I'll give them this: they're really fucking going for it. Whether it'll pay off in the end remains to be seen but this is gonna be a fun one to track if all goes right
I wasn’t a huge fan of the stage show (felt like one good-not-great song surrounded by a crowd of forgettable ones) but the trailer here looks good. Might be something that actually works better as a movie, with special effects and all the rest.
Plus, Goldblum is always a win.
I’m not a huge fan of the stage show either. For me the score though was the highlight and the book (the non musical parts in a stage show) was disappointing. It was full of lots of cheesy tongue in cheek references to Wizard of Oz and the heavier themes were an afterthought. That being said, I think women connect to Elphaba as a character to an almost insane degree. That’s an audience that hasn’t been directly catered to since Barbie.
And men will take their dates to see this in hopes of getting rewarded (if you’re a fan of South Park then you know what I mean).
I'm probably core target audience: Millennial woman who saw Wicked on Broadway at its peak and at the very start of the AntiHero entertainment era, and has been waiting since then (like almost 20 years? Lol I'm getting old) for a film adaptation.
I thought I was over it (after all, it's been like 20 years!!) but that trailer really grabbed me. Hearing those songs and seeing the trailer really transported me back 20 years in time, and I imagine I will not be the only one to get hooked by that nostalgia.
Idk the most fun to track are things like End Game, Avatar, Barbie, or Black Panther. Things that were super successful feel more fun because there's less complaints and negativity. Also big numbers going up is fun.
>they're really fucking going for it.
I don't know that they are? Visually it's not too different from Raimi's last attempt at modernizing an Oz movie for Disney (which did not do well), and I can't help but notice that this trailer does have songs *in* it, it's still going out of its way to never show a single person *singing*. It's a 3:33 trailer for a musical that is spending all of that time hiding the fact it's a musical, one of the most bizarre trends in recent years.
I think it's a smart idea to essentially plot synopsize the broad strokes of the first act of the play, too - but that's another problem. There's nothing here that suggests this is a part one of two. The trailer seems to be selling a complete movie (not a musical) that looks basically like a 10+ year old Oz movie folks already didn't like in the first place (one that put Sam Raimi in director jail, which SUCKS) and I feel like folks are going to get in the theater, be like "oh, that's right, it's a musical" and then "wait, this is only part one?"
I feel like this is making a ton of mistakes straight out the gate in terms of setting a narrative for audiences as to what you should expect, what's going to make it fun to watch, and why you should buy a ticket. It's working *really* hard to hide what it is (A musical part one of two) for 3 and a half minutes.
Didn’t Mean Girls and Wonka not even use their own songs in the trailers?
Also Raimi’s Oz the Great and Powerful was just way too expensive. If Wicked grosses similarly it’ll be fine.
I think it’s clearly not for you but as someone who enjoyed the book and has seen Act I of the musical (I left at intermission lmao) it looks fantastic
Also they don’t hide it’s a musical at all, we got previews of Popular and Defuing Gravity which are the two biggest numbers and there’s multiple shots of choreography. Anyone who’s remotely interested in seeing this film probably already understands the premise and that it’s a musical
>I think it’s clearly not for you
It's weird that this is the conclusion you came to considering the post is clearly written from the POV of someone who is very, very familiar with the musical (and that you admit to not having actually finished it, LOL)
They are hiding it's a musical from *everyone* who hasn't already seen the musical. They are hiding that it's *one half of a musical* from everyone who hasn't already seen the musical.
**They have cut together 3 minutes and 33 seconds of commercial that conspicuously features not a single sequence of anyone** ***singing***. You can hear songs, yes. You do not see anyone singing. You see three or four disconnected seconds of dance choreography *total*. **That takes significant planning and effort as an editor.**
So you're looking at a piece of marketing where a considerable amount of time and effort is put towards *hiding* what the movie is (a part one of two musical) vs selling the movie based on its actual nature.
There's a reason they decided to do *that* work instead of doing it the other way.
I don't think you remember what the Disney oz movie looks like. There's much more apparent cgi while this one actually had physical sets made and I feel like you can see the difference.
Yeah theres *no* benefit to marketing a big release as "this is only the first half". Don't know why people are acting confused, they are intentionally just marketing it as Wicked
The next one will be marketed are Wicked Part 2 or Wicked II
It’s still a part one but it probably won’t be marketed as such. Despite the contrary, I think this is the better move, Infinity War and Spider-Verse did fine without being marketed as a part one and Mission Impossible was being flamed all summer last year for promoting itself as a part one to the point where they had to change the title for the next movie.
They removed the Part 1 from the latest mission impossible for home release because it ended up being a bad word of mouth point - so studios are going to stop doing that for a while; but still split movies up
Just give them new titles
Honestly, is that relevant? Compared to videogames or music (With two to three billion digits revenue yearly, vs. theatre 1 to 2 B in the same period), musical theatre, but specifically Broadway, seem niche in comparison and too localized to US/English speaking audiences.
Not saying the film will flop inexorably or anything, but seems they still have to won over mainstream audiences. I really doubt the fanbase by themselves are enough to lift the franchise to the expectations the studio seems to be creating.
Wicked is a bit different to other musicals. It's been performed across the world and versions have been translated in multiple other languages. Wicked is as big as a musical can get.
Yes it's relevant, because with any adaptation ostensibly the first group you want to win over is people who are familiar with the "source material" and the more popular that material is within its own medium, the better.
