Top 10 WORST Movies of 2025

Courtesy of Warner Bros. – © Warner Bros.

Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! It is time to count down my top 10 WORST movies of 2025. Some of you may call this the fun list. Some of you may call this the unnecessary list. I just call it the list that I have to do in order to remind myself and others that you cannot have good movies without the bad. Each movie I have seen this year has provided with a unique experience. Sometimes that results in something memorable. That said, as these movies suggest, sometimes the word “memorable” is not always a positive. Before we begin this list, I will remind everyone that I have not seen every movie that has come out in 2025. While it is unfortunate that I missed a few titles, it also means that I do not have to talk about certain movies that I have heard less than stellar things about like “Five Nights at Freddy’s 2,” “Flight Risk,” and “Bride Hard.” Do not expect to see those on the list. Also, this is a subjective list. Everything you see here is based on my own experiences, staring at screens of my choice. Also, all the movies on this list have to have been released in theaters. If the film’s not in theaters, than it is technically “television.” Before we get to the top 10, there are a few dishonorable mentions to highlight for hopefully the last time.

And before I announce the first dishonorable mention, I will note that this year’s top 10 WORST list shows what an unfortunate year this has been for Comcast. Spoiler, a lot of their movies, whether they are from Universal Pictures or Focus Features, make the list. And before Comcast blacklists me from working at any of their outlets, I would like them to know that “The Odyssey” is my most anticipated movie of 2026 and I had a blast going to Universal in Orlando this year. I cannot wait to go back to see Epic Universe. It’s going to be sick. With that plea for mercy out of the way, let’s get this roast started.

Dishonorable Mention: Honey Don’t!

Courtesy of Focus Features – © Focus Features

And if you thought I was bluffing, turns out the first dishonorable mention is in fact a Focus Features movie, “Honey Don’t!.” This film is uniquely boring. While it may have star power courtesy of actors like Margaret Qualley, Aubrey Plaza, and Chris Evans, the film ends up being a complete drag. This is one of those movies that as soon as I left, my brain started vomiting out any information related to it that it had previously taken in. This is the second year in a row we’ve gotten a collaboration between Margaret Qualley and Ethan Coen, following 2024’s above average “Drive Away Dolls.” Safe to say, “Honey Don’t!” makes that film look like a masterpiece.

Dishonorable Mention: Captain America: Brave New World

I love Marvel, but even I have to admit that “Captain America: Brave New World” is not quite doing it for me. Other than the admirable lead performance by Anthony Mackie, there is not really much in this film to write home about. I thought some of the action sequences could have been more exciting. The special effects are some of the worst I can recall seeing in a modern superhero movie. And the film almost has an identity crisis! While the movie is called “Captain America,” the script acts as if it is supposed to be an “Incredible Hulk” sequel. That would be forgiven if the movie was good, but that is not the case!

Dishonorable Mention: Love Hurts

Going back to Comcast, it pains me a great deal to say that my last dishonorable mention is “Love Hurts.” I love Ke Huy Quan, and I am over the moon to see him keep getting work following his comeback in “Everything Everywhere All at Once.” While “Love Hurts” does satisfy at times when it comes to action, it often feels like a case of style over substance. If you want to watch a better Ke Huy Quan movie released this year, go watch “Zootopia 2.” Skip “Love Hurts.”

With those movies down, it is time to put the Moron in Movie Reviewing Moron. These are my top 10 WORST movies of 2025!

#10: Wicked: For Good

© Universal Studios. All Rights Reserved.

I was not joking when I said Comcast’s movies would dominate this list. The honorable mentions are just the beginning. Coming in at number 10 is “Wicked: For Good!” The original “Wicked” did not make my top 10 worst list last year, and looking back, I believe a large part of that was because the second half of the film had me hooked at times. So, why did this one make the list? Bear in mind, I knew nothing about the original musical prior to these films coming out, but when “Wicked: For Good” gets to the material that was made famous by “The Wizard of Oz,” the execution of some of it did not sit right with me. By the end of this film, I thought the story lost almost any potential stakes it could have had. I felt like nothing really mattered or had much of a substantial impact. Some of the numbers were okay. I thought “No Good Deed Goes Unpunished” was a highlight. Though I cannot think of any other numbers that quite reached the same level. Much like the original “Wicked,” the film’s color palette is not that easy on the eyes despite the neat production design. I was not a huge fan of either of these movies. And one could argue that these movies were not made for me, and such an argument would probably have a point. Even so, I found myself uninterested in a lot of what this movie had to offer. Parts of it dragged. As a musical it could have been better. And as much as I love Jeff Goldblum, the dude cannot sing.

