Review: Wicked: for Good

2.0 / 5 Stars

After the phenomenon of last year’s Wicked, I walked into Wicked for Good hoping the epic conclusion to Galinda and Elphaba’s story would recapture that spark. The first film was a massive hit — Oscar nominations, cultural takeover, Ariana Grande shocking audiences with real comedic and vocal chops, and Cynthia Erivo anchoring the emotional center with power and grace. I was one of the people swept up in the “Wicked movement,” despite having spent an entire summer clowning on the trailers and assuming the movie would be stupid. Joke was on me — the first one was awesome.

Which is why Wicked for Good hurt as much as it did.

From the jump, the second part feels like all the magic has been sucked out of the air. Wicked is already a big, melodramatic, emotional story, but Part Two opens with an hour that’s shockingly lifeless. Instead of building on the momentum of that incredible “Defying Gravity” ending, the film hits reset — reintroducing story threads, slowing everything to a crawl, and delivering musical numbers that are, frankly, duds. The singing in this movie is constant, but almost none of it is engaging. Every number blends together, every melody feels samey, and for a musical that spans nearly six hours across two parts, that’s a major problem.

It doesn’t help that the tone has shifted into something that feels…Marvelized. Characters suiting up, dramatic entrances, overly bombastic staging — the whole thing has an almost superhero-movie sheen to it that undercuts the emotional groundedness that defined the first film. I never thought I’d leave a Wicked movie thinking, “Huh. So they turned this into an MCU installment,” but here we are.

Thankfully, the movie starts picking up steam when it introduces the Wizard of Oz lore more directly — and specifically when the Tin Man enters the story. He is, without exaggeration, the MVP of the entire movie. Barely in it, but every moment he’s on screen feels alive, cool, intriguing, and finally like the story is expanding in an interesting way.

Which leads me to what I think is the film’s biggest missed opportunity: Dorothy.

I understand Wicked is not Dorothy’s story. I understand the musical keeps her at arm’s length. I also understand purists would riot if the source material were altered too much.

But this is film. It’s a two-part, six-hour cinematic saga. You have the Tin Man, Scarecrow, and Lion all woven into this universe — and then Dorothy shows up as a faceless extra with zero dialogue. Not even one line. Not even a shot of her face.

This is where adaptation should have stepped in. They could’ve cast an A-list actress, given Dorothy 4–9 minutes, maybe even a short musical number, and elevated the stakes while also setting up the future of this franchise they’re clearly planning. Instead, it’s a stumble — an all-time fumble — that leaves the Wizard of Oz mythos feeling strangely tarnished rather than enriched.

And speaking of the ending: this movie ends four different times. While I liked pieces of it, the narrative keeps fading out and fading back in, never quite settling emotionally. For a story that’s supposed to be the grand finale, it lands with more of an abrupt shrug than a sweeping final note.

Performance-wise, Ariana Grande remains one of the film’s stronger elements. She’s fine — even good — but she’s not nearly as electric, funny, or surprising as she was in the first part. Cynthia Erivo sings beautifully but often feels stuck in songs that sound identical to one another. Jonathan Bailey does what Jonathan Bailey always does: he shows up and he’s good. Michelle Yeoh? Villain of the year. I hated that character every single second — which honestly means she nailed the assignment. Jeff Goldblum, with his expanded role, ends up feeling miscast; the singing and dancing just aren’t his strong suits here.

In the end, what frustrates me most is that the wind that powered the sails of the first movie just wasn’t here this time. You can feel the studio knew it — nothing feels as confident, as joyful, or as magical as the first half. Instead of enhancing the world or tweaking the story in ways that film adaptations can, the movie plays it too safe and ends up being strangely empty.

That said, it’s still going to be a massive hit — probably $750 million worldwide, tons of cultural impact, and likely 3–7 Oscar nominations. But performance-wise? I’d be shocked if anyone gets acting nods this time. Ariana isn’t sniffing a supporting nomination, let alone winning it. The spell just isn’t as strong.

Wicked: For Good = 60/100

Leave a Reply

Scroll to Top

Discover more from Wannabe Movie Critic

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading