Film Review – Wicked: For Good

November 20th, 2025 | POSTED BY Allen Almachar

The continuation of the Wicked musical adaptation – Wicked: For Good (2025) – arrives in theaters riding the success of the first film. In case you’ve been living under a rock for the last two years, Wicked (2024) was a massive success, appeasing fans of the stage show and garnering a whole new generation of devotees at the same time. With tons of energy and charm, this alternate look at the world of “Oz” and all the characters in it became a major pop culture phenomenon. I wasn’t the biggest fan, but I can see why so many were drawn to it. Needless to say: the sequel has a lot to live up to. And while much of the same elements have carried onto this installment, there are some sharp turns that take us to unexpected places. Whether that is a good or bad thing will be up to the viewer. 

We pick up not too far removed from the events of the previous entry. The green skinned Elphaba (Cynthia Erivo) has gone on the run after discovering the heinous schemes of The Wizard (Jeff Goldblum) against all animal creatures. In turn, The Wizard – as well as Madame Morrible (Michelle Yeoh) – has launched a propaganda campaign against Elphaba. They have convinced all citizens of Oz that she is the “Wicked Witch of the West.” Caught in the middle is Galinda/Glinda (Ariana Grande), who is torn between the love of the people and her friendship to Elphaba. The narrative plays out as a conflict between two different philosophies. Should change be achieved through acts of resistance and rebellion? Or can change come from working within the establishment? Toss in some song and dance numbers and you have yourself a bonafide big screen musical!

Director Jon M. Chu (with screenwriters Whinnie Holzman and Dana Fox) structures Wicked: For Good in stark contrast to the first installment. Yes, the set design, costuming, make up, and special effects are back and as impressive as ever. However, the tone and atmosphere have made a dramatic shift. This is a much darker, somber, and sadder affair. The vigor of the school/university setting is now replaced with feelings of loss, regret, and broken relationships. The big, sweeping musical sequences that Chu is known for have been pared down to smaller intimate scenes. It also doesn’t help that none of the songs this time are as good. We don’t get any memorable moments like “Popular” or “Defying Gravity.” In fact, so much of the music is composed of sad, slow ballads that it drags the pacing to a crawl. We get scene after scene of Glinda or Elphaba with mournful looks on their faces, singing their hearts out but without much impact. Oddly, despite being almost half an hour shorter than the first film, For Good feels longer. The music moves too methodically to hold the dramatic tension.

To put it bluntly: Wicked: For Good isn’t much fun. The first time around, the cast and crew had a ball, and that energy radiated from the screen. Ariana Grande and Cynthia Erivo looked like they were having a blast playing off their natural chemistry. This time, they are tasked to play their parts way too seriously. The love triangle between them and the hunky Fiyero (Jonathan Bailey) was a kind of goofy side story at first, but here it is treated as a straightforward tale of love gained and love lost. Sure, there are times were Glinda and Elphaba are allowed to play around, but we don’t get nearly enough of it. The material just doesn’t give them enough varying shades of emotion. The writing and direction keep them mostly at a single, solemn gear.

If there is anyone here that appears to be enjoying themselves, it’s Jeff Goldblum. Sporting colorful outfits, quaffed hair, and a thin mustache, Goldblum plays The Wizard as a combination of circus ringleader and Walt Disney. Maybe it’s due to his own personal quirkiness, but nearly every line, gesture, and facial expression hits effectively on screen. Goldblum can garner a laugh just by a simple glance or smirk. But he isn’t just playing the role as a caricature – he gives it dimension and texture. The Wizard knows how to sway his audience. Even when his plans are evil – such as the persecution of Oz’s animals – he can win people over with his personality. He’s like a politician in that way. He might say one thing but will turn around and do something different. The Wizard’s goal of building the Yellow Brick Road isn’t just to improve traffic flow, he has other plans in mind. Goldblum’s one musical number, “Wonderful,” is the big highlight because of its double meaning. He may say that everything is wonderful, but if we dig beyond the surface, we realize things are the exact opposite.

Technically, For Good doesn’t have the same pizazz as before. Chu’s direction has a much more reserved style compared to say, the spinning library sequence from the first film. Most scenes hold on the characters in medium angle shots. There are far more nighttime interactions where the backgrounds are covered in darkness. There is one standout set piece, though. It’s the scene where Glinda sings in quiet contemplation in her home. The cinematography (Alice Brooks) follows her in an apparent unbroken shot, where she travels from room to room and hallway to hallway. Throughout, we see her looking at her reflection in mirrors. The camerawork, editing (Myron Kerstein), and special effects mixes and matches the imagery, to the point where we aren’t sure if we are actually looking at Glinda or at her reflection. The scene is a clear metaphor for her internal conflict. It’s too bad we don’t get enough of this creativity. 

***Warning: The Next Paragraph Contains Mild Spoilers***

One of the biggest issues plaguing For Good is its insistence in tying the plot to the events of The Wizard of Oz (1939). Granted, on paper this makes sense. Both the novel and stage show are reinterpretations of L. Frank Baum’s children’s book and the aforementioned film. However, the narrative takes such absurd paths to get there that it plays out awkwardly. The writing and direction twists itself into knots explaining the origins of each familiar character – Dorothy, The Tin Man, The Cowardly Lion, Scarecrow, etc. – that it takes away from the main storyline between Glinda and Elphaba. Each example plays out episodically, like an interlude taking us away from the central action. Because the narrative plays both ways – integrating these extra details within the overall story – both end up getting diluted. It’s the same problem that exists within the MCU, where the persistence in adding Easter Eggs, callbacks, and fan service does nothing of significance to the final product. Maybe this aspect exists in the novel or show, but on screen it doesn’t work very well. It’s all nostalgia for nostalgia’s sake. 

If Wicked: For Good proves anything, it’s that this entire undertaking would probably have been better suited as a single film. There just isn’t enough substance here to justify expanding into two installments. Will it make a boatload of money? Sure, but does that make for an engaging cinematic experience? Not really. This just felt like a grind. The magic that was once present is nowhere to be seen. Instead of going out on a high note, this fizzles down to a stop. It makes us want to click our heels and wish we were back home.

Ariana Grande, Cynthia Erivo, Dana Fox, Featured, Jeff Goldblum, Jon M. Chu, Jonathan Bailey, L. Frank Baum, Michelle Yeoh, The Wizard of Oz, Walt Disney, Whinnie Holzman, wicked, Wicked: For Good