#9: Him

At #9 is another Comcast movie! I am talking about the forgettable horror flick known as “Him.” Despite this movie starting off with the main character watching a football game, becoming obsessed with the sport, and getting invited to a location where he gets to take on football training sessions, I think football could have used a little extra screen time. For the record, if you know me in real life, I am not much of a football fan. But for a movie that is about football it could have used, I do not know, maybe more football. In my review for “Him,” I basically summed it up as “Whiplash” meets “Ex Machina.” You have a young man aspiring to be the next great in his desired field. That young man gets taken under the wing of an eccentric mentor, all the while staying at a remote facility. The film comes packed with fascinating ideas and concepts, but it ends up wasting every single one.

#8: M3GAN 2.0

Lookie here fellas, it is another Comcast film! Part of me was looking forward to this next movie, because I found myself to be pleasantly surprised by the original. This sequel surprised me too, but by that I mean I found myself surprisingly underwhelmed. “M3GAN 2.0” may have just killed its own franchise. If my personal opinion does not verify this claim, then the lackluster box office certainly does. I thought on paper, “M3GAN 2.0” had potential. The first “M3GAN” features its titular character as the baddie, but now she has become the hero. I thought that could have worked, but this idea was botched completely. At times, M3GAN reminded me of a variant of Deadpool who refuses to take their humor beyond a PG-13 level. Also, instead of a horror movie, like the first film was, this installment takes a more action-based route. I am all for franchises experimenting, trying new things, and going in oddball directions. But when it does not pay off, you get duds like “M3GAN 2.0.”

#7: Bugonia

Okay… Last Comcast film for now. Spoiler! Once this segment is over, we get back to bashing them in number five.

Ready for a hot take? I am not sure if you are, because this one’s as scorching as the Equator! “Bugonia” is easily one of the worst film experiences I have had this past year. While I respect Yorgos Lanthimos for delivering the banger of a flick known as “Poor Things,” this film, as well as a couple others he has done, has proven that his style may not be for me. I get that Jesse Plemons’ character was perhaps designed to be so moronic that he has fallen as deep into his echo chamber as he has, but it does not alter the fact that having to watch him be the hero of his own story for two hours was mind-numbing. Emma Stone, perhaps unsurprisingly, gives a solid performance. But it is not enough for me to give this film a pass. I will not deny that this film was disturbing, and that was perhaps the point. But when the point is so effective that I basically left the screening with a headache, I am not going to endorse the movie for that. I watch movies for many reasons. Hurting my brain is not one of them.

Throughout this countdown you are going to mostly see films I reviewed, but this next one is not one of them. I missed this film in the theater, but I ended up buying a used Blu-ray copy, which I ended up watching at the end of the year, and boy do I want my time and money back…

#6: The Alto Knights

This film showcases the talent of a popular actor whose films have influenced audiences worldwide, and this time around, they are playing not one, but two roles! Sounds an awful lot like “Sinners,” right? It is not. That movie was pretty good. Next up on this list is “The Alto Knights.” I am surely glad that I did not review “The Alto Knights” because that would have been a tough one to get through. While the first minute or so delivers an exciting, attention-grabbing scene, the rest of the film could not quite live up to that excitement. While I do appreciate Robert De Niro for taking on two roles, it is almost like the film is inserting two times the Robert De Niro to compensate for the utter boringness that ensues for its two hour runtime. This is one of those films that I was trying my hardest to stare at the screen and digest everything that was in front of me, but it felt near impossible to do so. I cannot name a single aspect of this film that stood out to me, maybe other than the production design. Well, that and some of the accents. This film is overacted to a sick degree sometimes. Overall, “The Alto Knights” could have been intriguing, but it falls flat on its face.

