I was loved for a minute, then I was hated. Then I was just a punch line.

I, Tonya (2017)

7.7/10 on IMDb
90% on Rotten Tomatoes

Chloe's thoughts: Signed, sealed and recommended by Chloe

Watch it if you: Want to see a well-acted, nicely directed film surrounding a real life sporting event;
Want to see unreliable narrators portrayed in a clever way;
Want to see some amazing acting by Margot Robbie and Allison Janney;
Are interested in the Nancy Kerrigan attack of 1994
In 1994, Tonya Harding and Nancy Kerrigan were competitive skaters looking to compete in the Winter Olympics in Lillehammer, when an incident happened that shocked people the world over. After a practice session, Nancy Kerrigan was attacked in the leg, forcing her to withdraw. She quickly recovered, and ended up getting through to the 1994 Winter Olympics, taking the silver medal home. For Tonya Harding, though, life was about to be turned upside down. The attacker was identified as someone hired by Harding's ex-husband Jeff Gillooly, as well as Gillooly's friend (also Harding's bodyguard). They and the attackers were sentenced to 18 months in prison, however Gillooly also testified that Harding knew of the attack beforehand. Harding was stripped of her previous titles, fined, and, instead of being jailed, was banned from the United States Figure Skating Association, unable to competitively skate for the rest of her life.

This movie depicts Tonya Harding's life and the events surrounding the incident, based on what was said in interviews on those involved.

At first, I really was not interested in watching this movie. In fact, I got really offended when I saw that Tonya Harding went to the Golden Globes. I thought, "Really, Hollywood, you're letting this sports villain into the Golden Globes?" But after watching this film, I actually feel sorry for Tonya Harding. I don't know what's true, or what's false, and I don't think even the director or the writers know, but it does portray Harding's side of the story, and if it is true, then it's terrible what happened to her.

In all honesty, I didn't know much about this incident. I mean, I wasn't even born when this happened. But I had seen some things on TV or some documentaries where they talk about the biggest controversies of the Olympics, and so I did hear a little about it. When you watch these bits of media, it's very clear how 100% sure the media thinks Harding was a villain in this. They make her out to be some cunning and selfish athlete who will do anything to win. Because of that, I just wasn't interested in watching a movie where they try to glamorise a villain and give her money and attention by making a movie on her.

But, the film is based on interviews of everyone involved. The writers interviewed Harding, Gillooly, Gillooly's friend, Harding's mother, Harding's trainer, and even a media reporter. And a lot of what they say is very contradictory, particularly what Harding and Gillooly say, so instead of trying to figure out how to portray one perspective that will please everyone, they just decided to portray everyone's perspective. The film is the epitome of the unreliable narrator, which I thought was really interesting because even if we don't get to see the truth of the matter, we can really tell what some of these people are like just purely based on the things they said (particularly Gillooly's friend, the bodyguard).

And the film doesn't just focus on the incident with Nancy Kerrigan. I mean, everything is building up to that incident, but we start off when Harding was just a little girl just starting to ice skate. We see how she comes from a trash family, with an abusive mother, then marries the first guy that tells her she's pretty only so she can get away from her mother, and then how he turns out to be abusive too. And how he pretty much ruins her entire career through this incident with Kerrigan.

I don't think the film is really trying to tell you what to think of the story, it's kind of just presenting everything as the real life people described it, but I think it did a good job at painting a very sad picture for Tonya Harding. She basically never got a break, except for when she was the first US woman to land a triple axel, and then soon after this her life turned to shit again. It's actually a really heartbreaking story, if you think about it.

Margot Robbie does an excellent job at portraying this tragic character. She's both headstrong and stubborn, but she's also very frail and vulnerable. She's able to show so much emotion, particularly towards the end, and she's come a long way from her Wolf of Wall Street (2013) days.

Allison Janney has to be the standout of the film though. She plays the abusive mother who never showed any love to Tonya (to the point where, when she was just 6 years old or so, Tonya had to piss herself on the skating rink and continue to skate, since Tonya's mother "wasn't paying for her to pee", she was "paying for her to skate"). She does a fantastic job and I really hope she wins the Oscar for this.

