Sure, but everyone going into the lord of the rings movies knows they’re adaptations of three seperate books. And at least with book adaptations if you’re really desperate you can read the book. An unfortunate side effect (which can’t be helped) of adapting a Broadway musical means the only other way I can find out how this story ends in advance of the movie is by traveling to where the show is being performed, and buying a fairly expensive ticket. Again it’s not the movies fault (and I liked the film) but it’s an interesting side effect of this kind of adaptation
I can't really say cause I know the musical but I think people would benefit from rewatches. People rewatch Harry Potter & LotR all the time as well. 🤷♂️
I totally agree, having never seen the story before watching the movie, I ended up feeling pretty unfulfilled. And this just makes me want to spoil the second act for myself now. It would be easier to ignore that urge if we didn't have to wait a full year for the next movie. I can understand it being split into 2 if the release dates were closer together, but now I've already looked around and gotten some small spoilers for part 2 and i just want to know how it all ends now.
I’ve had the same urge to spoil it for myself as well. Again- not because I have any issue with cliffhangers, or stories being told in multiple chapters. But just because I feel like the story of part 1 just doesn’t fully work without the context of whats to come because it wasn’t designed to be spread out this way
as far as i know It actually started as a book from 1995 and was adapted into the musical we all know. Then a 4 part book series and now a movie.. so i Think the new movie is so long because They use all of these books and the musical to draw inspiration from to give some more depth to the story of the movie .. but yeah the first half didn’t have much to it and i also Think the second half Will have a lot more happening… but you’re right i Think its a good idea to Watch the movie with that in mind ☺️
Hi, I'm also a first time Wicked watcher/fan...I found the part one interesting too. It didn't bother me that much. I just wish we didn't have to wait another whole ass year to wait to see what happens next. I'm hoping they follow up on the animal subplot...I really want the sentiment Animals to have a happy ending....same for Elephaba too. I'm very excited for part two....I wished it was coming out like in January or March or something instead of November 2025. But I enjoyed what we got so far. Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande both killed it and nailed their parts. I enjoyed this movie a lot. I'm still spellbound by it.
You didn't seem to review anything you saw. It's kind of one big whine. I haven't seen the musical and find a lot of dramatic action. I think the two leads are as compelling as any characters for a long time. I also have k own for at least 2 or three months that it was 2 parts.
This wasn’t a review, just my feelings about how my experience of this story was impacted by this movie being split into two. I also loved the leads, loved the performances and really enjoyed the music.
I’ll take that on board for future videos! Theres longer thoughts on my overall feelings on my Letterboxd account- but I enjoyed the movie, and am excited for part 2. Really loved the leads, enjoyed the songs and half loved the musical sequences but I struggled to care about the side characters and I though the animal subplot was very half baked
@@ConorsMovieList So I understand the frustration with part 1 stuff, but as someone who has seen the musical, I just can't see how they could go any different. I think John Chu went overboard some, and could've cut out ~15 minutes from some stretched out dance numbers and cut down some scenes. But the math of taking 2,5 hours of staging and just filming it doesn't work because theater and movie are different mediums, in movies you can have action shots, panning shots and close ups, on stage you can't have scenery moving beautifully, and can't see actors faces from up close, so everything moves faster. Which means that if they did the plot as it is without additions, you would need to increase runtime by at least 40-50 minutes for those things. Another part of the stage play is that there are very jarring and theatrical transitions between scenes, you need to give scenes at least breathing room, and better yet, expansion. Another problem is, musical if very much about Elphaba and Galinda relationship, everything else is an afterthought, and sometimes too surface level. That overwhelming animal subjugation? Barely present on a stage - there's short scene in professor Dillimand classroom, lion cub in a classroom, and monkeys scene and that's it, they had to return that theme to prominence. Third problem, everyone knows that the second act of Wicked is weaker one, and it flies at even faster pace with even more problems to plot cohesion, you need to make it work better somehow, which would add another 30-40 minutes, the resulst is 4-4,5 hour movie? An alternative is to cut it down, which means either cutting Nessarose, or Fyero, or animal xenophobia plot. Which would make it typical Hollywood adaptation which hollows out the originals and only leave the plot there. So I'm actually glad they did it as 2 parts, otherwise we would have a cut down "Oz Great and Powerful" with music and some later stuff tackled on at the end. Or those failures of adaptations that were "Sweeny Todd" and "Into The Woods" (by the way, "Into The Woods" stage version was filmed for PBS, it's on youtube, if you want to see just how much can be sacrificed for "realism" and run time, just compare it to the movie; stage version is funny and thoughtful, where they movie isn't).