#5: The Phoenician Scheme

Courtesy of TPS Productions/Focus Features – © 2025

Is it just me? Or is Wes Anderson slowly losing his magic? I had fun with “The French Dispatch,” but after seeing “Asteroid City” in 2023, and now “The Phoenician Scheme” in 2025, which I found even worse, I am starting to question when, or if, he will deliver his next great film. Much like “The Alto Knights,” “The Phoenician Scheme” starts off with an enticing hook. We see our main character caught in a plane crash, and we find out that this is one of several he has been through. As soon as the first minute of the film is complete, it is all downhill from there. The film may have a humungous, recognizable cast, but that honestly makes the experience of watching it much worse! These people could have done anything, but they chose to be in something as dull as this! Yes, I know, a lot of people would kill to work with Wes Anderson. Nevertheless, I wish Anderson himself gave this cast significantly better material to utilize. I do not mind a Wes Anderson quirkfest, but quirks are not enough to make a good movie. I hope he can get out of his slump and deliver the next “Fantastic Mr. Fox.” I would much rather watch that over this garbage.

#4: The Ruse

© Mena Films, Inc

If you want a horror flick that is a total snooze, look no further, because I present to you, “The Ruse!” The best part of “The Ruse” is Veronica Cartwright’s shining performance, but almost everything else feels insignificant compared to that. Well, okay, some of the locations are nice. There is that. Although, as I look back at the movie, I do not recall a whole ton about the other characters. Nothing really stood out about any of them. Each one felt paper thin. Few things disappoint more than a horror film that is not scary. The film contains plenty of jumpscares, which despite some decent buildup, often came off as cheap. The story gets more absurd as it goes along. As the film’s climax played out, it did not feel that satisfying. Much of the material felt like something that belonged in a second act. Overall, this movie should have been better than what it delivered. Veronica Cartwright deserves better. The rest of the cast and crew deserve better. The audience deserves better.

#3: Jurassic World: Rebirth

Photo by Universal Pictures and Amblin Entertainment – © Universal Studios. All Rights Reserved.

We come to Comcast’s worst film of the year… The “Jurassic Park” franchise really needs to take a breather. And I think I am being friendly with that sentiment. If you disagree, then chances are you have not been exposed to whatever the heck “Jurassic World: Rebirth” turned out to be. There are a couple positive things I can say about “Jurassic World: Rebirth.” I found the dinosaur action to be an improvement over “Jurassic World: Dominion,” which made my 2022 worst list. And Gareth Edwards, like usual, does a decent job at highlighting scale. He did it spectacularly with the titular monster in 2014’s “Godzilla,” and then he did it again with AT-ATs in “Rogue One: A Star Wars Story.” So, it is no surprise that he does a good job in that regard when it comes to showcasing the dinosaurs in “Jurassic World: Rebirth.” The film has some of the hottest stars working today including Scarlett Johansson and Jonathan Bailey, but their star power is not enough to keep this franchise’s engine running.  The film’s screenplay leaves quite a bit to be desired. A lot of the film tends to feel like a homage to the original “Jurassic Park,” that is if that homage were exclusively sold at Dollar Tree. It’s not even good enough for Five Below. It’s that cheap. Some of the film comes off as a joke. One idea implemented into the script was that the general public living within the “Jurassic” franchise has become heavily fatigued by dinosaurs. They’ve become boring by this point. To that I say, try walking outside and looking at a bird. Yes, chances are a lot of you reading this see birds everyday. But birds have been around forever and been part of many people’s lives! You think society is bored by something as commonplace as freaking birds? Now you want to tell me people would rather watch paint dry as opposed to even look at a dinosaur? Also, has humanity gotten tired of zoos? We have had zoos and aquariums for many years! I was at an aquarium in Boston over the summer and the place was packed! Perhaps the film was trying to emulate the audience’s reaction to the franchise, as the more recent installments have not been as well received as the older ones. I have no clue. But I did not buy this idea for a second. Add in some cheesy one-liners that sound like they are out of a bad Michael Bay movie and then you get “Jurassic World: Rebirth.”

#2: A Minecraft Movie

Courtesy of Warner Bros. – © Warner Bros.