Sebastian Stan is also really great as Gillooly, the at first very likeable and shy guy that makes Harding's life a little bit better, but then becomes the asshole who beats her up, shoots in her general direction, and ruins her ice skating career for life.

The whole cast actually did an excellent job, and I really wasn't expecting to like this movie as much as I did. The attack on Kerrigan seems like such a ridiculous thing to do, especially since she recovered and ended up winning the Silver anyway, so it was interesting to see this film explore sort of why and how it actually happened. The unreliable narrator trope was used well enough, and there's also quite a few fourth wall breaks in here (although I started getting sick of them as the movie progressed). In the end, this film is a really interesting look at Tonya's life, and it allows you to see her perspective of it.

And... you may even come out feeling sorry for her.

Unable to perceive the shape of You, I find You all around me.

The Shape of Water (2017)

7.9/10 on IMDb
92% on Rotten Tomatoes

Chloe's thoughts: Signed, sealed, and recommended by Chloe;
Watch it in cinemas

Watch it if you: Are a fan of Guillermo del Toro;
Want to see a mysterious and dark modern day fairytale;
Are after a change in tone for movies and are looking for something different and unique;
Want to see a visually beautiful and artsy movie
A mute cleaning lady discovers a captive amphibian creature.

I fairly recently watched Pan's Labyrinth (2006) and thought it was a great film by Guillermo del Toro, so I was excited to see this film too. It looked like such a ridiculous and unique concept that I was really excited to see it even just after the first trailer. And del Toro does another great job, and no wonder it's deserving of so many awards.

Firstly, this entire movie has such an amazing, ethereal, fantasy-like feel to it. Right from the start, the beautiful opening shot leaves you mesmerised, since it looks really stunning and really wondrously mysterious and intriguing. It felt like a dark fairytale and I absolutely loved that. It sort of brings out the inner child in you because it creates this feeling of wonder and amazement at what you're seeing.

And this feeling of wonder is carried through the entire film through Sally Hawkins, who is the standout in this film. She is phenomenal in this, playing a mute woman who's able to express herself so perfectly. Her sense of wonder is so innocent and childlike, her sadness is so heartbreaking, and she doesn't even need to speak for you to understand every single thing she's thinking.

One thing, though, is that I really would have liked for them to explore more of the relationship between Eliza (the mute lady) and the amphibian man.

Don't get me wrong, the film is really good, but for the first half of the film, I thought it was going to possibly be my favourite film of the year. I thought, damn this is going to be a must see for everyone!

But as the film progressed, it went a little down hill, particularly towards the end.

I think it really would have helped if they didn't rush through Eliza and the amphibian man getting to know each other, it would have been a better film if we saw their relationship develop slowly, rather than really quickly and all at once like it did in the film.

I also think the film was kind of messy going from character to character. It made sense that the film would want to elaborate on each character so you understood their thought process and their intentions, but sometimes it just got messy.

Don't get me wrong, though, the entire cast was great.

I loved Michael Shannon in particular; he is a fantastic villainous actor. I loved him in Nocturnal Animals, and in this film he really brought it in every scene he was in. He was this evil corporate guy that really took matters into his own hands and didn't see this amphibian man as a living being at all.

The amphibian man himself was stunning. And it wasn't CGI. They actually got Doug Jones to cover himself in prosthetics and make up, and he actually looked so amazing. He looked very ethereal and magical, and it was stunning to watch him move and act along with Sally Hawkins, since they were both voiceless characters. You could really see how characters in this film would be entranced by this amphibious creature, even to the point of calling him 'beautiful'.

The way the film is done also makes you feel like you're actually underwater, mainly because of the dark, slightly green, colour palette throughout the film.

I also loved the score in this movie. Right at the beginning, it was so perfect in taking you out of the real world and placing you within this fantastical world. It was just the right touch of whimsical to make you feel like this was a fantasy, but it could have still happened in this world of ours.

