bbc.com
Wicked Film Review: A Drawn-Out Disappointment?
A review of the film adaptation of the musical "Wicked," highlighting its strengths and weaknesses, particularly concerning its length and pacing.
- What are the main criticisms leveled against the film adaptation of "Wicked"?
- The film adaptation of the musical "Wicked" has received mixed reviews, with critics praising the performances of Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande but criticizing the film's length and pacing.
- What is the overall assessment of the film's success in appealing to both fans of the musical and new viewers?
- While the film successfully brings the musical to the screen, it fails to captivate audiences who are unfamiliar with the source material, highlighting a potential weakness in its overall appeal. The length also detracts from the viewing experience for those unfamiliar with the story.
- Does the review consider the possibility that the film might work better as a complete adaptation in a single film?
- Many critics feel that the decision to split the musical into two parts was unnecessary and that the film could have been more effective as a single, shorter movie. The film's pacing is seen as its major flaw.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The review frames the film's shortcomings as inherent flaws within the movie's structure rather than considering alternative explanations or external factors that may have contributed to the film's reception. This negative framing dominates the narrative and overshadows any positive aspects.
Language Bias
The review uses slightly negative language like "drawn-out," "self-important," and "bland" to describe the film. This subtly influences the reader's perception by highlighting the negative aspects of the movie without balanced positive descriptions.
Bias by Omission
The review focuses heavily on negative aspects, omitting potential positive critical responses or audience reactions. It primarily highlights the flaws in length and pacing without sufficient counterpoints.
False Dichotomy
The review presents a false dichotomy by suggesting that either the film is a masterpiece deserving of its length or a complete failure, neglecting the possibility of it being a decent movie that could benefit from improvements. The reviewer sets up a comparison with other films that implies that a movie should either be great or terrible, overlooking the middle ground of acceptable films.