When I think about it...Is Wicked THAT good? — Page 3

I asked what should we watch (Wicked VS Spelling Bee) because I am also bringing 3 people who haven't been to theater before.

1st is my 66 y/o aunt and my 2 cousins who are mid-40's.

I do understand people on these boards seem to dislike things with mass appeal, but I really think mass appeal is a big deciding factor in what is good. If it wasn't for that, then what? Should we base whether something is good or not on the critics reactions? NO THANK YOU!

With that mentality we could then say that Britney Spears, Madonna or Michael Jackson are the best musicians of the century- way beyond any trained opera singer. Wicked or Phantom are the theatre masterpieces of our generation and they might as well stop voting for the new architectural wonder of the world - the Disneyland castle has WAY more appeal than all of them put together.

What is the most accesible usually has the momentary appeal. What is truly great and crafted will last forever.

---

Their good intentions are misinterpreted, they are not accepted by the mainstream, they are pushed aside in favor of "the obvious choice," etc.

So many people feel that they are victims these days. Thanks for summarizing the reason for the show's appeal. Now it makes sense.

---

in my imagination, WICKED is a quiet, small, introverted, character-driven show.

so you understand why i never want to see it & ruin my illusion.

I love Wicked and I always will, but it definitely isn't as good as I used to think it was. The choreography is terrible, as are parts of the book and lyrics.

Well said millie_dillmount

---

Isnt this a fascinating thread... (Sean says somewhat facetiously).

As late as a year ago, to say that WICKED really isnt that good would have been considered heresy. The fanboys and -girls who had thread after thread about the most inan minutae involving this show would have taken up the pitchforks and torches if anyone had dared suggest that this half-baked, over-spectaculared piece of twaddle wasnt quite the masterpiece it aspired to be.

And now folks are finally figuring out that the only reason this thing plays in perpetuity is because it appeals to everyone in desperate need of fantasy and a resolved sense of victimhood? Man, where have you folks been? Outside having a cigarette?

Now, dont get me wrong. It has some pretty nice moments. But theyre moments and nothing more. WICKED is the sort of show that you leave thinking "Wow, that was cool!", only to realize the morning after that you've been had and your wallet is a hundred-plus bucks lighter.

But, hey, that's entertainment.

---

"And now folks are finally figuring out that the only reason this thing plays in perpetuity is because it appeals to everyone in desperate need of fantasy and a resolved sense of victimhood? Man, where have you folks been? Outside having a cigarette?"

No, SeanMartin. We're not "finally figuring it out." I posted this a long time ago when the show first took off around the country, on at least a dozen of the 3,000 threads created on the subject over those first few mega-hit months. I thought I'd skip most of the identical threads and not repeat myself, but apparently you've been outside having a cigarette during the many times I did chime in. Which is why I decided to post it again now... for those of you who are usually "outside having a cigarette" and haven't heard me say it before.

---

It is all glitz but not much more

It is enjoyable but not the greatest thing you have ever seen

---

Just becuase something is a success doesn't mean we should stop finding faults in it. Hell, Phantom's been running for 19 years and people still gripe about that.

---

I wish people would stop saying that people who see flaws in the show are only doing so out of jealousy of it's success. I actually used to enjoy Wicked a lot, until the novelty wore off. That's why I said I felt Wicked was all potential but nothing more. If you just take the music and listen to it, you'll hear a monotonous, overly synthesized score with lyrics that anyone else on this board could improve on.

One thing Wicked does do that many shows fail at is connection. I admit that I did feel connected to the characters when I first heard the show, but I realized that it was because I was making it much more than it was. I kept trying to find subplots and deeper meaning to the characters' actions, which is why I actually was more interested in Glinda's struggle of balancing her ambition to be successful and well-liked and doing the right thing and fighting the status quo. However, if I just took it for as it is, all I found was a show with mediocre to bad music, awkward staging, and a book that was all potential but very poor execution and missed opportunity to make the characters interesting.

Since we're all into generalizing, I have to say that if people didn't want to feel like a victim like Elphaba (which she is overly established as one in the show to the point where I just didn't feel sorry for her) than the show wouldn't have that connection that it does. It's all wanting to wallow in your self pity.

---

Let's look at it from another angle say, from the standpoint that it has managed to "hook" a whole new generation of kids on MT- yes.Those kids might never have set foot in a theatre otherwise and hopefully, this show encourages them to pursue a hobby, passion or career. Look what the show did and does where ever it plays- sold out houses each and every show, providing jobs for actors, tech crews and musicians and adding money to the local economies with the restaurants,etc. The fact that it also made the wearing of pink and green mandatory on females between 11 and 22 is an unfortunate by-product, though!
The really interesting thing to me is that all of the hype was about "Cheno and Idina" and yet, as the show continues in NY and all over the globe, it doesn't seem to matter WHO descends in the bubble and who slathers on the green make-up. The ones who should really be grateful to "Wicked" are the two aforementioned ladies (although, Chenoweth's voice is glorious and the opera world was that much poorer when she got off in NY instead of continuing onto Philly and her studies there!). The show, like virtually everything new playing on Broadway is not star-dependant as shows used to be.
I've heard the thing so many times that I'm immune to it now, but, again, if it brings kids into the theatre and they don't have to shrink down into their seats, blushing furiously during half of the evening (my mother is watching kids doing THAT?), then it has my vote.
It's no "Gypsy", but then again, what is anymore?

---