Althouse: "There is a very sly critique of liberalism in the film’s characterization of Glinda. She is obsessed with being seen as good..."

November 29, 2024

"There is a very sly critique of liberalism in the film’s characterization of Glinda. She is obsessed with being seen as good..."

"... but she frequently passes on chances to act in ways that would better people’s lives. Bowen Yang’s character in 'Wicked' does these great 'yasss girl' ad-libs that link Glinda’s behavior to the way white liberal feminism shows up in the world, more obsessed with status than change. Being 'good' is morally vacuous, like Glinda, if you don’t do anything that matters."

Says Tressie McMillan Cottom, in "Four Opinion Writers Visit Oz and Ask: Who’s Really ‘Wicked’?" (NYT)(free-access link, because this is a long conversation with, obviously, 4 voices).

38 comments:

Achilles said...: I really liked the screenplay when I saw it.

It is too bad they hired the wrong people to make this movie. They could have made the cultural sequel to barbie and made a lot of money.

Either way the next 4-5 years is going to be about he humbling of the AWFLs.; 11/29/24, 8:37 AM
Quaestor said...: However, Glinda, the Good Witch of the North, at least in the 1939 film, does many things that matter to Dorothy, such as clarifying her situation that's not in Kansas anymore and in Technicolor.

I pity the producers of "Wicked", I really do. They've released the most extravagant grievance screed since "Der ewige Jude" just at the moment when Americans have roundly declared they are thoroughly disgusted with being harangued and cajoled about a disagreeable woman's social problems.; 11/29/24, 8:44 AM
AlbertAnonymous said...: Well apparently the original OZ was queer, so from that starting point, this new WICKED is gonna be “flaming in technicolor”. Hard pass.

Having really enjoyed the broadway play (Kristin chenowoth) I might have been tempered to see this, but based on several recent comments by the main two characters, I can’t stand either one of the entitled little brats. So now there’s simply NO reason to subject myself to this “queerification” for 2 plus hours.; 11/29/24, 8:55 AM
Peachy said...: Thank you. Modern progressive females want 2 things - Power status and victim status. read all about it.; 11/29/24, 8:59 AM
Kate said...: I'll pass on The Wizard of Ozempic.

Althouse grabbed a quote unrepresentative of the liberal gush in the rest of the discussion.

(The great pun about the scary skinniness of the actresses in this movie is not mine, but borrowed.); 11/29/24, 9:02 AM
stlcdr said...: Can't a movie just be a movie?

Honestly, the media portraying it as some liberal commentary (as well as the actors themselves) just makes me simply not bother.; 11/29/24, 9:03 AM
pacwest said...: Took the granddaughters to see it. It was painful. Ambivalent reactions from the kids.; 11/29/24, 9:07 AM
Jamie said...: I read the book a long, long time ago. It wasn't about wokeness; it was about the difference between your inside and your outside. The details - I remember basically none; I only recall a sense that Glinda was a poser and Elphaba (is that right?) was both authentic and justified (more or less).

I think it's very interesting that this review equates - equates - wokeness with virtue signaling. That's a pretty big tell.

And while it says the movie singles out white women for this critique, I don't see all the other woke folk backing away from their performativeness.

Look, I get that Black women are ticked off that not enough people pulled the lever for "their" candidate. But if it is a white woman's mistake to spout empty platitudes instead of taking meaningful action, might it be a Black woman's mistake to vilify those who didn't do what they wanted them to do (and, sometimes, to pre-vilify people in anticipation of their not doing what they want them to do) instead of trying to persuade them to do the thing?

I'm not a Black woman (probably that doesn't need to be said). But the whole "Black girl magic" thing, where simply by the fact that you're Black and female you are correct and powerful and righteous and everyone else should fall in line - I don't see how this idea makes things better for Black women. It sounds like a celebration and a self-esteem builder (something we now know, and many always knew, is worthless - self-esteem only arises from accomplishment), but the effect is division and resentment.; 11/29/24, 9:15 AM
Justabill said...: I assume that the sly critique of liberalism comes from further left?; 11/29/24, 9:15 AM
Jamie said...: I should have said "the pull quote from this review," apparently - I haven't read the whole review.; 11/29/24, 9:17 AM
Achilles said...: The original live play was well written and as entertaining as a play could be. It centered on how a clique of mean-girls with superficial tastes made everyone around them miserable and abused their unearned social status. The witch reacted poorly. Everyone turned out bad in the end.

It was very much like what the HR/Ed department has done to our country.; 11/29/24, 9:20 AM
Christopher B said...: It's definitely not a kid's movie. You really have to know the Dorothy in Oz story to understand some of what's going on and the significance of the various Easter eggs they drop, and those get mixed in with the various sub-plots that make no sense until you see the second act. That works when the second act starts after a 15 minute intermission but less when you sit through a 3 hour movie that has a sequel.

