Wicked: Part 1 | Thanksgiving 2024 | Jon M Chu to direct | Ariana Grande is Galinda. Cynthia Erivo is Elphaba

[Alexander]

26 minutes ago, Krissykins said:

Knowing that they actually built that fully functioning train including tracks, and that those are sets and not green screens, they need to get a Barbie style on-set show off video out around the time of release. 
 

Also, 100% in. 

Yeah... About that:

 

 

[Krissykins]

21 minutes ago, Alexander said:

Yeah... About that:

 

 

I’m not watching that sorry, but I don’t mean no CGI full stop. I just mean not another Quantumania abomination where the cast seemingly never left a single room. 
 

The practically sets for Wicked are crazy. 

 

[SpiderByte]

There is also a considerable amount of CG in the trailer as well. Not that I think it's bad just that using this as proof you don't need CGI isn't accurate.

[Eric is Quiet]

11 hours ago, SpiderByte said:

THEYRE DOING THE HIDING ITS A MUSICAL BULLSHIT

FOR

FUCKING

WICKED????

They didn’t? They played Defying Gravity in the promo. Like that’s the main song everybody associates with Wicked and Broadway in general.

[Claire of Themyscira]

3 hours ago, Eric Creed said:

They didn’t? They played Defying Gravity in the promo. Like that’s the main song everybody associates with Wicked and Broadway in general.

Gag it, bb.

 

Thought it was a good trailer, has me interested! ❤️

 

Am a sucker for good singers, and this film definitely has them.

[SpiderByte]

5 hours ago, Eric Creed said:

They didn’t? They played Defying Gravity in the promo. Like that’s the main song everybody associates with Wicked and Broadway in general.

At the very end though. Compare it to the last musical Chu did:

 

 

[filmlover]

Been a minute since I've seen a movie generate as much chatter in my inner circles as much as this has within the past nearly 24 hours (even my mom called me up to tell me how excited she is for this). Also seems like it's generated the most buzz out of everything that premiered yesterday, so underestimate this at your own peril.

 

And lol at complaining over the music not being entirely spotlighted (even though it features the most iconic song) in a one minute teaser for a movie that's nearly a year away from release. Obviously later marketing materials will highlight Ariana and Cynthia singing more. And honestly? For anyone who somehow goes into this completely unaware it's a musical, even though the Broadway play is arguably the most famous musical to emerge in the genre over the past few decades, it's entirely on them for not being pop culture savvy. 

[SaltyPistola]

I think this looks surprisingly ugly. Bland CGI and lighting everywhere and there's like no OZ magic to be found.  I don't think it'll flop but probably a little under Wonka. A shame, this could have been huge. 

Edited February 13 by SaltyPistola

[Speedorito]

52 minutes ago, SaltyPistola said:

I think this looks surprisingly ugly. Bland CGI and lighting everywhere and there's like no OZ magic to be found.  I don't think it'll flop but probably a little under Wonka. A shame, this could have been huge. 

I sort of agree. I wish it more colorful like Barbie or Wonka. It honestly reminds of the live action Disney remakes, so I don’t think the general audience will be too bothered by the look. Hopefully the rest of the film will be good though.

[theruraljuror1121]

Already seeing critiques that this movie is "hiding that it's a musical" and criticizing the acting. Absolutely wild takes over 57 seconds of footage. For anyone to not know that the movie of Wicked is a musical, even at this point, is to be purposefully obtuse. It's one of the most famous musicals of all time, and the biggest A-list star in the movie is primarily known as a singer. And they even have the signature song being sung over the trailer. Just because we don't see it coming from Elphaba's lips, suddenly it's being hidden? 

 

I think this will be a big hit, but the critiques and discourse are extremely "go touch grass" on this one already. 

[BoxOfficeFangrl]

2 hours ago, theruraljuror1121 said:

Already seeing critiques that this movie is "hiding that it's a musical" and criticizing the acting. Absolutely wild takes over 57 seconds of footage. For anyone to not know that the movie of Wicked is a musical, even at this point, is to be purposefully obtuse. It's one of the most famous musicals of all time, and the biggest A-list star in the movie is primarily known as a singer. And they even have the signature song being sung over the trailer. Just because we don't see it coming from Elphaba's lips, suddenly it's being hidden? 

 

I think this will be a big hit, but the critiques and discourse are extremely "go touch grass" on this one already. 

