Wicked: For Good (2025) Review
4/10
Number of watches at time of review: 1
synopsis
Elphaba and Glinda finds themselves on opposing sides as the witch-hunt for Elphaba grows stronger throughout Oz. Their friendship is tested, and the future of Oz rests on their shoulders.
spoiler-free review
Following the footsteps of the stage musical, the second act of this worldwide Wicked phenomenon isn’t as strong as its predecessor. The story somehow feels rushed, despite the runtime of the act being stretched out, and there aren’t as many strong songs in the second act. The highlights were, once again, performances by Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande, and the costume and set design (though the use of CGI sets for some scenes dimmed this point somewhat). The film is enjoyable, but really hammers home the fact that the musical did not need to be stretched into two parts.
Wicked: For Good (2025)
directed by Jon M. Chu
screenplay by Winnie Holzman and Dana Fox
musical book by Winnie Holzman
based on the novel by Gregory Maguire
cinematography by Alice Brooks
music by John Powell and Stephen Schwartz
spoiler review
Many of my criticisms and praises of the first film carry over to this one, so let’s first run through those real quick before getting to things more specific to this film.
The positives:
The costuming, makeup, and hair was stellar.
The set design (when they filmed in actual sets and not on a green-screen background) was incredible.
The negatives:
The coloring of the movie was as bland and ugly as the first one, maybe even more so.
There were almost no interesting shots, and even those that were interesting in concept weren’t necessarily executed that way.
The CGI animals still looked horrible—is it really that difficult to use some of the budget on animatronics when the first movie is one of the highest grossing films of all time?
As in the first film, Ariana Grande’s acting as Glinda was outstanding. She kept the airiness of the role intact while also showing Glinda’s deeper feelings in key moments. Cynthia Erivo and Jonathan Bailey, however, seemed to throw any subtlety out the window for this film. While their performances were good, they felt as if they thought the camera was going to be much further away; their performances would suit a stage rather than a film.
Somehow, Michelle Yeoh was phoning it in even more this time around. She seemed completely disconnected from the movie, as though she wanted to be anywhere else. Her performance as Madame Morrible didn’t inspire any real fear of what she might do; even when she conjured the tornado, she seemed bored of it. In terms of antagonists, Jeff Goldblum as the Wizard was much more fun to watch, though he seemed to be playing the part in much the same way he plays any part: as himself. He was given more time to sing this movie, which was a mistake, as he has proved between the two of these to have no vocal talent, as did Michelle Yeoh. All in all, neither purported ‘true villains’ were at all interesting.
In a change from the first movie, there were entire new songs added to For Good. Perhaps to buffer the runtime of the movie, given that the film is about double the length of act two done on stage—it certainly wasn’t for story or album purposes, because both new songs are horrendous and add little to nothing to the story. The lyrics of each song sound as though they were penned by a child, and the music isn’t much better. “No Place Like Home,” a number in which Elphaba tries to convince fleeing animals to stay in Oz, feels like a cheap use of the iconic catchphrase from the original movie, while “The Girl in the Bubble,” a song where Glinda despairs about the position she put herself in, is an unnecessary pity party of one saved only by interesting camerawork.
Despite longer than the stage version of the second act, For Good does not use its extended runtime to explore anything interesting. It’s a bloated mess of a movie that has all the flaws of act two of Wicked’s stage production and then some.
personal connection
I don’t have as strong a connection to act two of Wicked as I do to act one, mostly due to not listening to the songs as much. It may be due to this that I enjoyed myself more during For Good than I did during the first movie, though I do think that this one is overall worse.
As someone who loves the world of Oz from the Baum books and the ’39 movie, it’s somewhat surprising that I don’t love these movies. For me, though, their flaws far outweigh any enjoyment I had watching them.
(Also, just as a pedantic note: Elphaba should not have been able to walk in the desert surrounding Oz at the end of the movie! Lore states that the desert is deadly to any living thing that touches it, disintegrating the organic material instantly.)
final thoughts
Wicked: For Good is a choppy landing for an already turbulence-wrecked plane. But if you enjoyed the first movie, you will almost certainly derive at least some satisfaction from this film. Given the Wicked fanaticism that’s embraced the world, it doesn’t seem like we’re going to stop hearing about the wonderful world of Oz anytime soon.