Re: Barnum's story arc

doctorlit reviews The Greatest Showman (spoilers) by doctorlit on 2018-01-19 12:47:00 UTC Reply

My oldest sister saw this, and then poked Mom into watching it with her, since she wanted to see it again. Then Mom poked me into watching it, because she wanted to see it again. This paragraph has been a spoiler block.

I'm going to be looking at this movie as a movie, and not as a representation of the historical events it's portraying. I don't know much about P.T. Barnum offhand, and I don't want to read up too much about the movie to avoid biasing my initial reaction. That kind of leaves me with two different ways to look at this movie: from the perspective of Barnum's character, and the aspect of inclusivity and respect for people who are different, which is a very strong theme running in the background throughout the whole film.

I think, as a portrayal of Barnum (or whatever level of flanderization of the real Barnum we're being presented with), it does incredibly well. It shows us his early upbringing in poverty, the treatment he receives from people in the upper classes, and his desire to do something exciting and entertaining, rather than having a dull, typical job. As his museum gains in popularity as it slowly develops closer to the modern concept of a circus, we see his ambition begin to ramp up, and the risks he's willing to take to find even more success, and the strain that begins to put on his family relationship. All along, his imagination and desire to entertain is constantly on display.

It's the other plot thread/theme that doesn't work so well for me. Don't get me wrong, the movie tries really hard, certainly more than most other Hollywood fair. I don't know whether all the actors portraying the sideshow performers actually exhibit the traits of the people they represent from Barnum's real life—with the exception of the small person who played Tom Thumb, all the other physical traits could have been done with makeup or prop effects. But the simple fact that this movie gives screen time to a woman with facial hair, an overweight man (in a non-punchline role), etc. puts it miles above the usual Hollywood method of using generally average-shaped people. A lot of the songs also have incredibly powerful lyrics about facing society with your true self and not feeling shame for being different. The one thing that weakens this part of the movie is, well, the other part. This is very clearly Barnum's story, and the sideshow characters always get the back seat behind his narrative. Actually, it's not only Barnum; a lot of focus is on his business partner and the trapeze artists he falls in love with. To be fair, that last pair form an interracial couple in the nineteen twenties, so it fits in with the themes of class-ism and acceptance. But that doesn't change the fact that the emotional focus of the movie is very heavily on three conventionally attractive characters.

The one failure that really ruins this movie for me is this: Barnum is at some fancy party, and when his sideshow employees try to enter, he bars them, very clearly because he doesn't want to be seen with them by the high society folks. I was shocked at this point, because it was pretty bold of the movie to have its protagonist be so overtly terrible. I was looking forward to the scene when they would confront him for this and call him on it . . . and I waited . . . and at some point, I got distracted by the flow of the movie, and only realized after I left the theater that the scene I had been waiting for didn't exist. There are no consequences to Barnum for the way he treated his employees in that scene. The next time they have a scene with Barnum, they're supporting him in a moment of doubt about the future of his circus. Leaving out repercussions that way is the kind of mistake I would expect from a bad fanfiction, not from a movie shown in theaters.

I feel like a lot of the movie suffers from the problem of people not talking about problems enough. It felt very rushed altogether. Probably just personal preference as a book nerd who likes to stew over events between chapters, but I really could have done with more scenes of dialogue with characters discussing their feelings and motivations. One subject in particular that suffered for this was the amount of phony effects the circus used. The movie doesn't shy from this at all, but there's no real examination of it either. Barnum gets called on it a few times, but always dismisses the criticism with a couple of sharp lines about people enjoying his show anyway.

Visually, the movie does an excellent job in costumes and sets of portraying 1920s New York. The one thing that detracts from that is the music. The music is good, don't get me wrong, I'll probably be listening to it on YouTube for the next couple of weeks. But it feels very modern and pop-ish, and it really jarred me out of the time period all the way through. Even a more timeless Broadway style of music would have worked fine, I think, but it sounded more like current radio music. But two things that were amazing about the songs were the choreography and the percussion. The choreography frequently went beyond just dancing, and they used very creative and unique motions to match the flow of the music. The percussion for some songs was especially fun, as they used physical objects or simply people's stamping feet as the backing to the orchestra.

Oh, also, I'm pretty sure all the animals were CGI, but I didn't mind that so much in this film, since they're often integrated into the song numbers, and all the flashing lights and humans jumping around erratically would have spooked animals pretty badly. This movie gets a pass for that, although one scene at the end where Barnum rides a (CGI) elephant through snowy New York streets in winter and left it outside unattended while he watched his daughter do ballet was a little too ridiculous for me.

