Universal's WICKED Films - News & Discussion Thread — Page 96

This the movie not a copy of the stage.. Both Ariana and Cynthia did an AMAZING JOB!!!

Love the whole entire movie found nothing wrong with it..

now it’s your opinion and I commend you for that… but I disagree whole heartedly!!!

Listener said: "Matt Rogers said: "Listener said: "I'm really, really surprised by all the over-the-top raving now that I've seen the film for myself.

Grande isn't funny, Erivo isn't interesting, and they both look blank 90% of the time.

What are people crying about? How is this movie touching people??

It isn't a trainwreck or anything, but it's hardly Oscar worthy.

And they barely changed anything tosignificantly improve on the source material.

...is everyone just hysterical? Ora paid shill?

And why is it so loooooooooong?

I liked some of it but it wasn't better than the stage version or anything."

Sorry you didn’t like it but you are clearly in the minority. I found it to be absolutely magnificent, even more so when I saw it again today in Dolby. Current predictions are that it will receive as many as 12 Oscar nominations, and it will definitely win some of them. Variety says Grande will win Best Supporting Actress."

Telling me "sorry for you" doesn't answer the question though. I'm asking sincerely: what am I missing here?

Did the audience at your screening laugh at all of Arianna's lines and movements? Did you see Cynthia's low-energy performance in some other light?

I mean, compare them to IM and KC and tell me how they're delivering even half as much...and yes, I get the difference between subtle film acting for the camera and acting for a Bwayhouse.

I'm not pooping on it needlessly here. I genuinely don't understand the hysterics over how amazing this is."


There isn’t really a way to answer your question. It feels like a “gotcha”.


Many have already shared why they loved it, and if those reasons / reviews don’t resonate with you, that is what it is.

Best to move on. The film clearly didn’t work for you, and that’s okay.

Oh my God. Why in hell would she say this?????

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/cynthia-erivo-wicked-fans-sing-along-debate-1236073481/

Updated On: 11/28/24 at 07:00 PM

Theatre Fan3 said: "Matt Rogers said: "Oh my God. Why in hell would she say this?????

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/cynthia-erivo-wicked-fans-sing-along-debate-1236073481/"

She was great in the movie but she's not doing herself any favors here ... first her meltdown over the fan edit of the movie poster and now this??? She accused the fan edit of trying to "erase her" ... isn't singing along with the movie "erasing her performance"??? She's not scoring any points with me with this kind of attitude!!"

It’s insane. The old lady who sat next to me and sang along (loudly, and badly) to Popular and Defying Gravity doesn’t know how close she came to being murdered.

caitlinette said: "Listener said:

Grande isn't funny, Erivo isn't interesting, and they both look blank 90% of the time.



I have to agree with you here. I thought the lead performances were incredibly tame compared to how sparkling and alive the roles are played on Broadway. Andbefore anyonewants to fight me on this and say it’s a movie, it is still a Broadway musical, and I wish it had more of that Broadway quality in its leads and pacing.


Ariana just comes across as so sad-eyed and vacant. Cynthia makes very safe choices. Perhaps this is just how they were directed?


For everyone raving about Ariana’s comedic timing, I have to wonder if they’ve never seenclips of say, Megan Hilty or Allie Mauzey as Glinda.

"

Thank you. Seriously, its good to read that I'm not the only one seeing what I'm seeing.

I still welcome a more detailed discussion of what everyone else is loving about this film, but I have to say, the harshness of the responses towards my observations is disappointing. I've always enjoyed posting here....but to be accused of being a troll? To ask for a conversation and be told "well it's just not for you to get!"

....I thought more of this community than that.

And yes, the 24/7 gushing on all media platforms, talk shows and message boards about how incredible this film is? It's really bizarre. It's an okay movie. I liked it well enough but prefer the stage show and think this could have gone further to improve on it.

And I'm willing to see things from a different perspective - which I have repeatedly stated - provided someone can actually respond to my criticisms.

I guess that's not of interest though? So it's attitude towards the naysayer instead?

Again, caitlinette, thank you. I could only imagine how a Hilty or Chenoweth could have made Popular a really magical movie moment with their pizazz and humor.

Arianna was only impressive, kinda, in NOMTW at the beginning, playing the multiple emotions. But she dropped the ball on laughs.

