Sitting in the theater watching Wicked: For Good, there were multiple times where I actually sat back and thought, “I can’t believe this is really happening right now.” After all of the anticipation, I had finally made it to this moment. Anticipation that started ten years ago when it was first announced the beloved stage musical would be adapted into a film. But anticipation that really kicked into high gear one year ago after seeing Part 1 of this franchise. I wrote in my review of that film, “Wicked: Part 2, which will cover the events of Act 2 from the original musical, will open on November 21, 2025, almost exactly a year after Part 1. I was initially worried about splitting the story into 2 halves but Part 1, at least, is satisfying enough to stand alone. I mean, walking out of the theater after “Defying Gravity” will have you ready to run through a brick wall.” Still true. And not only that, but Part 1 was also massively successful, grossing more than $758 million at the global box office (the highest grossing Broadway musical adaptation of all time), earning 10 Oscar nominations (and winning 2 for Best Costume Design and Best Production Design), and winning over audiences and critics alike. Wicked: For Good had a whole lot to live up to. When first reviews and reactions started coming out, they were overwhelmingly positive, only increasing my existing excitement. But then official reviews right before the release were a lot more mixed. And I worried the hype was too high and I could only be disappointed. But I should have known not to worry. Like I said about Part 1, “This movie was going to be nearly impossible for me not to love. I love the musical and the music so much, it is in my bones at this point. So any experience where I get to be in that world and listen to the songs is time well spent […] However, with any adaptation of a beloved property, there are, of course, some nerves. Will it live up to the mountainous expectations? Loving The Wizard of Oz and loving the musical “Wicked” as much as I do, I was already predisposed to like this movie. As were most of my friends and family. But I was curious to see how critics and general audiences, including people who never saw the show, would react to the film.” That question still stands. And, honestly, even more so for Part 2, in which the story gets much darker and weirder. Now that the movie is out, the negative reviews and reactions are piling up more and more. The movie has become extremely polarizing with critics and audiences with some loving the finale, calling it better than the first part, and some saying it’s one of the worst movies ever. Bottom line: If you didn’t like the first movie and if you don’t like musicals, you won’t like this. But if you love “Wicked” the stage show, you will love getting to spend time in this world again with For Good. The movie has flaws aplenty. I will get into all of them. But nothing could make me not love this movie and this musical. I saw one post that said, “The flaws are there but the way it makes me feel supersedes the gripes I have with pacing.” Another read, “The critical film fan is strong but sometimes the inner theater kid is stronger.” That is exactly how I feel. This is a case where the feeling this story and these songs give me outweighs any filmmaking critiques I have. It’s the feeling I’m walking away with, it’s the feeling that keeps me coming back to Wicked, and it’s the feeling that will always keep this story in a special place in my heart.

If you are somehow not familiar with the story of Wicked, let me catch you up. In 1995, Gregory Maguire wrote a book called “Wicked: The Life and Times of the Wicked Witch of the West”. The book was based on the 1900 novel “The Wonderful Wizard of Oz” by L. Frank Baum and its 1939 film adaptation starring Judy Garland, The Wizard of Oz. With me so far? In 2003, Maguire’s book was loosely adapted into a stage musical known as “Wicked”. The Broadway production, which originally starred Idina Menzel and Kristin Chenoweth and won multiple Tony Awards, takes place before, during, and after the events of The Wizard of Oz and charts the unlikely friendship of the green-skinned Elphaba (later known as the Wicked Witch of the West) and the perky, pink-loving Galinda (eventually dubbed Glinda the Good). While it wasn’t the first to do it, Maguire’s book popularized the idea of centering a well-known villain in a story and humanizing them by exploring their backstory. “How does wickedness happen? Are people born wicked, or do they have wickedness thrust upon them?” This trend has since taken off and occupies much of our film and television stories today. Now, 21 years later, the smash hit musical has finally hit the big screen. Early in the production, the decision was made to split the story into two parts, one film for each act of the stage show. I said in my Part 1 review, “Fans will always get their backs up when anything from the original (read: sacred) text is changed in any way. Usually it’s when things are cut. Splitting this story into 2 parts was meant to avoid that issue. So instead of cuts, we get expansion. Most of these extended moments contribute to deeper character development than a stage production is capable of.” Expansion is even more of a key word in Part 2 considering Act 2 of the musical is only 45 minutes and the movie is somehow over 2 hours long. In some ways, the cinematic art form provides opportunities for deeper exploration within this world. But it also took a tight story and bloated it unnecessarily. 