I'm so glad this movie got so many Oscar nominations, and I'll be so happy if Sally Hawkins takes home Best Actress. The whole cast was great though, and the cinematography was really brilliant although I do hope Blade Runner 2049 (2017) gets Best Cinematography. The film does go downhill towards the end but it still is overall a really unique and wonderful film to watch. It's a great story about people who don't fit in to normal society, and about finding your humanity and sense of meaning in life. It's a magical fantasy that sometimes seems ridiculous but it's portrayed in such a real way that you can't help but feel a little wholesome watching it.

A few side notes:

• I loved how the colour palette was really dark and green, but Eliza slowly started introducing red into her wardrobe the happier and more fulfilled she became.
  
• That poem at the end, part of which is the title of this blog post, was so beautiful.
  

Downsizing is about saving yourself.

Downsizing (2017)

5.8/10 on IMDb
50% on Rotten Tomatoes

Chloe's thoughts: Low-energy entertainment;
Proceed at your own risk

Watch it if you: Just want something to put on in the background when you do something else;
Just want a simple comedy that isn't as philosophical as it advertises itself to be
Attempting to cure the world of overpopulation and its resulting climate change effects, scientists discover how to permanently shrink people down to about 5 inches tall, literally reducing people's carbon footprints.

I was so excited for this movie when I saw the first trailer. It looked like a Black Mirror episode, except fun. It looked interesting, they didn't give away much of the plot, and I was really keen. Then I saw the second trailer for it (not deliberately, but it was shown in front of a movie I was watching), and I was like, oh... that's what it's about?! The second trailer kind of spoiled it for me, and I might not have watched this movie so soon if it weren't for a friend wanting to watch it with me.

Because of my low expectations though, I thought the film was not... terrible. But it was still... not very good. There are moments that are entertaining but there is definitely a lot more potential that the film could have reached, particularly because the premise is so interesting. In the end, it's a big disappointment.

Firstly, there will be mild spoilers in this blog. Nothing too spoilery, but I will be discussing the same things that the second trailer reveals. In fairness though, I think that if you want to see this movie, you need to know what you're getting yourself into.

So for the rest of this blog, be warned.

Sigh... so the first trailer shows us Matt Damon and Kristen Wiig as a married couple thinking of downsizing to relieve a lot of the financial pressure they are facing. Their money in the normal 'big' world can be translated to roughly 12 million dollars in the small world, meaning they can live a work-free life of luxury in a huge mansion for the rest of their lives.

Except, in the second trailer we find out that Kristen Wiig gets cold feet and decides to no longer undergo the downsizing procedure, leaving Matt Damon permanently small and without a wife. This is when the movie starts to go downhill, as it becomes a movie of self discovery.

And you know what? Movies of self discovery are fine. Heck, there are a lot of good self-discovery movies out there.

But this movie is so long because it's trying to handle the issue of downsizing, with the issue of climate change, with a whole lot of other social issues, all while going through Matt Damon's mid-life crisis. It's too much, it drags out, the movie seems unfocused and lacks a serious sense of direction. And the story line they choose to go with is the one least relevant to downsizing: it's Matt Damon's self discovery.

So they took this great premise of humanity killing the planet and people opting to downsize, and yet went nowhere with it. There are complications in this movie that fuel the plot that have nothing to do with downsizing, and sometimes you just forget that they're even small to begin with. It just seems like a normal movie about normal-sized people! Especially when there are things like small TVs and small mobile phones all built to scale so it doesn't even seem like they're not living in the real world. This whole film could have happened without them actually downsizing, honestly.

It would have been great if they brought in some large scale issue that actually affected small people because they were small. Something bigger than Matt Damon's self esteem blow needed to happen for this movie to be good.

