TheImpressiveX@lemmy.mlM to movies@lemm.eeEnglish · 13 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.mlexternal-linkmessage-square12fedilinkarrow-up148arrow-down13file-textcross-posted to: [email protected]
arrow-up145arrow-down1external-linkAccording 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 · 13 hours agomessage-square12fedilinkfile-textcross-posted to: [email protected]
minus-squareNigelFrobisherlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·3 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-23 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.