Actors in the movie adaptation of the Broadway sensation “Wicked” took their final bows as the movie’s second and final part premiered on Nov. 21, 2025. After the chart-topping success of the first film, the audience’s expectations were high when walking into theatres. For some, the movie was everything they had hoped for, while others felt the film fell flat.
The “Wicked” movie franchise directly follows the stage musical under the same name, but the story was initially born from Gregory Maguire’s novel “Wicked: The Life and Times of the Wicked Witch of the West.” The plot is a spin-off of the famous “Wizard of Oz,” following the origin stories of the Wicked Witch of the West, Elphaba, played by Cynthia Erivo, and Glinda the Good, played by Arianna Grande. The two “Wicked” movies were filmed simultaneously and directed by the renowned Jon M. Chu. The cast also includes Jonathan Bailey, Ethan Slater and Michelle Yeoh, who all expertly bring the film to life.
The overall production value of the movie was outstanding. While this was to be expected after “Wicked:” Part I, audiences were still blown away by the set and costume design. From seemingly endless fields of poppies to an entire skyline of glistening green high rises in the Emerald City, every set was on such a large scale, yet also so detail-oriented, that it was nothing short of remarkable. These visuals transported viewers to Oz, and the high-quality casting enhanced the immersive experience. The high production budget, with $300 million allocated between the two parts, was well spent.
However, the first topic of debate within the film was the musical score. As the cast features powerhouses of vocal talent, the songs were both impressive and moving. Despite this, many fans noted the lack of big musical sequences. Many of the tracks featured in this movie were more intimate and slower than in the first movie, which had a more balanced mix of emotional numbers and elaborate dance sequences. With expectations of grand choreography and catchy melodies, it was a bit disappointing to hear the movie’s soundtrack. While the songs were still well-crafted and polished, they weren’t nearly as impactful or memorable as tracks from the first movie.
Similarly, the overall plot of the movie was much slower than the first. Despite the run time of “Wicked: For Good” being 23 minutes shorter than “Wicked,” many of the scenes seemed to drag on. The film began not long after the end of the first part, and its timeline overlapped with the original Wizard of Oz story. The plot explores themes of propaganda, social behaviors and leadership, and a human complexity beyond a simple “good” or “wicked.” These themes are insightful and can easily be tied back to the real world, giving the movie a depth that is truly thought-provoking. Yet, because the scenes often played more into the emotional experience, the movie had less action and excitement than viewers might have hoped for.
In addition, some fans thought the chemistry between the cast felt off. The film was very well cast in the sense that all actors were extremely talented and fitting of their roles; however, the relationships between characters were less moving than they could have been. While the two leads, Erivo and Grande, have a tight bond that is easy to feel through the screen, some of the other character dynamics felt less authentic. This awkwardness was especially obvious during the song “As Long As You’re Mine” between characters Elphaba and Fiyero (Erivo and Bailey, respectively). The scene was supposed to be romantic and full of chemistry and tension, but instead it felt forced and was ultimately far from swoonworthy. This same uncomfortable dynamic could be noted in scenes between Elphaba and her sister, Nessarose (played by Marissa Bode). While the sisters were entangled in quite a bit of tension plotwise, the underlying affection and sisterly love they displayed for each other in the first film was missing. In all cases, the actors’ performances were outstanding when isolated. Many of the relationships between characters that were supposed to tug at the audience’s heartstrings just fell flat.
The movie was impressive, but hard to compare to the grandeur of the first film. In its defense, the original musical script was written to feature a more enticing first act and a slower second. Those who have been fans of the Wicked franchise since its Broadway origins were aware of this and knew what to expect when going to theatres. However, many newcomers to the world of Oz, who had hoped to find themselves on the edge of their seats, might have been disappointed in the lack of action. “Wicked:” Part I was a tough act to follow, and the expectations placed on “Wicked: For Good” were hard to live up to. The movie held its own in some aspects, and less so in others; however, it was still enjoyable and worth watching, especially for those eager to see the conclusion after the first movie.