@@nathanliteroy9835 With everything I've heard about act 2 of the play I agree that splitting the movie into two parts was probably the best approach. (and I say as much in the video) I just think the problems it creates are an interesting symptom of trying to adapt something from the stage. And specifically the problems of the adaptation are unique to adapting a stage show rather than a book. So I don't disagree with anything you've said but I still think the problems with doing a split are interesting and worth discussing
@@ConorsMovieList Don't disagree at all, it is always a problem, and really I rarely see it done well. I think something like Sweeney can be done well in one movie, the stage musical feels somewhat protracted. Wicked is not apparent for someone who haven't seen it, but it needs time because it has just too many threads and several main characters. Regarding my comment - when I post it in response to your video. youtube just deletes it for some reason. Wanted to check and post it in parts to sede which paragraph triggers the deletion, but decided to try posting the comment in a response here and it got through. It's really bizarre
I didn’t mention any of that because this isn’t a review (no mention of review in title, thumbnail, video or description) it’s just as the title says, my experience of watching wicked as someone who doesn’t know the show and how I felt that impacted my experience of the story
For the record though liked the songs- half loved the musicals numbers, loved the relationship between Elphaba and Glinda, loved the performances, but I really struggled with the animal subplot which felt very half baked to me
Have people forgotten about LOTR where Sam and Frodo just keep walking and the movie ends?
Sure, but everyone going into the lord of the rings movies knows they’re adaptations of three seperate books. And at least with book adaptations if you’re really desperate you can read the book. An unfortunate side effect (which can’t be helped) of adapting a Broadway musical means the only other way I can find out how this story ends in advance of the movie is by traveling to where the show is being performed, and buying a fairly expensive ticket. Again it’s not the movies fault (and I liked the film) but it’s an interesting side effect of this kind of adaptation
I can't really say cause I know the musical but I think people would benefit from rewatches. People rewatch Harry Potter & LotR all the time as well. 🤷♂️
I totally agree, having never seen the story before watching the movie, I ended up feeling pretty unfulfilled. And this just makes me want to spoil the second act for myself now. It would be easier to ignore that urge if we didn't have to wait a full year for the next movie. I can understand it being split into 2 if the release dates were closer together, but now I've already looked around and gotten some small spoilers for part 2 and i just want to know how it all ends now.
I’ve had the same urge to spoil it for myself as well. Again- not because I have any issue with cliffhangers, or stories being told in multiple chapters. But just because I feel like the story of part 1 just doesn’t fully work without the context of whats to come because it wasn’t designed to be spread out this way
as far as i know
It actually started as a book from 1995 and was adapted into the musical we all know. Then a 4 part book series and now a movie.. so i Think the new movie is so long because They use all of these books and the musical to draw inspiration from to give some more depth to the story of the movie .. but yeah the first half didn’t have much to it and i also Think the second half Will have a lot more happening… but you’re right i Think its a good idea to Watch the movie with that in mind ☺️
Hi, I'm also a first time Wicked watcher/fan...I found the part one interesting too. It didn't bother me that much. I just wish we didn't have to wait another whole ass year to wait to see what happens next. I'm hoping they follow up on the animal subplot...I really want the sentiment Animals to have a happy ending....same for Elephaba too. I'm very excited for part two....I wished it was coming out like in January or March or something instead of November 2025. But I enjoyed what we got so far. Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande both killed it and nailed their parts. I enjoyed this movie a lot. I'm still spellbound by it.
Hopefully it’s worth the wait
I haven’t seen the musical and I loved the movie.