I could only imagine how a Hilty or Chenoweth could have made Popular a really magical movie moment with their pizazz and humor.

Their performances would have been modulated for cinema by Jon M Chu just like Bob Fosse modulated Joel Grey’s Emcee for the film adaptation of CABARET. Even though Joel Grey won a Tony Award for the original 1966 Broadway production of CABARET, he has talked about having to completely relearn and reinterpret his Emcee for the film cameras as on stage acting is broader and on camera you have to bring levels down or it plays cartoonish and overwhelming.

This is why Carol Channing or Ethel Merman never had careers on film - their performances play too broad and extreme for camera. On stage it’s magical and electrifying, on screen its overwhelming and exhausting for an entire 2 hour film.

JasonC3 said: "Listener said: "....I thought more of this community than that."

Your original comment/post has the dashed off rhythm and tone of a troll-like post. Had your criticisms been expressed in the more measured and thought-out manner of your subsequent posts, you might have initially received a different response.

"

Fair enough, but do I have to constantly speak like Julie Andrews to be worthy of basic respect? The gushing over this movie and the leads is absurd to the point where I wanted to speak casually - in a space I felt we could, since we've all posted here for some time and all generally get along - and just say "...huh?? What's up with this? I don't get it."

I didn't think people would jump on me for it, but whatever, what's done is done.



"I don’t go around demanding the fans of those movies and shows explain to me why they love them so much because I understand that art is subjective. I also don’t read message board threads about art I didn’t like because that feels like a complete waste of time. Life’s too short."

...siiiiiiiigh. I'm not "demanding" anything. I'm saying stop being rude to me and acting like I'm speaking with the voice of authority here, when I'm just walking out of the cinema and listening to my friends gush and saying "what are you seeing here that I'm not??"

"There are now countless reviews in this thread with people explaining what they loved about the movie, as well as plenty of professional reviews from film critics that praise the film and the performances. If those aren’t enough to make you understand why people are enjoying this movie, then what will?"

....is that what you'd say to a friend who just came out of the theater and was confused why you loved it so much? "Go read the countless reviews!" Seriously?

Part of the problem is that everyone is saying these crazy over-the-top things that just don't seem to apply to what I saw in theaters. Even Barbie wasn't gushed about like this movie is.

And again, as I've already stated, I like Wicked. I'm a fan of the musical. So no, I'm not hating on it.

" If you didn’t find Ariana funny, fine. Lots of other people did."

Cool. Now can you - or anyone else who took the time to condescend - please tell me WHEN you found her funny? One example? Can nobody point to a line reading they loved or a gesture or something? You've spent all these words chastising me rather than just...responding like a normal person would in conversation.

If I can say which moments landed with a thud (and there were plenty) surely you can say which ones you found hilarious and why. And my asking isn't an attack.

There's this really stubborn refusal to respond to the simple question or back-up one's opinion. If someone asks why you liked the soup at a restaurant, do you just yell "BECAUSE!" and glare at them? Cuz that's how this is coming off. You guys would rather correct me and talk down to me than just...um...take the initial question as a jumping off point for a discussion about the strengths and weaknesses of the lead performances...

"...he has talked about having to completely relearn and reinterpret his Emcee for the film cameras as on stage acting is broader and on camera you have to bring levels down or it plays cartoonish and overwhelming."

Which I also stated I already factored in to my experience of viewing the movie. I completely get what you're saying. But Glinda is a comedic role and there were barely any chuckles during the screening I saw. Her hair flip wasn't even cute as much as weird, like she was trying to do something that was supposed to be funny, but it wasn't. In the show, the hair flip is adorable, even when different actresses perform it in their own signature way.



Anyway, the more I try to talk about this the more I'm being accused of being a demanding troll or whatever, a hater who is only here to pick on all of you, who doesn't understand tone (apparently!) so...have it your way. Love the movie. The movie is great. None shall question the greatness of the movie. The performances are brilliant. They deserve all the Oscars. I was blind but now I can see. And should I forget, I will shut my mouth and reread all the pages of this thread, and all the reviews rather than dare to ask a question as someone just coming into a conversation would.

Disappointed in you guys, for real.

Updated On: 11/29/24 at 01:52 PM

Listener said: "Disappointed in you guys, for real."

