If you want better editing quality
Choose Teenage Sex and Death at Camp Miasma. It scores 5.0 vs 1.3 for editing quality, with a 4.4 overall score.
Wicked: For Good Movie Review
Bottom Line
Choose it if Erivo and Grande’s performances, lavish Oz craft, and an emotional friendship finale matter more than a tidy plot. Skip it if you want Part One’s pacing, songbook, humor, or a cleanly structured standalone story.
Best for
Best for Wicked fans who already care about Elphaba and Glinda, and for viewers who prioritize Erivo and Grande’s performances, lavish costumes and sets, and an emotional musical payoff.
Not for
Less suited to newcomers or viewers who want a tightly paced standalone story, consistently memorable songs, bright readable visuals, or the lighter comic energy of Part One.
Verdict
Wicked: For Good is carried by Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande, whose vocals, dramatic work, and shared chemistry earn the broadest praise. The production design and costumes also remain major strengths, and the finale lands emotionally for many viewers. The tradeoff is a second act that reviewers frequently find both padded and rushed, with abrupt character turns, weaker songs, and a complicated overlap with The Wizard of Oz. Visual reactions are split as well: the physical craft can be sumptuous, while dim lighting and uneven CGI blunt some of the spectacle. Fans of the stage musical are more likely to embrace the faithful wrap-up; newcomers and viewers already lukewarm on Part One may find the structural problems harder to overlook.
Feature Scorecards
Summary
49 reviewed features-
Very positive 4.5-5.015 (31%)
-
Positive 3.5-4.47 (14%)
-
Neutral 2.5-3.417 (35%)
-
Negative 1.5-2.47 (14%)
-
Very negative below 1.53 (6%)
Pros highlights
-
Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande receive overwhelming praise, often described as the reason the film survives its weaker plotting and pacing. Their vocals, dramatic work, and shared scenes are consistently highlighted.
-
The performances are one of the film’s safest strengths, with the central cast repeatedly praised for carrying material that many reviewers found structurally weaker. Even mixed reviews often single out the acting as a reason the sequel still works.
-
Production design is among the strongest consensus positives. Oz is repeatedly described as elaborate, colorful, detailed, sumptuous, and richly built even by critics who dislike the lighting or CGI layered over it.
-
The emotional payoff is one of the strongest areas of agreement. The Elphaba-Glinda relationship, especially the title duet and final stretch, is repeatedly described as moving, tear-inducing, and cathartic.
-
The supporting ensemble is generally well regarded, with praise for performers such as Jonathan Bailey, Ethan Slater, Marissa Bode, and Jeff Goldblum. Michelle Yeoh’s singing and several underused roles draw the main reservations.
-
Costumes are a standout craft element, repeatedly described as lavish, imaginative, character-rich, and visually striking. Even reviews critical of the movie’s lighting tend to praise the wardrobe itself.
Cons highlights
-
The central friendship remains compelling, but the story is widely regarded as weaker than Part One. Critics repeatedly point to Act II’s rushed turns, Wizard of Oz overlap, and strained connective plotting.
-
The music is one of the most divided areas. The title song and No Good Deed are frequent highlights, but reviewers repeatedly say Act II lacks Part One’s memorable songs and find the new additions forgettable or merely serviceable.
-
Overall enjoyment is mixed but generally respectable. Devoted fans and viewers swept up by the performances often have a good time, while others find the long, uneven second act a slog.
-
Pacing is the most persistent complaint. Reviewers repeatedly describe a strange combination of dragging scenes and rushed plot turns, with the two-film split often blamed for making Act II feel both padded and hurried.
-
Visually, the film is a major point of division. Sets, costumes, scale, and color can look sumptuous, but dim lighting, desaturation, backlighting, and artificial-looking CGI repeatedly blunt the intended wonder.
-
The finale is divisive: some reviewers find it bittersweet, moving, and satisfying, while others call it rushed, contrived, anticlimactic, or tonally mismatched with the story’s darker implications.
Cast & Creators
-
ElphabaErivo earns near-universal praise for powerhouse vocals and a more vulnerable, mature Elphaba. Even reviewers disappointed by the film repeatedly cite her acting and singing as reasons the sequel remains compelling.
-
Galinda/GlindaGrande is one of the film’s clearest strengths, with reviewers praising her comic timing, vocals, dramatic restraint, and the added depth she brings to Glinda. Her quieter heartbreak and growth are repeatedly singled out as highlights.
-
Prince FiyeroBailey receives strong notices for bringing more gravity, tenderness, and nuance to Fiyero. Reviewers often say he makes a lot of limited screen time, even when the character or romance is underwritten.
-
BoqSlater is praised for giving Boq anger, sorrow, and menace as his story darkens. Reviewers who discuss him tend to like the performance and often wish the film gave him more room.
-
Costume DesignerTazewell’s costumes are a consistent visual highlight, praised as imaginative, character-rich, and strikingly detailed. The wardrobe remains impressive even when reviewers dislike how the film photographs it.
