#tgs hate

[schpiedehl]

To quote my 13 year old sister: “so Pasek and Paul are basically the Chainsmokers of the musical theater world”

[computationalcalculator]

I didn't much care for "non-black guy makes a musical about a real life historical slaveowner starring himself as that historical person that erases everything about that person owning slaves but it's ok because it's not actually history it's a reimagining of history" 1.0 in 2015 and I especially don't care for the 2.0 version in 2017 now that we've upgraded to "the same thing but an actual white dude made it this time and also there's capitalism"

[schpiedehl]

A Measured Response in Regards to The Greatest Showman

I was asked if the reason I disliked TGS was because of its fictionalized portrayal of Barnum. Here is my response, which I am saving here for posterity due to the ephemeral nature of Facebook comments.  ----- Part of it is that. That's not all of it though. It is kinda tone deaf as fuck to adapt the story of a slave-owning exploitative capitalist and cast him as something of a woke hero of the downtrodden, but I also have just general issues with the movie in general from a plot, music, framing, and characterization standpoint. I don't think I'll copy my whole rants right this second but it can basically be boiled down to: The music felt generic and uninspired. This is more personal, I suppose, but I prefer music in musicals to have some bearing on or reference the plot. Approximately 1.5 songs in TGS do this. It feels like a jukebox musical of contemporary top 40s, despite the fact it is a 100% original score. The songs all sound the same and not only that, they all sound the same of P&P's other work, complete with the same chord structures, similar instrumentation, and even similar themes. For instance, This Is Me bears a striking resemblance to You Will Be Found, musically. It feels like P&P have forgotten how to write original music and everything here sounds like it was tailored for radio play first and to serve a narrative purpose a distant second. An addendum to that - Jenny Lind's opera song was egregious. It doesn't even make sense that they included her, given what they did with the character, but the entire scene killed my suspension of disbelief. I have minor quibbles with things like pacing, but ultimatelty I am most critical of the plot. There is no plot and there are no real dimensional characters. If you remove all the problematic elements of the musical you're still left with little to no story and very little in the way of characters. (Which makes the decision to cast Barnum in such a positive light even more bizarre because it really does not serve any narrative purpose and could have been literally anyone else). Barnum, for instance, is not an active agent in his own story. Things happen to him but we are never actually shown how or why. There are literally no stakes at any point in this film. He loses his job but don't worry he can commit consequence-free fraud to open his museum. When he can't sell tickets, his daughter offers him a gift-wrapped solution, and he is able to exploit people for money with extremely little shown effort on his part. When he can't get the snooty rich to appreciate him, he manages to make a shiny new Zac Efron friend who can apropos of nothing introduce him to Queen Victoria. He gets Jenny Lind to come to America without so much as a proper conversation. His wife leaves him for cheating and losing all their money, but he gets her back (bizarrely by train even though she's at her parents' house which it was previously established is right down the road; also she is framed as hysterical and irrational for not listening to him but that's another can of worms). When the museum burns down, Zac Efron and the Manic Pixie Dream Freaks bale him out no questions asked. He never had any real stakes, is never shown actually, the """plot""" acts on him, rather than him being the propelling agent of the plot. He has no real character traits to speak of, either. And neither do any of the other characters, for that matter, Most of the Freak characters can be boiled down to one trait if that. Hell, most of them don't even get names. And for some, it's not even explained why they even merit a place in a Freak Show. Is it because they're black....? Asian? Bald? It took me the second time seeing the movie before I realized that the two Asian men who look nothing like who stood kinda near each other were supposed to be Chang and Eng Bunker. The only Freaks given any real "spotlight" were Ann, Lettie, and Charles. And all of their subplots are dropped without real resolution. Charles gets all of a 6 lines of dialogue and we know that he is... cocky but insecure about being a little person, that's it. Lettie gets a bit more, but we know that she's simultaneously insecure about her beard and also empowered by it (though we are never given insight into where this empowerment came from, it is only relevant for This Is Me and there is no narrative build up to it). Ann is the only of the Freaks that gets a proper subplot (albeit one that is ultimately also dropped in favor of Barnum's nonsense), and is also a Freak because.... she's a beautiful black woman? Certainly, being a trapeze artist is a fairly specialized and unusual skill but not exactly "Freakish." We know that the narrative frames her as cold and uncaring when she rebuffs Zac Efron's advances for extremely logical reasons and that the narrative drops the Romeo and Juliet angle entirely - despite the fact the film takes place in pre-Civil War America. Hell, racism is never addressed by name in the narrative, despite that being what they are clearly angling at addressing. seriously, the issue of race and class divide is brought up with Ann's subplot and is subsequently dropped with little to no meaningful examination, and then dwarfed by Barnum's "plot." The Freaks in general function more like Manic Pixie Dream Girls, they have some conflict in regards to Barnum's treatment of them but ultimately exist to forgive, affirm, and support him while exhibiting little to no character of their own. It's extremely disquieting that Barnum's story is framed as equal to -- and larger than -- the strife faced by the Freaks. When the Museum burns down, for instance, the Freaks lose their home, but it is framed as Barnum's tragedy, and the Freaks sing to him to cheer him up and Zac Efron will even front him the money to rebuild, no questions asked. Barnum's minor and easily overcome setbacks are framed by the narrative as having equal or more weight than the systemic oppression of the people he employs/exploits. And that brings us back around to irl Barnum. Irl Barnum, an exploitative capitalist who literally owned several people who performed in his Freakshow, is the hero of this story. He's a white savior in a story that doesn't even make sense to have a white savior character -- A story which is ultimately a glitzy by the numbers rags to riches showbiz story which could have literally been about anyone else. And would have been more interesting if it had been about literally anyone else. The irl Charles, for instance, who had fascinating rags to riches story of his own. Or Lettie. Or Ann. This movie could have been a story about a marginalized person clawing their way up and finding a unique place in a world and culture which systemically oppresses them, against the backdrop of racism and classism hinted at but never substantiated in the film, but instead holds up and celebrates their oppressor. And worst of all -- it doesn't even have anything interesting to say about Barnum. They changed his story and personality so much that it literally could have been anyone else. A good plot can cover a multitude of sins, good music can spackle over holes in the plot, but this film, in my opinion, has neither a good plot nor good music and as such, exists only as a curiously and problematically positive portrayal of a man who ought to be the villain of this story.

