Four hundred and fifty-seven million dollars. That is how much money the new live-action recreation of Wicked has accumulated as of December 9th, 2024. Along with its profit, Wicked has garnered a massive fanbase of all ages from around the world. But, despite its success, Wicked serves a greater purpose in the modern-day Sisyphean cycle of movie production.
It—and every other inadequate live-action remake—is part of a steady decline in popular film, which exists purely to support a market of profit and stable franchises over originality and creativity.
As with all other live actions, Wicked includes a strong group of established actors to gain the everyday viewer’s interest: Cynthia Erivo, who played Elphaba, previously appeared in a dozen movies and starred as Celie Harris in Broadway’s The Color Purple. Ariana Grande needs no introduction. Additionally, Michelle Yeoh, who played Madame Morrible, won the 2023 Academy Award for Best Actress in a Leading Role for Everything, Everywhere, All at Once, a marvel of modern film creation.
The movie itself is a mediocre adaptation of a long-established franchise. Watching Wicked, I appreciated only a few details, most notably the beautifully sung finale of “Defying Gravity.”
I easily could have slept through everything else.
Wicked is tainted by its attempts at humor; it tries to supplement its underwhelming, reused narrative with repeated, exhausted tropes. The overuse of the name “Shiz” University was blatantly annoying: it was exaggerated purely to gain a laugh but was superseded by its obscene number of uses.
The stereotypes were irritating as well: the aloof blonde G(a)linda, the handsome love interest who becomes the hero, the wicked (pun intended) parents, the gay best friend who thinks the handsome savior is cute, the “good guy” who is revealed to be the villain.
All of these stereotypes contribute to a pleasant movie experience when utilized in moderation. Still, their unremitting use just makes Wicked a worse version of its Broadway original and an even worse adaptation of The Wizard of Oz, a long-established novel with a clear end.
A clear end is the main feature that all bad modern live-action recreations share: it is their downfall.
“So why does Wicked exist?” one may ask. “If it fails as a movie, why is it so successful?”
Consider for a moment how memorable all the movies made from pre-existing, thoughtfully resolved franchises have been.
Moana 2 turned a beautifully-concluded story into a cash grab, much like Frozen 2. On the contrary, the Five Nights at Freddy’s movie added a wealth of story to a constantly expanding timeline rather than solely restating one story over and over again.
Much like FNAF, Wicked’s Broadway release provided an original take on the famous novel The Wizard of Oz, but its movie form is only a rehash; Wicked, as a movie, does not provide any new information to its franchise.
Wicked fails as a movie for the same reason The Mario Movie is so forgettable; The Mario Movie attempts to tell a new story of a timeline that has already been retold to exhaustion.
Many details of Wicked were plain weak. I was most dissatisfied with the message included on Dr. Dillamond’s blackboard: “Animals should be seen and not heard.” While this detail is equivalent to the Broadway original, it still made an impression on me as a severely lacking threat to a powerful story detail.
Wicked concerns a race threatened by eradication under a corrupt authority; to include such a simple quote is to treat the viewer as if they cannot understand complicated pieces of the story by themselves.
Yes, Wicked is enjoyed by all ages. Yes, all ages should be able to understand the base plot of a given movie. However, a theme as heavy as genocide—upon humans or animals—deserves more detail than that given to a child’s explanation.
As a viewer, I felt as if the whole storyline of Wicked was being presented to me as if I were a toddler.
“So why does Wicked exist?” one may ask. “If it fails as a movie, why is it so successful?” A wise man once said, “Money makes the world go round.” Money is, in fact, what makes Wicked go round as well. More specifically, return on investment, or ROI, is the driving factor of modern live-action recreations. To ensure a stable ROI, studios prefer to utilize an existing, well-known franchise instead of risking their investment on an original idea.
This is the driving force behind why major studios rarely push out niche films: niche films do not guarantee ROI.
This is the driving force behind why major studios rarely push out niche films: niche films do not guarantee ROI. Moviegoers will come across an advertisement for a new sequel or recreation; they will watch the film; by the time another recreation comes, they have forgotten the mediocrity of the previous one, proving it to be a monetary success.
I write this not to dismiss the opinions of Wicked fans but to provide a unique view on the state of many films today.
If you truly enjoy watching live-action recreations to relive a sentimental memory or purely for entertainment, never stop that; never take away what makes you happy. However, I would like to send out a call for action: watch more indie films. Pay closer attention to the details in a movie, the minuscule labors of love that make works of art special. Much of mass-produced pop culture is missing that spark that makes it memorable, the spark that makes it meaningful.
So, find that spark. Find meaning in the movies you watch, the music you listen to, the literature you read, and most importantly, the life you live.