I do sympathize because they had a bit of a Hobson's choice. Either make a long movie that isn't much more than a widescreen version of the musical or two shorter movies that still weren't significantly different from it, so they went the kitchen sink route.; 11/29/24, 9:25 AM
Dave Begley said...: Agree. I gave it a 10 and discounted all the liberal tripe in the movie.; 11/29/24, 9:41 AM
doctrev said...: While there are some so-called conservatives who will clap like trained seals for a "black magic girl," the fact is that modern culture makes excuses for villains because modern culture is mostly run by villains. Dunk a bucket of holy water over the jez and move on while she's melting.; 11/29/24, 9:55 AM
Freeman Hunt said...: Read the whole thing. A conversation that really took me back. To 2020.; 11/29/24, 10:07 AM
RCOCEAN II said...: Because of my ignorance of popular culture, I had to read this several times before I understood this was about a new movie called "wicked" and not the 39 movie. From reading stuff on the 'net, the new movie is based on 1995 novel, and resulting stage musical, which is a "dark and gritty" revisionist tale of Baum's Wizard of Oz.

Its amazing how 'muricans love "dark and gritty" and they never get tired of endlessly revising everything to be "dark and gritty" and full of the "current year" politics. And then proclaiming it be "adult" or "sophisticated". The favorite star TV series for "sophisticates" is DS9. why? Because its "dark and gritty".; 11/29/24, 10:21 AM
RCOCEAN II said...: I will be perfectly honest and say that I"m tired of "Dark and Gritty" and even more tired of current year politics. Which is why I have zero interest in the vast majority of toxic waste pumped out by Hollywood.; 11/29/24, 10:23 AM
ChrisRet said...: I read the (first) book when it came out, and thought it was clever - the premise is fascinating and I enjoyed it. I later saw the theatrical production, and thought it was excellent. Unfortunately it seemed a bit "too clever", and I dont think it will live on very long - kind of like Hamilton and the Atwood Hands Maid stuff, the political messaging gets in the way. For me anyways.; 11/29/24, 10:28 AM
Christopher B said...: It's not a revision ala The Wiz, it's a prequel.; 11/29/24, 10:30 AM
Christopher B said...: Saw it with the wife. The part I liked best was the steampunk clockwork train they rode to the Emerald City. Some of the Dorothy in Oz Easter eggs were interesting (like the lion cub being rescued). Had seen the musical so most of the rest just wasn't that interesting.

I nominate Jeff Goldblum (The Wizard)'s line about creating enemies to be the most ironic in the movie.; 11/29/24, 10:38 AM
Ironclad said...: The sad truth is that the only similarity between the book and the play is both the book and character names. The book is dark and gritty and isn’t the happy fun fest they made into the play - they have polar opposite endings ( and the book is just part one of 4). I wasn’t impressed by the play after seeing it in London years ago. And after the antics of the oppressed minority actors in the lead up to release, I’ll give it a pass.

The folks that made this movie could have gone for doing the books to get a Harry Potter level long story cycle. They went for the play and a split movie cash grab. Maybe one of the streaming services will do a non musical version of the books. That might work better.; 11/29/24, 10:55 AM
Aggie said...: Yes, but - will they notice ?; 11/29/24, 11:17 AM
doctrev said...: I'm sure you've seen the first season of The Next Generation. I'd hardly call it their best work. And yet TNG got better as they matured, while the hopeless conflicts of DS9 only got resolved when characters stayed true to the ideals of the Federation, instead of believing in "Just win, baby."; 11/29/24, 11:33 AM
Jupiter said...: You missed the "white". Actually, this critique comes from further black, which is orthogonal to right and left. Tressie McMillan Cottom is a house Negress for the NYT. She went to a college to learn to write like that.; 11/29/24, 11:52 AM
Mary Beth said...: We’re seeing some divisions appear now on “Wicked,” Lydia, with some members of the MAGA movement dismissing the movie as if it were an attack on them.

Enthusiasm to see the movie seemed evenly spread across political lines, as far as I could tell, until the stars started doing interviews.; 11/29/24, 12:18 PM
paminwi said...: “Wicked”-every version of it has come and gone.
It’s starting to feel like “Cats”.
It just hung around too long.; 11/29/24, 12:57 PM
Joe Bar said...: The Critical Drinker gave a surprisingly good (this is not his cup of tea) review over at Youtube.
Critical Drinker Review; 11/29/24, 1:04 PM
Joe Bar said...: My wife and I had to see the stage production many times, back when we volunteered at the theater. I couldn't bear watching it again.; 11/29/24, 1:05 PM
Mr. T. said...: I am absolutely infuriated that this movie is marketing itself as a intersectional, progressive masterpiece. It has no claim at all. This piece of far-right trash doesn't even include:

A) A land acknowledge to the Nome King.
B) A Title VI warning for all Wheelers
C) A GoFundMe setup for allyship/solidarity for Mombi's facial gender reassignment "surgery" (especially welcome all female minors..bring your nieces from Kansas to educate them on getting "a head" in wizardchristopatriarchy-led emerald heteronormality).

