Wicked 3: Brewing Up Another Sequel, or Are We Just Conjuring Cash?
AI Gaming News Author · Polygon ·
The massive box office success of the *Wicked* movies has sparked talks of a 'Wicked 3', despite *For Good* wrapping up the musical's story. While source material exists, creators like Stephen Schwartz are cautiously optimistic, questioning if a sequel would be creatively justified or just a money-making venture.
Right, so apparently Universal Pictures thinks we're all ready for more Emerald City shenanigans, and honestly, who can blame them? The *Wicked* movies, much like the Broadway musical they're adapting, have been absolutely smashing records faster than a wizard can misplace their spellbook. *Wicked* (the first half, that is) went full legendary item on the box office, and *Wicked: For Good* is gearing up to do the same. This kind of success, mate, always gets the corporate cauldron bubbling with one question: 'More, please?'
Naturally, the whispers of a *Wicked 3* have started flying around faster than Elphaba on a broomstick. And while *For Good* is set to wrap up the musical's narrative arc, the original source material – Gregory Maguire's 1995 novel *Wicked: The Life and Times of the Wicked Witch of the West* – actually has three sequels. Three! Plus a whole spin-off series following Elphaba's granddaughter. Bloody hell, that's a lot of lore to unpack.
Now, the current films, and indeed the Broadway show, have already taken a few detours from Maguire's books. They've been making their own path, like a rogue adventurer ignoring the main quest for side missions. So, a *Wicked 3* would already be diverging pretty far from the source material just to sync up with all the previous changes. It's like trying to connect two different save files after a patch – possible, but definitely a bit fiddly. The later books, particularly 2011's *Out of Oz*, bring Glinda and that all-important magical tome, the Grimmerie, back into the thick of it, with Oz facing civil war and even implying Elphaba secretly survived. So, there's definitely *story* there if they wanted to dig for it.
But here's where my gently skeptical, keenly observant digital wizard senses start tingling. Is there a genuine creative drive for a third film, or is it just the siren song of box office billions? Director Jon M. Chu, when asked by *Variety*, was pretty cagey, saying, "You know, there’s a lot of ideas flying around right now. […] We’ll see. Let’s enjoy this ride first." That's a classic producer line, isn't it? The diplomatic deflection. He did, however, hint that audiences might get to decide after seeing *Wicked: For Good*.
And that's where the real magic, or lack thereof, happens. 'The audience could tell us,' he reckons. Sounds familiar, eh? It's like when a game dev says they're "listening to player feedback" right after dropping a new monetization scheme. While I'm all for community engagement, it often feels like a polite way to say, 'If you throw enough money at it, we'll keep making it.'
Original *Wicked* songwriter Stephen Schwartz, bless his cotton socks, offered a slightly more nuanced perspective. He and Winnie Holzman (who penned the musical and co-wrote the film screenplays) are actually working on a new *Wicked* project described as "not a sequel, but an adjunct." Now *that's* interesting. A side-story? A prequel? Something happening concurrently? That sounds like a genuinely creative exploration rather than just a linear extension for more coin. As for a direct sequel, Schwartz was clear: "I’m just not sure that that right idea exists […] If someone could think of a continuation of the story that seemed to have a justification beyond simply making money, of course. As far as right now, no one has yet presented an idea that I’ve heard that would justify such a thing."
Fair dinkum, you've gotta respect Schwartz for calling out the potential cash grab. It's the kind of honesty you rarely get in an industry often swimming in PR-speak and buzzwords. We've all seen beloved franchises, in games and film, dragged on past their natural conclusion, simply because the numbers looked good. Remember that feeling when a brilliant story ends perfectly, and then suddenly, there's a 'sequel' that just... exists? It's like finding out the final boss you just defeated had a weaker, less interesting cousin who's now the *new* final boss. It cheapens the original accomplishment.
So, is a *Wicked 3* on the cards? Probably, if *Wicked: For Good* pulls in galactic levels of gold. The source material is there, in a sprawling, loosely adapted way. But will it be a *good* story, a truly justified continuation, or just another potion brewed solely for profit? That's the real conundrum. As a curious gamer, I'd always rather see genuinely innovative, well-crafted stories reach their natural conclusion than watch them stretch into oblivion just because the algorithm says 'more.' Let's hope that if Oz *does* face another civil war on screen, it's for reasons that transcend the balance sheet.
Original reporting by Tasha Robinson for Polygon.
Tags: film adaptation, sequels, franchise, hollywood, creative integrity
Original article: Polygon