Cynthia Erivo's Social Media Meltdown Over *Wicked* Movie Poster: A Case Study in Celebrity Entitlement

Cynthia Erivo's social media meltdown over a *Wicked* movie poster demonstrates the pitfalls of celebrity entitlement.

### Cynthia Erivo's Wicked Poster Meltdown: A Case Study in Celebrity Social Media Mismanagement
* 🎭 Cynthia Erivo, star of the *Wicked* movie adaptation, ignited a social media controversy by reacting negatively to a fan-edited movie poster.
* 😡 The fan edit partially obscured Erivo's face, mirroring the original stage show poster's design, which was intentionally mysterious and ambiguous.
* 🤔 The original poster cleverly used visual elements like hidden eyes and a smirk to create intrigue and subtly suggest the character's complexity.
* 🎬 In contrast, the film poster showed Erivo with a blank stare, lacking the nuance and mystery of the stage version's design.  
* 🗣️ Erivo's response was a public emotional outburst, criticizing the edit as "erasing" her and expressing hurt feelings.
* 💥 This reaction sparked significant backlash, turning what could have been a minor incident into a major public relations disaster for the film.
* 🤔 Erivo's response is seen as a prime example of "main character syndrome" often exhibited by celebrities who believe their opinions are paramount and react poorly to criticism.
* ⚠️ This incident highlights the importance for celebrities to manage their social media presence and avoid reacting negatively to criticism, as it can severely damage their public image and impact their projects' success.

You know, they say that social media has been one of the worst things to happen to modern culture since the Kardashians were spawned into existence, but I tend to disagree. The truth is that it's actually one of the worst things to

happen to the cult of celebrity, exposing more stupidity, nuclear-level bad takes, and causing more goofy meltdowns than

any other form of media in human history. Case in point: Cynthia Erivo, star of the upcoming live-action adaptation of *Wicked*,

who, for some reason, picked the most bizarre of all hills to die on a couple of days ago, kicked off a social media

firestorm and, as a result, is now in hot competition with Rachel Zegler and Amandla Stenberg to be crowned the most whiny,

entitled, and unlikable actress of 2024. Damn, talk about a strong playing field, now, right? Off the bat, I want to make it

clear that I've got no particularly strong feelings about *Wicked* as a movie project. Believe it or not, I actually

went and saw the stage show in London a few years ago, and I thought it was pretty good. Ha!

Gay, I mean, it's not exactly my usual media diet, but out of all the things that you can be guilted into seeing with

your girlfriend, well, there's worse stuff out there, believe that. And I can't say I was surprised when Universal picked up the film rights,

because, let's be honest, *Wicked* was practically the inspiration for the modern trend of redefining irredeemably

evil female villains into cool, relatable, misunderstood anti-heroes who are usually pushed unwillingly down a

villainous path by a far more evil white guy. Sorry, Disney, but it doesn't matter

how many layers of punky, rebellious, tough-chick makeup you slather onto her; you're never ever going to get me to

identify with a woman who wants to murder puppies so she can turn them into designer handbags. Anyway, I digress, so

Wicked was all teed up and ready to go with its premiere barely a month away, and as far as I could tell, the atmosphere

around the movie seemed to be pretty positive. The trailers were well-received; there were no major controversies around

the production, and none of the cast had said or done anything particularly problematic, unlike other movies we could

name. But that was all about to change. The problems began on October 16th when a Twitter user revealed a fan edit of

the movie poster with star Cynthia Erivo's face partially hidden by the shadows of her witch's hat, just like the original

stage show poster. And as I'm about to demonstrate to you, they had a pretty good reason to do it. The intention was

to recapture the intriguing mix of dark, mysterious danger, knowing sardonic humor, and subtle sensuality of the stage

version. Because, believe it or not, a lot of thought actually went into that poster, and it's really remarkably good at

what it does. The ironic smirk suggests a protagonist who knows things the audience and other characters don't, who

may have sinister intentions in mind, or just views the world around her with the nonchalant amusement of someone who

knows exactly who she is and what she wants to become way before anyone else has figured it out. The bright red lips

create a striking visual contrast with the green skin and suggest the understated sexuality of women's lipstick, evoking images of the dangerous

but alluring femme fatale archetype that's been a staple of fiction for centuries now. Lastly, there's the eyes, which are

hidden, and for very good reasons. So pay attention to this one, 007. The eyes, as they say, are a window to the soul; they

can tell you a great deal about what a person's really feeling, and making direct eye contact with someone is a

show of trust and confidence because you're opening yourself up to them; you're inviting them in and showing them

that you've got nothing to hide. But when you look in a person's eyes and they don't match their facial expression, you

notice it right away because your brain's trying to warn you that they might be trying to deceive you. Ever

heard the old saying, 'the smile that doesn't quite reach the eyes'? Well, there you go. But if you remove the eyes

altogether from an image, it takes away our biggest insight into a person's true motivations and intentions. Now they're

no longer open, trusting, and honest; they're mysterious, closed off, and enigmatic. They could be thinking anything, and you wouldn't really know it

because you can't see them. We don't see her eyes in the poster, so we don't know who

she really is and whether the look in them matches the smile that we see. The overall effect is to create a subtle but

very important sense of ambiguity and mystery. This is a character we're not meant to know yet, who could ultimately

be good or evil, and seems to enjoy the mystery of keeping her true nature hidden from us. She's in on the joke

already because she knows where all this is leading, and she wants you, the audience, to go on that journey with her

and maybe learn a few things that you didn't expect along the way. Like I say, it's very smart, making use of simple and

striking imagery to convey complex ideas and subtly encouraging the audience to find out more. Then there's the movie

poster, which abandons all of that carefully constructed mystery, ambiguity, and compellingly complex mix of infantile

