this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2024
177 points (93.2% liked)

Movies

7605 readers
454 users here now

Lemmy

Welcome to Movies, a community for discussing movies, film news, box office, and more! We want this to be a place for members to feel safe to discuss and share everything they love about movies and movie related things. Please feel free to take part and help our community grow!


Related Communities:

!books@lemmy.world - Discussing books and book-related things.

!comicbooks@lemmy.world - A place to discuss comic books of all types.

!marvelstudios@lemmy.world - LW's home for all things MCU.


While posting and commenting in this community, you must abide by the Lemmy.World Terms of Service: https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/

  1. Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, ableist, or advocating violence will be removed.

  2. Be civil: disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally insult others.

  3. Spam, self promotion, trolling, and bots are not allowed

  4. Shitposts and memes are allowed until they prove to be a problem.

    Regarding spoilers; Please put "(Spoilers)" in the title of your post if you anticipate spoilers, as we do not currently have a spoiler tag available. If your post contains an image that could be considered a spoiler, please mark the thread as NSFW so the image gets blurred. As far as how long to wait until the post is no longer a spoiler, please just use your best judgement. Everyone has a different idea on this, so we don't want to make any hard limits.

    Please use spoiler tags whenever commenting a spoiler in a non-spoiler thread. Most of the Lemmy clients don't support this but we want to get into the habit as clients will be supporting in the future.

Failure to follow these guidelines will result in your post/comment being removed and/or more severe actions. All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. We ask that the users report any comment or post that violates the rules, and to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works 115 points 1 month ago (5 children)

Oh lord. This did not need to be a two parter. Man, I miss movies being well contained 90 minute stories.

[–] dditty@lemm.ee 89 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

The whole Broadway show can be done in a 2 hour-ish performance live, there is no justification to stretch this to two movies other than corporate greed milking every IP to the limit

[–] bollybing@lemmynsfw.com 51 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

I don't know, I thought the Broadway show was missing an interspecies love triangle.

And maybe a long scene with barrels.

[–] falidorn@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

Why does it hurt so much?!

[–] DScratch@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 month ago

Because it was Reeeeeel!

load more comments (2 replies)

From everything I've seen so far about Wicked the movie(s), yes that's exactly what it is.

The show is still touring folks, go see the show if you can

[–] ME5SENGER_24@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Unless its a planned trilogy with 3 strong stories that could semi-standalone (short of context being lost without the other installments) then any movie that needs more than 2 hours should just be a mini series. You wanna tell a 4 hour long story about the Wizard of Oz? Fine, stick it on Netflix and anyone who wants to binge watch it can to make it “feel like a movie” and those who don’t will have 4 - hour long episodes.

[–] Syntha@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They wouldn't make 4 episodes, they'd make 8 and half of them would be filler episodes.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Flamekebab@piefed.social 8 points 1 month ago

I'm starting to suspect that this is why I don't watch as many films as I'd like to. They've all become such a time commitment. Show me what you can do with an hour and a half!

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] bcgm3@lemmy.world 66 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Just you wait...

  • 2024: Wicked (Part 1)
  • 2025: Wicked Part 2 (Part 1)
  • 2026: Wicked Part 2 (Part 2)
[–] ElPussyKangaroo@lemmy.world 18 points 1 month ago

Someone's been to the Attack on Titan School of Numbering.

[–] BenutzterName@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 1 month ago

Zeno’s triology: Part 1 Part 2 (Part 1) Part 2 (Part 2 (Part 1)) Part 2 (Part 2 (Part 2 (Part 1))) …

As long as you lose less than half the audience in every fraction, you’ve got to make infinite money.

[–] Rusty@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 month ago

Is Wicked directed by Gabe Newell?

[–] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Starting to look like a prog album:

2028: Wicked, are you there? I’m destroying Dorothy volume iii Through the eyes of Oz

[–] danc4498@lemmy.world 54 points 1 month ago (4 children)

I’m still bitter about Spider-Man. Had no idea it was a part one until it ended. Maybe we just create whole movies with the 2+ hours we are using.

[–] DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Ah fuck you reminded me of the ending of Spiderverse. Probably at least 2 years away still...

[–] danc4498@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I don’t think they were even making part 2 when they ended it that way. Made it so much worse.

[–] emax_gomax@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

And the fact they said we'd have this to you by EOY. Absolute BS. Still no updated release date.

[–] Nuke_the_whales@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I was so psyched for that movie, but when I found out it was a part one, I lost interest and still haven't seen it

[–] caseofthematts@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It completely killed any narrative cohesion or pay-off by just ending. I remember thinking "it's been a really long time... how are they going to wrap this up?"

Turns out the answer is "don't wrap it up". It truly makes me not recommend it - though I had other issues with it aside from just that absurd decision. Rewatch the first again, instead.

[–] emax_gomax@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I agree the split in half angle was horribly handled but the movie wasn't totally ruined. ::: spoiler Narratively across the spider-verse was gwens story. It started with her and ended with her and miles was the backdrop for much of what happened spoiler ::: . I've seen the movie 3 times and I still love it. I don't think the take away is movies should be shorter because it had so much amazing visuals and story telling and really ramped up the expectations for the next one. The take away is don't lie to your audience pretending it's a single movie. Also don't lie and say the next one is coming out in 8 months, it's been 2 years lol. They were never gonna make that deadline.