You didn't seem to review anything you saw. It's kind of one big whine. I haven't seen the musical and find a lot of dramatic action. I think the two leads are as compelling as any characters for a long time. I also have k own for at least 2 or three months that it was 2 parts.
This wasn’t a review, just my feelings about how my experience of this story was impacted by this movie being split into two. I also loved the leads, loved the performances and really enjoyed the music.
@ConorsMovieList ok. Fair enough. Still would have liked to know what you thought about what you did see.
I’ll take that on board for future videos!
Theres longer thoughts on my overall feelings on my Letterboxd account- but I enjoyed the movie, and am excited for part 2. Really loved the leads, enjoyed the songs and half loved the musical sequences but I struggled to care about the side characters and I though the animal subplot was very half baked
You deserve more views
Thank you 🙏
I guess my comment got deleted? Nice
I didn’t delete anything? Repost it?
@@ConorsMovieList Ok. This act of random youtube censorship is frustrating
@@ConorsMovieList So I understand the frustration with part 1 stuff, but as someone who has seen the musical, I just can't see how they could go any different. I think John Chu went overboard some, and could've cut out ~15 minutes from some stretched out dance numbers and cut down some scenes.
But the math of taking 2,5 hours of staging and just filming it doesn't work because theater and movie are different mediums, in movies you can have action shots, panning shots and close ups, on stage you can't have scenery moving beautifully, and can't see actors faces from up close, so everything moves faster. Which means that if they did the plot as it is without additions, you would need to increase runtime by at least 40-50 minutes for those things.
Another part of the stage play is that there are very jarring and theatrical transitions between scenes, you need to give scenes at least breathing room, and better yet, expansion.
Another problem is, musical if very much about Elphaba and Galinda relationship, everything else is an afterthought, and sometimes too surface level. That overwhelming animal subjugation? Barely present on a stage - there's short scene in professor Dillimand classroom, lion cub in a classroom, and monkeys scene and that's it, they had to return that theme to prominence.
Third problem, everyone knows that the second act of Wicked is weaker one, and it flies at even faster pace with even more problems to plot cohesion, you need to make it work better somehow, which would add another 30-40 minutes, the resulst is 4-4,5 hour movie?
An alternative is to cut it down, which means either cutting Nessarose, or Fyero, or animal xenophobia plot. Which would make it typical Hollywood adaptation which hollows out the originals and only leave the plot there.
So I'm actually glad they did it as 2 parts, otherwise we would have a cut down "Oz Great and Powerful" with music and some later stuff tackled on at the end. Or those failures of adaptations that were "Sweeny Todd" and "Into The Woods" (by the way, "Into The Woods" stage version was filmed for PBS, it's on youtube, if you want to see just how much can be sacrificed for "realism" and run time, just compare it to the movie; stage version is funny and thoughtful, where they movie isn't).
@@nathanliteroy9835 With everything I've heard about act 2 of the play I agree that splitting the movie into two parts was probably the best approach. (and I say as much in the video) I just think the problems it creates are an interesting symptom of trying to adapt something from the stage. And specifically the problems of the adaptation are unique to adapting a stage show rather than a book. So I don't disagree with anything you've said but I still think the problems with doing a split are interesting and worth discussing
@@ConorsMovieList Don't disagree at all, it is always a problem, and really I rarely see it done well. I think something like Sweeney can be done well in one movie, the stage musical feels somewhat protracted. Wicked is not apparent for someone who haven't seen it, but it needs time because it has just too many threads and several main characters.
Regarding my comment - when I post it in response to your video. youtube just deletes it for some reason. Wanted to check and post it in parts to sede which paragraph triggers the deletion, but decided to try posting the comment in a response here and it got through. It's really bizarre
So....did you like the songs? Music? Production design? This review left me hanging. Is there a part 2 of this review?
I didn’t mention any of that because this isn’t a review (no mention of review in title, thumbnail, video or description) it’s just as the title says, my experience of watching wicked as someone who doesn’t know the show and how I felt that impacted my experience of the story
For the record though liked the songs- half loved the musicals numbers, loved the relationship between Elphaba and Glinda, loved the performances, but I really struggled with the animal subplot which felt very half baked to me