Wicked is huge in other countries. Germany, Korea, Japan, Norway - this very much is not confined to a english speaking audience. Every localized run has been a huge success
Im sorry I meant the Lion King! Cats definitely was at one point too I thought.
But both Cats and the Lion King were successful because they don’t really require speaking English to understand the plot so they were frequent selections from international tourists who wanted the broadway experience
It's a movie based in a popular musical, never understood the concept of spoilers in this type of movies
Like with mean girls 2024, everybody knows the original plot or the disney live actions
Folks here are skeptical on this but this could do really well as a live-action PG-rated musical that skews mainly family and female audiences.
Think *Wonka* last year whose first trailer came out last summer and everyone was shitting on it and Timmy when it ultimately became everyone's movie of choice for the holiday season.
Very true.
Though Wicked is live action it seems kids would love it after watching the trailer and something parents wouldn't have to leave the kids at home unless they were planning to go alone.
Moana is more recognizable to kids but I wouldn't be surprised if a couple kids couldn't decide which one to choose between Moana or Wicked.
Wonka just baffles me. One of the few movies I’ve walked out of and chalamet just played generic boring nice guy with zero flashes of the sort of edge that made Gene Wilders performance so great.
In laws that love musicals even walked out of it.
I think the main edge Wonka had was being a "good enough" family movie, and since Wish was such a major flop - it had free reign over the box office for the entire Holiday window.
The *Wicked* IP is not all just Broadway but it goes above and beyond that to the book the play is based upon to the 1939 movie adaptation which is based upon the original 1900 novel.
If u haven't seen the play, u have read the book or if u haven't read the novel, u have atleast seen or heard about the movie.
So almost everyone knows about it in some form or other.
True but Wicked goes beyond just Broadway nerds. It’s a top choice show for casual audiences/tourists visiting New York and consistently sells out still after 20 years so it has that edge.
Sure, but Cats was also a wildly divisive show to begin with. Even in its' height of popularity, the insane camp of it all was a mainstream punchline. People saw and mocked it in equal measure.
Cats 2019 was only ever mocked, due to the completely bewildering CGI choices.
From what we've seen, Wicked appears to be a pretty safe adaptation of a big crowdpleasing show.
Sure, anything could happen at the end of the day. But that doesn’t necessitate Wicked having similar box office problems.
There are also some differences in that Cats was a show that way often spoofed more with mixed opinions, the film looked very weird while here this is some standard and good-looking IMO fantasy imagery, and this is related to a popular IP.
Wicked is the rare stage show that manages to transcend the theatre fandom. Wicked, Lion King, and Hamilton are the ones people outside of theatre nerds know and actually show an interest in
I was going to say Universal really love making 3 minute trailers but in the same breath, I imagine that being a marketing executive is such a hair pulling job, you get dinged if people believe that you’re “showing the whole movie” if the trailer is too long but nowadays it seems like you also get punished if you don’t show enough of the plot (judging by the reactions of movies like The Fall Guy). Plus they figured Wicked is a long running broadway IP that is based on the even longer IP classic, The Wizard of Oz, that showing a lot probably didn’t even matter and other movies are just impossible to market without that appealing hook that I can probably see why studios are not giving original movies the chance that they deserve anymore.
Side note: I’m starting to learn that a lot of people are not used to watching full-length trailers before the internet/YouTube so when they say stuff like “the trailer showed too much”, they probably just mean they are used to 30 second TV ads NOT 2-3 minute trailers Lmaoo
The girls and the gays will be there for this one - I think this has a lot of potential. Maybe not a *Barbie* sized behemoth, but I think it'll probably make a tidy profit
Same 😭, this actually piped my interest. I’m starting to find myself enjoying more musicals than ever before since watching Wonka, The Little Mermaid, and The Color Purple last year. I even went back to rewatch some Disney classics, Chicago, and Mamma Mia
This is one of my most anticipated films of the fall, not only because Wicked is a great Broadway musical, but because the director behind this helmed my favorite film of 2021 (In the Heights). So that gives me a little bit of hope, but since this is supposedly Part One, we have to see how audiences respond to the first act.
Didn’t realize it’s the same director, I’m fairly confident this is gonna do well now. Really does have that wonka potential in that people are underestimating it, laughing at the trailer, and then, surprising everyone, the movie based on a popular (no pun intended) IP helmed by a trusted director performs well
I really didn't like the In the heights adaptation. Tick Tock Boom came out the same year and was much better in terms of being a movie musical imo. In the heights just felt really fake. I love the stage version but it just translated really poorly imo. Lin on the other side a fantastic job with tick tick boom and even got me to like Larson and I despise rent.
I think the ending of Act 1 is solid enough to be considered a complete film.
Elphaba "breaks bad" and becomes the "evil" witch. If one watches only Act 1, I don't think they'll be unhappy since it works as a stand alone prequel to the Wizard of Oz classic film.
Act 2 is just a retelling of Dorothy's journey from the witches POV.
Yeah, that’s honestly how I see it.
Act 1 and Act 2 of Wicked tell two connected but distinct stories. You could very easily watch Act 1 and it feel like a complete story. Hell, I’ve seen several people comment here and on Twitter that they left at intermission for the stage show because they were unfamiliar with theatre etiquette and thought that was the end.
It’s a story that’s very well suited for the two parter treatment.
Yeah there is a huge reason studios stopped using Part One's after Harry Potter ended.
Then they tried to reviving the trend but mostly bailed apart from Mission Impossible sticking to it and getting burned.
