Movies

Fantasy Movies

Ariana Grande's Star-Studded Fantasy Sequel Is Taking Over Netflix

By Witney Seibold

July 21, 2026 7:00 pm EST

Universal

Jon M. Chu's "Wicked: For Good" is the second part of a massive two-part movie adaptation of Stephen Schwartz and Winnie Holzman's "Wicked," one of the most successful stage musicals in Broadway history. That stage show was, in turn, based on Gregory Maguire's 1995 deconstructionist novel, also called "Wicked," which told the autobiographical story of Elphaba, better known as The Wicked Witch of the West. Of course, the character herself originated in L. Frank Baum's 1900 novel "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz" and was famously played by Margaret Hamilton in Victor Fleming's 1939 film adaptation "The Wizard of Oz." Indeed, it's the latter that serves as the main inspiration for "Wicked" in its many forms, both visually and in terms of its story beats.

2024's "Wicked: Part I" (which is often referred to as simply "Wicked") for almost as giant a success as its source material, bringing in $759 million at the box office and garnering an eye-crossing 10 Oscar nods (plus two wins). The movie starred Cynthia Erivo as Elphaba, a green-skinned citizen of Oz with latent magical powers who eventually becomes close friends with her uber-popular fellow university student Galinda (Ariana Grande, billed as Ariana Grande-Butera). From there, the film and "For Good" (which came out in 2025) follow Elphaba as she clashes politically with the unscrupulous Ozian regime and is branded the "Wicked Witch" through a whole lot of propaganda, forcing Galinda — who decides to rename herself Glinda at one point — to pick a side.

"For Good" wasn't as big a commercial hit as its predecessor and scored zero Oscar nominations. All the same, it's currently the most-watched movie on Netflix in the U.S., where it only barely debuted (via FlixPatrol).

People are watching Wicked: For Good on Netflix

Universal

For the record, I personally disliked the first "Wicked" movie I felt that its satire wasn't pointed and, forgive me, its two leads were lacking in personality. A Broadway adaptation should have more energy than what Jon M. Chu brought to the screen there, and that's coming from a genuine lover of Chu's "Step Up 3D" (one of the best dance films of its generation) and his "In the Heights" (a creative and soulful cinematic take on Lin-Manuel Miranda's stage musical). Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande can certainly belt out the high notes better than anyone, but their various speaking scenes were flat and ineffectual.

Overall, though, "Wicked: Part I" was a true crowd-pleaser, drawing the original stage show's many fans to movie theaters. It likely helped that "Part I" contained the stage musical's biggest, best, barn-burning-est musical numbers, "Popular" and "Defying Gravity." Unfortunately, that left "For Good" to adapt what's generally considered the weaker half of the "Wicked" stage musical. It didn't help that "For Good" had an overextended runtime due to the new (and mostly extraneous) material added to the film.

"Wicked: For Good" is also rather different in tone from the first "Wicked" movie and leans into the darker elements of their shared story. It has a lot of ground to cover as well, as it shifts its attention away from Elphaba and Glinda to reveal the backstories for other famous Ozians. What's more, a lot of the film's would-be dramatic and even scary moments just end up being, well, a bit silly at the end of the day, even in the context of a movie that takes place in the whimsically weird world of Oz.

What did critics think of Wicked: For Good?

Universal

While "Wicked: Part I" was very much a critical darling on the whole, "Wicked: For Good" wasn't nearly as well-reviewed. /Film's BJ Colangelo enjoyed the "Wicked" sequel, however, praising its political ambitions and savvy exploration of propaganda in her review. For my money, I will admit that I felt that Ariana Grande gives a better and more nuanced performance in "For Good" than she did in the first "Wicked" movie, all the more so since Glinda has more to contend with this time around.

Justin Chang, on the other hand, loathed "For Good." As he wrote in his review for The New Yorker, "Onstage, all this narrative retconning has a breezy behind-the-scenes cleverness, as if the story were being slyly fleshed out in the margins. Onscreen, and on full display, it's close to an abomination."

To remind readers, "For Good" takes place after Elphaba flees the Emerald City in the first "Wicked" movie, having discovered she's one of the few people in Oz with real magical powers and that the Wizard of Oz (Jeff Goldblum) is a corrupt fraud. So, in order to assert control over his kingdom, the Wizard instigates a campaign to rid Oz of talking animals, using them as scapegoats for the realm's ills. Elphaba tries to free the animals and fight this corruption, but the Ozian government successfully paints her as a "Wicked Witch," causing just about everyone to fear and distrust her.

Recall, though, that Elphaba has access to the Grimmerie, a Necronomicon-like tome that enhances her powers. Likewise, her penchant for dressing in all-black certainly has her clashing with the pastels and steampunk rainbows of Oz. If you want to see what happens from there, you're not alone. Catch up with everyone else on Netflix.