And they actually tried to do this... they tried to show human nature not really changing even when small, they tried to show the effects of climate change on the human race, they tried to show the effects of corrupt politicians in developing countries, the struggles that refugees face, and they even tried to show us the effects of poverty. There's a lot of social issues happening but these don't really go anywhere. It's weird that I feel like these things were both 1) very preachy, and 2) not expanded on enough. I think it's because it felt like they had too many wild ideas floating around their minds, that they couldn't decide which idea to go with, so they all sort of crammed everything in to this movie. Which is what makes it long and lacking direction and focus.

As to the acting. Matt Damon is fine but he doesn't really stand out in this film. It's actually interesting all his movies in the last two years have been flops, I really hope his next few movies are a lot better.

However, Christoph Waltz is amazing in this. He is a fantastic actor, and I think he mentioned his character was actually written for a young actor, but he convinced the director to cast him, and he does a really great job. He is so funny and really steals the scene a lot of the time.

However, the person who steals the entire show has to go to Hong Chau. It was so nice seeing an Asian woman have so much screen time, and Hong Chau did a really good job at being both really funny, with great comedic timing, as well as being a really good dramatic actor. The only thing is that it was really unfortunate that her character and her actions were really a big caricature of a Vietnamese immigrant. Her accent was insane and very stereotypical, although I am guilty of laughing at the way she said things (and I now want to rewatch Anjelah Johnson's nail salon stand up).

Overall, this movie was disappointing because it has a really great premise but they didn't make full use of it. There is too much social commentary happening, and the main plotline doesn't even need to happen to someone who downsized. It seemed interesting at the start but then it becomes a movie where they forget downsizing even really exists in that world. The acting is decent but it's not enough to make up for the film's flaws.

A few side notes:

• As if they were the first couple to have gotten cold feet? As if there isn't a thing where if one half of a couple gets cold feet, then they wouldn't continue doing the procedure with the other person?
  
• Also why are children getting downsized? They should be at least 21 years old before they get to choose to downsize. You can't just force your already 10 year old kid... what if they never wanted it and they're stuck small forever???

Wouldn't you go to prison to stop this war?

The Post (2017)

7.5/10 on IMDb
88% on Rotten Tomatoes

Chloe's thoughts: It's alright

Watch it if you: Are interested in the event (The Washington Post's publication of government secret reports);
Are a fan of Meryl Streep and/or Tom Hanks
Katharine Graham, the first female American newspaper publisher, faces a difficult decision when it comes to light that four US Presidents were covering up government secrets relating to the Vietnam War. With her company's reputation, her family's legacy, and even her freedom, at stake, she must be the one to ultimately decide how to expose the truth.

The film ends up getting better, but the first half of the film felt like a bit of a drag. It was a bit slow, and I found it a bit confusing when they just rattled off names. It was hard to figure out which name was which character and which character played what role in the big conspiracy. As a result, you had this idea that something bad was happening with some papers, but they don't focus on it too much. It would have been nice for them to not rush through the important facts, which they kind of did in order to focus on the superb acting ability of the cast. So these important tidbits of information felt like they went by too quickly and it was hard to follow.

Sometimes you also feel like the film is trying a bit too hard to get some Oscar awards, with the camera work and such happening in some scenes. But at the same time it doesn't feel as epic as it should be, so I don't think the fancy camerawork, long takes, and difficult dialogue felt worth it. It didn't feel like they pulled it off well.

In saying that, there are some great scenes with Meryl Streep and Tom Hanks. Any film directed by Steven Spielberg that can sell itself just by using two words, "STREEP. HANKS." isn't going to be terrible after all. There is one scene where Streep and Hanks are just having coffee or something, and it's a really long take chock-full of dialogue, and it's great to see them just talking and acting so naturally well with each other.

And the film does get a lot better, but then it kind of goes downhill again right at the very end where they end up publishing the news article. It's all a bit... anticlimactic. And they even end the film with a snippet of the Watergate scandal, which felt really out of place. It made me feel like they were suddenly a Marvel movie teasing a sequel that was going to be much better than the one we just finished watching, particularly because the Watergate scandal was an even bigger deal at the time.

