Exploring Adaption Through Wicked | StoryCraft Advent Calendar Day 6

I always get excited when a big adaptation comes out. It is one of the few things that has me flying to social media. I love it because there is always a conversation about whether or not the new version of a loved story was done “correctly”. I eagerly read threads between fans every time a new MCU project comes out, got completely lost in everything Bridgerton, and now am sinking into the latest discord with Wicked.

When I was at film school, one of my favorite classes was in adaptation. What is the right way to take something and turn it into something else? If you’re switching mediums, like going from book to stage or stage to screen, there needs to be major adjustments made. And art is so subjective that each person coming to view this new piece will have their own unique experience and interpretation of the original. It almost seems like an impossible task to create something that the masses will embrace or even accept. Yet we have seen it done successfully. So, what’s the secret?

What we learned in that class, and what I have come to believe as I have continued to study adapted work, is that the most important thing to maintain is the purpose and spirit of the original, rather than the details. And using the strengths of a new medium in your favor is likely to be the best road to success.

The evolution of the new film Wicked, starting with the source material of Frank L. Baum’s The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, moving to the 1939 film adaptation, and then onto Gregory Maguire’s book Wicked in 1994, to the musical version by Stephen Schwartz and Winnie Holzman in 2003, and now to the film version of the musical by Winnie Holzman, Dana Fox, and Stephen Schwartz in 2024, is a masterclass in adaptation. It moves through all of the different definitions and considerations.

(I also feel the need to point out here that the only things I had to look up there were the book and film writers for the musical Wicked. My best friend is a Wizard of Oz fanatic and I have therefore memorized more details about Oz than I will ever be able to express. And, as a hopeful musical book writer one day, I am ashamed of myself that hers was the name I didn’t know.) Ok, back to business.

Let’s look at some of the different considerations for adapting Baum’s original work through the years and what has helped to make these different adaptations a success.

The Wonderful Wizard of Oz to The Wizard of Oz – Using Your Medium and Time to Your Advantage

There are a few different reasons why I think The Wizard of Oz was a success and has continued to be a cultural phenomenon 85 years later and they all relate to the filmmakers taking advantage of the medium of film and the technology and audience that they had at the time.

First, The Wizard of Oz is known for its visuals – something that instantly separated it from the original. While Baum’s book had illustrations by W.W. Denslow throughout the story, The Wizard of Oz could show a living version of Oz in Technicolor to the audience. That moment of Dorthy entering Munchkinland is still one of the most iconic scenes in film history because it captured something within the cultural zeitgeist of the time - a fascination with the new technology of film and a need for the wonder of escapism as World War II was beginning and the Great Depression was lingering on.

Another thing that they took keen advantage of was the popularity of movie musicals at the time. Most of these were contemporary stories and by creating something that was in a fantasy world, it felt brand new while still working within the desires of their audience.

When creating any adaptation, one of the most important questions to ask yourself is how the medium and time that you’re writing in are going to affect the work. If you’re switching mediums, it’s likely everything from the structure to the perspective is going to need to change. If you’re writing in a new genre or just for a more modern audience, you need to consider how you are going to both satisfy and surprise new readers and lovers of the original.

The Wicked Book and Musical - Jumping Off While Staying Grounded

There are different forms of adaptation. When moving from the original book to The Wizard of Oz movie, the writers stayed true to the overall plotting and story structure. When Gregory Maguire created the book Wicked, he used the world and the core of the story as a jumping off point and created a plot that works parallel to the original. When taking this approach, understanding the essence of the original is very important. Why do people love it? What is the story’s message? What is the experience that people get with the story? Gregory Maguire wanted to subvert by showing a different side to the “villain” by making her into the hero. But he needed to work within the parameters of the original. He couldn’t change existing lore, but instead was showing us the same from another angle.

With the musical, the writers were working with Maguire’s book as their text but still were paying homage to the movie musical. The character’s voices and their costume styling are similar. We have little easter eggs throughout for movie lovers. There is a great respect given to fans of the movie, while taking us in a different direction.

