Universal's WICKED Films - News & Discussion Thread — Page 49

DramaTeach said: "I know everyone is concerned about Kristin Chenoweth and Idina Menzel having cameos, but I’m more interested in seeing Joel Grey. The man is 91 and I’d love to see him have one last hurrah in the movie. I don’t know if he’s capable of traveling to London for the shoot, but I hope it happens."



I interacted with him a lot in 2019. Unless something has happened between then and now, I'd say he is more than ok to make the trip. The man was so full of energy. He was 86/87 at the time and I had no clue he was in his 80's.

Who is going to pay money to see a Wicked film that doesn't feature Defying Gravity?

Rentaholic2 said: "rattleNwoolypenguin said: "Who is going to pay money to see a Wicked film that doesn't feature Defying Gravity?

"

Huh? Are you talking about Part II? Because DG ends Part I - it's literally the reason they cited for breaking the movie into two parts.

"

That is exactly what I mean. Part II is not going to have Defying Gravity. So what big set piece are the audiences showing up for in Part II?

rattleNwoolypenguin said: "Rentaholic2 said: "rattleNwoolypenguin said: "Who is going to pay money to see a Wicked film that doesn't feature Defying Gravity?

"

Huh? Are you talking about Part II? Because DG ends Part I - it's literally the reason they cited for breaking the movie into two parts.

"

That is exactly what I mean. Part II is not going to have Defying Gravity. So what big set piece are the audiences showing up for in Part II?"

This honesty makes no sense. Do you see people walking out of Wicked at intermission because there isn’t a “big set piece” in act II?

QueenTwinnied said: "rattleNwoolypenguin said: "Rentaholic2 said: "rattleNwoolypenguin said: "Who is going to pay money to see a Wicked film that doesn't feature Defying Gravity?

"

Huh? Are you talking about Part II? Because DG ends Part I - it's literally the reason they cited for breaking the movie into two parts.

"

That is exactly what I mean. Part II is not going to have Defying Gravity. So what big set piece are the audiences showing up for in Part II?"

This honesty makes no sense. Do you see people walking out of Wicked at intermission because there isn’t a “big set piece” in act II?"

I think you'd be surprised at the number of people who ask if it's over, at intermission. Even Harry Potter 7 part 1 had the courtesy not to ask audiences wait a full year before part 2.

If people don't like part 1, they aren't coming back for part 2.

I think you seriously overestimate how much the general public cares about Defying Gravity, especially when they probably don’t know who Cynthia Erivo is and the flying effect will be a lot of CGI. If Part 1 is good, people will come back to see the story finished and Ariana Grande stans are gonna see both parts regardless

lol I imagine if people see the promos for Wicked, they will see the promos for Wicked 2. Not to mention their will almost certainly be a “to be continued” at the end of part one.

rattleNwoolypenguin said: "No, nobody is leaving at intermission because that ONE ticket buys them the ability to see the entire story that night.

Whereas with the movie you are buying a ticket to see half of a musical that features the most famous song in that first half and they're asking millions of people to wait and buy another ticket to go back for Act Two a year later and see the rest of the musical that now does not feature the most famous song the show is known for."

Are you familiar with the films The Lord of the Rings? Yeah...

And it's not like they're asking anybody to take out a second mortgage to see part 2? It's $15. One would imagine Wicked Part 1 and Part 2 would not simply be that. There will be resolutions and new questions raised with the finale of Part 1. It will be a sequel. It is not just cutting the Broadway show in half and releasing it a year apart. You know that, stop acting foolish.

If just as many people see Part 2 as they do Part 1? Then great! But I assure you, Universal is not banking on that for it to be a success.





"

I do think think the full year in between the two films is not a wise idea. A year is a long time, and while it gives time for excitement to build if part one is truly great, but if it is anything less than great, it will give everyone time to pick apart its flaws and build up a sense of indifference for part two. If they were releasing part two in the summer, part one will have recently stopped playing in the smaller secondary markets, it wouldn't have as much time to settle and build up as much negative energy if it is anything less than perfect.

jimmycurry01 said: "I do think think the full year in between the two films is not a wise idea. A year is a long time, and while it gives time for excitement to build if part one is truly great, but if it is anything less than great, it will give everyone time to pick apart its flaws and build up a sense of indifference for part two. If they were releasing part two in the summer, part one will have recently stopped playing in the smaller secondary markets, it wouldn't have as much time to settle and build up as much negative energy if it is anything less than perfect."

A year is not a long time between film sequels, especially when there's been 12 years between Avatars, 2.5 years between Dunes, 3.5 years between SpiderVerses...etc. The year between also allows for WOM to build on streaming after it's in theaters. Don't want to oversaturate the market with Wickeds. It also sets up something of a tradition - "we saw Wicked with the family last Thanksgiving, let's do the same again this year."

There's also the matter of VFX, editing, ADR, incidental scoring, and other post-production tasks. Sure they were able to do some stuff during the strike hiatus, but they're going to be working at breakneck speed just to get Part 1 ready for test-screenings (and then further editing) and ready to go by Thanksgiving (or earlier if it plays a film festival). And then immediately on to Part 2. The response from Part 1 could also theoretically allow for reshoots, retooling, fixing effects, etc. for things that get a poor response in the first film.

You don't want this to be a CATS situation where the VFX were barely done by the time the DCPs were delivered.

What's crazier is this Kevin Costner Western "saga" at WB, Horizon, which he independently financed and is releasing Part 1 on June 28 and Part 2 on August 16.

Updated On: 1/26/24 at 02:42 PM

The exact comment from Kerry:

“Very exciting xx thank you again for having us be part of this x”

Curious to know who “us” is. Other former wicked cast members, perhaps?

ErmengardeStopSniveling said:

A year is not a long time between film sequels, especially when there's been 12 years between Avatars, 2.5 years between Dunes, 3.5 years between SpiderVerses...etc. The year between also allows for WOM to build on streaming after it's in theaters. Don't want to oversaturate the market with Wickeds. It also sets up something of a tradition - "we saw Wicked with the family last Thanksgiving, let's do the same again this year."

I'm honestly very curious to see the marketing roll-out for this one. I was (and still am) skeptical of their decision to split it into two movies. Felt like a risky move and seems even more risky now that movie theater attendance has been so erratic lately, with people really only turning out in droves for big 'event' movies.

It feels like the marketing department really's gonna have their work cut out to make this a must-see-in-theaters cinematic event like Barbenheimer, Dune, Avengers, or Across The Spider-Verse. And then they have to sustain that interest another year so that the people are invested enough to turn out again. I think that's a tall order for a non-comic book movie these days (for example, look at Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning Part 1 & Fast X part 1, two giant bombs from last summer).

I guess you could point to Dune as a good example of a two-parter non-comic book movie succeeding this way, although I would argue that splitting Dune was out of necessity and was definitely the right call, and also those movies have a much more star-studded cast than the Wicked movie does.

Updated On: 1/28/24 at 08:10 PM