Speaking of disappointment, it is really not cool to quote me in #2388 and then after my single comment, add a bunch of comments that are not from me. Now someone could construe everything else came from me when you cut, paste, and combined things into one post

In reply to me you acknowledge your tone and language in your post #2351 may have provoked some of the responses you don't like, but you then undermine that acknowledgement with the juvenile Julie Andrews retort. If that is how you reply to someone trying to engage with you in good faith, all I can say is good luck. You deserve to get back exactly what you put out.

Updated On: 11/29/24 at 02:30 PM

Matt Rogers said: "Oh my God. Why in hell would she say this?????

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/cynthia-erivo-wicked-fans-sing-along-debate-1236073481/"

I dunno. Because she feels that way? Because she made a huge gaffe about fan art, so she's making sure not to alienate fans of the movie again? Who cares?

JasonC3 said: "Listener said: "Disappointed in you guys, for real."

Speaking of disappointment, it is really not cool to quote me in #2388 and then after my single comment, add a bunch of comments that are not from me. Now someone could construe everything else came from me when you cut, paste, and combined things into one post

In reply to me you acknowledge your tone and language in your post #2351 may have provoked some of the responses you don't like, but you then undermine that acknowledgement with the juvenile Julie Andrews retort. If that is how you reply to someone trying to engage with you in good faith, all I can say is good luck. You deserve to get back exactly what you put out.
"

*shakes head in disbelief*

OKAY! So, again, I. Am. Not. Attacking. You.

I spaced that out so you will hopefully really believe it. Now, could you stop coming at me?

Also: I am only able to quote ONE POST by pressing the "quote post" option at the bottom of a post. All the other quotes had to be copy/pasted manually by me into the body of the reply afterwards from the other posts I was seeing, and therefore do not attribute names automatically the way the "quote post" button does. So..that's not a me distorting what you said thing. You're reaching for reasons to paint me in a bad light. No one even assumed you said all those things.

Seaweed, to put it frankly: why are you asking me why I need a performance's greatness explained to me, when you could just....offer your point of view on the performance as a contrast to my comments? You are wasting words creating an argument here where I have zero desire for one.

Honestly, do people not learn how to politely debate in schools anymore or discuss topics? Having differing viewpoints does not automatically equate to an argument or fight.

But here we are, multiple posts in, without a single example to counter what I viewed as shortcomings.

"And yes, if a friend and I had differing opinions on the taste of a food item, I’d ESPECIALLY just say I liked it “just because.” If it tastes good to me, it tastes good to me. I’ve never been convinced that something tastes good just by someone explaining to me why it tastes good."

...and then you'd insult them for asking, right?

"It seems you’re upset that others enjoyed it and you now feel left out. I’m sorry you feel that way."

Nope. The movie was fine. I'm upset purely that I came here, a fun message board about theater, and said I was confused why something was being praised in a way that seemed overblown, and got insulted by people here. You realize you just called me condescending, right? And now Jason has said I'm juvenile. So this is escalating in a really dumb way.

I can support my opinions, but I'm interested to hear those of other people...without attacking them. I guess we're very different that way.

Memorable, maybe that poster in the Sunset thread wasn't doing anything "in the guise" of anything. People don't usually have nefarious intent when discussing musicals....but thanks for the head's up. I'll be sure not to commit the sin of saying this production of Boulevard is underwhelming too.

*walking away now*

I didn't like the movie, the stage show was OK. The movie wasn't funny, there was no need for tears-sad-where?, the famous last song was ruined, kept looking for the tight white pants, the colouring was not bright enough but somehow I wasn't bored. Maybe waiting for it to improve.

I have heard enough people gushing over everything that I didn't like so obviously Wicked doesn't 'do' it for me.

I've been, I've seen, wasn't conquered. I'll never understand what people are raving about but Hey--I like vegemite and marmalade together on toast.

Saw it today and thought it was fine. The movie adds some blood to the material and some much needed room to breathe, which really worked for the final payoff of the number we all know. However, I just can’t wrap my head around why almost all the performers in the movie did not trust the material and decided to add distracting flourishes that did not add any value to their performances. The show works if you sing the score the way it is written and it’s proven every night at Gershwin. The last note of Defying Gravity is also a letdown considering what Cynthia Erivo, of all people, could achieve vocally. Ariana Grande’s enunciation is also somewhat problematic and hard to hear sometimes. Overall I had a good time but it does have much room to improve.