The first act is so important and contains the majority of iconic moments from the show. They needed to make it its own movie to give everything room to breathe (I still think they could’ve cut it down a little but whatever). But then they also had to pad Part 2 to help it be able to stand on its own. And much of the padding felt clunky and forced, giving us more of plotlines no one cares about (sorry, I love animals but could really do without the ones of Oz), flashbacks that don’t provide much context, and scenes that just feel like they go on too long. Even some of the existing songs get additional new verses or reprises on top of the two brand new songs written for this movie. Almost every scene felt like you could shave off two minutes and not lose anything important. On my second watch, that’s what bothered me most: the pacing. In the first hour especially. I was just waiting to get to the good stuff that I knew was coming later. But that was always going to be the problem with adapting Act 2 of the show into its own film. It’s widely known that it is the weaker act compared to Act 1. There’s only one notable song (“For Good”) and the story definitely gets weird. I went to see the show again on Broadway two weeks before seeing Wicked: For Good (for research purposes, of course) so I felt primed for the weirdness. But I was really curious to see what people who have never seen the show would think of the second film. It is definitely a tougher hang and a more crazy story. Especially if you are very familiar with The Wizard of Oz, when Wicked starts to weave in and out of that story and take shape around it, it’s a little jarring. Sometimes fun, but sometimes insane. And, as it turns out, so far those newcomers aren’t hanging with it. On the one hand, I get it. The Wizard of Oz is an untouchable classic. But, on the other hand, I really take issue with people knocking the movie for plot points directly from the stage show. That is the source material. It is what it is. Yeah, it’s a little goofy, but let’s judge the movie based on how it executed that story because it didn’t invent it. Also, at the end of the day, it’s just not that serious. So it doesn’t exactly map onto The Wizard of Oz. Okay, and? It’s Broadway. It’s over-the-top and fun and playful.

The expansion of Part 2 doesn’t just apply to the runtime of the movie. The scope of the storytelling and depth of emotion are also magnified. It’s an “epic conclusion”. Wicked: For Good cinematographer, Alice Brooks, described the difference between the two parts thusly: “Some of the intentions for the first movie were desire and choice and yearning and longing and dreams, and the second movie was sacrifice and surrender and consequence.” Choice vs. consequence. You can feel that shift in the tone, as well. Part 1 is effervescent and light and fun with all the possibility that comes before committing to a choice. Part 2 finds all of our characters reckoning with the choices they made at the end of Part 1. It’s darker and heavier and more emotional. There are still moments of levity and comedy, but they are much fewer and far between. Part 1 takes place mostly during the day, ending during sunset as the sky grows dark. Part 2 takes place mostly at night. Another dichotomy between the halves of the franchise is the way the main characters are centered. Overall, Wicked is a story of sisterhood. And I feel like even more so in the film version. In the stage show, you want Elphaba and Fiyero to end up together and are happy when they do. But, in the film, I found myself barely caring about Fiyero at all. The only relationship of worth to me was the friendship between Elphaba and Glinda. That has always been the core of this story and it is so beautifully, deeply rendered in these films. But in splitting the story in two, Part 1 became Elphaba’s journey of empowerment and self-acceptance while Part 2 now fully belongs to Glinda.

