Wow, this is really happening huh? Okay, first of all, comparing 'Wicked,' to WOZ is like comparing apples to oranges. 'Wicked,' is based off of it's own book, WOZ is based off of a book by L. Frank Baum. They are two COMPLETELY different stories, and to say one has ruined your experience of the other is just shortsighted and bordering on ignorant. Next, 'Wicked' the musical and 'Wicked' the book are also quite different. However, comparing them is more like comparing oranges to tangerines. Similar but not remotely the same. Bits of the storyline are similar, and drift farther and farther apart as the musical progresses, and most of the characters are the same. Aside from that, they are their own entities. I picked up the book when I was in theatre because everyone was raving about the musical: it was quite a shock, as I was expecting the musical plot. I absolutely love the book and have since read many other Maguire books, but the musical took SO many artistic liberties. The book revolves around discrimination and the politics that protect it (intertwining Elphie's own encounters with it). Frankly, it would make a snore of a play. So, I understand the differences and love them both equally. Baum's WOZ will ALWAYS be the source material and without it, Maguire wouldn't have a book and Broadway wouldn't have a musical. My main point being: stop comparing it all because none of the three of them are anything like the other. To let one ruin your experience of the other is ridiculous.
reply
share