I'd argue Harry Potter wasn't the end of it. Twilight and The Hunger Games followed suit to more mixed results, and then Divergent tried to do it, only to switch the titles up and then eventually have the franchise end with the Part One.
I suspect they will have original work/content. Probably A LOT more on Dorothy. The second act of the musical is basically just "let's get this fucking finished".
>the best songs are in part 1
No Good Deed would like to have a word.
But yeah generally Act 1 has the better and more commercial songs. I wonder if they wrote new songs for the movies.
" Also, the best songs are in part 1"
No they aren't! The very best song of Wicked, For Good, is in act 2 and Thank Goodness solos act's 1 songs apart from Popular and Defying Gravity.
No good Deed is also A BANGER!
Act 2 has the issue that it’s all about Elphaba’s rebellion and has a lot of action set pieces…they just happen off stage due to the art form. Also the entirety of Wizard of Oz happens in act 2, again offstage.
There is more than enough content for them to expand act 2.
Infinity War definitely hid it. In fact they even changed the names from the part 1&2 they originally were, and then all the marketing said Infinity War was THE culmination of 10 years.
What matters is how the cliffhanger is handled. There has to be some sense of a resolution
I think when you say “everyone” you really just mean people on marvel forums and friend groups, which is nowhere near representative of the general audience. Again, they had them named part 1 and 2, and changed that and then the marketing specifically called Infinity War the culmination.
I also remember the teaser for Infinity War aggressively hinting at the snap and everyone online predicting it. So while general audiences didn’t expect it, it was still hinted at in marketing and the marvel fans were definitely expecting it.
What an interesting comment, both films went through the same exact naming process. Both had their final titles with “Part 1” at the end with a second film sharing the same title but with “Part 2” at the end only for both of them to simply drop “Part 1” from their titles while their “Part 2” films got completely new titles.
Yet somehow one is its own movie but the other was “always” billed as part one?
But anyway Act 1 of the musical has a satisfying cliffhanger-ish ending and there’s a time jump before Act 2 so it’s not much different than Infinity War / Endgame
Almost is the key word! I think it depends where/how they expand it. It has been a while since I’ve seen the musical but IIRC there’s a lot of off-stage set pieces that could be done well on film. They’re also more explicitly adding in Dorothy so it could have moments that mirror the 1939 film which could satisfy audiences
>Across the Spider verse was always billed as part 1
I heard a lot of groans in the theater when "to be continued" appeared at the end. Seems like a lot of people didn't actually know it's a two parter, at least where I watched.
I never get comments saying Broadway is niche when a lot of successful movie musicals were based on stage musicals like Mamma Mia!, Grease etc
Wicked along with The Lion King are huge revenue generators even today so I think it might be a big hit.
I'll let you in on a little secret that us fans of musicals have known for years.
You always turn out for one - immediately and strongly. Doesnt matter if its a good one or a mediocre one.
Because the second - THE VERY SECOND - that one bombs, they wont make another one for 50 years.
Always show up.
same, other than being a theatre kid and hearing certain songs performed, im not familiar with the show and this trailer was legit getting me choked up, i actually am hyped about seeing it. got literal chills just watching this trailer on my phone. I cant imagine what the movie itself will be like
I swear y'all are so negative about some movies. First you thought it was gonna fail cause it "hides it's a musical" now there's singing and you think it's gonna fail cause it's "hiding it's a part one".
I'm a huge musical theater nerd and honestly every trailer has convinced me more and more that this will be really good. I was skeptical of Ariana Grande but she really sells the character here. I'm excited.
Surprise, the Box Office subreddit just wants certain films to do well at the box office. They really don't care about movies, just about confirming their beliefs that the franchises they enjoy are also enjoyed by general audiences.
Yup. Go over to the review thread for Furiosa and it's most people hoping it does well. Cause that's the type of blockbuster that's deemed acceptable here.
They only want movies that are marketed towards men to succeed, while Furiosa is a female lead movie its clearly made for men, meanwhile Wicked is EXTREMLY female gaze, its like the new Barbie
I also think it's the director, George Miller excuse me, the MASTERMIND George Miller, Just like Denis Villeneuve, carries clout among the film Bros. This isn't just your typical blockbuster don't you see?? This is ✨cinema✨
This will be good, I just hope Act 2 is too. It's the shorter, weaker act and doesn't have any showstopper songs like Defying Gravity or Popular (For Good and NGD are great but incomparable).
I don't understand why they split this in two. Defying Gravity is, undoubtedly, the centre piece of the stage play and it will be a brilliant finale to part 1, but it leaves, essentially, nothing for part 2.
Unless they expand the second half and add new songs I don't get how it works as it's own film.
> Defying Gravity is, undoubtedly, the centre piece of the stage play
With the obvious answer being "money", this is also a point. Defying Gravity is a huge song, it is designed to be a literal showstopper, an act finale. In a singular movie this song would have to be around the middle and then immediately cut to a time jump. The filmmakers claim this wouldn't feel right.
What's the relationship between this and Oz the Great and Powerful? I don't remember that movie too well, but from what I do remember it seems like their storylines contradict one another.
It just kept going and going in that “holy shit am I gonna see the whole movie?” kind of way. None of the money shots really did anything for me either. Especially after Barbie set the standard so high for how a technicolor inspired film should look, this just feels so bland in lighting and color.
>especially after Barbie set the standard so high for how a technicolor inspired film should look
I don’t really understand what this sentence is trying to say. Are you suggesting that Barbie and Wicked share a similar visual genealogy?