Wicked: For Good has transformed Act 2 of the stage show into Glinda’s redemption story. When we find her at the beginning of the movie, her only power is her popularity. She doesn’t have magical abilities, but people love her and want to believe in her and will follow her anywhere. And she loves the attention. She loves to be adored. Madame Morrible weaponizes this for her and against her. In Part 1, she’s comedic relief, the perky, flighty, popular girl whose plight can’t compare with Elphaba’s persecuted outsider narrative. What problems could Glinda possibly have in her pretty pink bubble world? In Part 2, Elphaba’s path is straightforward and clear. She has her objective and she’s always moving towards it. She wears her emotions on her sleeve instead of having to hide them and keep up appearances. Glinda’s journey is much more complex. She’s dealing with the responsibility of being a public figure, a betrayal in her romantic relationship, and the fear and hurt of her friendship with Elphaba on top of the crushing realization that getting everything you ever wanted might not be what you want anymore (see: the lyrics of “Thank Goodness”). That is a lot for one person to handle and a lot for one actor to emote. Ariana Grande goes above and beyond. Her performance as Glinda not only runs the entire spectrum of emotions, balancing humor, heartbreak, charisma, introspection, anxiety, sadness, loyalty, and strength, but she also has to communicate multiple feelings at the same time. Pretending to be happy, pretending to hate Elphaba, feeling sad and hurt and lonely and putting on a brave face. The acting is a masterclass. After Part 1, I wrote, “The story is really a two-hander but, to me, Ariana walked away with it. Her performance absolutely blew me away. We already knew she was astonishingly talented vocally. I never doubted her ability to sing these songs. But she was firing on all cylinders in this film. Her vocals were better than ever, her comic timing was one of the best parts of the film, and her ability to toggle between funny, callous moments and genuine, heartfelt ones is the core of what this movie is about. In the Galinda-showcase song, “Popular”, Ariana just sets the screen on fire. I thought she jumped off the screen more than anyone in the film, she was born to play this role, and I am officially onboard the Ariana Oscar train.” I still maintain she should have won the Oscar for her performance of “Popular” alone which, to this day, still knocks me out, leaves me speechless, explodes my brain. But now more than ever, Ariana has a real shot at winning. This performance of Glinda is deeper and more complex, showcasing even more impressive range. She could easily run in Best Actress. This is very clearly her movie, afterall. But she has a much better chance of winning in Supporting and I want that for her. So badly. If she and Cynthia Erivo are nominated again for playing Elphaba and Glinda, they would join a very short list, becoming the seventh and eighth performers in Oscars history to be recognized twice for the same role. The nomination is almost a lock but I will be there, once again, on Oscar night manifesting the win for her. 

Cynthia Erivo is also an incredible talent. She came into Wicked already as a Tony winner and past Oscar nominee and her voice speaks for itself. I find it so impressive how well Cynthia is able to show emotion on her face through all of the Elphaba makeup. Her eyes are constantly so expressive and do so much work. They reveal the inner fragility Elphaba tries so hard to conceal with her tough exterior. She’s so so good in this movie too, but Ariana has the showier role. In both parts, actually. Forcing Cynthia’s Elphaha to become the straight man to Glinda’s comedy act and the driver of plot to Glinda’s emotional journey and character arc. And I do have mixed feelings about what is meant to be Elphaba’s story being somewhat given away to Glinda here. Especially when Elphaba in the film is canonically a woman of color. The moral of the story is that Glinda, a white, blonde, wealthy, beloved girl, is the only person capable of wielding power and creating change and the person with actual power and unwavering integrity is forced into exile because she will never be accepted in this world. That’s definitely dicey and, I can’t lie, makes me a little uneasy. But that doesn’t take away from Cynthia or Ariana’s amazing performances. The Best Actress Oscar is basically already decided (Jessie Buckley in Hamnet, it’s yours to lose) so I don’t think Cynthia has much of a chance there, but I want to see them both at the ceremony and, even better, up on that stage performing together!

In my Part 1 review, I said, “Jonathan Bailey as Fiyero exudes more charisma than should be legally allowed for one human.” He’s still good in Part 2, but with the darker, more somber tone and growth in his character, he brings more gravitas than charm this time around. Jonathan Bailey even told The Hollywood Reporter he changed his vocal style for Part 2, choosing to riff less and sing in a more straightforward, sincere way to reflect his character’s newfound seriousness. Although, occasionally he did kind of a crazy eye thing when he was trying to communicate intense emotions that was unintentionally goofy. I think the strength of Fiyero’s narrative and his relationship with Elphaba is hurt most by the discordant tone of the movie. Wicked: For Good seemed to struggle to find the line between PG and PG-13. This is maybe most exemplified by the fact that in one of my screenings there were previews for both the new SpongeBob SquarePants movie and Wuthering Heights starring Margot Robbie and Jacob Elordi. Who do they think the audience for this film is? They tried to split the difference instead of committing to one, giving us some darker moments that are potentially scarier for smaller children but rendering the sexual chemistry between Elphaba and Fiyero completely inert and making a scene like “As Like As You’re Mine” feel confusing and messy. Speaking of confusing and messy, Michelle Yeoh’s Madame Morrible has an increased presence and importance in the second film. She is revealed as the puppet master behind the Wizard’s figurehead, ruthless and impatient and the truest source of villainy in the story. Yet, her character is one of the weakest parts of the film. It doesn’t help that Oscar winner Michelle Yeoh’s performance is just really not that good, but the character also has no clear motivations. We know nothing about her other than she’s basically evil. But why? What does she want? These are the kinds of questions that start to arise when you expand a story a little bit, but not enough to fill in all the new gaps you’ve created. As for other performances, Jeff Goldblum was dialing up his Jeff Goldblum to 11 (also the de-aged version of him was horrifying), Ethan Slater does a good job with a more complex role, and Bowen Yang is once again hysterical and the movie could’ve used more of him. 

