DVDizzy Forum

The_Iceflash wrote:NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

For the love of God No!!!

I don't want that disaster of a fanfic anywhere near Disney.

Fanfiction? That's an actual DISNEY ARTIST that made that. Yes, for fun, but if they decided to actually make it, that's the quality that the people at Disney would be putting out. Hardly a "fanfic."

And the concept art is extremely professional quality as well. The artist that did that is a recently graduated animation student. Not some schmuck drawing Wicked pictures for the hell of it.

SWillie! wrote:

The_Iceflash wrote:NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

For the love of God No!!!

I don't want that disaster of a fanfic anywhere near Disney.

Fanfiction? That's an actual DISNEY ARTIST that made that. Yes, for fun, but if they decided to actually make it, that's the quality that the people at Disney would be putting out. Hardly a "fanfic."

And the concept art is extremely professional quality as well. The artist that did that is a recently graduated animation student. Not some schmuck drawing Wicked pictures for the hell of it.

I think he's talking about "Wicked", not the artist who provided the art, or the storyboards.

KubrickFan wrote:

SWillie! wrote: Fanfiction? That's an actual DISNEY ARTIST that made that. Yes, for fun, but if they decided to actually make it, that's the quality that the people at Disney would be putting out. Hardly a "fanfic."

And the concept art is extremely professional quality as well. The artist that did that is a recently graduated animation student. Not some schmuck drawing Wicked pictures for the hell of it.

I think he's talking about "Wicked", not the artist who provided the art, or the storyboards.

I am taking about Wicked and not the art. I should have clarified that.

Well, no matter what, it's still technically "fanart" buuuuuut her stuff looks very Mary Blair-esque, so she's all right in my book.

Even though it technically is "fan fiction".. that term has come to have very negative connotations. Which I don't think Wicked OR the art here is worthy of.

SWillie! wrote:Even though it technically is "fan fiction".. that term has come to have very negative connotations. Which I don't think Wicked OR the art here is worthy of.

I wasn't using it as compliment.

I do like the artwork though. It was very well done.

What did you think was disasterous fan-fiction, the book or the musical or both?

And how do you think any of it was...a disaster?

The_Iceflash wrote:

SWillie! wrote:Even though it technically is "fan fiction".. that term has come to have very negative connotations. Which I don't think Wicked OR the art here is worthy of.

I wasn't using it as compliment.

I do like the artwork though. It was very well done.

Yeah.. I was saying what Duster has said in a more elegant fashion. I'm just amazed that anyone can call the masterpiece that is Wicked "disastrous fanfic".

Ooh, ooh, I can, me me me.

The musical at least. The book has more going for it.

SpringHeelJack wrote:Ooh, ooh, I can, me me me.

The musical at least. The book has more going for it.

You never answered me further earlier in the thread - why do you think it's so bad? I mean I know there are always opinions that go against the majority, but it's always interesting to hear why.

Edit: And that's funny you say that, because most people seem to be much less fond of the book. I personally like it, although I think the show is a million times better.

I kind of dislike both the book and the show.

But at least the musical has songs (even if it is Schwartz), Kristen Chenoweth and Idina Menzel.

I can put together my list of grievances, it will just take me a while to get my thoughts together as it's been a long time since I've had to think about it. I might have to get a bootleg and take notes. It truly is a long list. I think my boyfriend and I once spent the better part of a night dissecting the show to see why it didn't work.

Disney's Divinity wrote:But at least the musical has songs (even if it is Schwartz), Kristen Chenoweth and Idina Menzel.

Eh, I typically don't have an issue with Schwartzy. I dig "Pippin" and "Godspell" and his stuff from "Working" and while no one would ever classify "The Magic Show" as a good musical, it has a certain 70s New York charm to it. I like him best when he just does music or lyrics as opposed to both, however. Anytime he does both it seems like he stretches himself too thin and one suffers (typically lyrics).

Now you want to know who I don't care for ? Idina. She has AWFUL technique.

Disney Duster wrote:What did you think was disasterous fan-fiction, the book or the musical or both?

And how do you think any of it was...a disaster?

Both but more the musical. I don't like what the book did to the characters of Elphaba (IMO, the best thing to come out of the book was her name.) and Glinda. To me, the two as they are in Wicked are completely out of character and I don't like how they are portrayed. The musical IMO was more disastrous because of the music. IMO, it contains some of the worst music I've ever heard in a musical. Defying Gravity makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up.

The_Iceflash wrote:

Disney Duster wrote:What did you think was disasterous fan-fiction, the book or the musical or both?

And how do you think any of it was...a disaster?

