Stephen Schwartz is ready to share insights into his remarkable journey. As the iconic composer behind the musical “Wicked,” Schwartz has crafted one of Broadway’s most celebrated scores. Now, more than two decades later, he is guiding the music’s transformation into a cinematic masterpiece that is poised to compete for the prestigious Best Picture award. Adding to this talented team is Stephen Oremus, the original arranger and music supervisor from the stage production, who reunites with Schwartz to bring the soundtrack to life in this exciting new format.

This collaboration between the two esteemed Stephens is nothing short of extraordinary. Schwartz, renowned for his pivotal role in adapting “Wicked” from Gregory Maguire’s book to a musical, boasts an impressive resume with six Tony Awards and three Oscars for works such as “Pippin,” “Godspell,” and the Disney film “Enchanted.” Meanwhile, Oremus, a Tony Award winner for his orchestrations in “The Book of Mormon” and “Kinky Boots,” has also contributed significantly to popular Broadway productions like “Frozen” and “Avenue Q,” as well as the animated film “Frozen 2.” Their partnership, along with music producer Greg Wells, signifies a powerhouse team for this cinematic adaptation.

Currently, Schwartz is in the spotlight as an Oscar contender for his collaboration with John Powell on the instrumental score for “Wicked.” His legacy in the realm of musical theater is defined by the way he has shaped powerful anthems that resonate deeply with audiences. In a recent conversation with Variety, Schwartz and Oremus reflected on the creative choices that have been made, especially after the film crossed the impressive $600 million mark at the global box office, establishing itself as the highest-grossing Broadway musical film adaptation of all time.

Fans of “Wicked” over the past two decades have been rediscovering lesser-known songs that may have faded into the background alongside the more popular numbers. Are there specific tracks in the score that you are thrilled to see gaining renewed attention?

Schwartz: It’s hard to pinpoint just one. However, I find it fascinating to witness various interpretations of the songs recently. For instance, a group of librarians at the Library of Congress somehow memorized the choreography for “What Is This Feeling?” and performed it in the aisles, showcasing their incredible talent. Just today, I received a hilarious video of a young girl, painted green, lip-syncing to “Defying Gravity” while standing in a wagon that her father spun around. At the climax, she delivered the iconic battle cry as her dad lowered the garage door like a curtain call. These creative, personal expressions of enjoyment are delightful to see, and I don’t have a particular favorite among them. Stephen, do you have one?

Oremus: It’s been astonishing to see how “What Is This Feeling” has transformed into a viral dance craze online. Another surprising development has been the newfound love for “I’m Not That Girl,” which has emerged as a quiet emotional highlight in Act 1. After the film’s release, many viewers expressed how beautiful and poignant the performance of that song was, particularly how it flowed from the scene. It’s been a pleasant surprise to witness this appreciation.

Schwartz: Indeed, that song underwent some changes for the film adaptation. We adjusted how it transitions into the song, and the tempo was significantly slowed down after hearing how Cynthia (Erivo) interpreted it. This change was intended to give her voice more space to resonate, along with a more elaborate instrumental interlude. I’m glad that audiences are responding positively to these variations.

Oremus: Interestingly, that’s the only song in the score that we altered the key for. We actually raised the key for Cynthia, as it suited her vocal range much better.

It’s fascinating to note that there’s a history of tailoring music for actresses, dating back to the original Broadway production. I read that the vocal approach for Glinda was modified because Kristin Chenoweth wanted the opportunity to sing in her natural soprano range, leading to the idea that she would perform in that range when addressing the public, while using a different style in her everyday voice throughout the show.

Schwartz: One of the remarkable aspects of musical theater is its collaborative nature, which is often more pronounced than in straight plays. The vocal style of lead actors can significantly influence the final version of a song. Unlike playwrights who may not experience the same level of collaboration, in musicals, every note, rhythm, and tempo is tailored to the performers to ensure a natural and seamless delivery. This approach ultimately sets the stage for future productions.

Oremus: Both Cynthia and Ari (Ariana Grande) have discussed their experiences during the press tour. During rehearsals, they would tentatively try new ideas, and Stephen and I were often encouraging them to explore further. They treated the material with deep respect and were excited to immerse themselves in their characters, discovering the best ways to express the music. For us, this exploration was a significant aspect of the process. Given that we had over two decades of history with “Wicked,” we were keen to honor our original creation while simultaneously reimagining it for a fresh audience. This challenge was exhilarating, and we were thrilled to see how everyone on the music team, from orchestrators to actors, wanted to push boundaries and have fun with the material.

Were there other songs, aside from “I’m Not That Girl,” where adjustments were made due to the cast members and their vocal styles?

Schwartz: There were definitely other adjustments, but they weren’t necessarily made for that reason. For example, “Dancing Through Life” underwent changes due to the choreography that Chris Scott wanted to incorporate, allowing us to explore a different rhythmic approach with more instruments at our disposal. While John Bailey also contributed vocally to the film, those changes were not specifically tailored to him; they were simply based on the resources we had available.