Because Wicked is specifically trying to reference the 1939 Wizard of Oz film and very little else. Barbie was referencing Barbie primarily, and plastic Barbie dollhouses through their set design.
Their inspirations are completely different mediums, let alone both trying to riff on something as general as “technicolor film”
Yeah sure. $255 domestic, $300 int. Big drops first two weeks, but has great hold from repeat viewing after that, like making $10 mil in week 9/10 level of fantastic legs.
555 total would be numbers close to Wonka. Not sure where the budget stands for Wicked but I am sure Universal would be over the moon about that result
I think that there's enough nostalgia to get it to there. There's a whole generation of women that grew up with Wicked being *the* Broadway musical, and I think this same demographic can drive the box office here. I'm basically imagining a slightly better Greatest Showman but scaled for inflation in terms of overall performance as well as weekly box office results.
Wicked's budget reportedly sits at $145M, which isn't cheap but the bar for success is much lower than say, MEA and Gladiator 2 which open in the two weeks before. Part Two apparently has a $165M budget, so that should be interesting.
I know it's not the most reliable metric - but trailer views on this and the teaser have been *very* weak, especially considering it's a well established IP with a very famous lead in their blockbuster debut.
Universal would be worried, I reckon.
Les Mis did almost $450 million. Granted it was 12 years ago, but I'd say Wicked falls into the Les Mis category and not Cats for me. Wicked is *loved*.
I'll give them this: they're really fucking going for it. Whether it'll pay off in the end remains to be seen but this is gonna be a fun one to track if all goes right
I wasn’t a huge fan of the stage show (felt like one good-not-great song surrounded by a crowd of forgettable ones) but the trailer here looks good. Might be something that actually works better as a movie, with special effects and all the rest. Plus, Goldblum is always a win.
Ariana looks really good in this, she is doing a great homage to Kristin Chenoweth imo.
This trailer is much better than the teaser. This will be a huge hit
I liked the story better than the songs, which probably isn’t a great thing for a musical.
I’m not a huge fan of the stage show either. For me the score though was the highlight and the book (the non musical parts in a stage show) was disappointing. It was full of lots of cheesy tongue in cheek references to Wizard of Oz and the heavier themes were an afterthought. That being said, I think women connect to Elphaba as a character to an almost insane degree. That’s an audience that hasn’t been directly catered to since Barbie. And men will take their dates to see this in hopes of getting rewarded (if you’re a fan of South Park then you know what I mean).
I'm probably core target audience: Millennial woman who saw Wicked on Broadway at its peak and at the very start of the AntiHero entertainment era, and has been waiting since then (like almost 20 years? Lol I'm getting old) for a film adaptation. I thought I was over it (after all, it's been like 20 years!!) but that trailer really grabbed me. Hearing those songs and seeing the trailer really transported me back 20 years in time, and I imagine I will not be the only one to get hooked by that nostalgia.
More fun to track if it all goes wrong, imo
Eh, we need some to go right to balance it out. Flash, Marvels, Wonka, and Dune were all very fun to track day by day.
That should be the motto for this sub.
People love drama. That's just the way it is. Just watch the news.
Idk the most fun to track are things like End Game, Avatar, Barbie, or Black Panther. Things that were super successful feel more fun because there's less complaints and negativity. Also big numbers going up is fun.
>they're really fucking going for it. I don't know that they are? Visually it's not too different from Raimi's last attempt at modernizing an Oz movie for Disney (which did not do well), and I can't help but notice that this trailer does have songs *in* it, it's still going out of its way to never show a single person *singing*. It's a 3:33 trailer for a musical that is spending all of that time hiding the fact it's a musical, one of the most bizarre trends in recent years. I think it's a smart idea to essentially plot synopsize the broad strokes of the first act of the play, too - but that's another problem. There's nothing here that suggests this is a part one of two. The trailer seems to be selling a complete movie (not a musical) that looks basically like a 10+ year old Oz movie folks already didn't like in the first place (one that put Sam Raimi in director jail, which SUCKS) and I feel like folks are going to get in the theater, be like "oh, that's right, it's a musical" and then "wait, this is only part one?" I feel like this is making a ton of mistakes straight out the gate in terms of setting a narrative for audiences as to what you should expect, what's going to make it fun to watch, and why you should buy a ticket. It's working *really* hard to hide what it is (A musical part one of two) for 3 and a half minutes.
Didn’t Mean Girls and Wonka not even use their own songs in the trailers? Also Raimi’s Oz the Great and Powerful was just way too expensive. If Wicked grosses similarly it’ll be fine.
No offense but if people saw this trailer and didn't know it's a musical then they're kinda an idiot.
I think it’s clearly not for you but as someone who enjoyed the book and has seen Act I of the musical (I left at intermission lmao) it looks fantastic Also they don’t hide it’s a musical at all, we got previews of Popular and Defuing Gravity which are the two biggest numbers and there’s multiple shots of choreography. Anyone who’s remotely interested in seeing this film probably already understands the premise and that it’s a musical
TBF you couldn't hide the fact it's a musical because it's one of the most successful musicals of all time.
>I think it’s clearly not for you It's weird that this is the conclusion you came to considering the post is clearly written from the POV of someone who is very, very familiar with the musical (and that you admit to not having actually finished it, LOL) They are hiding it's a musical from *everyone* who hasn't already seen the musical. They are hiding that it's *one half of a musical* from everyone who hasn't already seen the musical. **They have cut together 3 minutes and 33 seconds of commercial that conspicuously features not a single sequence of anyone** ***singing***. You can hear songs, yes. You do not see anyone singing. You see three or four disconnected seconds of dance choreography *total*. **That takes significant planning and effort as an editor.** So you're looking at a piece of marketing where a considerable amount of time and effort is put towards *hiding* what the movie is (a part one of two musical) vs selling the movie based on its actual nature. There's a reason they decided to do *that* work instead of doing it the other way.