All in all, this film did not hit its potential. It didn't feel at all very out there or dramatic and different. It just felt like a pretty typical Hollywood retelling of a historical event that was famous enough to get seats in the cinema. Even though it's got Spielberg, Streep and Hanks, three of the greatest names in Hollywood, it's only alright.

A few side notes:

• At one stage there was Jared from Silicon Valley, Meth Damon from USS Callister, and then Tom Hanks in between the two of them! I was so in awe during that scene I was hardly paying attention to what they were talking about.

The Outrageous Misfortune of One of the Heirs of J. Paul Getty: Painfully Rich, Indeed.

All the Money in the World (2017)

7.1/10 on IMDb
77% on Rotten Tomatoes

Chloe's thoughts: Signed, sealed, and recommended by Chloe;
It's alright

Watch it if you: Are interested in films based on true events;
Want a tense drama with some great acting, particularly by Christopher Plummer

Inspired by true events, All the Money in the World tells the story of when the richest man in the world refuses to pay the 17 million dollar ransom for his kidnapped grandson.

I think this film wasn't really marketed or hyped a lot, and thus there wasn't much talk about it, particularly in the light of other Oscar-season movies such as The Post (2017) coming out around the same time. Surprisingly, this movie was actually really well done, and it just goes to show that Ridley Scott is far from being done with his directing days.

While I don't think this is a particularly amazing film in terms of rewatchability, it is actually a pretty intense film and really well made.

It's a bit long, with a run time of 2 hours and 15 minutes, but the movie felt pretty tight, and you don't really think of how long it is since it's 2 hours and 15 minutes of tensions. The fact that it is also based on true events makes the story feel so incredulous when watching it.

In fact I think if I didn't know it was a true story, I honestly would have thought, "This movie is so stupid. It's unrealistic, unbelievable, and just stupid."

And while they do dramatise some things that didn't happen, some things that happened in real life were actually worse than in the movie! You walk out of the theatre absolutely hating John Paul Getty Senior. Even though he's in the film for a short amount of time, his sinister presence overshadows the entire film.

Christopher Plummer did such a great job at playing this complete dickhead of a character. His blasé attitude and frugal nature to the kidnapping, ransom demands, and torture of his own grandchild make you really, really, despise him.

And to top it all off, Christopher Plummer wasn't even in this movie originally! It was meant to be Kevin Spacey in old age make up and prosthetics, but over the sexual assault allegations made over Spacey, they had to quickly reshoot his scenes with Christopher Plummer in something like 9 days. And you can't even really tell, because the movie was edited so well and even almost flawlessly.

Christopher Plummer was Ridley Scott's original desired actor, but I heard somewhere that the studio wanted someone more famous to help sell the movie. Which in hindsight is ridiculous not just because of the sexual assault allegations, but because 1) Kevin Spacey looks ridiculous (same link as before but honestly, he looks so weird!), and 2) Christopher Plummer is one of the best parts of this movie.

I mean, this guy walks in, rushes to learn his lines and do a quick 9 day job, does an amazing job while he's at it, and he gets nominated for a Golden Globe, and is possibly getting nominated for an Oscar. And, he's 88 years old! He's a legend, basically, is what I'm saying.

The other actors did really well too, with Michelle Williams being a really strong and determined mother who's stressed out to the max and is trying her darndest to convince J. Paul Getty Sr. to pay the ransom. The same goes with Mark Wahlberg, he's been doing a really good job with his most recent films lately, and I'm happy he's been choosing to do these good dramatic roles (I mean, for a guy who's doing stuff like Daddy's Home and Transformers movies...)

Charlie Plummer was also convincing as the kidnapped grandson, and I really loved his scenes with Romain Duris who plays Cinquanta. Duris was fantastic and he stole the show every time he was on scene.

So this film was surprisingly very intense and well made. It was able to build that tension relating to the kidnapping and J. Paul Getty Sr. not wanting to oay a single cent of the ransom. It can be quite suspenseful, and some scenes are really graphic and not for the faint-hearted. Christopher Plummer does an amazing job, as do the other actors, and Ridley Scott does a fine job as a director for seamlessly recasting Kevin Spacey so last minute. It's probably not something you will re-watch, but it provides a really interesting insight into this dysfunctional family.

