no one is being normal about wicked

maybe we can be honest for a sec

I've been wondering how to write about Wicked (2024), a movie that has been in the making since the first Obama administration and about whom people, it seems, cannot be normal.

Let's first lay the cards on the table: I am a musical theater fiend. I am of the earnest belief that An American in Paris is one of the most beautiful films ever made. People ask what's on my TikTok FYP, and it's a bunch of theater kids comparing the different Audreys from Little Shop of Horrors, waxing poetic about Audra McDonald, generally weeping about Sondheim, and making fun of Lin-Manuel Miranda. All worthy pursuits, by the way¹.

Because I enjoy it as a medium and because I'd prefer if more (good) film musicals were made, I am predisposed to enjoy them. When it comes to musicals, I want to like them.

To my everlasting detriment, however, I am also in possession of standards. And so while I enjoyed Wicked (more than I thought I would!), I was tested when I finally watched it last week, and again when I began seeing the reviews and responses trickling in.

Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande for Wicked. (Universal Pictures)

Something was not clicking.

Clare

, whose entire Wicked piece is worth reading, aptly compared Wicked’s reception to that of Marvel films:

A better way to say that would perhaps be that Wicked is Iron Man for girlies, i.e. all of Gen Z and the girls and gays of its elders. The problem with that, what makes Wicked uniquely crazy-making, is when you make Iron Man for girlies, they won’t swallow it whole without pause; it has to become a point of critical inquiry, even if that inquiry is, “I love this, is that okay?”.

I loved this. Because listen, I consume Not Great media all the time! I enjoy it, too, because not everything can be Great, and sometimes I need to see witches in badly-lit fantasy worlds prancing and singing. But just because I like a film does not mean I delude myself into thinking it's Great — we can all be self-assured enough to understand that enjoying something is not what makes it great. Yes, taste is subjective, but art has standards. (See also:

Caroline Chambers

' recent (genius) Christmas movie good-bad matrix.)

If you've been around for a while, you might recall that I wrote about Barbie back in January when everyone seemed to be losing their minds at the film receiving not-ten-but-eight Oscar nominations:

Part of the problem is that we have become such a lazy audience that we now need themes spoon-fed to us in big, explicit terms. A movie is not feminist unless it tells us that it is about women’s empowerment. We are at risk of losing our ability to appreciate, or even perceive, subtext, and it worries me, because what kind of art will be made if such a large subset of the audience is only willing to take in its obvious, surface-level meaning?

With Wicked, my question seems to have been answered, because no Themes have ever Themed as hard as Wicked’s, and as such people far and wide are treating the film as an Unflinching Look at Gender, Fascism, and Race in Contemporary Society. It is both fascinating and bleak.

Let’s discuss one specific response that bamboozled me.

When

Marion Teniade

sent me the New York Times roundtable discussion on Wicked, the same one that

Clare

also mentions in her piece, I don't think she knew she'd be derailing my entire day. I could feel my eyes wanting to pull further and further from their cozy little sockets the longer I kept reading.

---

Small interruption to announce I’m running 20% off annual subscriptions holiday sale until the end of the year, making the cost $40/year (instead of $50). Full disclosure, I’ve been toying with the idea of keeping the annual subscription at $40 indefinitely even after December, because I know economic anxiety is a real thing and I get that spending money on a newsletter is not the highest priority, so! Would like to diminish the barrier as much as possible while still making a living, etc.

---

I should've known I was in for a doozy the second I saw the below, from Patrick Healy, as the roundtable's very first utterance:

While I love “The Wizard of Oz” and I love theater, I was never interested in the Broadway musical “Wicked.” I had assumed it was for teenage girls and saw it only because of my job (when I was the Times theater reporter).... A big-budget “Wicked” movie with a strong antifascist message? I did not expect that.

Forgive the incoming slew of italics and all-caps, but how are you a former THEATER reporter for the NEW YORK TIMES and comfortable saying, out loud, that you weren't particularly interested in a production that received TEN Tony Award nominations and is currently the fourth-longest running Broadway show, because you thought it was for teenage girls? In 2024??? Forget personal taste: what happened to professionalism? You know who would've expected "a strong antifascist message" from a Wicked movie? Someone whose literal job it was to pay attention to the Broadway musical when it premiered.