-
Production DesignerCrowley’s production design is strongly praised for elaborate, eye-popping sets that give Oz physical scale and detail. Even visually critical reviews tend to separate the rich set work from lighting or CGI problems.
Compared With Category Average
Compared with other Movies, this product is above average in value for money, drama quality, rewatch value, near average in production design, character development, below average in cultural representation, editing quality, writing quality.
Comparison summary
49 compared features-
Above average 0.4+ pts higher16 (33%)
-
Same as average within 0.3 pts10 (20%)
-
Below average 0.4+ pts lower23 (47%)
Largest category differences
| Attribute | This product | Category average | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| cultural representation | 1.0 | 3.5 | -2.5 |
| editing quality | 1.3 | 3.5 | -2.3 |
| writing quality | 1.3 | 3.0 | -1.7 |
| realism | 1.7 | 3.4 | -1.8 |
| cinematography | 2.9 | 4.2 | -1.3 |
| pacing | 1.8 | 3.0 | -1.2 |
| value for money | 5.0 | 3.4 | +1.6 |
| dialogue quality | 1.5 | 3.0 | -1.5 |
Consider This Instead
If you want better cinematography
Choose Peaky Blinders: The Immortal Man. It scores 5.0 vs 2.9 for cinematography, with a 3.7 overall score.
If you want better plot clarity
Choose Heart of the Beast. It scores 5.0 vs 1.6 for plot clarity, with a 3.9 overall score.
If you want better CGI quality
Choose Crime 101. It scores 5.0 vs 1.8 for CGI quality, with a 4.0 overall score.
Compared in Reviews
Products reviewers directly compared with this model, grouped into quick takeaways.
Wicked
- Similar: overall quality The reviewer rates the sequel roughly on par with Wicked overall.
- Better: song quality A new song is judged more generic than Wicked’s best-known musical numbers.
Cats (2019)
- Similar: CGI character realism The Cowardly Lion’s digital appearance is unfavorably likened to the unconvincing felines in Cats (2019).
In the Heights
- Alternative: movie-musical appeal In the Heights is recommended as another big-screen musical adaptation for viewers who liked this film.
FAQ
Is Wicked: For Good as good as the first Wicked?
Reviewers are divided. The leads and production craft remain widely praised, but many consider the second-act story, pacing, and song lineup weaker than Part One.
How are Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande?
They are the strongest area of agreement. Reviewers repeatedly praise their vocals, dramatic performances, and the emotional chemistry between Elphaba and Glinda.
Are the songs as memorable as Part One?
Usually not, according to the reviews. No Good Deed and For Good are frequent highlights, while the two new songs and much of Act II are often described as less memorable.
Is Wicked: For Good suitable for younger children?
Some reviewers appreciate the PG-level restraint, but others warn that the darker story, frightening transformations, implied violence, and an intimate scene may be uncomfortable for younger viewers.
Do you need to know The Wizard of Oz or the stage musical?
Familiarity helps. Several reviewers say the plot becomes harder to follow when it overlaps with The Wizard of Oz, while established Wicked fans are more likely to accept the Act II turns.
Is the ending satisfying?
That is one of the biggest splits. Many find the final Elphaba-Glinda material moving and tear-inducing, while others call the resolution rushed, contrived, anticlimactic, or tonally mismatched.
Sample Expert Reviews We Analyzed
These are a few of the reviews included in our analysis.
Video Reviews
YouTube - MickeyJoTheatre
- Review score
- 2.5
Article Reviews
voicemag.uk
Wicked may have defied gravity, but as a conclusion it's second part doesn't quite manage to defy it's own impossibly high expectations.
- Review score
- 3.3
dcfilmdom.com
Wicked: For Good is not just a movie; it's a statement, a fervent warning against bigotry and xenophobia.
- Review score
- 4.6
avnirvana.com
Wicked: For Good Movie: :4stars: Video: :5stars: Audio: :4.5stars: Extras: :4stars: Final Score: :4.5stars: Movie Last year’s 4K and Blu-ray...
- Review score
- 3.9
pluggedin.com
‘Wicked: For Good’ tells a moving tale of friendship and sacrifice, but the movie’s darkness and magic may not be for the “good” of all.
- Review score
- 4.0
Top Movies to Consider
Choose this inventive, unsettling documentary for fearless questioning, dark humor, and unpredictable storytelling. Skip it if you want a short, straightforward exposé with definitive answers.
Pros: originality, humor
Extraordinary performances and richly observed relationships make this a rewarding, emotionally forceful drama. Its nearly three-hour length and slow opening demand patience and undivided attention.
Pros: class commentary, character development
Best for a hypnotic, bookish mystery with tactile visuals and cerebral chills. Skip it if reading-heavy, attention-demanding storytelling sounds more exhausting than exciting.
Pros: Atmosphere, cinematography
Cons: audience appeal
Best for an intimate, searching documentary that rewards focused attention and invites discussion. Skip it when devastating grief, addiction footage, and unresolved family tensions would be too much.
Pros: emotional impact, theme depth