Both but more the musical. I don't like what the book did to the characters of Elphaba (IMO, the best thing to come out of the book was her name.) and Glinda. To me, the two as they are in Wicked are completely out of character and I don't like how they are portrayed. The musical IMO was more disastrous because of the music. IMO, it contains some of the worst music I've ever heard in a musical. Defying Gravity makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up.

I do see your point. The music I don't have a viewpoint on yet but the whole storyline of the musical plays out more like a "cliched high school outcast" story more than anything else. Even the ending is a bit of a copout.

The_Iceflash wrote:

Disney Duster wrote:What did you think was disasterous fan-fiction, the book or the musical or both?

And how do you think any of it was...a disaster?

Both but more the musical. I don't like what the book did to the characters of Elphaba (IMO, the best thing to come out of the book was her name.) and Glinda. To me, the two as they are in Wicked are completely out of character and I don't like how they are portrayed. The musical IMO was more disastrous because of the music. IMO, it contains some of the worst music I've ever heard in a musical. Defying Gravity makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up.

I can't help but feel like if you had never heard Defying Gravity until it was released in a Disney film, you would absolutely love it. How can you possibly not like that song? I don't get it.

And SpringHeelJack - if your list of grievances is all a bunch of nit-picky things that came from dissecting the story, much like how so many on this forum ruin Disney movies by reading into them too far and finding the tiny loopholes in the story that don't make sense, then I'm not really interested. I could dissect the story myself and see why "it doesn't work"... But those aren't opinions. That's just being too stuck up for me.

However, if you have some actual reasons and opinions as to why YOU don't like it (i.e. The music, imo... or, I didn't like the direction they took with the characters... or, the story is too ___ for my interests) then I'd be interested to hear.

But if it's all just finding the technicalities of why the show doesn't work, I'm not interested.

I've never been a big "Wizard of Oz" or "Wicked" fan but this little story reel is amazing! The direction, the camera angles, the epic scale reveal that an animated version could indeed have real potential.

SWillie! wrote:SpringHeelJack - if your list of grievances is all a bunch of nit-picky things that came from dissecting the story, much like how so many on this forum ruin Disney movies by reading into them too far and finding the tiny loopholes in the story that don't make sense, then I'm not really interested. I could dissect the story myself and see why "it doesn't work"... But those aren't opinions. That's just being too stuck up for me.

However, if you have some actual reasons and opinions as to why YOU don't like it (i.e. The music, imo... or, I didn't like the direction they took with the characters... or, the story is too ___ for my interests) then I'd be interested to hear.

But if it's all just finding the technicalities of why the show doesn't work, I'm not interested.

So because pointing out plot holes and the inconsistencies they create is "stuck up"? That's funny. I don't see why an opinion should be the only thing matters in discussing or analyzing a work. More so, any opinion formed will be based on the work itself, and thus be based on any sort of flaws inherit in it. I'm not sure how much discussion you think two people can have if it's just "Well, I don't like the music... I think the story was dull." That's hardly discussion.

I don't think it's being too nitpicky to say things like the whole "child of two worlds" thing at the end comes out of nowhere and raises more questions than it could hope to solve.

Or to wonder why the Munchkins are presumably supposed to be small, yet Boq as the Tin Man would be normal-sized to fit into the movie's plot, as the musical so desperately tries to do.

Not to mention that Boq as Tin Man in the musical is a total contradiction of the Tin Man in the movie, and not in a "Wicked is a revisionist take" way, in the sense that someone who rallies a bloodthirsty mob to kill the witch doesn't gel with a shy Tin Man who seems panicked every time he's near the Wicked Witch in the movie.

And why would the Wicked Witch in the movie set the Scarecrow on fire if he's really her secret lover?

Why is Fiyero, a member or the Wizard's secret army or whatever, scared shitless by the enormous head in the movie despite the fact that he presumably knows the Wizard is not the force he presents himself as?

These things are plot holes that exist in the musical, not the book, thus they are solely the fault of the librettist. You can say I'm reading into this too much, but when you present your work as something that fits in with the movie that we all know and love, you need to make it do so. And the musical's book, which is appallingly bad in so many ways from awful shout-outs to the movie to making total hash of the second act, fails miserably in this respect.

Also, the lyrics are at best serviceable and I think the costumes are uninspired. Is that a good enough distillation?

The_Iceflash wrote:

SWillie! wrote:Even though it technically is "fan fiction".. that term has come to have very negative connotations. Which I don't think Wicked OR the art here is worthy of.

I wasn't using it as compliment.

I do like the artwork though. It was very well done.

