TheImpressiveX@lemmy.mlM to movies@lemm.eeEnglish · 15 hours agoAccording to the Wall Street Journal, "Wicked" Parts One and Two cost $320 million ($160 million per film). Both parts were shot back-to-back.lemmy.mlimagemessage-square12fedilinkarrow-up150arrow-down13file-textcross-posted to: movies@lemmy.world
arrow-up147arrow-down1imageAccording to the Wall Street Journal, "Wicked" Parts One and Two cost $320 million ($160 million per film). Both parts were shot back-to-back.lemmy.mlTheImpressiveX@lemmy.mlM to movies@lemm.eeEnglish · 15 hours agomessage-square12fedilinkfile-textcross-posted to: movies@lemmy.world
minus-squareNigelFrobisher@aussie.zonelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·4 hours agoMusicals are massively popular. People go to them to get drunk and sing along too loud, and maybe have a fight.
minus-squareFlocklesscrow@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·edit-24 hours agoI have no problem with musicals. Wicked was published in 1995. Making this movie might have made sense up to 2009, but now? It’s a sentimental cash-grab. Same reason they’re making Gladiator 2.
Musicals are massively popular. People go to them to get drunk and sing along too loud, and maybe have a fight.
I have no problem with musicals.
Wicked was published in 1995. Making this movie might have made sense up to 2009, but now? It’s a sentimental cash-grab. Same reason they’re making Gladiator 2.