Even though I refused to play it, this video game was so popular growing up that a feature film with big stars felt practically inevitable. While said feature film, unsurprisingly, made a lot of money, it is also rich in schlockiness. “A Minecraft Movie” may be the most excruciating hour and a half of cinema I watched this year. I caught “A Minecraft Movie” a couple weeks after it was released with a friend. He paid for the tickets, so I thank him for that. And while I saved some money, the movie ended up stealing my time. I was not the biggest fan of “The Super Mario Bros. Movie” when that came out, as I thought it was unbelievably cliché. But at least it had a clear beginning, middle, and end with its titular protagonist at the front and center.

It is almost unclear who and what “A Minecraft Movie” is actually about. Maybe that is why it is called “A Minecraft Movie.” Even the title seems unsure of itself and what it wants to be. Is the film about Steve? Is it about the younger brother and sister? Is it about Jason Momoa’s character? Honestly, I do not care about what kind of story “A Minecraft Movie” wants to tell, because whatever it did tell me was a chore to sit through. None of the jokes were funny, and the whole movie comes off as if it were designed to be a meme. I can watch a film that refuses to take itself too seriously, but this one was a bit much. Jack Black gives a slightly less annoying performance than what he gave in last year’s “Borderlands,” but he is still a bit too overly obnoxious for my taste. The film has some notable stars, but few, if any, had decent material to work with. Danielle Brooks sounded like she did not want to be there. Jennifer Coolidge commits to what’s in front of her, but it does not make for the easiest watch. The only actor I like in the film is Jason Momoa, who plays a narcissistic video game shop owner. I thought he played the part well, even if some of his jokes felt like they were made for the under five crowd. Also, while this film is experiencing a cultural impact, I wish that impact did not associate with people bringing live chickens into movie theaters and throwing popcorn around the auditorium. The film is a 90 minute monstrosity through a cubed uncanny valley. I will admit though, my expectations were not that high for this film. So, at least I was not disappointed.

#1: Smurfs

Much like number 2, my final pick for this countdown is a family film. Although whereas I could see how “A Minecraft Movie” would appeal to a lot of young boys and maybe remain as a core part of their growing up, it a bit harder for me to see how exactly 2025’s “Smurfs” is going to maintain a long-lasting cultural impact of its own. I am not going to pretend I am all that into the “Smurfs” property. In fact, I went into this film with absolute morbid curiosity. The trailers irked me, and maybe that is where I should have held my horse. But for some reason, I decided to go see this film in the theater. What a life-affirming choice that was, not! The only “Smurfs” anything I watched prior to this movie was the 2011 live-action film, which to this day is one of the worst pictures I have ever seen. This 2025 animation is almost as infuriatingly awful as that atrocity. The movie may be called “Smurfs,” but at times it feels more like a 90 minute long Rihanna music video. Part of this is because, well, Rihanna plays Smurfette, one of the film’s main characters. The other main character in the film is No Name Smurf, played by James Corden. His resume amazes me to this day. I do not know if James Corden is purposefully picking roles in projects that he knows will end up being crap. Or, if the project starts off great, but Corden has magical powers to make his projects crappier. For all I know, chances are Corden thinks his projects always sound like masterpieces on paper. But between this film, “Cats,” and “The Emoji Movie” just to name a few, it is kind of astounding to see Corden take on one abominable project after another.

Of course, with this film being released in the 2020s, there is a multiverse connection. Admittedly, this might have been the one slight redeeming quality of the movie, as it did allow the animators to go absolutely bonkers with some of the styles, kind of like “Spider-Verse,” but that excitement literally lasts for a minute and then the rest of the film plays out as boringly as possible. Speaking of which, the film constantly blends live-action with 3D animation in certain scenes, and at times, it looks plain odd.

