Look, I'm all about listening to a woman of color explain how something that might seem innocuous to a white man like me might actually be harmful. I'm willing to accept that there are things I don't fully understand and I'm willing to take a different perspective if pressed.

But I can't wrap my head around this one. Elphaba is a fictional character. The movie poster is almost the same as the Broadway playbill. Theatre nerds with photoshop adjusted it as a homage, and understandably so. Hiding beneath the the rim of your hat with a smirk on your face has a much different feel than staring deadpan at the camera. Wicked fans are just expressing their excitement about this movie...

This argument that "covering my eyes erases me and silences my nonverbal communication" just doesn't check out. It's clear why people made that specific adjustment, and to suggest that it was a deliberate attack against the actress is just grasping at straws. This isn't a story about the woman Cynthia Erivo, this is a story about the character Elphaba Thropp, The Wicked Witch of the West. She isn't the first to play Elphaba, and she won't be the last. If she's mad that people see the character she plays and not her, she needs to reconsider her philosophy towards acting, because that kinda the whole point...

What an utterly ridiculous and inconsequential thing to get upset about. Someone should tell her to re-read what she just wrote and think about how stupid it sounds.

What is she trying to communicate anyway? She has the plainest, most boring face of all time, just staring at the camera with the eyes of a dead fish. There is no communication going on.

because, without words we communicate with our eyes

IDK, the original and the edit both communicate way more mystique and mischievousness than the one with her eyes visible

If that’s the most offensive thing they have seen they live a charmed life.

The ego and vanity is astounding. And the movie poster sucks because she's looking straight at the camera.

Stolen from reddit

I was on the fence about giving any time to viewing Wicked but I think it's gonna be a hard pass now.

In matters of taste, the customer is always right.

Nobody but the audience gets to decide what the audience wants. Not writers, not actors, not directors, not graphic designers. If you can give the audience something they didn't know that they wanted until they got it, so much the better for you. But if the audience just plain wants something else, then there's no amount of cajoling or negotiation that will make them feel otherwise.

That said, I have no idea what the collective response is to either of these posters, and this does feel a bit like a tempest in a teapot.

Without words we communicate with our eyes

True, but this actress ain't doing that. She's completely dissociated in the pic, her expression so blank and emotionless, screaming that she's dead inside. While a dissociated character could make a good villain, it's not hard to see that the character in the poster for the musical isn't a dissociated villian who is unaware of her cruelty but someone who is fully conscious of and revels in it. It's only natural that people who are fans of the original work notice just how out of character this is and try to fix it.

Don't like it? Stop making stupid remakes of ancient stuff and make something original for once! Maybe try putting some emotion into it!

But you know, that'd require Hollywood actually put in effort and they've probably forgotten how to do that by now. Seriously, is anyone watching the new shit that they fart out over there these days? Most everyone I know either rewatches old shit or watches anime. Hey, maybe we'll see the rise of Bollywood over the next couple decades, who knows?

Huh. This is why you need a PR team.

Yea lady, that's totally just as bad as people asking if your ***** is green.

If it was her decision that her full face should be on display, the backlash should be evidence enough that someone else gets paid to make those decisions, not her.

The original looks boring. She has absolutely no emotions on her face. There's no mystique, no 'wickedness'. Even the composition looks like something a high schooler in Photoshop class would make.

The edit isn't perfect either. But at least it pays homage to the original in more than just image. It adds that mystique back, and makes her look more menacing.

What it truly boils down to is ego. Although the edit is better, and so many people agree on it, it doesn't show her full face. And she can't let that go.

This is the wildest, most offensive thing I have seen

Congratulations I guess?

Imo the fan one is better. They should have done the red lipstick with a smirk rather than green and looking bored.

Bit of an overreaction if you ask me

The original composition with her eyes covered is just better and way more interesting.

I prefer the original poster. The new poster still looks like Wicked to me, and I would be disappointed if it recreated the original exactly. The fan edit is fun, I like it, but I understand artists from current year who made the modern poster would want to make a statement different than artists from when the original came out.

Everyone is making art, why do we have to be mad about that?

Nerve status: Struck

As we all know snapping at the fans, especially over matters of source material accuracy, always works out well for everyone involved in the making of the adaptation.

Totally proportionate reaction.

In the original Broadway poster and the fan edit, it looks like they're up to something--there's some mischievousness at play, some wickedness.

I don't really know what the full-face one is supposed to convey.