A few side comments:

• Sometimes real life is worse than in the movies. According to Wikipedia:

When the kidnappers finally reduced their demands to $3 million, Getty senior agreed to pay no more than $2.2 million—the maximum that would be tax-deductible. He lent his son the remaining $800,000 at 4% interest. Paul III was found alive in a filling station of Lauria, in the province of Potenza, shortly after the ransom was paid. After his release Paul III called his grandfather to thank him for paying the ransom but, it is claimed, Getty refused to come to the phone. Nine people associated with 'Ndrangheta were later arrested for the kidnapping, but only two were convicted. Paul III was permanently affected by the trauma and became a drug addict. After a stroke brought on by a cocktail of drugs and alcohol in 1981, Paul III was rendered speechless, nearly blind and partially paralyzed for the rest of his life. He died 30 years later on February 5, 2011 at the age of 54.

So how's it all going in the nigger-torturing business, Dixon? It's 'Persons of color'-torturing business, these days, if you want to know.

Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri (2017)

8.4/10 on IMDb
93% on Rotten Tomatoes

Chloe's thoughts: Signed, sealed, and recommended by Chloe;
Low-energy entertainment

Watch it if you: Are a fan of Frances McDormand;
Are a fan of Sam Rockwell;
Want to enjoy a foul-mouthed comedy that has surprising heart in it
Months ago, Mildred Hayes' teenage daughter was raped and murdered, and police have hardly progressed on the case. Taking matters into her own hands, Mildred paints over three billboards outside the town, pointing the finger at Chief Police Officer Willoughy.

I was fortunate to see an advanced screening of this some weeks ago, with an interview with David and Margaret (the duo from At The Movies), and Margaret had put this movie as her favourite of 2017, so I was pretty excited for it. Since it's been a few weeks, my memory isn't the greatest, but I do remember really enjoying this film.

The great thing about this film is that it's really funny, but then it can go from 0 to 100 real quick and suddenly turn a bit dark and depressing. It's a great dark comedy, but it's also a really interesting drama as well.

The writing in this case was done really well, since it was able to realistically be really funny and yet really heartbreaking all at the same time. And it was able to subvert a lot of your expectations in many scenes, making heartbreaking scenes turn out to be funny, funny scenes turn out to be emotional, et cetera, et cetera.

And Frances McDormand is great in this because she was able to work with those crazy tonal shifts, and she did such a great job at being a psycho bitch one second, and then a loving and caring motherly figure the next second. It was great to see her portray this damaged woman who we first feel sorry for, then we start getting a little freaked out because of how psychopathic she is, and then we go back to feeling sorry for her because we realise that despite her craziness, she is still a sad and broken creature.

A lot of awards buzz for her, and she even nabbed the Golden Globe the other night. She definitely deserves it and she's a strong contender for the Oscar (but I haven't seen many of the other awards films this year, so I can't say who my pick would be yet).

But the rest of the cast was great too. Firstly, it was nice to see Lucas Hedges (the kid from Manchester by the Sea (2016)) here, even if he didn't have much to do. But I really liked seeing Caleb Landry Jones here. He did a good job in Get Out (2017) and American Made (2017), and he was really good in this so he's having a great year this year.

The stand out for me, though, was Sam Rockwell as Officer Dixon. He did an amazing job, I was so blown away by him and I'm so happy he got the Golden Globe because he completely deserved it! He does such a great job at being this imbecile of a policeman, and to see how his character ends up was really satisfactory. In fact all of the character arcs that happen in this movie feel very natural and real for each individual character, which is again a nod at how great the writing was.

Woody Harrelson also did a great job, which is good because I didn't really like him in War for the Planet of the Apes (2017). But here, his character's storyline is a bit tragic, and you get that he's a really great and fun guy despite being pestered by these billboards that Mildred's put up. There is one scene in particular that he does with Frances McDormand and that is when it goes from witty banter to serious shock real quick, and that was such a memorable scene. The actors in this movie honestly did such a great job, all round.

