The Oscars Wanted Nothing to Do With Wicked: For Good — and That Says Everything

by

Wicked: For Good was completely snubbed at the Oscars, earning not one single nomination.

Universal Pictures hoped the movie Wicked: For Good would establish a successful, award-winning franchise. However, the Oscars revealed a harsh truth: the film received no Academy Award nominations. This was a surprising turn after the success of the first movie and suggests Hollywood is losing interest.

The film received no Oscar nominations – not for the leading or supporting actresses, nor for any technical categories like costumes, visual effects, or original song. This is especially surprising considering the sequel included two new musical numbers specifically created to be award-worthy, one of which was co-written by Cynthia Erivo. These songs weren’t just artistic choices; they were deliberately added to attract awards attention. The fact that voters overlooked them despite this suggests a strong rejection of the film.

Honestly, this wasn’t just a few missed awards; it felt like a total shutout. It was the kind of rejection you usually only see for films the Academy seems to want to sweep under the rug – like they’d rather not even acknowledge it existed.

Despite Universal’s clear intention to submit the film for awards consideration, it received no nominations – a complete and obvious oversight.

A Franchise That Lost Its Shine

While Wicked: For Good wasn’t a financial failure—it earned $523 million worldwide and likely made a profit—it didn’t reach the heights many expected. It performed respectably at the box office, but significantly less than the original Wicked film, which grossed $756 million. The sequel also lacked the same level of buzz and cultural impact.

As a movie critic, I’ve learned to take Hollywood’s definition of ‘profitable’ with a grain of salt. Often, when a studio claims a film is in the black, it’s code for ‘it didn’t quite live up to expectations.’ This is especially true with sequels – they’re supposed to expand a franchise, not just barely scrape by.

As a huge movie fan, I was really hoping Wicked: For Good would keep the excitement going, but sadly, it just didn’t. The initial buzz faded pretty quickly, people weren’t rushing back for second or third viewings, and ultimately, it didn’t have the staying power at the box office that you’d expect from a big franchise like this.

The fact that the Oscars didn’t give the franchise any awards just reinforces what viewers have been feeling – it’s simply not as good as it used to be.

When the Press Tour Beccomes the Story

Some of the audience’s weariness towards the film stems from its marketing. In the months before Wicked: For Good came out, the constant press coverage became hard to miss—and it wasn’t always positive.

Interviews with Ariana Grande and Cynthia Erivo were marked by a lot of crying and physical touch, and an overly dramatic display of emotion that many viewers found off-putting. While likely meant to seem genuine and show artistic openness, it instead felt artificial, overly reliant on connection, and didn’t resonate with how most people experience movies.

Honestly, the focus quickly moved away from the movie itself – the story, the songs, how it was made – and onto the actors. That’s usually not good for a film, and it really didn’t help here. Instead of letting us, the audience, get excited about the world of Wicked, the interviews made it feel like we were accidentally overhearing something deeply personal and a little awkward. It felt like we were intruding, not being invited in.

The Structural Problem No One Wanted to Admit

Beyond marketing challenges, a core problem with Wicked: For Good was its foundation: it’s based on the second act of the stage musical. This act is generally slower, more somber, and less memorable musically than the first. Trying to expand it into a full movie was a risk, and unfortunately, it didn’t succeed.

I have to admit, the second movie just didn’t have that same spark as the first one. The original had songs you immediately loved and remembered, but this sequel felt… different. It was much more serious, and honestly, there weren’t many songs that really stuck with me. It felt like they stretched the story out just to make the movie longer. For someone like me, who wasn’t a huge fan of the stage show, it just didn’t quite work. It lost a lot of what made the first film so enjoyable.

The problems with the second half of Wicked were well known. Trying to turn that weaker portion of the show into a full-length story only made those issues more obvious.

Just because a show is successful on stage doesn’t guarantee it will work as a movie. The film adaptation of Wicked: For Good is a prime example of this challenge.

Rejected by Audiences—and Now by the Industry

The Wicked Oscars snub isn’t just an awards footnote. It’s a verdict.

Hollywood cares about hits, but even more about keeping that success going. The fact that the Academy didn’t nominate the film shows that any positive reputation the sequel might have had is now gone. It didn’t excite viewers, it didn’t improve the series, and it didn’t impress anyone in the industry.

Those who didn’t enjoy the movie, or were tired of all the hype surrounding it, might feel the Oscars results proved them right. Wicked: For Good wasn’t wrongly criticized or unfairly attacked; it just didn’t receive the awards Universal Pictures hoped for.

Award shows aren’t just about celebrating achievements; they also indicate when a project’s popularity has peaked. With the first Wicked movie, there was a real sense of excitement, but the second feels like it’s trying to stretch things out too much.

The franchise is now in a tricky spot. While it still makes money, audiences have lost interest and industry insiders aren’t impressed, leaving it creatively stuck and facing public criticism.

Read More

2026-01-23 20:01