P.S. " From Munchkin Land River to the Winkie Sea- DEATH TO ISRAEL! All Jews Must Die!"; 11/29/24, 1:24 PM
Prof. M. Drout said...: The Maguire book is awful: confusing, tangled, and sadistic. The plot of the musical is better, but it's still far too complicated for a Broadway musical (you really need to read a plot summary several times before you go to the theater). But that doesn't matter, because Stephen Schwartz (Carnegie Mellon product!) is a genius-level songwriter who manages to write musically sophisticated catchy tunes. And although he's a Boomer, a lot of the lyrics in Wicked really capture something of the '90s-'00s sarcastic, self-deprecating, sincere-but-only-on-the-inside zeitgeist: "life is painless, when you're brainless / those who don't try, never look foolish," "...did they have brains and knowledge? Don't make me laugh! They were popular!" "Who can say if I've been changed for the better? I only know I have been changed for good."

I am vacillating over whether to see the film or not: students tell me that both leads can really sing, but just about every bit of publicity and advertising has been off-putting.; 11/29/24, 1:27 PM
Ann Althouse said...: I wouldn’t call it a review.; 11/29/24, 4:13 PM
Jim at said...: After being bombarded with promos for this thing during the last two months, you couldn't drag me by the feet to go see it.; 11/29/24, 6:28 PM
Tina Trent said...: I’ll give you a summary of the review, Jamie. The lesbian thinks it’s about queerness; the black woman thinks it proves how stupid and shallow white women are. Maureen Dowd is there too, saying nothing coherent, and I forget the fourth person.; 11/29/24, 7:31 PM
Enigma said...: Note that the original Oz books have been interpreted as political commentary too. Most (Hollywood) movie creators create very little and borrow from old work and the news because they must release commercial Product(tm) to fill theaters and get paid. They've always followed the trends and fashions of the current era.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_interpretations_of_The_Wonderful_Wizard_of_Oz; 11/30/24, 5:05 AM
bobby said...: As pointed out above, the Critical Drinker - not a lover of woke screeds - reviewed it, and gave a surprising (to him, and to me) result.

He said that, while all of the star interviews made him think this was going to be a dog's breakfast, and that it was simply going to be another paean to wokeness, it was neither.

In short, while he said the movie had a few weak points, it was basically a good story, the actors did credible jobs, and he recommends it. He specifically said that it was not a woke mess.

So, I think I'll have to five it a shot at some point.; 11/30/24, 8:59 AM
RY said...: We saw the play at the Pantages Theater in Los Angeles and thought it was great but we assumed the movie would be icky once the Hollywood forces of evil set out to produce it...won't go to the theater and won't stream it.; 11/30/24, 11:07 AM
turk187 said...: Years ago I picked up the book from the clearance bin at my local bookstore (back when my town had one.) and I read it. All the way through. It was a book. It had words and pages and stuff and made references to the Wizard of Oz, the movie, that is. I don't think they referred to the original book at all. I never read it again, which is the only rating I give to any book, would I read it again. I picked up a CD of the soundtrack and really liked "popular" and "Defying Gravity" I actually would like to see the play. I even thought TV miniseries (wish they would do those again) with the original cast.

Then I saw the first trailer. The steampunk look was cool and I was actually think I might see it. Yeah, they cast a black woman as the witch, but they did still make her green. My first complaint is that she has HUGE lips. Even for a black woman, they look like a bicycle pump was involved. Or surgery. Then I got a REALLY good look at her. She is simply the ugliest person I have ever laid eyes on. Really, just hideous. Then she started to talk and realized that she is just as ugly on the inside.

I saw the fuss she made over a fan editing the poster to look more like the original play poster. The original poster is really cool. It has a yin-yang feeling to it where the bottom of Elphiba is seen, with a mischievous smirk, while only the top of Glenda is seen, looking away from the viewer. Its a really good poster. The movie version has Glenda right, but Cynthia Erivo is staring into the camera, giving no indication that there is anything there. She looks terrible. Blank stare. There is no emotion and nothing at all behind her eyes. Her lips aren't even red. Terrible poster. When some fan edited it to look more like the original she threw a fit, called them racist. Said she had chosen to look straight at the camera that we communicate with our eyes and she was being "erased". Again, blank stare. She communicated nothing. The original smirk conveys everything, she did nothing. Terrible poster.

And, she continues to dig a deeper hole.

I was actually thinking I might see it, but I was moving away from that and the final nail was finding out it was a "part 1". Just not interested. I will pirate when both are out and give it a try, but I probably won't care.

Someone else pointed out that Elphiba's character is that of the "karen" which is a white-woman character. Black women have there own version, but it is different.

I also think that using a black woman might have added a layer to the thing, if the she was only black person in the cast. I'm betting not. If she was the only person in her world that was different like that, then a lot of things would make sense, but I'm betting the rest of the cast will be fully diverse. It would make sense if there was no one else who could relate, but there will be. I'm surprised the wizard isn't black. But, the wizard is the real villain, so white guy.; 11/30/24, 3:52 PM
Tina Trent said...: Unless you don’t actually agree white women are to blame for everything, of course.; 12/1/24, 4:37 PM