Wicked: Part One

Wicked, directed by John M. Chu, is part one of two adaptations of the world-famous stage musical. At almost three hours, it's longer than the original in its entirety, and only half the story. Padded and plodding, it replicates familiar numbers from stage to screen, but loses the emotional heft and magic in the process. The result feels cynical.

Luckily, the lead actors, Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande, are spectacular. Erivo, in particular, helps carry the film even when it doesn't work otherwise. Mainly in scenes involving the violent eradication of thinking, speaking animals from the land of Oz, and their Underground Railroad working to get everyone out of the kingdom before it's too late.

Those parts stand out from the bright and bubbly film in the wrong way. Without Erivo's grounding presence, they would feel distasteful. Not because they're bad. In fact, they're the only moments in an otherwise saccharine film that feel like anything. But director Chu doesn't know how to handle them. Instead, they feel tacked on and forgotten the moment we return to Shiz, the Hogwartsian school of snark.

In one of the most tone-deaf moments, we go from learning that speaking animals are hunted into extinction and forced into slavery to a meet-cute between Elphaba and this world's Prince Charming. It's a problem created by the padding of the material. Everything we see now is set up, the payoff comes later. Which means Wicked stutters to a halt every 15 minutes or so because it can't progress any further.

There's an underlying theme of nature vs. nurture in Wicked, which argues that judging people as truly evil is reductive by nature. Nobody is born that way. Yet, because this is a whimsical fairy tale built on caricatures, that's precisely how some are treated. In a move almost as disdainful as seen in Harry Potter, Wicked makes a point that even the most beautiful evil people can have a modicum of goodness, but those not traditionally attractive are only good to be henchmen.

Granted, all this might change by Part 2, but it's the filmmaker's fault for splitting a story into parts when it doesn't need it. We'll have to wait a year for the conclusion, and by then the emotional heft will have drained from whatever the first part can muster.

It doesn't help that director Chu feels hopelessly lost with his musical numbers. Most of them feature two people standing in place and singing at each other. In a world as bright and colorful as this, with some of the most spectacular set design seen all year, it's painful to watch a director struggle to get anything out of it. Even the big finale, involving the fan favorite song "Defying Gravity" feels unearned and flat. Which isn't a knock at either lead actress, who belt their hearts out in an attempt to carry the director to the finish line.

Other numbers, even those featuring dancing extras and elaborate backdrops, leave little to remember them by. As the film came to a close, I couldn't point out a single song that I could hum. For a musical, that's not a great sign. Chu's camera moves with the elegance and grace of a hippo. Without the cast saying outright what they're feeling, it would be impossible to tell whether a number was happy or sad based off the visual language alone.

Wicked isn't a disaster, but more of a missed opportunity. I can't help but think what it would look like in the hands of a truly visual, maximalist filmmaker. Someone like Baz Luhrmann or Julie Taymor. A visionary who could balance out the maximalist fare with tragic subtext and not lose out on the crowd pleasing parts. Because it's clear that Chu isn't up to the challenge, and his workmanlike, slavish adaptation is here to replay the hits and nothing more.

In the end, if you love Wicked, you'll probably enjoy the film adaptation as well. But you'll have a better time revisiting a taped Broadway show. It's shorter, more emotionally satisfying, and most likely far more fun.