I know this was a pretty negative review, but honestly, I think this movie is worth seeing once, if it sounds interesting to you. It didn't quite get to where I was wanting it to go, but it tried awfully hard, and the musical numbers are quite good.

Have a spoiler block.
This is the greatest spoiler. This is the greatest spoiler. This is the greatest spoiler. This is the greatest spoiler. This is the greatest spoiler. This is the greatest spoiler.

—doctorlit, the Greatest Lowman

Delta Juliette reviews! (also spoilers) by Delta Juliette, circus nerd extraordinaire on 2018-01-20 07:05:00 UTC Reply

So! First off, to prevent people stumbling across spoilers: shout-out to the aerialists just sorta hanging out on hoops in full arabesque in the background of the circus shots. That pose is hella painful and they were rocking it. This has been a spoiler block.

Elephant in the room: That was almost entirely unlike P.T. Barnum's actual life. He started poor, made a fortune primarily in showbiz, and had a slip into financial trouble when a business didn't turn out. And that's it- everything else in the film is made from whole cloth. His tour with Jenny Lind was wildly successful, his circus never broke up or burned down, the one big financial problem he had was when he tried to get into major real estate. (Although it was then his circus people, many of whom had gone on to their own acts, who got him back on his feet. But it wasn't a moment of desperation. And his home burned down during the process, not his circus.)

The music was incredible. It was perfect- because it was, very specifically, circus music. Too much story to be pop or modern dance, too much beat to be theater, and I've got half a routine choreographed for each of those songs already. It's very cirque nouveau, specifically- the modern circus movement that's more about telling stories than just spectacle. All of it makes me want to get back into the air.

And the choreography... I'm still a bit envious. That bit in the bar, particularly- that was such a circus piece, a discussion and decisions and dance, and the choreography was glorious and small and fast. You couldn't perform that piece for an audience of more than ten, because nobody else could be close enough to see all the details that make it sparkle. The big stuff was equally good- both the choreography and the performance.

So, now drifting into the stuff that wasn't so good.

You're right, the whole thing felt rushed. They banged around from scene to scene, it really feels like they could have let all of it soak in more.

I'm not sure I see that one failing as a movie-ruiner- it's the arc of Barnum's story. He keeps chasing bigger and bigger things, and never stops to think about what he has- and that piled-up karma leads to his ruin. Jenny bails on him, destroying his fortune, the circus burns, Charity leaves- all of that crashes down on him in the fourth act. (And it's an extra twist of the knife to have Jenny singing "all the stars in the sky, and it's never enough...") That's the consequences of his selfishness, his lack of awareness. And that moment where the people come back together? That's not just "a moment of doubt," it's full-on ruin. His money is gone, his credit is shot, his properties are ruins or foreclosed, by the way he'd been seeing the world, he had nothing- except for the people he'd given a family.

Some of the editing also really didn't work for me. That moment at the end, where Barnum suddenly runs out of the bar, jumps on a train? I had no idea what he was doing. Was he running away? Were they jumping ahead to when the Barnum and Bailey circus traveled by train? Was it something else entirely?

Final shoutout- Zendaya worked hard to play an aerialist, and it showed. She... well, she wasn't doing anything terribly difficult? But she had really good form, and she sold it so well. And for someone who only had months to learn, she must have worked really hard.

Re: Barnum's story arc by doctorlit on 2018-01-20 12:15:00 UTC Reply

This is the greatest spoiler. This is the greatest spoiler. This is the greatest spoiler. This is the greatest spoiler. This is the greatest spoiler. This is the greatest spoiler.

His money is gone, his credit is shot, his properties are ruins or foreclosed, by the way he'd been seeing the world, he had nothing- except for the people he'd given a family.

My problem with that is, that I don't feel Barnum is entitled to that family's support any more. He turned his back on the performers, and they never confronted him over that. Then they're suddenly there to bolster him in his moment of disaster? Why? I mean, I guess you could simply argue that the performer characters are better people than character!Barnum, but . . . from my standpoint as a viewer, it still feels like a very arbitrary and artificial moment.

—doctorlit

Oh, yeah, that's definitely a thing. by Delta Juliette on 2018-01-20 15:59:00 UTC Reply

That was stiff and a bit- eh? I mean, I'd argue that they were better people (circus folk tend to be), but it didn't come across well. And for the big finale number, that was a flop.