Somewhere That's Green
Wicked may end up being the biggest
hit musical of all. Looks like it's going to run forever. The critics didn't love it, and it's not my kind of show, but it's obviously struck a chord.Now there's talk of a movie. This is always interesting. It's pretty easy to screw up a musical, and there's not the audience for them there used to be. Some film adaptations become hits--Chicago, Mamma Mia!, Hairspray--but they're more likely to do disappointing business--Dreamgirls, Phantom Of The Opera, Sweeney Todd, Evita--or flop outright--A Chorus Line, The Producers, Rent, Nine.
Stephen Sondheim said almost no film adaptation of a stage musical works, because if the show is good in the first place, that's because it was created for the stage. Remove the show from its native habitat and you kill it. Will this happen to Wicked?
Wicked has spectacle. This may sound like it'll adapt well, since movies practically specialize in spectacle. But stage spectacle is different. Just throwing money at something won't impress a movie audience, since every week there's another big budget film.
Then there's the question of a director. Do you want a stage guy who's worked in movies, like Rob Marshall, or Sam Mendes? Or a guy who's done big, physical projects, like Tim Burton or J.J. Abrams? Of do you want a director who concentrates on human stories, and let's the music take care of itself? (There have been some musical mismatches before, but the worst I can think of is cerebral he-man John Huston directing Annie.)
Above all, who'll play the two leads? The roles are strongly associated with Idina Menzel and Kristin Chenoweth, and their fans may want to see them, but the show opened seven years ago and the stage is more forgiving (not to mention neither are movie stars). More likely names like Anne Hathaway or Reese Witherspoon or Amy Adams or Amanda Seyfried or Lea Michele will get the roles. Another way to go is hiring an unknown, though I'm guessing this'll be big budget and they'll want star insurance.
You'd think there's a huge built-in audience for a Wicked film. But if I had to guess, it seems there are more ways to screw it up than do it right.
posted by LAGuy @ 12:02 AM
3 Comments:
The only thing worse than "Wicked" the musical was "Wicked" the book.
None of which bodes well for "WICKED" the movie.
The reason has nothing to do with staging and everything to do with story.
The idea behind "Wicked" is extremely intriguing: Re-imagine "The Wizard of Oz" from the P.O.V. of a misunderstodd Wicked Witch of the West.
The problem is/was the execution of that premise: The story is too dark, too stark, and WAY too non-cohesive.
Oh, and the music is nothing great, either - even the "show-stopping" ACT ONE closer, "Defying Gravity".
Teenage girls have made "Wicked" (the musical) what it is.
Which, given the success of "Twilight", means it would seem a certainty to become a movie...
...becoming, like "Twilight", another adolescent-targeted celebration of mediocrity.
"Popular" is the only good song in the score.
The musical Wicked is not as dark as the book - particularly because they cahneg the ending. But that could save an adaption ofthe show over an adaption of the novel. No one would want to see a film based strictly on the book (though I thought it was an entertaining read).
I think the spectacle of Wicked could make for a very successful film, the way "Music Man" (imho) might be a better film musical than it is a stage musical. When I saw the stage production (and it was the big touring company), I was a little let down by the paucity of the scenery and effects. On film, you'll have flying monkeys and a Wizard of Oz who are awe inspiring (and probably 3D).
I would like to see Chenoweth be able to reprise her role, but I suppose she is getting a little long in the tooth to play the part.
Post a Comment
<< Home