Universal's WICKED Films - News & Discussion Thread- Page 126

[TheOtherOne2]

Posted: 1/23/26 at 12:32pm

QueenAlice said: "Angels in America and Perestroika were written and performed as two separate works on stage in a single season...."

Not exactly.  Angels In America: Part One is called Millennium Approaches and Angels In America: Part Two is called Perestroika. They had been presented as one play by the Eureka Theater Company in San Francisco in May of 1991, though Perestroika was only given a staged reading.  Millennium Approaches was then produced by the Royal National Theatre in January of 1992.  Parts One and Two were then presented in LA at the Mark Taper Forum in November of 1992, with plans announced for it to open on Broadway the following spring.  There were three cast replacements in between (Harper, Joe and Belize) and with an eye on successive Tonys it was decided to open Part One in time for the 92-93 awards and save Part Two for the 93-94.  Each play did in fact win its seasons Best Play Tony (deservedly), but the revivals at the Signature in 2010-11 and on Broadway in 2018 treated Parts One and Two as one play (as I believe it had been categorized on the West End as well). 

It was a slick if crafty move.

Interestingly, Stephen Spinella (Prior) won the Best Featured Actor Tony in 1993 while Ron Leibman (Roy) won Best Actor.  Leibman was not nominated in 1994 and Spinella then won Best Actor.  In 2018, Andrew Garfield won Best Actor for playing Prior and Nathan Lane won Best Featured Actor for playing Roy when the plays were presented as one work.

 

Updated On: 1/23/26 at 12:32 PM

[Kad]

Posted: 1/23/26 at 12:59pm

Yes, I think the major hurdle For Good could not overcome in categories like Production Design, Costume, etc is that, indeed, much of what we see in For Good we already saw- and what was already awarded- in part one. If you are purely assessing the new elements that appear solely in For Good, it's a smaller and weaker body of work. There are only a handful of new settings (Elphaba's treehouse, Glinda's penthouse, Kiamo Ko), costuming is generally variations of things already seen, there are two big makeup elements (Tin Man & Scarecrow) that are decidedly mixed in success. 

Updated On: 1/23/26 at 12:59 PM

[TheOtherOne2]

Posted: 1/23/26 at 1:49pm

Bette's Turban said: "TheOtherOne2 said: "Why on earth should any of them have been nominated two years in a row for the same production? They suckered millions of dollars out of people. They don't need Oscars, too."

Well.. they didn’t sucker anything out of anybody. And the expectation was that Ariana would be nominated . Don’t act like a know it all. "

As the “know it all” in question here, I’d like to say that I thought Wicked had the potential to be one excellent movie and was disappointed in the results of it being stretched into two. I don’t think I’m alone or even a minority in this, so its lack of Oscar nominations didn’t offend me, especially considering that most of its potential nominees were nominated last year. For what it’s worth, I also expected Ariana to be a nominee. She managed to be great in both films and I was surprised that she wasn’t nominated. 

 

Updated On: 1/23/26 at 01:49 PM

[tomorrowBIGLITES]

Posted: 1/23/26 at 1:56pm

Also when the cat fight happens onstage in Act Two. It’s a show stopper. 
You never feel like the audience is squirmy during Act Two. They love it cause it plays to live audience sensibilities.

[MagicalMusical]

Posted: 1/24/26 at 9:29am

So, I just looked to see Amy Madigan was nominated in Supporting. She was great, but she didn’t have a big long journey that made me tear up like Ariana. I would have nominated Ariana over her, but I guess since Weapons was the better movie, they figured Amy deserved it more. That’s usually how the Best Costume winner works. Not all the time, but usually, the Academy just votes most for the costumes in the film that was also nominated for Best Picture, even when other nominated costumes are clearly better.

And speaking of costumes, everyone wore different costumes in For Good than the ones they had in Part One, save for the ones in the end like the pink dress, and I think Yeoh wore one previous costume in like one scene. So I don’t agree they should not have been nominated for For Good.

Updated On: 1/24/26 at 09:29 AM

[ColorTheHours048]

Posted: 1/24/26 at 10:28am

MagicalMusical said: "So, I just looked to see Amy Madigan was nominated in Supporting. She was great, but she didn’t have a big long journey that made me tear up like Ariana."

Well, thankfully, the award isn’t Best Big Long Journey That Made MagicalMusical Tear Up.

