Wicked Movie

And wasn't it originally conceived as a film? If so it makes the delay even stranger

I've always thought Wicked in its current form as a stage musical is very tricky to translate to film.  Some of the biggest moments, like Defying Gravity, totally work as spectacles in the theatre but would just read as campy in the movie unless they're revamped quite thoroughly.  Elphaba hovering above Oz in CGI whilst singing the climax of the song for a whole minute just can't have the same impact as it does on stage.  The whole show needs careful thought and deconstruction to make it work on film.  As Schwartz explains in the article posted above by Anthony: "“In order to do something that will work on its own merits, you have to do something different. The only concern is people who would be coming expecting to see a filmed version of the play. They’re not going to see that.”

Some musicals - The Prom for example - work well lifted and transposed to another medium.  Others - like the Producers, which granted is an extreme example of lifting the stage show and just adding a fourth wall - just don't.  Wicked wouldn't, and I think one reason it's taking so long is that they realise this and are purposely taking their time to rework the source material.  I also think it's actually testament to how well it was originally moulded into a musical that it's tricky to unravel into something else.  I see Someone in a tree's point re: the project originally being conceived as a film, but you have to remember that was before it was worked into its current form.  Had it originally developed into a film as planned, it would be a very different process and end product.

I also think casting is a major issue. Lea Michele in her Glee days was the obvious movie Elphaba.  Once she got too old (and all the backlash towards her on set behaviour began) there was no one else obvious.  I'm afraid anyone on here guessing the names recent West End Elphabas or Galindas are way off the mark, as are those guessing older Elphabas who are now "names".  The two leads are going to be Americans, they're going to be young (Kerry Ellis is not going to be playing a college aged Elphie) and they're going to be names in some way - possibly along the same lines as how Halle Bailey was cast as Ariel in the live action Little Mermaid, so famous in certain circles but a "new" face to many people.

Finally, there is also a slight issue with the Wizard of Oz connection.  The source is based on the MGM Movie (the witch isn't even green in the book) so there's every possibility that rights could be difficult to clear, and that each little detail needs consideration depending on how closely they want to align the finished product with the 1939 original.  The Disney sequel Return to Oz had to clear the ruby slippers separately to the characters, for example, as they were owned by MGM.

So all in all, there's a lot causing delays!

I believe it's called "development hell" isn't it? Where a movie can't get past the early stages of production due to problems with scripts, concepts, directors etc.

And yes, Wicked is such a... stage musical, I imagine translating it to screen just as effectively is going to be difficult. Don't expect to see a stage Elphaba or Glinda in the final film though. It'll be Hollywood casting, even if they're relatively unknown.

Dove Cameron does seem the obvious choice for Glinda. And they'll squeeze James Corsen in somewhere, probably as The Wizard, with a Meryl Streep/Christine Baranski type as Morrible. It'll be Elphaba who's the tricky casting. All I ask is that they cast people who can actually sing it, as written, without needing to be lifelessly autotuned beyond all recognition (Emma Watson and Dan Stevens, I'm looking at you).

Oh, Christine Baranski as Morrible! Now THAT I could see!

If they can film Hamilton onstage, why can't they do the same for Wicked?

I was very sceptical about how a Wicked movie would look like, but after seeing In The Heights I think Jon M. Chu is going to absolutely nail it. Can't wait to see who he casts.

The show doesn't need a movie, but you can bet your arse that Hollywood producers have been pushing for one - they see it from the opposite angle to what you describe above - i.e. "the musical is such a huge hit, still selling well and had many international productions, so the "brand" is a guaranteed money maker"!



It needs a little bit more presence for Dorothy as you say, but I don't think it needs much - and I'd hope they'd find a way of doing it that doesn't break the flow of the witches' story.  For example, they could start the movie with a traditional recapping of Dorothy's story from her point of view, explaining the key points about her interactions with the witch, and then "rewind" to the beginning. With certain rights they could even use footage from the 1939 film for the recap. Get it narrated by Idina Menzel (presumably but not explicitly as an older Elphie) to tick off her cameo and end the narration with a reworking of the original tagline "But so much happened before Dorothy dropped in..." Reverse the shot of the house falling from the original movie, cue Wicked Overture.

I'll get my hat.

I really like the fact that the references to Dorothy are fleeting, as if we’ve just arrived a few seconds too late and missed her. And the bucket of water scene at the end, with the silouhette of her with the pigtails. Hilarious!
Don’t show Dorothy in the film!

Wonder who James Corden will play?

No, but seriously. I’d love to see Helen Mirren or Olivia Colman as Morrible.