As I watched this film, as well as my number 2 pick for this list, “A Minecraft Movie,” I felt like I was part of the crowd at the Enchantment Under the Sea dance in “Back to the Future.” For all I know, somewhere, somehow, Marty McFly showed up on screen to profess to me that I was not quite ready for these movies, but my kids, should I have them, are probably going to love them, with the disclaimer that they watch them at a certain age. Except I am not so sure if that is the case, based on my own experience of watching this film in the cinema with a good amount of children. Maybe my experience of watching this film was vastly different than yours, but as I watched “Smurfs,” it was really hard to tell how many people were actually enjoying the movie or getting something out of it. When I go to a lot of these family movies, I find the audiences to be a bit more active. Although in this case, nearly the entire crowd was dead silent. Hey, I will take it over the chaos of some of the “Minecraft” screenings, including my own, where a lot of children were busy shouting out the memes. But at least that crowd sounded entertained. Out of everyone in the auditorium, I might have been the only person to even chuckle at the film. Amazing, right?! While it is true that a lot of comedy derives from great pain, it is kind of astounding to me how my one laugh in a film containing the “Happy Song” came from one character opting to sacrifice themself. For the record, this is a film that is chock-full of jokes! Although at the end of the day, the joke is likely on me, as I wasted 89 minutes of my precious time watching what I found to be one of the most cringe-inducing animations that has ever come across my consciousness. Again, like “A Minecraft Movie,” my expectations for “Smurfs” were low, so at least I was not disappointed. Although the film is still unwatchable enough to be the worst of 2025 for me.

Courtesy of Paramount Pictures – © Paramount Pictures

Thanks for reading this countdown! As someone who loves movies and wants to make them, it pains me sometimes to make these lists. But I only do it because I love the art form and as someone who reviews these movies, I always believed that honesty is the best policy. If you enjoyed this countdown, I have another on the way! You cannot have the bad without the good! In the coming days I will be sharing my top 10 BEST movies of 2025! I can guarantee that list will bring significantly more joy than this one. I might do another countdown as I have done three around this time in years past. Although I am not going to do a most anticipated list as I already saw one 2026, which I will review later this month. If you want to see that countdown and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, what are your worst movies of 2025? Do you agree with this list? Do you have your own? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Wicked: For Good (2025): Can This Second Half Follow the Yellow Brick Road?

© Universal Pictures

“Wicked: For Good” is directed by Jon M. Chu, who also directed the prior “Wicked” installment. This film stars Cynthia Erivo (Genius, Widows), Ariana Grande-Butera (Victorious, Scream Queens), Jonathan Bailey (Jurassic World: Rebirth, Bridgerton), Ethan Slater (Lost on a Mountain in Maine, Gen V), Bowen Yang (Awkwafina is Nora from Queens, Saturday Night Live), Michelle Yeoh (Everything Everywhere All at Once, Transformers: Rise of the Beasts), and Jeff Goldblum (Jurassic Park, Independence Day). This film is the second in a two-part adaptation of the “Wicked” musical, which itself is based on a book of the same name. In this story, we see our main characters from the first film return as they embrace their identities of Wicked Witch of the West and Glinda the Good.

© Universal Studios. All Rights Reserved.

If you read my review for “Wicked” over the past year, you would notice that I have not offered the fondest of opinions regarding the film. While I acknowledge the film is by no means broken, I found it to be mostly slow. I thought a lot of the musical numbers were not doing it for me. And I thought some of the film’s technical aspects such as the color grading needed improvement. That said, I know that movie has its fans. I will even say there are things I liked about it. While most of the music failed to impress me, signature songs like “Popular” and “Flying Gravity” were well executed. Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande are excellent as the main duo. And even though I thought the film could have been more aesthetically pleasing in certain regards, I was impressed by the production design.

I was quite nervous for this sequel, because I acknowledge that I probably pooped on a lot of people’s parties when it comes to my opinion on the first film. A lot of people I know really dug it. Those people were also looking forward to this one. The film was a shining star over the past awards season, but I wish I aligned with those who praised it. Given how I am a Movie Reviewing Moron of the people, I used one of my A-List reservations to see this film opening weekend.

Having now seen the film, I cannot say “Wicked: For Good” surprised me in any way. I expected to not like the film, and that is exactly what happened. Of course, I go into every movie wanting it to be good. But in the case of “Wicked: For Good,” it did not do it for me.

© Universal Studios. All Rights Reserved.

