Skip to main content

Well, hyperbole isn’t the worst crime.

The Greatest Showman
(2017)

(SPOILERS) I can see why The Greatest Showman was such a big hit, but largely, I still have to side with the critical drubbing it received. As a patchwork of infectiously catchy songs (all with the same effusive crescendos to get you properly emotionally uplifted) it has a certain appeal, in an extended pop-promo sense. As a movie, it’s barely coherent.

It’s one that largely dispenses with characterisation, assuming audiences will get the gist of the fundamentals, knowing that all you really need is an intermittent belter to fill in the fine detail. And I guess director Michael Gracey and screenwriters Jenny Bicks and Bill Condon (the latter really ought to know better, but then the last two Twilights and live-action Beauty and the Beast would probably have something to say about that) were right, as it’s probably the most impressive example of a sleeper success of the last few years, written off on opening but subsequently proving that positive word of mouth and cynicism-free allegiance can still turn a leaky ship around.

To me though, much of what’s here is only palatable as borderline parody, right from the opening flashback of young PT Barnum launching into A Million Dreams with his childhood sweetheart, then reprising it as big Barnum Hugh Jackman, now wed with Michelle Williams’ Charity. This sets the stage for what follows, the briefest of sketches considered sufficient to tell us what’s going on, favoured over imparting the characters with any actual emotional life. Barnum’s freaks get zero development, aside from Zendaya, who isn’t actually a freak. Keala Settle’s bearded lady delivers This Is Me (it should have taken the Best Song Oscar, no argument there), but there’s nothing else to her, while Sam Humphrey’s General Tom Thumb is only distinguished by being an obnoxious little shit. As a result, they’re only really informed by Barnum being ashamed of his discoveries when he’s finally invited into high society.

Which kind of fits, as the picture’s most interesting feature is that it has the audacity to pass off Barnum’s exploitation as aspiration, progressiveness and inclusivity. I’m not talking the real Barnum here (the picture’s such an obvious fantasy, I’m genuinely surprised anyone would have a serious beef with it on that score), merely the nuts and bolts of putting societal rejects and fringe dwellers on display for the leering, voyeuristic inspection of others and testifying to it creating a positive familial atmosphere among them. I mean, that’s what the songs tell us, so it must be so, despite their having abuse hurled their way by an angry mob each night and the filmmakers being as remiss as Barnum by omitting to characterise the freaks in any way other than sum-them-up-in-a-stage-name freakishness.

Gracey doesn’t seem to know what the hell he’s doing when he isn’t choreographing a number, such that the picture’s cutting can become bewilderingly distracting during a simple conversation (witness Barnum meeting Zac Effron’s Carlyle for a drink before they break into song). The song-and-dance routines themselves are fizzy and eye catching, but all operate according to the same formulaic uplift, designed to leave the audience on a serotonin high. Barnum has an arc of sorts; hoisted by his own petard and distracted by the genuine talent of opera singer Jenny Lind (Rebecca Ferguson), he needs bringing back down to earth, to his family and freaks, but it’s all pretty perfunctory in execution.

I mean, I’d much rather watch something like this, where there’s evidently genuine passion involved, than the dead-eyed, reheated stage antics of the likes of a Chicago, but you still need to come up with a something that works coherently as a movie, when all is said and done. This most resembles the kind of ADD, frenetic, fractured fare Baz Lurhmann routinely comes up with, although thankfully Greatest Showman isn’t quite as horrifically off-putting as his Moulin Rouge. Still, the movie sufficiently resembles the results of spending a coke-fuelled, weekend bender in the editing suite (no less than five editors are credited, including two Oscar winners, suggesting a serious salvage job was called for – certainly, James Mangold was sequestered to oversee post-production) that one can call it an achievement, but that isn’t necessarily a compliment.

Occasionally, the picture actually threatens to become involving. The Zendaya-Effron romance works surprisingly well, particularly as Effron does his best to preen his way through the picture (he’s particularly laughable when puffed up in his Barnum outfit at the end, literally handed the baton to take over compere duties). Ferguson too, albeit not performing with her own pipes, offers a frisson Williams has no chance to compete with, relegated to wifey on the fringes. And Frederic Lehne brings the necessary loathsome credentials as Barnum’s father-in-law.

What The Greatest Showman does highlight is how difficult it is to get the musical formula right, such that La La Land’s modestly satisfying achievement is a relatively rare one. The recent Mary Poppins Returns could have done with some of Showman’s restless energy – and crucially, rousing tunes – while Gracey could have done with a touch of her restraint. Between them, there’s probably an accomplished musical. This also feels like the natural outcome of two decades of music-orientated reality shows, such that one can cut straight to the edited highlights without worrying about the messy, involved business of actually telling a story or coming up with motivation and character. I suspect the restrained response to Poppins and contrastingly effusive one to this means there’s more of the latter style to come. Certainly, Greatest Showman 2 has the greenlight, whereas it might be another couple of decades before there’s a Poppins 3.


Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

So you want me to be half-monk, half-hitman.

Casino Royale (2006)
(SPOILERS) Despite the doubts and trepidation from devotees (too blonde, uncouth etc.) that greeted Daniel Craig’s casting as Bond, and the highly cynical and low-inspiration route taken by Eon in looking to Jason Bourne's example to reboot a series that had reached a nadir with Die Another Day, Casino Royale ends up getting an enormous amount right. If anything, its failure is that it doesn’t push far enough, so successful is it in disarming itself of the overblown set pieces and perfunctory plotting that characterise the series (even at its best), elements that would resurge with unabated gusto in subsequent Craig excursions.

For the majority of its first two hours, Casino Royale is top-flight entertainment, with returning director Martin Campbell managing to exceed his excellent work reformatting Bond for the ‘90s. That the weakest sequence (still good, mind) prior to the finale is a traditional “big” (but not too big) action set piece involving an attempt to…

I just hope my death makes more cents than my life.

Joker (2019)
(SPOILERS) So the murder sprees didn’t happen, and a thousand puff pieces desperate to fan the flames of such events and then told-ya-so have fallen flat on their faces. The biggest takeaway from Joker is not that the movie is an event, when once that seemed plausible but not a given, but that any mainstream press perspective on the picture appears unable to divorce its quality from its alleged or actual politics. Joker may be zeitgeisty, but isn’t another Taxi Driver in terms of cultural import, in the sense that Taxi Driver didn’t have a Taxi Driver in mind when Paul Schrader wrote it. It is, if you like, faux-incendiary, and can only ever play out on that level. It might be more accurately described as a grubbier, grimier (but still polished and glossy) The Talented Ripley, the tale of developing psychopathy, only tailored for a cinemagoing audience with few options left outside of comic book fare.

Remember, you're fighting for this woman's honour – which is probably more than she ever did.

Duck Soup (1933)
(SPOILERS) Not for nothing is Duck Soup acclaimed as one of the greatest comedies ever, and while you’d never hold it against Marx Brothers movies for having little in the way of coherent plotting in – indeed, it’s pretty much essential to their approach – the presence of actual thematic content this time helps sharpen the edges of both their slapstick and their satire.

Afraid, me? A man who’s licked his weight in wild caterpillars? You bet I’m afraid.

Monkey Business (1931)
(SPOILERS) The Marx Brothers’ first feature possessed of a wholly original screenplay, Monkey Business is almost brazenly dismissive towards notions of coherence, just as long as it loosely supports their trademark antics. And it does so in spades, depositing them as stowaways bound for America who fall in with a couple of mutually antagonistic racketeers/ gangsters while attempting to avoid being cast in irons. There’s no Margaret Dumont this time out, but Groucho is more than matched by flirtation-interest Thelma Todd.

You killed my sandwich!

Birds of Prey (and the Fanatabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn) (2020)
(SPOILERS) One has to wonder at Bird of Prey’s 79% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes. I mean, such things are to be taken with a pinch of salt at the best of times, but it would be easy, given the disparity between such evident approval and the actually quality of the movie, to suspect insincere motives on the part of critics, that they’re actually responding to its nominally progressive credentials – female protagonists in a superhero flick! – rather than its content. Which I’m quite sure couldn’t possibly be the case. Birds of Prey (and the Fanatabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn) isn’t very good. The trailers did not lie, even if the positive reviews might have misled you into thinking they were misleading.

On account of you, I nearly heard the opera.

A Night at the Opera (1935)
(SPOILERS) The Marx Brothers head over to MGM, minus one Zeppo, and despite their variably citing A Night at the Opera as their best film, you can see – well, perhaps not instantly, but by about the half-hour mark – that something was undoubtedly lost along the way. It isn’t that there’s an absence of very funny material – there’s a strong contender for their best scene in the mix – but that there’s a lot else too. Added to which, the best of the very funny material can be found during the first half of the picture.

You’re a disgrace to the family name of Wagstaff, if such a thing is possible.

Horse Feathers (1932)
(SPOILERS) After a scenario that seemed feasible in Monkey Business – the brothers as stowaways – Horse Feathers opts for a massive stretch. Somehow, Groucho (Professor Quincy Adams Wagstaff) has been appointed as the president of Huxley University, proceeding to offer the trustees and assembled throng a few suggestions on how he’ll run things (by way of anarchistic creed “Whatever it is, I’m against it”). There’s a reasonably coherent mission statement in this one, however, at least until inevitably it devolves into gleeful incoherence.

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989)
(SPOILERS) There’s Jaws, there’s Star Wars, and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy, to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “mainly boring”.

Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the system when Burton did it (even…

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…