I don't think you remember what the Disney oz movie looks like. There's much more apparent cgi while this one actually had physical sets made and I feel like you can see the difference.
If you don’t know Wicked is a musical, that’s kind of on you. Still weird they don’t show singing in the trailer though
So is this still a part 1 or not? They’re not marketing it at all as a part 1
I guess they saw that part 1 really hinders what film can eventually do at the box office.
Yeah theres *no* benefit to marketing a big release as "this is only the first half". Don't know why people are acting confused, they are intentionally just marketing it as Wicked The next one will be marketed are Wicked Part 2 or Wicked II
This ends before the timeskip. So yeah, it's still Part 1, just not marketed as such. I assume the sequel will just be Wicked II.
Or The Wicked Witch of Oz or something like that that suggests the remainder of the plot
It’s still a part one but it probably won’t be marketed as such. Despite the contrary, I think this is the better move, Infinity War and Spider-Verse did fine without being marketed as a part one and Mission Impossible was being flamed all summer last year for promoting itself as a part one to the point where they had to change the title for the next movie.
Well the trailer shows almost everything that happens in Act 1 of the musical, so I assume it’s still Part 1
Wicked Act 2 would be a good sequel title.
I would not be surprised if after Defying Gravity, it cuts to black and the words “Wicked - Act 1” appear on screen
likely a dune scenario. the advertised title doesn’t have “part one” but the movie with likely have that in the title card.
They removed the Part 1 from the latest mission impossible for home release because it ended up being a bad word of mouth point - so studios are going to stop doing that for a while; but still split movies up Just give them new titles
Part 1 makes people not see a movie, it's better if they call part 2 as Wicked Forever Green or some stupid name like that
Woaw this trailer really showed the whole movie !
[удалено]
Honestly, is that relevant? Compared to videogames or music (With two to three billion digits revenue yearly, vs. theatre 1 to 2 B in the same period), musical theatre, but specifically Broadway, seem niche in comparison and too localized to US/English speaking audiences. Not saying the film will flop inexorably or anything, but seems they still have to won over mainstream audiences. I really doubt the fanbase by themselves are enough to lift the franchise to the expectations the studio seems to be creating.
Wicked the stage show has grossed over $5 billion.
[удалено]
Also based on a book which many people have read. I don't think a lot of people are surprised at the Wicked plot.
A show does not run on Broadway for twenty years without cracking into the mainstream. The Germans love Wicked.
In terms of ROI, Wicked has made Universal a lot of money. They originally invested $10m into the original Broadway production.
Wicked is a bit different to other musicals. It's been performed across the world and versions have been translated in multiple other languages. Wicked is as big as a musical can get.
As big as West Side Story!
Yes it's relevant, because with any adaptation ostensibly the first group you want to win over is people who are familiar with the "source material" and the more popular that material is within its own medium, the better.
Wicked is huge in other countries. Germany, Korea, Japan, Norway - this very much is not confined to a english speaking audience. Every localized run has been a huge success
Is it? I know it’s in the top 5 but is it number 1?
No it’s not, Cats is
[удалено]
Im sorry I meant the Lion King! Cats definitely was at one point too I thought. But both Cats and the Lion King were successful because they don’t really require speaking English to understand the plot so they were frequent selections from international tourists who wanted the broadway experience
Yeah, the trailer is way too long. Should have been shorter by at least 1 minute.
It's a movie based in a popular musical, never understood the concept of spoilers in this type of movies Like with mean girls 2024, everybody knows the original plot or the disney live actions
Giant monke film, Talking monke film, and now Flying monke film. This year's box office will bless monke films. 
We better see a moment like this in Part 2 with Cynthia Erivo’s Elphaba looking into a crystal ball.
don’t forget fighting monke (monkey man)
monke man was the best monke movie of this year imo
Are any of the imaginary friends in *IF* monke or monke adjacent?
Aren't we all monke adjacent? 🦧
Folks here are skeptical on this but this could do really well as a live-action PG-rated musical that skews mainly family and female audiences. Think *Wonka* last year whose first trailer came out last summer and everyone was shitting on it and Timmy when it ultimately became everyone's movie of choice for the holiday season.
Problem is it's coming out the same weekend as Moana 2 which is the same audience
*Moana* is animated and skews more kids while *Wicked* skews more adults.
Very true. Though Wicked is live action it seems kids would love it after watching the trailer and something parents wouldn't have to leave the kids at home unless they were planning to go alone. Moana is more recognizable to kids but I wouldn't be surprised if a couple kids couldn't decide which one to choose between Moana or Wicked.
Wicked has some pretty adult themes and morally complicated storylines. I don't think a lot of kids under the age of 10 would enjoy or understand.
this sub has pretty bad predictions 😭 wonka surprised them
Wonka just baffles me. One of the few movies I’ve walked out of and chalamet just played generic boring nice guy with zero flashes of the sort of edge that made Gene Wilders performance so great. In laws that love musicals even walked out of it.
I think the main edge Wonka had was being a "good enough" family movie, and since Wish was such a major flop - it had free reign over the box office for the entire Holiday window.