The music of Wicked: For Good was always of some concern to filmmakers and audiences. Almost every single song in Act 1 of the musical is an absolute banger. But Act 2 only has one notable song. So notable they changed the name of the movie to remind people it’s here. While the songs here don’t compare to Part 1, and there are no personality showcases like “Popular” and “Dancing Through Life”, I actually do think some are better than they’re given credit for. And the talent of the cast elevates them to the stratosphere. One of the limitations of Broadway is that the actors just stand there and sing. But that’s also what can make it so powerful. That directness and openness and connection with the audience. In trying to do what Broadway can’t, to differentiate the movie from the show and justify its existence, Wicked: For Good ends up doing too much during the musical numbers and loses that connection. Between the movement, the camera tricks, the effects, and more, not to mention the busy choreography and frames full of detail, it can feel more overstuffed than the Scarecrow at times. Especially in moments when you want the songs and the singing to have room to breathe on their own. I think the biggest culprit of this is “No Good Deed”. Upon seeing the stage show again recently, “No Good Deed” really stood out for me as an underrated showstopper. And Cynthia Erivo’s performance of it in the film is unbelievable. It’s big and powerful and is the real setting-the-screen-on-fire moment of the movie. The theater couldn’t help but applaud after this one. But I do think the force of it is diminished slightly by the amount happening on screen when she’s singing. There are visions and flashbacks and flying monkeys and special effects when I could’ve used a little bit more of just Cynthia performing. The song hits even harder to me when I listen to it on the soundtrack because there are less distractions and Cynthia’s vocal is able to cut through even more (if you haven’t listened to this yet, I beg you to stop what you’re doing, stop reading this, go listen right now and then come back. You’ll thank me later). 

There are other (smaller) choices like this across many of the musical numbers that frustrated me. In “Thank Goodness”, the camera cuts away from Ariana during some of the song’s most fun vocal flourishes. In the new original Glinda song, “The Girl in the Bubble”, the entire scene is shown through reflections and mirror shots, portaling through them over and over. I liked the song and the message for Glinda’s character arc, and the visuals were definitely on the nose but still worked for me except it was just overdone. Used a few times too many. Something I really don’t understand is why “For Good” doesn’t end on a two-shot of Elphaba and Glinda as they sing together. That’s the emotional hinge of the entire movie! Luckily, they make up for that by transitioning from the end of that song into the most diabolical split screen of the two women on either side of a door, sobbing as they say goodbye forever. I knew going in that “For Good” alone would make me cry, but ending that scene with “I love you” and then that shot broke me the most out of anything in the movie. 

That is always the trade-off with adapting a story: there will be some changes that work and some changes that don’t. And especially here, because everything is so expanded, there are a good deal of changes. Existing songs get new reprises with revised lyrics, like “What Is This Feeling?” and “The Wizard and I”. That I didn’t mind. Two brand new songs were added. Like I said, I thought Glinda’s solo “The Girl in the Bubble” was fine but Elphaba’s “No Place Like Home” I found to be really not good. The performance of “Wonderful” was made supersized and changed from being a duet between Elphaba and the Wizard to a trio including Glinda. This was done to get more of Elphaba and Glinda together on screen in a story in which they spend much of their time apart and I actually think it really works well. The two leads have such great chemistry and we want to see them together as much as possible, so it’s a successful scene both narratively and in performance. Something else I really loved was the use of underscoring throughout the movie. Composer John Powell’s score weaves in many musical callbacks to songs from Act 1. It’s really cool to notice on subsequent watches how the subtle notes of “Defying Gravity” or “Popular” or “No One Mourns the Wicked” in the background of a scene influence our perception of what we’re watching. Wicked: For Good is a lot of movie, most noticeably in the musical numbers. Some of that is the inherent nature of Broadway energy, but some of it feels like it overpowers the songs and the performances of them. Especially in Part 2 of this story where it’s overall less pop-y and big and showy and needs to be a little more nuanced.

