Should Chu Create a 3 Hour 'Director's Cut of Wicked

When I saw the first Wicked movie when it opened, I enjoyed it. Six months later, I tried to watch it on Amazon, and was bored stiff, turning it off after 45 minutes or so. When I saw For Good earlier today, much to my surprise I enjoyed it, although I thought both new songs were mediocre. Interestingly, I was a little restless in the first half, but enjoyed the second half, mediocre Oscar bait or not. I think the main reason was the evolution of Glinda's character (which I don't remember being as effective in the show, despite seeing it 6 or 7 times) and AG's performance, which I thought was excellent. CE was fine, but her role just was not as good as in the first half.

So, here's my theory. IF Chu could go back to the editing room with the goal of dramatically reducing 'the bloat and coming up with a single 3 hour movie, would the result be an improvement over the current output and, more importntly for the money people, could they develop an advertising campaign to incent people to return to the movie houses to see the dramatically shortened version?

Please God, make it stop.

I still stand by my theory that the only way to win public approval on Part 2 was not to play, and simply to release Part 1 with a "to be continued" before pausing indefinitely.

But as far as a shortened director's cut of the two films? Despite theatre people's opinions, the current trends in alternate cuts go in the other direction: he's likelier to make a hyper-extended "Wicked: the Epic Experience" cut with both films plus additional material, or even a miniseries cut that expands the piece but cuts it into five or six episodes instead.

darquegk said: "I still stand by my theory that the only way to win public approval on Part 2 was not to play, and simply to release Part 1 with a "to be continued" before pausing indefinitely.

But as far as a shortened director's cut of the two films? Despite theatre people's opinions, the current trends in alternate cuts go in the other direction: he's likelier to make a hyper-extended "Wicked: the Epic Experience" cut with both films plus additional material,or even a miniseries cut that expands the piece but cuts it into five or six episodes instead."

But what if his 'marching orders' were to make a 3-hour version, in a goal to get another shot at the box office, wouldn't that be different? The only reason that I actually even thought of this was not to copy the show. IT was because, when I really like a movie, I will see it multiple times, getting something new with each viewing usually. I could not sit through more than 45 minutes of he current first movie because of the bloat. Yet I thought that there were enough really entertaining parts that, if dramatically re-cut, it could be result in a more entertaining product.

Updated On: 12/10/25 at 03:17 PM

If they could get it down to a few 22 minute episodes I might give it a chance.

The real question is: should he have done so? It's too late now. The movies are what they are.

Intersting that some people are already rethinking their response to the first movie.

My guess is that for most Wicked fans, the movie is likely to stand the test of time alongside the stage show. But the larger audience who were swept up in the excitement of it all will probably look back on them with a "meh" response, much as I think they have with various superhero, Harry Potter, Twilight and Tolkien franchies.

What the two Wicked movies are not likely to retain even with Wicked fans is the excitement of being the new thing everyone is talking about and excited to see. You usually only get that once. Wicked got it twice. Pretty good proof of success, as far as I'm concerned.

Updated On: 12/11/25 at 11:51 AM

I think he needs to leave it alone. The second film paled in comparison to the first. IMO.