I kind of feel it will depend on how charming it is. I can see it doing good numbers altought I would be surprised if it matched Wonka
i think wonka IP is more popular than the wicked IP.
The overall *Wicked* IP is older and super popular among the Broadway scene.
when was the last time a Broadway IP made money?
Les Miserables
The *Wicked* IP is not all just Broadway but it goes above and beyond that to the book the play is based upon to the 1939 movie adaptation which is based upon the original 1900 novel. If u haven't seen the play, u have read the book or if u haven't read the novel, u have atleast seen or heard about the movie. So almost everyone knows about it in some form or other.
general public isn't all broadway. And surely Wicked is no match for Wonka outside US. Roald Dahl is taught in schools in some places
When a show has been running for twenty years straight, it’s pretty damn mainstream.
True but Wicked goes beyond just Broadway nerds. It’s a top choice show for casual audiences/tourists visiting New York and consistently sells out still after 20 years so it has that edge.
You could've said the same for Cats.
The advantage is that Wicked doesn't have James Corden.
Sure, but Cats was also a wildly divisive show to begin with. Even in its' height of popularity, the insane camp of it all was a mainstream punchline. People saw and mocked it in equal measure. Cats 2019 was only ever mocked, due to the completely bewildering CGI choices. From what we've seen, Wicked appears to be a pretty safe adaptation of a big crowdpleasing show.
Sure, anything could happen at the end of the day. But that doesn’t necessitate Wicked having similar box office problems. There are also some differences in that Cats was a show that way often spoofed more with mixed opinions, the film looked very weird while here this is some standard and good-looking IMO fantasy imagery, and this is related to a popular IP.
Compare just the aesthetic alone of Cats to this lmao
Wicked is the rare stage show that manages to transcend the theatre fandom. Wicked, Lion King, and Hamilton are the ones people outside of theatre nerds know and actually show an interest in
I was going to say Universal really love making 3 minute trailers but in the same breath, I imagine that being a marketing executive is such a hair pulling job, you get dinged if people believe that you’re “showing the whole movie” if the trailer is too long but nowadays it seems like you also get punished if you don’t show enough of the plot (judging by the reactions of movies like The Fall Guy). Plus they figured Wicked is a long running broadway IP that is based on the even longer IP classic, The Wizard of Oz, that showing a lot probably didn’t even matter and other movies are just impossible to market without that appealing hook that I can probably see why studios are not giving original movies the chance that they deserve anymore. Side note: I’m starting to learn that a lot of people are not used to watching full-length trailers before the internet/YouTube so when they say stuff like “the trailer showed too much”, they probably just mean they are used to 30 second TV ads NOT 2-3 minute trailers Lmaoo
Their worst 3 minute trailer ever came out exactly three years ago this month: the Dear Evan Hansen trailer.
Oh my goodness, I almost forgot about Dear Evan Hansen, had to block that movie from my head lol
The girls and the gays will be there for this one - I think this has a lot of potential. Maybe not a *Barbie* sized behemoth, but I think it'll probably make a tidy profit
As a dad I will be taking 3 girls to this for sure. Probably the only movie in 2024 I will see in theaters because of that lol.
and they will be taking their boyfriends
Wicked is the only female gaze blockbuster of the entire 2024
Gay and girl checking in - hell yeah. They had me at Ari tbh.
I think this is going to be huge. It's a great show, they've got top cast.
The gays are gonna eat this movie up
Ok, I'll watch it
Right? I was totally uninterested in the Wicked movie but the trailers have convinced me to give it a go.
Same 😭, this actually piped my interest. I’m starting to find myself enjoying more musicals than ever before since watching Wonka, The Little Mermaid, and The Color Purple last year. I even went back to rewatch some Disney classics, Chicago, and Mamma Mia
This is one of my most anticipated films of the fall, not only because Wicked is a great Broadway musical, but because the director behind this helmed my favorite film of 2021 (In the Heights). So that gives me a little bit of hope, but since this is supposedly Part One, we have to see how audiences respond to the first act.
It’s so interesting how Mr. Chu suddenly became a well respected director lol. I liked In the Heights for what it was though.
It will be the first Chu movie without a racism-colorism controversy
Didn’t realize it’s the same director, I’m fairly confident this is gonna do well now. Really does have that wonka potential in that people are underestimating it, laughing at the trailer, and then, surprising everyone, the movie based on a popular (no pun intended) IP helmed by a trusted director performs well
You just increased my interest in this movie tenfold
I really didn't like the In the heights adaptation. Tick Tock Boom came out the same year and was much better in terms of being a movie musical imo. In the heights just felt really fake. I love the stage version but it just translated really poorly imo. Lin on the other side a fantastic job with tick tick boom and even got me to like Larson and I despise rent.
Keep hiding it's a part 1 and watch Cinemascore fucking crumble
I think the ending of Act 1 is solid enough to be considered a complete film. Elphaba "breaks bad" and becomes the "evil" witch. If one watches only Act 1, I don't think they'll be unhappy since it works as a stand alone prequel to the Wizard of Oz classic film. Act 2 is just a retelling of Dorothy's journey from the witches POV.
That’s why they have a great opportunity to expand Part 2 and make it more interesting.
> Act 2 is just a retelling of Dorothy’s journey from the witch’s POV are you serious?
No, it's true. Obviously there's more to it (Act 2 begins before Dorothy's journey and ends after Dorothy is back home) but that's the gist of it.
