This post was updated Jan. 8 at 7:52 p.m.

Video advertising killed 2025’s star movie.

After the success of 2024’s “Wicked,” which became the highest-grossing musical film adaptation, the popular assumption was that the sequel would be an effortless success. Monetarily, this seems fairly accurate, with the film making $68.6 million in the United States and Canada on its opening day. The critical response, however, has been much less enthusiastic, with “Wicked: For Good” receiving a 69% on Rotten Tomatoes by the end of its opening weekend – compared to its predecessor’s 88% – a rating that has dropped even lower since. Plenty of critics have given extremely harsh reviews, none more direct than The New Yorker, which simply said, “‘Wicked: For Good’ is very, very bad.” Many factors may have contributed to this disparity, not the least of which being that the Broadway musical’s second act was notoriously weaker than the first, but with the extreme amount of recent collaborations and marketing, one begins to wonder if advertising overexposure led people to be less “obsessulated” with “Wicked.”

The past year has seen – to name a few product tie-ins – “Wicked” Takis, deodorant, macaroni and cheese, body washes, Febreze, hand sanitizer, napkins, beauty refrigerators, gum, Skittles, laundry detergent, record players, cinnamon rolls, soap, Dutch ovens and much more. The sheer number of these products, many of which simply amounted to a change in packaging, most likely had some impact on potential audience members. While many certainly experienced the intended buzz of the “Wicked” merchandise in every store, overexposure could have led to the opposite result.

[Related: Movie review: ‘Wicked: For Good’ enchants with elevated magic, emotion as spellbinding sequel]

These collaborations would have been enough on their own, but with each partnership typically sold in at least two versions – pink and green – the number of products increased exponentially. Many of the items that lined shelves for 2024’s movie release, like “Wicked” Rice Krispies Treats and Betty Crocker tie-ins, simply remained available until the 2025 film, increasing the amount of marketing for part two. In addition to the incredible amount of overconsumption waste from the excessive merchandising the movie created, there had to be adverse effects.

Beyond the product collaborations, the large amount of film content released before the movie’s premiere was far more than normal, particularly for a project so anticipated. Prior to the release of “Wicked: For Good,” trailers and advertisements revealed Glinda’s singing appearance in the number “Wonderful,” the Lion’s speaking role, the addition of two new songs and what the Tin Man would look like, for example. Even some of the early-released LEGO sets loosely exposed the look of Elphaba’s hideout, which had not been featured in the first film. The marketing team simply gave too much away.

Unlike part one, in which Idina Menzel and Kristin Chenoweth’s cameos were kept secret, part two lacked surprises that would have allowed for social media frenzy, greatly diminishing the overall postrelease chatter online. According to his interview with TheWrap, Jon M. Chu even kept the final shot of “Wicked: For Good” a secret from Universal Pictures executives out of fear they would include the iconic recreation of the original Playbill cover in trailers.

[Related: Second Take: BookTok creates renewed love for reading but lacks in real literacy]

By the time the second part hit theaters, the advertising cycle had overfamiliarized audiences with the film, exposing people to every color-coded product and major reveal before the curtains even rose. What was meant to bubble excitement subsequently smothered it, another example of how overpromotion can burst even a guaranteed hit. Notwithstanding its box office success, its critical reception is a result of day-to-day overexposure and a lack of cinematic twists to discuss online. Even a perfect movie could never live up to the hype of last year’s release.

The marketing budget of “Wicked: For Good” may have been unlimited, but it did not come without a cost.