Believe it or not, there are plenty of positives in “Wicked: For Good.” Many of the things that I found to work in the first film also work here. Then again, this should not be a big surprise given how both titles were shot back to back. That said, much like the original film, the sequel wowed in terms of its production design. Oz feels just as grand as I recall it feeling a year ago. I thought the music was great, and in some ways, it was an improvement over the first part. There were bits of the first film where it felt like the characters were singing almost unnecessarily. In this sequel, every song seemed to have a purpose. They either fit the moment or enhanced a character’s arc. During my review for the first film, I pointed out that the music became so loud at my screening to the point where I almost had a headache. At the risk of torturing myself, I ended up seeing “Wicked: For Good” at the exact same theater and auditorium, which is a Dolby Cinema at an AMC location. I do not know if they turned the volume down in that theater, but I found the soundtrack much more comfortable to listen to than the one from the original. Speaking of sound, the sound editing was top notch. For example, I like the attention to detail the movie gives whenever Glinda is in her bubble. You can hear a little blockage coming through whenever she talks because the camera’s point of view is from the outside of the vehicle.

Another point of praise I would have to give is that most of the cast does a good job with the material they are given. Of course, Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande, who had dynamite chemistry in the first film, work well together this time around, that is during whichever moments allow the two to be on screen together.

© PHOTO BY: UNIVERSAL PICTURES – © 2025 UNIVERSAL STUDIOS. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

I am not going to pretend that I found the first film’s screenplay to be phenomenal, but there was at least a novelty to it even though it was based on both a play and a book. This film’s script is consistent with the first film in certain ways. Therefore, like the first film, I found a lot of the fantastical vocabulary to be rather annoying. I get that this film is not directly set on earth, but a lot of the diction dropped by select characters including “thrillifying,” “obsessulated,” and most especially “clock tick” felt too over the top. Every time a character in this film said the words “clock tick,” it felt tacked on. It did not feel authentic, even for Oz. It came off as a fantasy version of “Mean Girls” where instead of people trying make fetch happen, they were trying to make “clock tick” happen.

When I reviewed “Wicked” last year, I pointed out that there was a pink and green tint attached in my presentation. That was not the case this time. I can only make an assumption, but maybe the projector had a filter that should have been removed. I do not know if it was a 3D filter because the screen did not look that dark. Point is, the screen looked normal during “Wicked: For Good.” Shoutout to the staff at the AMC Liberty Tree Mall 20 for the upkeep. I found “Wicked: For Good” to look much better than the original “Wicked” did during my initial watch. The sequel’s viewing experience fully allowed me to see the film the way Jon M. Chu intended. Sadly, I do not know if his vision satisfied me all that much. “Wicked: For Good,” like its predecessor, feels lacking in color. Again, the set design is great. I will even say a quite a bit of the framing is pretty good. But I think the color grading could have been pinched up a little bit, and a lot of the shots seem to lack personality. I hate saying this, because I have a soft spot for these movies, but these “Wicked” films look like select MCU films. They look slapped together and almost done on the fly. Like the original, “Wicked: For Good” has some decent shots, but it is also packed with a lot of shots that look gray, digital, and lifeless.

© PHOTO BY: UNIVERSAL PICTURES – © 2025 UNIVERSAL STUDIOS. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Overall, I found this film to engage me more than the original did. That said, this film will definitely be enhanced by watching the original, as much as I do not recommend doing so. I found “For Good” to start off with a bang. It quickly establishes the Wicked Witch as a threat amongst Oz, or at least a threat in people’s minds. That said, despite establishing Elphaba as a threat to Oz’s population, I can say that this film feels uneventful by the conclusion. Does this film have a beginning, middle, and end? Yes. But by the time the film is over, I had little attachment to any of the characters. Not Elphaba. Not Glinda. Not a single soul in the cast. This is a film that is supposed to cap off the story and instead of going out with an emotional bang, it closes things off with a dull whimper. I get that “Wicked” in essence paints the story told in “The Wizard of Oz” as an anti-Elphaba propaganda piece, but the way that the film showcases some of the events from “The Wizard of Oz” lacks something the classic tale had. Sure, “The Wizard of Oz” is a formulaic hero’s journey, but like a lot of formulaic hero’s journeys, it had stakes. As I watched parts of “Wicked: For Good,” I almost did not care about a single character in the cast. The film barely paints the Wizard as a threat, even if Elphaba most definitely sees him that way. The closest thing to an unforgivable act I can say he pulled off is him capturing a bunch of animals, which, okay, that is not something reasonable people do. Not to mention, such an action piggybacks off of material from the first film. But even that plot point feels like it barely gets any spotlight. It comes off as an afterthought.

