Reese Witherspoon & a Wicked Movie? — Page 2

I don't know about singing but I know acting and looks wise she'd make a great Glinda, but it's Kristen's role, it'd be like replacing Jack Sparrow with someone other than Johnny Depp(although it's been done many times before on Broadway lol).

I support a Wicked movie just as long as Idina or someone equally talented(like there is someone in hollywood that is lol) is playing Elphaba and not Britney Spears *shudders*

That's cool that Reese's a Wicked fan though, another reason to respect her

Ahhh.... Tricky.

And she probably felt good about having it in her contract at the time!

---

I can't think of a single really "famous" Hollywood person that can sing Glinda. As much as we all hate on Wicked on this board, Glinda really has some damn challenging soprano parts that half of the Glinda replacements haven't even been able to pull of well.

---

As much as I love Reese Witherspoon, I wouldn't want to see her as Glinda. Kristin and Idina or nothing.

I guess this is kinda on the same topic but someone on a myspace message board said Demi Moore was going to be in a Wicked movie. And I just had to laugh.

By the time a Wicked movie comes out, Kristin's stardom may be huge from all the movie roles she has been getting that Universal might be begging her to do the role.

i think she's too old to be onscreen glinda. i mean she already played marian the librarian onscreen, who's supposed to be pushing 27 i think.

is anyone else interested in seeing a wicked film thats more book than musical? or at least more of both? (new songs, slightly different plot, etc). since the book and the musical are such different entitites, i'm all for the screen movie being completely different as well, with a few elements from both.

i think if a wicked movie is going to be successful they should do it AFTER they've squeezed the juice out of wicked the musical. 10 years or more from now.

also, just because rent used the original cast for its movie doesnt mean all musicals have to. i think the main reason this happened for this film was because of the connection and everything they have due to their collaboration with larson, and because they wanted to stay as true to HIM as they could.

the original leads for the producers are another exception. my guess is that they're both big enough stars to be able to do the roles onscreen.

---

I didn't even think about the age thing. A big gap of time is supposed to happen between Act 1 and 2, so they might even consider using different actresses. And the talent pool for a school-aged Glinda is even more depressing than older Glinda. It could be like Hilary Duff grows up to be Jessica Simpson.

*shudder*

---

Uyy. The reason that Stephen Schwartz was contemplating making Wicked a movie, but made it a play is because it would be BAD as a movie. There is some sense to that. It would lose whatever magic it has on the screen.

i think the book was a huge success before the show, i love ths show, but the book is so much more, i would also prefer more of the book if it becomes a movie

Contract ?? if they make wicked a movie, but not musical does the contract still apply??

---

I would LOVE to see Reese Witherspoon as Galinda. She's in my dream cast for the movie. What dream cast?...I'm glad you asked.

Elphie - Dee or Steph
Galinda - Reese or Kristin
Fiyero - Adam Lambert
Wizard - Michael Caine
Morrible - Judy Dench

bunchamuncha- How did Reese sing in the film? I am slightly curious. I went to school with her and can't really remember her ever singing. (Not that one would have to be very strong vocally to play June Carter-Cash.)Surely she wouldn't see herself in one of the roles, but who knows.

On a different note: If a movie were to be made, I don't think following the novel would be wise. It's just too dark overall. I would think the average moviegoer would be expecting the somewhat frightening, but happy ending package of the original film. I would like to see the musical version, with maybe a few more dark additions, come to the big screen. But I honestly wouldn't have a lot of interest in seeing it if Idina and Kristin weren't at least in the roles of the adult women.

---

"Uyy. The reason that Stephen Schwartz was contemplating making Wicked a movie, but made it a play is because it would be BAD as a movie. There is some sense to that. It would lose whatever magic it has on the screen. "

NO! Someone else had the screen and stage rights to Wicked (I forget his name though). He actually had a screenplay but felt something was missing. He was approached by Stephen Schwartz to turn it into a musical. According to the screenwriter, that's what he felt was missing, so agreed to allow it to be turned into a musical. I think he was working for or on behalf of Universal, which is why they are one of the producers of the show.

Fosse76: You're right. That producer was Marc Platt, president of production at Universal. He optioned the rights and was struggling with developing a non-musical film based on the book. Since he (and Universal) own the rights to the novel, and with the enormous success of the stage show now, it is very unlikely at this point that a non-musical film will be done anytime remotely soon. A musical film will come first. Then (who knows?) years or even decades from now, we might see a non-musical movie or (better yet) mini-series based on the much-darker book.

Also, I believe if they DO go back to the original book as a source for non-musical material, our beloved Reece would definitely be left behind. Galinda (in the book) is nothing like the Legally Blonde-type character that has evolved in the musical.

---