash onto Disney’s doorstep. I really want to implore the House of Mouse to take their time with sequels and not rush out an onslaught of shoddy follow-ups.