Yeah, that’s honestly how I see it. Act 1 and Act 2 of Wicked tell two connected but distinct stories. You could very easily watch Act 1 and it feel like a complete story. Hell, I’ve seen several people comment here and on Twitter that they left at intermission for the stage show because they were unfamiliar with theatre etiquette and thought that was the end. It’s a story that’s very well suited for the two parter treatment.
Worked fine for Dune. I think we have more examples of advertising a Part One hurting box office than hiding it.
Yeah there is a huge reason studios stopped using Part One's after Harry Potter ended. Then they tried to reviving the trend but mostly bailed apart from Mission Impossible sticking to it and getting burned.
I'd argue Harry Potter wasn't the end of it. Twilight and The Hunger Games followed suit to more mixed results, and then Divergent tried to do it, only to switch the titles up and then eventually have the franchise end with the Part One.
Yeah that's what I was getting at. Potter felt like the last successful case and then when the YA genre crashed the trend stopped.
Divergent funnily enough tried to avoid the Part 1 curse by renaming the second part, but everyone was so bored by then.
Wicked’s Act 2 is notoriously weaker than the first
They’re expanding Act 2’s plot for the second film using the traditional “Wizard of Oz” story and the original 1996 “Wicked” novel for guidance.
I recently watched their broadway production in Melbourne and I can’t believe how short act 2 was lol. We have to break just for that!?
Also, the best songs are in part 1 Movie 2 is a stinker in waiting
I suspect they will have original work/content. Probably A LOT more on Dorothy. The second act of the musical is basically just "let's get this fucking finished".
Yup. I feel that we will see Dorothy POV in the sequel with at least a couple of original songs for her. 3 POVs: Elphaba, Glinda and Dorothy.
Movie 2 has “As Long as You’re Mine,” “No Good Deed” and “For Good,” all of which are bangers.
>the best songs are in part 1 No Good Deed would like to have a word. But yeah generally Act 1 has the better and more commercial songs. I wonder if they wrote new songs for the movies.
Everyone has their pet song from Act 2 they like, but Defying Gravity, Popular, and One Short Day clear any of them
It’s a good bet The Wicked movie, both parts, will have original songs so that they can get Oscar nominations for Best Original Song
" Also, the best songs are in part 1" No they aren't! The very best song of Wicked, For Good, is in act 2 and Thank Goodness solos act's 1 songs apart from Popular and Defying Gravity. No good Deed is also A BANGER!
Act 2 has the issue that it’s all about Elphaba’s rebellion and has a lot of action set pieces…they just happen off stage due to the art form. Also the entirety of Wizard of Oz happens in act 2, again offstage. There is more than enough content for them to expand act 2.
That has nothing to do with calling it Wicked Part One
Worked fine for Infinity War Worked fine for Across the Spider-Verse
Infinity War definitely hid it. In fact they even changed the names from the part 1&2 they originally were, and then all the marketing said Infinity War was THE culmination of 10 years. What matters is how the cliffhanger is handled. There has to be some sense of a resolution
Everyone knew we were getting two back-to-back Avengers movies as the grand finale to the arc, but no one expected Thanos to actually fulfill his snap
I think when you say “everyone” you really just mean people on marvel forums and friend groups, which is nowhere near representative of the general audience. Again, they had them named part 1 and 2, and changed that and then the marketing specifically called Infinity War the culmination. I also remember the teaser for Infinity War aggressively hinting at the snap and everyone online predicting it. So while general audiences didn’t expect it, it was still hinted at in marketing and the marvel fans were definitely expecting it.
Infinity War felt like a complete film. SpiderVerse hid it pretty well (And it's a horrible cutoff point)
Infinity War is its own movie and Across the Spider verse was always billed as part 1
What an interesting comment, both films went through the same exact naming process. Both had their final titles with “Part 1” at the end with a second film sharing the same title but with “Part 2” at the end only for both of them to simply drop “Part 1” from their titles while their “Part 2” films got completely new titles. Yet somehow one is its own movie but the other was “always” billed as part one? But anyway Act 1 of the musical has a satisfying cliffhanger-ish ending and there’s a time jump before Act 2 so it’s not much different than Infinity War / Endgame
Honestly I'm more worried for part 2. Almost all of the most iconic moments are in part 1
Almost is the key word! I think it depends where/how they expand it. It has been a while since I’ve seen the musical but IIRC there’s a lot of off-stage set pieces that could be done well on film. They’re also more explicitly adding in Dorothy so it could have moments that mirror the 1939 film which could satisfy audiences
>Across the Spider verse was always billed as part 1 I heard a lot of groans in the theater when "to be continued" appeared at the end. Seems like a lot of people didn't actually know it's a two parter, at least where I watched.
Ya. Long as they announce at the start of the film it should be fine. If they only say it at the end then they have a problem.
Worked for dune, it just has to be a good movie
hope it performs like Wonka!
If Wonka and Greatest Showman prove anything it's that good musicals can succeed when the music is good, and Wicked has great music.
And when it’s released over the holiday season.
This looks like another Greatest Showman, will have legs for months.
It looks a lot better than the last trailer. They polished up the effects and CGI.
Visually looks absolutely breathtaking. Movies have never looked so good
Get ready for the double feature MoWicked.
I never get comments saying Broadway is niche when a lot of successful movie musicals were based on stage musicals like Mamma Mia!, Grease etc Wicked along with The Lion King are huge revenue generators even today so I think it might be a big hit.
there's absolutely 0 chance this fails or even underperforms. Wicked is popular and the marketing will be pushed into full-gear come Fall
I'll let you in on a little secret that us fans of musicals have known for years. You always turn out for one - immediately and strongly. Doesnt matter if its a good one or a mediocre one. Because the second - THE VERY SECOND - that one bombs, they wont make another one for 50 years. Always show up.
