Really? You'd rather see them go into how It's only natural enemy is an ancient cosmic turtle that vomited our universe into existence? If you'd really rather suffer through that being brought to the small screen, cheers. But even Stephen King himself has itted he all but loses his mind 3/4 of the way through his own books. Some concepts are simply best left to his books....and the Dark Tower series

(Continued)...But if the creative minds should give into the temptation to preserve the musical's ending in the interest of making another boatload of cash, I suggest a Marvel-esque post credits scene:

Glinda and Elphaba come across each other years later as the two wake up next to each other only to find they're both disembodied heads in a hallway lined with glass cabinets that contain many other beautiful female heads as well. The two look at each other, face forward at the camera, and scream. The end.

POTENTIAL SPOILERS. I have to be honest, I was so happy to see this story's headline. I thought "Well, finally somebody speaks some sense about the end of this show!" That quickly faded when I realized the author wasn't suggesting the film concludes with the Wicked Witch's death as it has played out in every other iteration of L. Frank Baum's classic story for decades.

The greatest flaw inWicked is the absurd ending that takes far too much artistic license. After all the injustices that plagued this green-skinned woman since the moment she was born, they decided that by showing she faked her death and riding off into the sunset with her true love stuffed with straw by her own poor judgement, this would constitute a "happier" ending?

After everything we see in what will ultimately be between 5 and 6 hours long when we finally reach the credits, Wicked doesn't need - and shouldn't have - a happy ending. This plot completely turns the original story on its head by showing us that the Wonderful Wizard of Oz is not merely the sideshow humbug we know him to be when Toto pulls the curtain aside, but that he was wielding his power like a corrupt politician to oppress talking animals. The book was infinitely darker than this, even. So why should such a bleak plot warrant a warm, fuzzy ending? If we're going to suspend everything we know from Baum's story for an increasingly dark political plot, it seems ridiculous that the characters involved - most of whom are either dead or seriously maligned by the end as it is - aren't left to ponder the consequences.

The Wicked Witch melts. The Scarecrow is left to rule over Oz in the Wizard's absence. Dorothy realizes she had the power to go back to Kansas the entire time....and Glinda looks like an a** for having put that little girl through such a traumatic experience just to teach her a lesson. The end. Click, dialtone. Goodbye.

I would ask them to consult Gus Van Sant before getting too far into a project they may regret. And how exactly would the plot to Vertigo translate? The plot's very much of it's time.

I very much agree, though if you come away with the same general opinion as those you see here, please feel free to stop back so everyone has the opportunity to say "I told you so."

With all due respect, basing this theory on the castle floor seems a bit premature. I confess I'm not a fan of their decision to alter the most basic and consistent of plot points in the interest of having a happy ending for Broadway. That Elphaba dies at the hands of a young girl is the last indignity in a life filled with tragedy. Every incarnation of the story has ended that way, even the novel Wicked is loosely based on.

The question I'd expected this would address is the identity of the cloaked figure riding the horse as the Winged Monkeys abandon the witch's castle.

It's also worthwhile to point out that Chu has dropped several hints that suggest the near-flawless adaptation of the first film won't hold over into the second. There's a lot more work to be done to bring Act II of the musical to the screen as it shifts times and locations more frequently. This is a point that a member of production recently echoed in a YouTube comment thread. That conversation confirmed that the production filmed alternate scenarios for specific sequences, most notably how Marissa Bode's Nessarose will be affected by the charm placed on the jeweled shoes that gives her the ability to walk, a scene that could be very controversial if interpreted as insensitive to Bode's very real disability.

Though I too grow extremely impatient with the 45-and-living-in-their-parents' basement type that enjoys absolutely nothing more than complaining about everything that didn't re-capture the magic they felt as a five year-old, I do find the optimistic view of Rey's appeal surprising.

Firstly, the fanboys will never accept anything with a female protagonist. Full stop.

Rey was a great anchor for the sequel trilogy but, like absolutely every other factor in the films, so much was damaged beyond recognition because of how disted the individual films ended up being. In that sense, I'll be more than happy to side with the fanboys. It is sad, however, that sexism is especially healthy with that lot.

I've always said that the true measure of a Star Wars film should be judged in how a child reacts to it. If they leave the cinema with a huge smile on their faces and begging their parents for another action figure or cheap lightsaber replica, it did its job.

Though even I, as an adult, was often bored to death with the endless space politics of the prequels, younger adult fans that saw the prequels as kids are now singing their praises, as evidenced in this article. I said back in 1999 that nobody watching the prequels with an adult's eyes will ever be able to accurately judge them, because adults can't see them as kids do. If The Phantom Menace - with all its flaws - captured the same wide-eyed wonder in kids as the originals did to those of us rapidly approaching AARP hip, we can't judge that.

....And if someone's been in a position to see kids running up to Rey at either of the Disney Parks, excited to see someone they consider a hero (or, God forbid, a role model if the child is a little girl or a little boy that has yet to be taught that society looks down on boys that ire girl heroes), that's not for us to judge.

The movies stopped being made for us years ago.

The author of this piece did not do the appropriate homework to write about this topic. Either that, or they decided to omit some of the most important details.

Firstly, the primary reason Glinda's costumes varied in the Broadway show was because using any colors or designs too reminiscent of the 1939 film would result in lawsuits. This has been the bane of every filmmaker that's ventured into Oz for the last eighty years.

The new film returns to Glinda's most recognizable hues because Wicked is the first Oz project produced with the full involvement of the company that owns the IP to the 1939 film. I'd also like to point out that Glinda's costumes do indeed run more of a range in the films, but the one opening next week is only the first half. Images from the set have given us a glimpse into the second half. Glinda's most notable gown in the second half is in lilac shades.

Though she makes the role her own, Ariana Grande's Glinda doesn't stray far from the other Broadway portrayals. As in any stage-to-screen adaptation, she's reigned in, but by most s, Grande's born to play it.

Another detail that I found appalling was Margaret Hamilton's recollection of how pampered Billie Burke (Glinda) was during the production. She'd come and go by limousine whereas after Hamilton's accident with the fire during her exit in Munchkinland, the studio didn't call an ambulance, but rather put her into a cab and paid the driver to take her to the hospital. Whether Billie Burke's limos were on the studio's dime or simply a perk of being married to Flo Ziegfeld, I can't recall, but Hamilton mentioned this fact during interviews for years afterward.

Ruth beat me to it. Luis Guzman is a dead-ringer for the character Charles Addams created in the comic s published by The New Yorker in the 1930's. Though most would consider Raul Julia's portrayal definitive, he couldn't have been further from how he was originally conceived.

Anjelica Huston's Morticia did in fact have shades of red and deep purples, as seen in stills from Addams Family Values and a recently-auctioned gown. Even more color appeared in the costumes Bebe Neuwirth wore as Morticia on Broadway. The colors aren't as much a departure as the lack of the torn fringes on her arms (which Wednesday updated to a bell sleeve) and the tentacle-esque shreds at the bottom that have been consistent through all incarnations over the past 91 YEARS(!) until now. The gowns created for Catherine Zeta-Jones in Season 1 looked too much like something easily bought off the rack at a Torrid store. We waited decades for Tim Burton to do something with this property; it's disappointing to see him try to make The Addams Family less....creepy? Kooky? Mysterious and spooky? So much of what has made the Addams Family so popular hinges on their inability to confirm to society's norms.

Oh, and to reiterate for the 10,294th time, Pubert was purely a creation for Addams Family Values (1993) and is highly unlikely to be made canon outside of it.