[schpiedehl]

On The Greatest Showman...

Oh boy I HATED the Greatest Showman. I hated the music, I hated the premise, I hated what passes a plot. I went in expecting it to be Problematic™️ but I really did not expect it to be as bad as it was. Lemme preface this real quick: I do not need my movies to be unproblematic to enjoy them. A good plot can cover a multitude of sins, as can good music in a musical. And great execution can plaster over plot holes and technical issues. The problem with TGS is that it does not have a good enough plot to merit the extreme historical revisionism, and its music is bland and uninspired, meaning that I cannot ignore the plot in favor of catchy, well-written music. Perhaps worst of all, it has NOTHING INTERESTING TO SAY. If you are going to be blatantly historically inaccurate to the point of lionizing an oppressive capitalist who exploited minorities and people with physical and mental disabilities for personal profit, you might as well have something interesting or new to say on the subject. TGS does not, instead sticking to a formulaic as fuck show biz rags to riches narrative, complete with Manic Pixie Dream Freaks to affirm the ill-thought our hero’s journey.

TGS is a musical so I’ll tackle the music first. This isn’t gonna Garner me much favor, and this isn’t a popular opinion I understand, but Pasek and Paul are hacks. They can write approximately 3 songs. Don’t believe me? Play “This is Me” and “You Will Be Found” at the same time. They are almost beat for beat the same song, complete with some of the same overarching themes. My problems with the music in TGS at numerous and as follows: 1 All the music sounds e x a c t l y the same. If you played the album straight through you’d think is was just one long song. Similar lyrics, similar instrumentation, same chords, and according to My Friend With A Music Degree, same chord progression. It’s one thing to have the same lyrical motifs and holy hell Did they and another thing to copy and paste your instrumentation. Which they absolutely did.

2. The songs were REPETITIVE AS FUCK 3 choruses for every verse, the same lines repeated over and over and over. They were bombastic, pretentious lines too. It’s clear the music wants to be more than it is. It sounds like the worst of Mumford & Sons mashed up writing the worst of P!nk. There were times it reminded me of that damn Imagine Dragons song where the chorus is just “Thunder” repeated over and over.

3. The scene where jenny lend, an opera singer, was singing with a 30 piece orchestra for a bunch of rich fucks and she sung a repetitive Taylor Swift sounding pop song about wanting the whole world. Standing Ovation. How hard would it have been to give her a goddamn actual operatic song?

4. I’m fine with contemporary music in a period piece but they didn’t even Fucking try to tie it in to the period at all. It seemed less like a stylistic choice vis a vis Hamilton and more like they literally didn’t know how to. It’s a period with rich musical tradition, with a multicultural cast, and yet, we get the same contemporary bombastic stadium pop shit over and over. I like pop music fine but there’s a place for it.