 

It was a teaser during the Super Bowl. Even if you hadn't heard of the stage show, Wicked is clearly a take on the Oz story and the most famous movie version of it is also a musical. I think there'd be less fuss about the teaser lacking singing, if it weren't for the recent advertising for Wonka and Mean Girls.

 

With music movies, the campaign tries to build up some anticipation for the biggest songs. This is literally the first official footage for a movie not being released for another 9 months. I doubt that Universal will spend the entire time until November hiding that there's singing in the movie starring Ariana Grande and Cynthia Erivo.

 

Edited February 13 by BoxOfficeFangrl

[The Panda]

22 hours ago, SpiderByte said:

At the very end though. Compare it to the last musical Chu did:

 

 

In the Heights has minimal dialogue and is operetta like. Wicked is a more traditional Broadway musical with a scene-song-scene structure.

 

I don’t think they’re hiding anything (other than that it’s part 1, which would generate much bigger backlash).

Edited February 13 by The Panda

[Last Man Standing]

17 minutes ago, The Panda said:

In the Heights has minimal dialogue and is operetta like. Wicked is a more traditional Broadway musical with a scene-song-scene structure.

 

I don’t think they’re hiding anything (other than that it’s part 1, which would generate much bigger backlash).

I don't think Part I-ing the audience really generates backlash. Dune didn't really suffer for it, neither did Spiderverse.

[PlatnumRoyce]

4 minutes ago, Last Man Standing said:

I don't think Part I-ing the audience really generates backlash. Dune didn't really suffer for it, neither did Spiderverse.

and neither did Infinity War

[TerwillikerInst]

On 2/11/2024 at 6:51 PM, SpiderByte said:

Spoilers for this very famous and old musical about the Wizard of Oz, there are  elements from Wizard of Oz in the second act.

 

What the second movies trouble has is that the first half is widely considered vastly superior to the second one.

tbh- I can actually see what they're going for here. 

 

The hook for the first movie will be all the stuff people actually remember about the musical, and then the hook for the second one will be that they've beefed it up by making it even more of a direct Wizard of Oz retelling. 

 

Those shots of Dorothy screamed "end of movie stinger" to me. 

 

 

Edited February 13 by TerwillikerInst

[SpiderByte]

19 minutes ago, TerwillikerInst said:

tbh- I can actually see what they're going for here. 

 

The hook for the first movie will be all the stuff people actually remember about the musical, and then the hook for the second one will be that they've beefed it up by making it even more of a direct Wizard of Oz retelling. 

 

Those shots of Dorothy screamed "end of movie stinger" to me. 

 

 

This only really would work if theyve completely changed the entire second half of the musical. Like new music and everything.

[ViewerAnon]

1 hour ago, Last Man Standing said:

I don't think Part I-ing the audience really generates backlash. Dune didn't really suffer for it, neither did Spiderverse.

 

1 hour ago, PlatnumRoyce said:

and neither did Infinity War

 

I think it's telling that none of these movies were released as "Part One." SPIDER-VERSE dropped it from the title and re-titled the sequel. DUNE didn't have Part One anywhere in its marketing materials - trailers, posters - and only included it on the title card at the beginning. (And I heard that was a late addition because test audiences got mad at the cliffhanger without it)

Edited February 13 by ViewerAnon

[Mojoguy]

1 hour ago, PlatnumRoyce said:

and neither did Infinity War

Also IT, which had great legs for horror film.

 

Only 2/3 came back for IT chapter 2 which was fine since the adult stuff was always less interesting.

[Spidey Freak]

13 hours ago, SaltyPistola said:

I think this looks surprisingly ugly. Bland CGI and lighting everywhere and there's like no OZ magic to be found.  I don't think it'll flop but probably a little under Wonka. A shame, this could have been huge. 

 

It's too late to the party. Frozen ate its lunch 11 years ago.

[Last Man Standing]

26 minutes ago, ViewerAnon said:

 

 

I think it's telling that none of these movies were released as "Part One." SPIDER-VERSE dropped it from the title and re-titled the sequel. DUNE didn't have Part One anywhere in its marketing materials - trailers, posters - and only included it on the title card at the beginning. (And I heard that was a late addition because test audiences got mad at the cliffhanger without it)

It seems it hurts movies when they're advertised as Part Is, e.g. Mission Impossible, but audiences don't really care THAT much if you spring it on them. Sure there'll be complaints here and there, but nothing that'd actually hurts the movie or the sequel.