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Which Spiderman was a part 1 of 2?

[–] newthrowaway20@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

The second spider-verse movie, I think. No mention of it being a trilogy but the story clearly ended setting up a third movie.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Same, caught it on a plane and was pissed I had to keep sitting there not knowing the actual ending

[–] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 46 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I really don't care anymore .... when a new movie is announced, I really don't care to do anything special to go out and see it. I just forget about it and wait a year or two and watch it as a stream on one of the services I already pay for.

It usually works out. If the movie was crap, everyone will tell me, I'll read about it or see low review scores for and just never bother watching it ever ..... or it's released on Netflix, Disney or Amazon and I watch it there a year or two later.

If it has great reviews and not available anywhere, then I just wait a year and rent it for $5 and watch it at home.

There's more than enough content to last a lifetime, I'm not spending any more money to watch the latest greatest movie as soon as it comes out.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 13 points 1 month ago

Yep. Being a patient consumer is the way.

[–] brygphilomena@lemmy.world 27 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Just make it long with an intermission.

Lots of old musical films did that. Like Oklahoma!, Fiddler on the Roof, and Hello Dolly.

[–] Cort@lemmy.world 19 points 1 month ago

They don't want to pay for the special effects for the sequel if the first movie bombs

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 points 1 month ago (5 children)

This did have PART 1 early in reveal but then realized people wouldn't see it so they lied about this being a complete movie. Mission Impossible Dead Reckoning did the same thing

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 month ago

People aren't going to see a movie that lies about it being a part 1 either, at least not after the first weekend when the word gets out

[–] hopesdead@startrek.website 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I pretty sure it was public knowledge (even talked about in publicity) Dead Reckoning was two parts.

[–] paraphrand@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Yeah, they scrubbed it from the title once it was on digital/streaming for awhile.

Here’s what AppleTV looks like:

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 19 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Wow I didn't know they cut it in half. After the whole poster thing I wasn't super enthused to see the film, after all I thought the play did amazing job, now I'm even less enthused.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Dragonstaff@leminal.space 18 points 1 month ago

I have to say it's pretty funny that the article's second half is behind a paywall.

[–] Bonesy91@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Good. Hope this thing flops.

[–] TheRealKuni@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Hope this thing flops.

Why?

I like Wicked. I would’ve preferred a single-movie version, but there is a lot of plot kind of rushed or skipped over in the musical. If they go back to the source material of the book they can flesh some of that out nicely and give more context to the story.

It might be good! It might be terrible. I don’t know yet.

But why hope for it to flop?

Edit, days later having seen the film: It was great, and I have essentially no complaints. Glad they split it into two, it would’ve been far too rushed as a single movie.

[–] And009@reddthat.com 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Itz cool to be cynical against any hint of capitalism

[–] CeruleanRuin@lemmings.world 3 points 1 month ago

Look at me, I hate thing, give me attention

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] thisphuckinguy@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I saw the trailer yesterday at the theaters. Looks like hot garbage

[–] Thcdenton@lemmy.world 31 points 1 month ago

I dunno i went to wicked.com and it looked pretty nice :]

[–] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Damn, I planned on watching this too. No point now.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] FinishingDutch@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago (2 children)

It’s annoying when they do it for sure. And personally, I love a long movie. I’d rather watch a three hour epic than two 90 minute movies.

But I don’t have the attention span of a goldfish like many people seem to have these days. So it’s understandable that they feel the need to split, especially if there’s going to be kids watching it.

[–] HeartyOfGlass@lemm.ee 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I like a good epic as much as the next person, but this is pushing 3 hours itself. Assuming Part 2 is similar, I definitely don't have the attention span to hold me through a 5 1/2 hour, 2-part musical. Yikes.

I'm trying to think of any musical that would be tolerable at 2x the original runtime.

[–] FinishingDutch@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

I hadn’t seen the runtime before; you’re right! 161 minutes! That’s definitely three hours with trailers and intermission. Yowza.

It does seem strange to have a part 2 with that much runtime.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Whelks_chance@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I was surprised when Dune did it, not sure why they hid it.

[–] makeshiftreaper@lemmy.world 23 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Dune I can give a pass to because Frank Herbert originally wrote it as a trilogy and combined it into one book. It has pretty clear chunks breaking it up. They absolutely should have been better about advertising what it was, but it's hard to cover all that content succinctly

Wicked however is based off a 2 hour and 45 minute Broadway show with a 15 minute intermission. There is no good reason that a movie that can have tighter transistons, faster costume changes, and no reused cast should be longer than the Broadway show. Let alone twice as long and spread over multiple films

[–] keckbug@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Strictly speaking, the show is somewhat based on a series of novels. There’s an awful lot of story in those that is simply not present t in the musical, but could possibly have been included in the movie. I don’t know if that’s actually what happened, but there’s certainly a canon source for substantially more content.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›