Apparently it’s a two part movie and the next half is next year. So maybe it does deserve 1 star.
Naw. I was a bit worried when they said they were splitting it, but my wife and I love Wicked (she talked about it on our second date and before our third date I had listened to the soundtrack and sent her my thoughts and started reading the book), so we went to see it opening night.
Having seen it, I now think it’s a very appropriate use of the Part I/Part II split. They divide the movies at the intermission of the musical, Act I is Part I and Act II will be Part II. This may seem silly since the musical itself is about as long as Part I (if you include intermission), but a musical can tell a story like this much faster than a movie. Movies have establishing shots and reaction shots, longer action sequences, time spent allowing moments to land, letting scenes breathe, people taking in their surroundings, etc.
If they had tried to cram both acts into one movie it would’ve felt extremely rushed. They barely added any story elements to the movie, and song-wise only really added a bit to One Short Day, but it still filled it’s runtime and never (to me anyway) felt like it was dragging or filler.
We loved it. Now, we’re biased because we love the musical, but it’s a good musical. So I recommend the movie!
Nope, because that wasn’t really a secret. You would have had to be very out of the loop to not know that in advance. But I saw Dune with a buddy and he was very “What?! It just ends there?”. Wrt Wicked, I saw the musical in London ages ago and was very surprised to hear that this is a two part movie (also known as a miniseries).
If you liked the musical, I recommend the movie. I was somewhat skeptical going in, but I did keep in mind how story-dense the musical is. Pretty early into the movie my wife and I were both like, “Oh yeah, it’s a good thing they split it.” It would’ve felt crazy rushed in the medium of film if they had both acts in one movie, or they would’ve had to cut stuff out.
I don’t really blame them for hiding “Part I”; that’s just good marketing, as fewer people would see it if it declared itself a Part I. But it really is worth seeing as a movie, just one that demands a sequel. It may seem somewhat duplicitous but…that’s marketing. Once you’re in the theater they put Part I up on the title card.
that sounds so fucking metal WHAT MOVIE IS THIS
Wicked. It’s a prequel / slight overlap to the Wizard of Oz.
Apparently it’s a two part movie and the next half is next year. So maybe it does deserve 1 star.
Naw. I was a bit worried when they said they were splitting it, but my wife and I love Wicked (she talked about it on our second date and before our third date I had listened to the soundtrack and sent her my thoughts and started reading the book), so we went to see it opening night.
Having seen it, I now think it’s a very appropriate use of the Part I/Part II split. They divide the movies at the intermission of the musical, Act I is Part I and Act II will be Part II. This may seem silly since the musical itself is about as long as Part I (if you include intermission), but a musical can tell a story like this much faster than a movie. Movies have establishing shots and reaction shots, longer action sequences, time spent allowing moments to land, letting scenes breathe, people taking in their surroundings, etc.
If they had tried to cram both acts into one movie it would’ve felt extremely rushed. They barely added any story elements to the movie, and song-wise only really added a bit to One Short Day, but it still filled it’s runtime and never (to me anyway) felt like it was dragging or filler.
We loved it. Now, we’re biased because we love the musical, but it’s a good musical. So I recommend the movie!
Did you also give Lord of The Rings one star?
The thing is that they are deliberately hiding it’s part 1 of 2.
Nope, because that wasn’t really a secret. You would have had to be very out of the loop to not know that in advance. But I saw Dune with a buddy and he was very “What?! It just ends there?”. Wrt Wicked, I saw the musical in London ages ago and was very surprised to hear that this is a two part movie (also known as a miniseries).
If you liked the musical, I recommend the movie. I was somewhat skeptical going in, but I did keep in mind how story-dense the musical is. Pretty early into the movie my wife and I were both like, “Oh yeah, it’s a good thing they split it.” It would’ve felt crazy rushed in the medium of film if they had both acts in one movie, or they would’ve had to cut stuff out.
I don’t really blame them for hiding “Part I”; that’s just good marketing, as fewer people would see it if it declared itself a Part I. But it really is worth seeing as a movie, just one that demands a sequel. It may seem somewhat duplicitous but…that’s marketing. Once you’re in the theater they put Part I up on the title card.