Ariana Grande likely placed around 6th or 7th in the Oscar voting for Best Supporting Actress, as that particular category turned out to be more stacked than anticipated. If you’re going to place any blame on who bumped Grande out of the race, look to the two Sentimental Value ladies who were both duking it out in the precursor awards; not Amy Madigan, who is neck and neck as the frontrunner alongside Teyana Taylor.

[LooseTapScrews]

Posted: 1/24/26 at 8:07pm

^Agree completely, ColorTheHours048! 

Can we just talk about the amount of performances up for consideration in all four acting categories is insane. So many of them were honestly win competitive in any other year and each of the four categories had at least two or three actors left off nominations that could easily have been nominated and win competitive in any other year… (Paul Mescal, Ariana Grande, Odessa A’zion, Joel Eggerton, Amanda Seyfried, Tessa Thompson, Chase Infiniti…to name a few*). 
 

For a year with five films that were locks + four foreign language films that could have been nominated across the board; this really turned out to be an exceptional year for film and will be remembered as such with time. (But Wicked: For Good was not one of those films. Sorry, Not Sorry).

[TheOtherOne2]

Posted: 1/24/26 at 8:17pm

^ Don't forget Jesse Plemons.  

[LooseTapScrews]

Posted: 1/24/26 at 8:23pm

TheOtherOne2 said: "^ Don't forget Jesse Plemons. "

Absolutely! There’s a handful+ I left off but Jess’s one I absolutely would have listed and if the edit option wasn’t somehow blocked from my (forced new) account I would have edited to add him 100%…

[MagicalMusical]

Posted: 1/27/26 at 12:21am

So you think Amy just did a better job at acting in her smaller role than Ariana? I can understand that. She was chilling.

I have not seen many films this year. I usually see films from friend recommendations, and also try to at least see whatever wins Best Picture. It sounds amazing that this year is considered that good for films and performances. At least I saw Sinners (and liked it very much).

Updated On: 1/27/26 at 12:21 AM

[TheatreMonkey]

Posted: 2/1/26 at 5:49pm

And they won the GRAMMY for "Defying Gravity".

Kinda wild they beat the KPOP Demon Hunters juggernaut. 

[MagicalMusical]

Posted: 2/3/26 at 12:09am

Wow! Yes it is amazing they beat Kpop Demon Hunters! Good for them!

[Jeffrey Karasarides]

Posted: 2/8/26 at 7:41am

As a fan of Next Best Picture, I get to vote for the nominations and winners for their annual film community awards. Nominating ballots are due before February 14th. To those who'd like to nominate Wicked: For Good in any category, you can do so here.
https://nextbestpicture.com/the-2025-nbp-film-community-award-nomination-ballots/

[Jeffrey Karasarides]

Posted: 2/10/26 at 10:20am

Brian Rowe of The Awards Contender has recently published a video on why Wicked: For Good flopped at the Oscars.

[BrodyFosse123]

Posted: 2/10/26 at 10:45am

Jeffrey Karasarides said: "Brian Rowe of The Awards Contender has recently published a video on why Wicked: For Good flopped at the Oscars.

The Academy voters voted and nominated WICKED (aka Part 1) as the whole WICKED film (both parts as one film). It’s utterly ridiculous how the phreaks are reacting as if WICKED was completely ignored by the Academy when its first time out it received 10 Oscar nominations (including nods to both actresses) and winning 2 Oscars. WTF?

 

[EDSOSLO858]

Posted: 2/10/26 at 10:52am

The first film was likably over-padded. Started off a little slow, but the two leads did their job, Bailey gave it a much-needed jolt of energy from his first moments, and I was hooked for the rest of the runtime.

The second part was just overblown, workmanlike. The two new songs were meh and some of the sequences, like those of the first film, were loooooong. 

 

 

[Kad]

Posted: 2/10/26 at 10:56am

BrodyFosse123 said: "Jeffrey Karasarides said: "Brian Rowe of The Awards Contender has recently published a video on why Wicked: For Good flopped at the Oscars.

The Academy voters voted and nominated WICKED (aka Part 1) as the whole WICKED film (both parts as one film). It’s utterly ridiculous how the phreaks are reacting as if WICKED was completely ignored by the Academy when its first time out it received 10 Oscar nominations (including nods to both actresses) and winning 2 Oscars. WTF?"

 

Maybe because they are two films and each film was eligible, separately, for awards? If For Good had been better received, it likely would’ve racked up more nominations, regardless of how part one performed with awards.

Updated On: 2/10/26 at 10:56 AM