Oremus: I should also remind you about the extended ending of “Popular”…

Schwartz: Yes, the extended ending of “Popular” was initially met with some resistance from Ariana, as she was concerned it might seem more about her than about Glinda. However, once I explained that if I had thought of this idea earlier, I would have included it in the original stage version, she embraced it. Both Ariana and Cynthia were deeply committed to ensuring that every decision was focused on character and storytelling rather than on their identities as performers outside of the narrative.

What exactly was the change in “Popular” that Ariana was apprehensive about?

Schwartz: There’s a sort of coda, an expansion of what you might call the “la-las” at the end, which didn’t exist in the stage production but felt right for this adaptation.

Oremus: It almost didn’t make it in. Remember, Jon and Chris were inclined to stick with the original ending. However, we kept pushing for it…

Schwartz: The music team was adamant that we needed to include it.

Oremus: Everyone began contributing creatively, discovering an exciting way to present it.

Schwartz: Exactly. Stephen Oremus characterized our approach well when he mentioned that everyone came to this project with a deep respect for the original material and the fans. We were mindful of the existing “Wicked” soundtrack and the original production. Our goal was to honor what we had created while exploring new musical possibilities, utilizing the additional resources and tools we now had at our disposal.

Wasn’t the Broadway production scored with a 23-piece orchestra?

Schwartz: That’s correct, yes.

Nobody who attended the show or listened to the original cast album thought, “Oh, this doesn’t sound full.” But now, with virtually limitless orchestration options, did you feel like, “Finally, we can realize our dream of a fuller version”? Or was it more a case of, “No, we achieved the scope we intended on Broadway…”

Schwartz: I think the latter is more accurate. While we were fortunate to have a relatively large orchestra during the original run, that was due to negotiations with the musicians’ union.

Oremus: We were grandfathered in. The musicians had actually been reduced, but we managed to secure five additional musicians.

Schwartz: As part of our negotiations, we were allowed to have a larger orchestra than is typical for Broadway shows today. However, we were very proud of our original orchestra and orchestration. When we recorded the cast album, we did enhance the string section a bit, which is a common practice for Broadway cast recordings. But we never felt a lack of resources at the time. The opportunity to expand sonically and musically for the film was indeed thrilling.

Oremus: We mustn’t forget the joy of building this score for the screen. We were constructing it to fit the visual edits. Prior to production, we recorded everything to MIDI demos that Greg Wells and I put together to create a grand and expansive feel, ensuring the performers weren’t just singing along to a piano track during the film but felt fully supported. Then in post-production, we had the chance to make everything feel real based on the footage we shot.

Schwartz: Stephen aptly reminds me that the orchestration was deeply influenced by what we were seeing on screen. Early on, I made a mistake—due to my limited experience in adapting stage musicals for the screen—while working on “The Wizard and I,” one of the first songs we orchestrated. We developed a version we liked but didn’t consider how it would fit with the visuals. Upon reviewing it against the footage, we realized it didn’t align at all. We then established a rule to always create with the visuals in mind, ensuring that our audio complements what viewers see onscreen.

Can you describe how it felt to work more closely in enhancing what was on screen?

Schwartz: Sometimes, what worked well as a recording didn’t fully support the visuals. After reworking it, it still made sense as a recording, but it became something that accompanied what was happening on screen. Our goal was to ensure that the music enhanced the visuals, including where the crescendos occurred, the pacing, and even the moments of silence—all supported by the orchestration.

You mentioned having 87 musicians in the orchestra. Is that the accurate number?

Oremus: I need to count. It was around 85, I believe, with the percussion and saxophones that we added. Plus, if you count Greg Wells, he adds to that number.

Schwartz: That’s true. When you include him, it could exceed 100 musicians.

Oremus: Greg handled the entire rhythm section. Many of us played keyboards—Dominick Amendum, myself, Greg—we all contributed in various ways, but Greg primarily managed the guitars, bass guitar, and drums throughout the film.

Schwartz: There are quite a few guitar tracks on some of the songs. Greg is essentially a one-man band. Initially, he was a talented pianist, which is how I first met him. Now, he’s also an excellent guitarist, bassist, and drummer, capable of creating the rhythm tracks independently. Given that some songs have a more pop-oriented feel, the process involved collaboration. In certain cases, Jeff took the lead on orchestration, and we would suggest, “We’re really missing a guitar vibe here. Could you add that in?” In many instances, as Stephen described, we began with a rhythm track and added layers, reminiscent of the “sweetening” technique I learned back in the ‘70s as a record producer.

Speaking of Greg Wells, he relayed something you mentioned during the soundtrack recording: that some of those ominous chords in “No One Mourns the Wicked” elicited comments about their intensity. You reportedly responded, “Well, it is a horror film.”

Schwartz: Absolutely, there are elements reminiscent of horror films. One of the aspects I admire about Jon Chu as a director is his ability to deliver a film that can shift between genres seamlessly—whether it needs to be a suspenseful horror scene, an action-packed moment, a romantic comedy, or a deeply personal narrative. His versatility allows him to navigate different cinematic styles within a single film, maintaining coherence throughout. For example, the attempted balloon escape towards the film’s conclusion, which is unique to this adaptation, definitely feels like an action sequence. The flying monkeys, too, resemble characters from a horror film. I appreciate how these varied cinematic genres come together to form a cohesive experience, and that’s a testament to Jon Chu’s talent, I believe.

Many fans who cherished