Entertainment - The Orange County Register: A little less than 10 years ago, a curious new show called "Wicked" started drawing crowds at the Curran Theatre in San Francisco. Even then, its creators knew it was something special. They were right: their prequel to "The Wizard of Oz" is now a member of musical theater's small but elite club of perpetual blockbusters.
The Broadway production, which opened October 30, 2003, is approaching its 10th anniversary and its 4,000th performance, and its popularity is showing no signs of waning; houses are routinely sold out. Currently it's the 12th longest-running show in Broadway history.
4 comments:
I always find it interesting looking at the media that have failed to impress critics, but have gone on to be wildly successful, and sometimes I wonder whether the critics are as useful as they seem, if they are using such wildly different criteria to judge things. I also wonder how people feel about the differences between the original book and the play, when I don't believe the book is nearly as popular. Having never read the book I can't comment, but if it's anything like it's sequel Son of a Witch, there is a lot of politics that was cut out because it likely wouldn't have translated between mediums well. I also wonder what it is about a musical that made Wicked work, when the article says that screenplays just weren't the right medium.
Not going to lie, Wicked is sort of the reason I wanted to pursue theater. It was the first show that I ever knew by heart, and before i realized how much I like being back stage, I sang it at a talent show in the fifth grade. I also find it very surprising when shows or movies that do so well never impressed critics. I sort of wonder if that's because as theater artists, we each have our own idea of what "good theater" is as opposed to just an entertaining show. However, I think that Wicked is successful because of the quirkiness of the world in which it was created. Everyone knows of OZ as the place somewhere over the rainbow that, while beautiful, can be a very awful place. It's still like that in Wicked, but it somehow seems closer and more believable as a world because the story about the witches' relationship is very real to many of the audience members. I also find it interesting that the original story made a better musical than a movie. Of course it had to be heavily adapted to be come what it is now, which makes me wonder if Hollywood will turn Wicked into the next movie-musical.
I still haven't seen Wicked, but everyone I know who has had said it was amazing. I managed to get my hands on a ground plan of the stage last year from a friend who had a friend who worked on it, and it was such a complicated ground plan, I could not visualize it. I find it funny how the article says that the show wasn't originally seen as a big hit, but it became one, and then guy in the video I think was so right: it is a spectacle!
Wicked is beautifully designed, the characters are hilarious, and the music and lyrics were beautifully written. However, I can understand how critics were not impressed by the show. Even the article made the plot sound boring."It tells a very compelling story about friendship between teenage girls." You know what this sounds like? Disney princess, Glee, crappy ABC shows. What is the significance to this story? Does it make a difference in the world? No. Wicked was made for pure entertainment purposes with a wishy-washy moral to it. I think critics look for deeper meanings in more serious situations. But audiences, they come to shows to enjoy themselves and not to think (at least most people do). Plus, this type of wish-washy moral story would attract many young girls and their mothers. Theatre is actually a mother-daughter bonding experience. You get all dressed up, you go to a nice dinner, you see a show, and you enjoy the nightlife after. Since this bonding time will always occur, I don't think Wicked will be leaving us anytime soon.
Post a Comment