6. The chords and chord progressions, as per Music Friend and other more qualified people are literally IDENTICAL to DEH. The sad song in the middle has exactly the same instrumentation as Only Us from DEH.

7. Autotune. Get that out of my musicals, dammit.

8. Like DEH, the music can all exist completely independent of the musical. It doesn’t feel like musical theater music but the audience is clearly musical theater fans. I like my music to progress or at least reference the plot. What’s the point of making it a musical otherwise? You could just go the Glee route or make a contemporary music soundtrack otherwise. Ugh.

9. The one ra ra fight the power song was undercut by one, the actual plot, and two, the repetitive P!nk-esque lyrics and 3, bizarre Lady Gaga synchronized dancing.

10. The choreo in general was just kinda meh. Some of it was great, a lot of it was like a lady Gaga music video. Great for pop music, dumb for a musical.

The plot was abhorrent. Here’s why:

1. There is no real plot and there are no stakes. He faces hardship that never feels dire and is always solved easily and without much thought or work or triumph. Loses his job but commits fraud CONSEQUENCE FREE to get the museum. No one goes to his museum but that’s fine, he can just /exploit/ people (specially those with physical deformities and… ethnic minorities? Unclear why they would be considered “freak show” material and it is never explained) to make a penny. Can’t get rich folk to take him serious, that’s fine he’s got a new friend who can introduce him to the QUEEN OF ENGLAND. wife leaves him, takes him back with basically no effort on his part (and shes framed as being the irrational one — what with his infidelity being fake and her not even letting him explain himself before storming out in hysterics). Museum burns down, his freak show performers and business partner bail him out no questions ask. He never had real stakes. Ever. Which is why,

2. it’s Insulting that his narrative and plight are framed as EQUAL TO (or more important than tbqh) THAT OF THE FREAK SHOW PERFORMERS WHO ARE SHOWN TO HAVE ACTUAL PROBLEMS LIKE PEOPLE ATTACKING THEM IN THE STREETS, LIGHTING THEIR HOMES ON FIRE, AND SYSTEMIC CLASSISM AND RACISM.

2a. Most of the “freaks” go unnamed and unexplained so you just kinda gotta take it that makes what them worthy of being in Barnum’s cabinet of curiosities is that they’re Not White. Unless dreadlocks or being bald as a woman were really that risqué to Victorian sensibilities.

2b. And let’s not forget IRL Barnum started his career by exhibited a slave woman he claimed to be 150 years old. And also routinely showcased black folks as “savages” In cages billed as human apes and/or the missing link.

3. And despite all this, racism is never explicitly addressed despite the fact it is l I t e r a l l y a subplot. I think? Or is Anne not marriage material because she is a trapeze artist? Like seriously, the issue of race and class divide and brought up and than subsequently Dropped by the movie with little to no actual examination and ultimately are completely dwarfed by Barnum’s “problems”

4. Not only is his story parallel to theirs via “””plot””” structure — he’s portrayed as like the woke hero of the downtrodden here to save monitors and the physically deformed from a life of societal exploitation and prejudice… by publicly exploiting them. And he’s the hero I say again.

5. And aside from that 3 minutes of rebellion, they’re pretty ok with it. They’re his Uncle Tom Manic Pixie Dream Freaks here to support his ambitions and love him unconditionally

6. And I could stand some of this historical revisionism if they had something interesting to say about Barnum or the history of Barnum & Baileys or what my have you. Movies don’t have to be about good people to be interesting. Hell I can forgive a Movie framing a shit person as a hero if it has something interesting, new, or original to say. BUT IT DOESNT. It’s literally a by the numbers rags to riches show biz story. It literally does not get more basic than this.

7. SERIOUSLY HOW TONE DEAF DO YOU NEED FO BE TO MAKE THIS MOVIE

Addendum: There are also minor things here and there like just, plot threads that are constantly dropped, etc.

And having seen the movie twice now I will add that Zendaya was fantastic, as was Keala Settle. The acting and singing was great despite the extreme limitations of the material.

I just wanna hammer home that this SHOULD have been a movie about Anne or one of the other “freak” characters finding their place in a world that is fundamentally opposed them and exploited them but was instead yet another film which celebrates an abusive and exploitative mediocre white man.

[schpiedehl]

I mentioned to a friend that This is Me from the greatest showman is nearly identical to You will be found from DEH as a joke… and then played them at the same time. They are the same song. Pasek and Paul, the best song writers of this generation, y’all. 🤦‍♀️