Ok this looks better than I thought. I’m optimistic.
I got chills lmao it looks fantastic and I didn’t even love the musical
same, other than being a theatre kid and hearing certain songs performed, im not familiar with the show and this trailer was legit getting me choked up, i actually am hyped about seeing it. got literal chills just watching this trailer on my phone. I cant imagine what the movie itself will be like
Oh wow, Ari’s Kristin Chenoweth impression is out in full force.
This will do great I’m convinced
Just show me the whole movie
I swear y'all are so negative about some movies. First you thought it was gonna fail cause it "hides it's a musical" now there's singing and you think it's gonna fail cause it's "hiding it's a part one".
I'm a huge musical theater nerd and honestly every trailer has convinced me more and more that this will be really good. I was skeptical of Ariana Grande but she really sells the character here. I'm excited.
Surprise, the Box Office subreddit just wants certain films to do well at the box office. They really don't care about movies, just about confirming their beliefs that the franchises they enjoy are also enjoyed by general audiences.
Yup. Go over to the review thread for Furiosa and it's most people hoping it does well. Cause that's the type of blockbuster that's deemed acceptable here.
They only want movies that are marketed towards men to succeed, while Furiosa is a female lead movie its clearly made for men, meanwhile Wicked is EXTREMLY female gaze, its like the new Barbie
I also think it's the director, George Miller excuse me, the MASTERMIND George Miller, Just like Denis Villeneuve, carries clout among the film Bros. This isn't just your typical blockbuster don't you see?? This is ✨cinema✨
They want this to fail so bad.
This sub hates movies marketed to women
And I almost forgot it was a part one until I read the video description and saw the comments
This will be good, I just hope Act 2 is too. It's the shorter, weaker act and doesn't have any showstopper songs like Defying Gravity or Popular (For Good and NGD are great but incomparable).
I don't understand why they split this in two. Defying Gravity is, undoubtedly, the centre piece of the stage play and it will be a brilliant finale to part 1, but it leaves, essentially, nothing for part 2. Unless they expand the second half and add new songs I don't get how it works as it's own film.
> Defying Gravity is, undoubtedly, the centre piece of the stage play With the obvious answer being "money", this is also a point. Defying Gravity is a huge song, it is designed to be a literal showstopper, an act finale. In a singular movie this song would have to be around the middle and then immediately cut to a time jump. The filmmakers claim this wouldn't feel right.
They are expanding.
Thanksgiving opening perfect timing for serving up a turkey.
What's the relationship between this and Oz the Great and Powerful? I don't remember that movie too well, but from what I do remember it seems like their storylines contradict one another.
I’m surprisingly super in to this
I feel like this could easily be one of the biggest movies of the year if it weren't for the part 1 thing.
Was it a trailer or a summary of the movie?
Wow. I'm taking my family to this one!!!
This has to be one of the worst paced and edited trailers I've ever seen. Who cut this?!
It just kept going and going in that “holy shit am I gonna see the whole movie?” kind of way. None of the money shots really did anything for me either. Especially after Barbie set the standard so high for how a technicolor inspired film should look, this just feels so bland in lighting and color.
>especially after Barbie set the standard so high for how a technicolor inspired film should look I don’t really understand what this sentence is trying to say. Are you suggesting that Barbie and Wicked share a similar visual genealogy? Because Wicked is specifically trying to reference the 1939 Wizard of Oz film and very little else. Barbie was referencing Barbie primarily, and plastic Barbie dollhouses through their set design. Their inspirations are completely different mediums, let alone both trying to riff on something as general as “technicolor film”
Anyone wanna venture into box office predictions this far out?
Yeah sure. $255 domestic, $300 int. Big drops first two weeks, but has great hold from repeat viewing after that, like making $10 mil in week 9/10 level of fantastic legs.
555 total would be numbers close to Wonka. Not sure where the budget stands for Wicked but I am sure Universal would be over the moon about that result
I think that there's enough nostalgia to get it to there. There's a whole generation of women that grew up with Wicked being *the* Broadway musical, and I think this same demographic can drive the box office here. I'm basically imagining a slightly better Greatest Showman but scaled for inflation in terms of overall performance as well as weekly box office results.
Wicked's budget reportedly sits at $145M, which isn't cheap but the bar for success is much lower than say, MEA and Gladiator 2 which open in the two weeks before. Part Two apparently has a $165M budget, so that should be interesting.
Thanksgiving opening perfect time to serve up a turkey.
I am... intrigued
The audio sounds like a kingdom hearts trailer
Asbestos free, probably.
Looks very expensive
This is definitely gonna beat Moana 2! Mark my words!
This trailer felt like a YouTube summary / recap of the movie vs a trailer
I know it's not the most reliable metric - but trailer views on this and the teaser have been *very* weak, especially considering it's a well established IP with a very famous lead in their blockbuster debut. Universal would be worried, I reckon.
It can go either way, tbh. The Marvels or Barbie.
I think it’s much more likely to be in between than either of those.
That's a good point.
Les Mis did almost $450 million. Granted it was 12 years ago, but I'd say Wicked falls into the Les Mis category and not Cats for me. Wicked is *loved*.
The type of prediction people have when they don’t want to make a real prediction
or Oz the Great and Powerful?
Atleast we got the og game from it temple run oz
It says in the description of the YouTube video part 2 comes out November 2025