In 1900, when L. Frank Baum published his monumental novel, the Wizard of Oz, many readers felt that the role of the witches was incomplete. Now, over 125 years later, his whimsical ideas have been brought back to life and answered in the blockbusters Wicked and Wicked: For Good. Director Jon M. Chu rejuvenated Baum’s lessons of friendship and power with a fresh and modern perspective. The film transforms Baum’s lessons about power and isolation, using them to teach how identities are built and destroyed.
My expectations were low when I entered the theater in December. The previous Thanksgiving, I had watched Wicked with my family, and I enjoyed the songs, but I thought the actual plot and storyline were too slow-paced and shallow. Overall, I was unimpressed by Wicked. I expected Wicked: For Good to be the same.
Wicked: For Good explores the dynamics between Elphaba, the Wicked Witch of the West and Glinda, the good witch. Elphaba is simultaneously the scapegoat of Oz and the main advocate for Oz’s marginalized citizens—the animals. Because of Elphaba’s determination to protect the animals, the rest of Oz turns against her, a plot point I like because of its relevance in the real world, as many modern changemakers receive backlash for expressing their beliefs.
The two witches’ unlikely friendship, revealed in the first movie, now becomes a study of how public opinion can affect one’s friendships. The hate of Elphaba and the love for Glinda created a dynamic in the friends’ relationship that led to a hatred between the two characters. If one of them was supposedly good and one was supposedly evil, how were they supposed to get along? Later in the movie, the friends reunite, which I interpret as how others’ opinions on your life shouldn’t matter.
In the first movie, we find out that Elphaba has profound magical powers. She is extremely powerful, which The Wizard tries to use for his personal benefit. I think this comments on current events where billionaires take advantage of and exploit talented people to make themselves richer.
Glinda, on the other hand, becomes closely tied to Oz, as she feels like cooperating with Oz is the best option for her own safety. She most certainly represents the people who are too scared to speak up against wrongdoing in order to best protect themselves.
Chu also illustrates how the media exaggerates certain qualities of a person to make them appear different. For example, Elphaba’s green skin was used against her and weaponized in flyers declaring her as “wicked.” Glinda’s public persona, meanwhile, is polished into perfection. This mirrors modern-day situations where someone’s race and identity are seen as a bad thing. In real life, people often don’t get the same opportunities as others simply due to the color of their skin.
While exiting the theater, I was surprised to find that I enjoyed the movie a lot. Purely from a music standpoint, the first movie was better, but in terms of actual rhetoric, Wicked for Good was the clear winner. If the original film was a musical first and a narrative second, Wicked: For Good reverses the order. It is a film less interested in spectacle and more in asking why we believe what we believe and why we trust the status quo and the ruling power.