Like the last film I reviewed, The Running Man, the politics here are once again timely. The Wizard of Oz has always been a political story. Back in 1939, the story honed in on the notion that leaders are capable of mass manipulation. At the time, that idea was at the forefront with the rise of fascism across Europe leading into World War II. But now watching The Wizard of Oz, it feels more like a comfort, an escape from the scary reality we live in. Wicked: For Good plays on the same concepts brought forth in the original 1939 film, but makes them seem newly sadistic through the modern lens of today’s political climate. The Wizard is still a self-described “wise old carnie”, a showman with no real power but tons of influence, leading by deception. The war he and Madame Morrible fight against Elphaba is all PR and propaganda. It’s the version of the story they present to the public, what they lead them to believe. The Wizard doubles down on the unimportance of what is real with lines like, “The truth is not a thing of fact or reason, it’s just what we all agree on” and “Where I’m from we believe all sorts of things that aren’t true. We call it history.” This dialogue was written over 20 years ago for the original stage show but feels more relevant now than ever. As with thinly veiled plotlines using animals and munchkins as stand-ins for immigrants needing express permission to travel or being locked away and exiled. Part 1 of this franchise came out right after the 2024 election. In that moment, it was seen as having a feel-good message for uncertain times, presenting a universal themes of friendship, resilience, and defiance of the odds. Wicked Part 1 is a fairly uncomplicated story of good triumphing over evil. The message of For Good isn’t quite that simple (see my thoughts on Elphaba’s portrayal above). The political reading is there if you want it, and some of the winking emphasis on the Wizard’s lines might imply we should be making those connections. But it’s also easy enough to just get lost in the fantasy world of Oz and forget the real world for a moment. 

Wicked: For Good really is a mixed bag of a movie. There are positives and negatives in all aspects, technically, narratively, stylistically, performance-wise. (Two elements I haven’t yet mentioned are 1) the color in this one: it’s not perfect but I thought it looked better than in Part 1 which got a lot of flak for looking so washed out and overexposed and 2) the costumes and set pieces are so impressive. There are some moments that look like a set in a good way, calling back to the look of the original Wizard of Oz film.) The sequel was just never going to be as good as the first film. That’s an impossible task. But what For Good lacks in fun, it makes up for in emotional depth. And, overall, the two films together create a really large but beautiful journey. I want so badly to take both movies and recut them into my own version that’s one movie without all of the unnecessary fat. Maybe one day I’ll have the time and resources to figure that out. But, for now, I’m happy enough with the versions we have. This movie will likely be nominated for Best Picture again at the Oscars and Jon M. Chu may also get another Best Director nomination (probably not deserved, in my opinion). And I do think the movie will do well at the box office and with audiences. It already set a new box office record, achieving the biggest opening weekend ever for a Broadway musical adaptation with a global debut of approximately $226 million ($150 million domestically and $76 million internationally). We saw this with Barbie and The Eras Tour and Wicked (Part 1) that women and girls are a huge and influential audience who will show up big when content is created for them. But Hollywood constantly underestimates this. Or they learn the wrong lessons. Like all of the conversations happening right now about a Wicked 3 or spin-offs. All I have to say about that is no. NO. Please don’t do this. Can we not squeeze every last drop out of something popular and just let it be? Wicked being super successful does not mean we need to make more Wicked. It means we need to make more movies for female audiences. This story has an ending. Let it end. And the ending of Wicked: For Good might be one of my favorite parts of the entire movie. The very last shot shows Elphaba and Glinda in flashback recreating the original “Wicked” Broadway poster. And it destroyed me. I don’t even know why but I genuinely keep tearing up every time I think about it. Something about it felt so special to me, so powerful, so momentous. Like an ode to where it all started as this stage musical to this massive thing it’s become now. Bringing it all full circle. And for all its flaws, for Wicked: For Good to end on that shot just made my heart swell. That’s the feeling I walked out of the theater with. Appreciation for the entire journey of this story from stage to screen, for the way it has existed in culture and in my life for the past 20 years, and for every second I get to spend living inside of it. Wicked has definitely changed me for good (yeah, I know it’s corny but I had to do it).

2025 Count: 78 movies, 48 seasons of television, 4 specials