sensuality and dark, moody aloofness, and instead just has the protagonist staring blankly at the audience like she's L

confused by what's being whispered in her ear. The knowing, mysterious smile with the bright red lipstick is gone,

replaced by a straight, nonplussed expression that means nothing at all. The eyes, the facial expression, the use of

light and shadow, and the monotone green face convey nothing of interest to the audience; she's just a non-entity

staring gormlessly straight at the camera with nothing to say and no secrets to reveal. Now, these little facts

of artistic design were probably well known to the person who made the fan edit, which is why the image quickly went

viral amongst Wicked fans and eventually came to the attention of Cynthia herself. Now, this is one of those little forks in

the road that life sometimes presents us with—a choice about how to react to a given situation, and that choice can have

pretty big repercussions further down the road. On the one hand, she could have chosen the safe option and said nothing

at all, because why bother, really? It's just an image that someone made; it doesn't mean anything and it doesn't

affect how people feel about the movie in general. And as an actor, you're not obliged to react to every image or

piece of fanfiction that crops up online; it's not your job. Or she could have chosen the gracious option, which is to

compliment the artist and say something blandly positive, like, 'Wow, this movie has the best fans ever! So creative. Can't

wait to see you all at the theater when it releases next month.' That would have shown magnanimity to her and helped

to promote the movie at the same time. Good job. Or there's the third option, which I like to call the 2016 election

Approach, guess which one she chose. This is the wildest, most offensive thing I have seen, equal to that awful AI of us fighting.

Equal to posing the question, "Is your green...?" None of this is funny; none of it is cute. It degrades me; it degrades us.

The original poster is an illustration; I am a real-life human being who chose to look down the barrel of the camera to

you, the viewer, because without words, we communicate with our eyes. Our poster is an homage, not an imitation. To edit my

face and hide my eyes is to erase me, and that is just deeply hurtful. Really, you know, it's actually kind of

tough to watch public meltdowns like this because they're so completely unnecessary. It would be like starting a

fight with someone because they said they liked the shirt you're wearing. It really should go without saying that the

golden rule with fan criticism is either not to respond to it at all or be polite and professional and just wave it away

without a care in the world. Because the moment you let people know that they're getting to you by clapping back at them

publicly is the same moment that you inspire hundreds of other people to do the same thing. It's a battle you're

simply never going to win because you're outnumbered thousands to one. And in this case, it's even worse because it's a

battle that didn't need to be fought in the first place. The person who made the artwork was just an innocent fan sharing

an idea, and if she'd ignored it, it probably would have fizzled out in a matter of days, and nobody would have

cared. Instead, she decided to declare war on someone who didn't deserve it, and it just made her look petty and insecure.

And consider for a moment the language of her tweet, because this is important: "I am a real-life human being who chose to"

Look right down the barrel of the camera at you, the viewer. To edit my face and hide my eyes is to erase me. Notice how

many times she uses the words "I" and "me." It's like she doesn't quite understand that she's just an actor playing a role

and the movie is about her character and not her as a person. No, this is my movie, my poster, my face, and what I

choose to show you, the lowly viewer, and you will accept what I choose to give you without question. It's a bold

strategy, Cotton. Let's see if it pays off for her. You know, this kind of main character syndrome is by no means unique

to Hollywood actresses, but man, it's tough to think of any group that has embraced it quite as wholeheartedly as

them before. Before Cynthia, there was Amandla Stenberg; before her, there was Rachel Zegler; before her, there was Brie Larson,

and before her, there was Jennifer Lawrence. All of them bought into their own hype just a little too much, allowed

their egos to get just a little too big, started to believe that their work was above reproach, that their opinions

were the only ones that mattered, that they would be the ones to punch back at the critics and silence the haters. For

goodness. Well, where did it get them? Lawrence and Larson haven't headlined a major movie in years. Zegler's more

toxic than a romantic weekend in Chernobyl, and as for Stenberg, well, at least she's got her music career to fall

back on. And it seems like the same thing might well be happening to good old Cynthia right now. The backlash against

her meltdown has been massive, souring what seems to be a mostly positive buildup for a movie, and it's almost

certainly going to encourage more people to troll her on social media. And it's kind of sad because all of this could

have been avoided if she just learned the one skill that every celebrity needs to learn on social media: the subtle art

of shutting up. Anyway, that's all I've got for today. Go away now.

Wicked - How To Tank Your Movie In One Easy Step

The Critical Drinker

Social media exposes celebrity flaws and meltdowns.

Cynthia Erivo's reaction to a *Wicked* movie poster edit exemplifies this.

Erivo's response sparked a social media controversy.

Erivo is compared to other actresses known for negative online interactions.

Analysis of the *Wicked* Movie Poster and Fan Edit

A fan edit of the poster partially hid Erivo's face.

The edit aimed to recapture the original stage show poster's mystery and intrigue.

The original poster's design elements (smirk, red lips, hidden eyes) created a sense of ambiguity.

The movie poster lacked the subtlety and complexity of the fan edit.

The movie poster showed Erivo with a blank expression, lacking the mystery of the original.

Erivo had multiple options for responding to the fan edit.

She could have ignored it, responded positively, or reacted negatively.

Erivo chose a negative response, expressing hurt and offense.

Her reaction was deemed unnecessary and amplified the issue.

Her response made her appear petty and insecure.

Erivo's language emphasized her personal feelings over her role.

She seemed to confuse her personal identity with her character.

Erivo's behavior is compared to other actresses who have had similar negative responses.

Examples include Amandla Stenberg, Rachel Zegler, Brie Larson, and Jennifer Lawrence.

These actresses' negative reactions have impacted their careers.

Erivo's actions could have been avoided by not responding.

Celebrities need to learn to manage social media interactions effectively.