One place where the musical differs quite a bit from Maguire’s book is in its tone. The Wicked book is quite political and dark, while the musical is more catered to families rather than adults who would be interested in these themes. Both focus on the relationship between Elphaba and Galinda, but the musical does it in a more playful way – using songs like “What Is This Feeling?” and “Popular”.

Here, their intended audience was more fans of Broadway and musicals and those with a love for the original story of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz than it was necessarily just for fans of Maguire’s book. While the book was popular at the time, it never reached the wide appeal of the musical. The writers of the musical intentionally made their story fit a wider umbrella.

I think it is the change of perspective that allowed for this change in tone and feel of the story. While the book is written in third person, it stays close to Elphaba. With the musical (and later the movie), we see things from further back, giving us the chance to sympathize and understand various characters in a different way. We identify more with Galinda, Fiyero, and even Madame Morrible as we understand the side they were viewing things from.

While knowing your audience is always important in any writing, it might be even more so in adapting existing work. Why does this new version need to be present in the world? What is it offering that the original does not? Is it appealing to a different audience? Saying something new? Told in a new voice?

When you are using the source material as more of a jumping off point than a roadmap, you do have more freedom. But you still need to honor the original and not contradict it, wherever possible. Otherwise, your credibility will waver and your new version will fight against the original instead of feeding off it.

The Wicked Movie

I finally made it to the movie theatre last week to see the film adaptation of Wicked. Like with any other adaptation attached to a property I care about, I went in with both excitement and apprehension. (And I was there with my Oz-obsessed friend, so I was really worried about what he would think!)

I found from the opening number and images, I was already comparing it to the stage show. I missed the wall of sound that you get in live theatre with a full chorus singing something like “Good news! She’s dead!” I was fascinated by Ariana Grande’s choices during the song and loved that we got to see her expressions in a much more detailed way that I ever could afford with the live version.

I knew that they had added a lot of material – as the entire musical is about three hours and this was the same length with only the first act. So, I was extremely curious to see where that time was added. And I felt like some of the choices were successes and some didn’t work as well.

One thing that did work was the addition of some pieces that filled in the backstory and lore. An example is the play that original cast Idina Menzel and Kristin Chenoweth performed during “One Short Day” that explained the Grimerie. Film allows for changes in locations and scenes in a way that live theatre does not and this was used well throughout the film.

One thing that I felt didn’t work was breaking up songs to include more dialogue. As someone who has had every word of the soundtrack memorized for the past 20 years, it not only didn’t allow me to sing along in my head with the same ease, but it also felt like it often upset the emotional progression of the songs. This was especially true during “Defying Gravity”, which felt like it was climbing up and then crashing down several times instead of building to those last notes.

Coming out of watching the film, I found myself feeling like it was a success, in that John Chu and the thousands of other artists on the film used their medium to their advantage. While I personally might have cut back on some CGI additions, it was amazing to see them maintain some of the feel of the 1939 film with real sets and elaborate costumes. Ariana Grande and Cynthia Erivo also clearly had amazing respect for the source material. Ariana perfectly blended taking cues from Billy Burke and Kristin Chenoweth’s versions of Glinda and finding something that was her own. Cynthia’s physicality, from her nails to some of her postures, was a love letter to Margaret Hamilton.

At the end of the day, while I might not have agreed with every choice, I could see there was intention behind it. They weren’t trying to change things just to change them, but instead were bringing their version into their own medium, time, and experiences. It felt like theirs as much as it felt like something fans could embrace.

I am currently working on my own adaptation and I have found some new inspiration. One of the things I loved the most is that the political themes of Maguire’s book were more at the forefront. For my own adaptation, I want to highlight how the struggles faced by a single woman in Austen’s time are not the same as a single woman today (but how there are some parts of that experience that are still the same).

I believe that when we’re storytelling today, we’re all working a little in adaptation. Everything within a story has likely existed in some form before. What makes your story unique is how you infuse yourself, your voice, and your experience into the story you’re telling. So, how are you going to craft your version?

Happy Writing!

-jess