Do things happen in “Wicked: For Good?” Sure. Do characters develop in “Wicked: For Good?” Sure. We see some characters change more than others, but there is some character development to be had. That said, by the film’s conclusion, I felt like nothing really mattered that much. There was not much in the film that left a significant impact on me.

There is quite a bit in this film that I do not like. I did say there are plenty of positives, but I utter such a sentiment with as much generosity as I can provide. That said, if there is one reason why you should watch this movie, especially on the big screen, I think I might be able to pull one out of my sleeve. The soundtrack to “Wicked: For Good” is not as solid as the original. In fact, the parts of the soundtrack I found to be the most memorable are throwbacks to songs from the original movie. There are some good songs, but not anything on the level of say “Defying Gravity,” except for one number. That number being “No Good Deed Goes Unpunished.” There are so many fantastic elements that make this sequence worth writing home about. I almost want to shout out Cynthia Erivo for her ability to carry a tune in this scene like it is nothing. But then I remember that this sequence contains some incredibly dazzling showcases of visual effects. And while I do think the film could have been improved from a color perspective, I thought the overall aesthetic of this scene was perfect at times. Despite a lot of pizzazz going on in the frame, several shots feel kind of dry and rugged. It kind of matched the tension of the film at the time. It came at one of this film’s closest moments to what somebody could call a tipping point. The soundwork in this scene is great, and this was most definitely a treat to hear in Dolby. After seeing these two “Wicked” films, I would be totally fine if I never had any chance to watch them a second time. But I will not lie, part of me could see myself going on YouTube and either watching this clip again for fun, or listening to this song through my headphones.

I have not seen the “Wicked” play. Yes, I know, “No Good Deed Goes Unpunished” is not a song that is original to this film’s soundtrack. That said, I like the way the song is utilized in this film. It satisfies both the eyes and ears. One thing I also like is that in the moments that follow, we have a crowd of people singing a similar sounding song called “March of the Witch Hunters” that changes the core lyrics ever so slightly. It is executed rather chillingly.

Speaking of singing, watching Jeff Goldblum try to sing in this movie is something else. Do not get me wrong, Jeff Goldblum as the Wizard, like many of his other roles, is charismatic. But the guy cannot sing. He can change your apartment, he can change the world, but he cannot sing. He tries. He puts some effort into his material, and even as he fails he still has a sense of star power. Although when the film has Goldblum singing, he comes off like a reserved, yet somewhat noticeably drunk dad who drags his family into the basement so he can try out his new karaoke machine for the first time. I love Jeff Goldblum, but this is not his best work. If I were to judge Goldblum for his performance in the first “Wicked” I would say his performance was perfectly acceptable. But when this movie asks him to sing, which is one of the most important parts of making a musical, that is where the corniness ensues.

In the end, the “Wicked” movies are 0 for 2. I do not mind musicals. I enjoy fantasy movies. To quote that one kid from “A Christmas Story,” “I like ‘The Wizard of Oz.'” If there is one adjective that I could use to describe these movies, it would be “consistent.” The films are consistently boring, consistently colorless, and consistently annoying. I never latched onto the universe that these two movies were trying to sell me. It has simply never once appealed to me. When I reviewed the first “Wicked,” I said it failed on the most important thing a part one is supposed to do, which is get me excited for this film, part two. Wait, sorry, I mean for “For Good…” The title card in the original says “Part One,” why does this one not say “Part Two?” Kind of weird. Anyway, now that I have seen “Wicked: For Good,” it fails at something of equal importance, which is getting me to care about the cast of characters. I like the actors in the film, and I think like the last movie, Ariana Grande easily gives the best performance. But their characters, like the story, rarely, if ever, engage me by the film’s conclusion. I am going to give “Wicked: For Good” a 4/10.

“Wicked: For Good” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Sentimental Value!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Zootopia 2,” “Wake Up Dead Man: A Knives Out Mystery,” “Jay Kelly,” and “Bugonia.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Wicked: For Good?” What did you think about it? Or, which of the two “Wicked” movies is superior? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!