I dont think anyone was implying you were complimenting "Wicked", just that there *are* good fanfics out there amongst the crap heap.

SpringHeelJack wrote:

SWillie! wrote:SpringHeelJack - if your list of grievances is all a bunch of nit-picky things that came from dissecting the story, much like how so many on this forum ruin Disney movies by reading into them too far and finding the tiny loopholes in the story that don't make sense, then I'm not really interested. I could dissect the story myself and see why "it doesn't work"... But those aren't opinions. That's just being too stuck up for me.

However, if you have some actual reasons and opinions as to why YOU don't like it (i.e. The music, imo... or, I didn't like the direction they took with the characters... or, the story is too ___ for my interests) then I'd be interested to hear.

But if it's all just finding the technicalities of why the show doesn't work, I'm not interested.

So because pointing out plot holes and the inconsistencies they create is "stuck up"? That's funny. I don't see why an opinion should be the only thing matters in discussing or analyzing a work. More so, any opinion formed will be based on the work itself, and thus be based on any sort of flaws inherit in it. I'm not sure how much discussion you think two people can have if it's just "Well, I don't like the music... I think the story was dull." That's hardly discussion.

I don't think it's being too nitpicky to say things like the whole "child of two worlds" thing at the end comes out of nowhere and raises more questions than it could hope to solve.

Or to wonder why the Munchkins are presumably supposed to be small, yet Boq as the Tin Man would be normal-sized to fit into the movie's plot, as the musical so desperately tries to do.

Not to mention that Boq as Tin Man in the musical is a total contradiction of the Tin Man in the movie, and not in a "Wicked is a revisionist take" way, in the sense that someone who rallies a bloodthirsty mob to kill the witch doesn't gel with a shy Tin Man who seems panicked every time he's near the Wicked Witch in the movie.

And why would the Wicked Witch in the movie set the Scarecrow on fire if he's really her secret lover?

Why is Fiyero, a member or the Wizard's secret army or whatever, scared shitless by the enormous head in the movie despite the fact that he presumably knows the Wizard is not the force he presents himself as?

These things are plot holes that exist in the musical, not the book, thus they are solely the fault of the librettist. You can say I'm reading into this too much, but when you present your work as something that fits in with the movie that we all know and love, you need to make it do so. And the musical's book, which is appallingly bad in so many ways from awful shout-outs to the movie to making total hash of the second act, fails miserably in this respect.

Also, the lyrics are at best serviceable and I think the costumes are uninspired. Is that a good enough distillation?

To be fair, I don't think the musical is trying to be consistent with the Wizard of Oz movie. I mean the slippers in question are silver (like in the "Wizard" book), not ruby. It also has Elphaba arriving in Munchkinland once Dorothy leaves on the Yellow Brick Road, rather than while Dorothy is still in M-land. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'm just not sure the musical is trying to fit in with the movie. (Though if it is, the librettist Winnie Holzman sure screwed up!)

monorail91 wrote:To be fair, I don't think the musical is trying to be consistent with the Wizard of Oz movie. I mean the slippers in question are silver (like in the "Wizard" book), not ruby. It also has Elphaba arriving in Munchkinland once Dorothy leaves on the Yellow Brick Road, rather than while Dorothy is still in M-land. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'm just not sure the musical is trying to fit in with the movie. (Though if it is, the librettist Winnie Holzman sure screwed up!)

The slippers "turn" red when Elphaba casts the walking spell upon them (at least, they're briefly lit red, I can't recall if they try to be consistent). While it never shows Elphaba showing up when Dorothy is in Munchkinland, her line "All that is left were those shoes, and now that wretched little farm girl has walked off with them." implied to me that she knows Dorothy took the shoes and left, i.e. that she did show up, yell at Dorothy, then leave and return to yell at Glinda.

The thing is, the Maguire's book solely fits into the L. Frank Baum novels and makes no attempt whatsoever to try and fit in with the movie. The musical's book, on the other hand, wants to relate to the movie as much as possible, and why not, because that's basically the musical's selling point. People know that "The Wizard of Oz" is a book, but I guarantee you that more people have seen the movie than the book. However, for some reason, Holzman went overboard with trying to make it relate to the movie with jokes ("Lemons and melons and pears!") and by making supporting characters in the musical "become" characters in the movie (as I'm sure most of us know, Fiyero never becomes the Scarecrow, Boq never becomes the Tin Man seeing as how he is a minor character in the L. Frank Baum novel as well). As such, the stage musical doesn't neatly fit into the book nor does is tie into the movie. Thus it ends up a hodge podge of ideas that don't stand together.