Overall, this was a really fun movie to watch with surprising heart and emotion in it. You go in wanting to munch on popcorn while seeing these insane characters do crazy things, but you end up really caring for them, and each character has a unique character arc. It's a fun time, with some witty banter that will make you chuckle, and it's got some great writing and fantastic acting in it.

A few side notes:

There is one scene with a deer, and the CGI for it was so offputting, but I don't know if that's just because they were deliberately trying to make it seem unrealistic. But yeh, that was the only super weird part for me

Also, Peter Dinklage is in this, and rocking a mullet!

This is brave, this is bruised, this is who I'm meant to be... This is me.

The Greatest Showman (2017)

8.0/10 on IMDb
55% on Rotten Tomatoes

Chloe's thoughts: Signed, sealed, and recommended by Chloe;
It's alright

Watch it if you: Enjoy watching musicals;
Care more for great songs and dance performances rather than writing and plot
Inspired by P.T. Barnum's creation of the circus, The Greatest Showman explores what it may have been like to start up a circus in 18th century America.

I was really keen to watch this since I've been seeing the trailer for this over and over and over again (not deliberately, just every time I see a movie in the theatre), constantly getting 'This is Me' stuck in my head when I hadn't even heard the full song! And while it's not the best film or best musical ever, it still didn't disappoint because in the end it was a fun musical with great performances and superbly catchy songs.

This film doesn't have a very high rating on Rotten Tomatoes, but that's mainly because of the criticism of having this film portray P. T. Barnum as some revolutionary visionary who protected his circus 'freaks' and wanted them to have better lives. No, in actuality P. T. Barnum was kind of a jackass who faked a lot of his 'exhibits', exploited his 'freaks', and did everything (even philanthropy) purely because of the profits. While they sort of touch on Hugh Jackman's character as being a bit of a con artist and gathering his 'human attractions' just for a buck, they still portray him as a nice guy who genuinely cares for them.

While I agree with needing to accurately portray people in movies, I don't recall this movie actually saying it was based on a true story or true events. I know in the ads it said it was inspired by true events, which is fair enough since it was inspired by the creation of the circus. But I guess having that same name sort of puts a sour taste on the movie because you have this feeling that something is just off. Imagine if there was a musical out there celebrating Hitler as a nice person. It's not the same, but if you think about it, it's understandable why a good movie can get low ratings because the character is nothing like their real life persona.

So I think if they just made this movie about someone who creates a circus, someone other than P. T. Barnum, then it would have been more positively reviewed. I don't even mean change how the character was written, I mean literally just change the character's name and keep everything else the same. I think that way it would have been received better.

Apart from that, there's not much else to fault on this movie. I did find it was a bit sloppy in terms of writing and editing, like the plot and the transitions between scenes were a bit all over the place, but in the end I went in not wanting a great movie with great writing, I just wanted a great musical with catchy songs and great feel-good music performances, and I got that.

All the songs were great, and all the dancing was great too.

Each song has a very unique feel to it, either because of the singers, the dancing, or even the set location. Seriously I was so amazed that not every single song was just in the circus setting. Each set choreography was great because they adapted the song and dance to match where they were. For example, I loved the song 'The Other Side' which Zac Efron and Hugh Jackman sing together, and in the background there's a cool bartender doing crazy moves, and the choreography includes the usage (and drinking) of shot glasses.

I also loved when Michelle Williams and Hugh Jackman were dancing on their roof to 'A Million Dreams' in between the white sheets hung up, it looked really magical. And Zendaya and Zac Efron singing 'Rewrite the Stars' was another great visual performance, since they were dancing on the trapeze and it looked amazing.

That is possibly my favourite song of the whole soundtrack, but I also really like 'This is Me' and 'Never Enough' (which is not actually Rebecca Ferguson singing, but someone called Loren Allred who was on The Voice U.S. in one of the seasons). But honestly, all of the songs are really good.

So in the end, this wasn't the perfect film. The writing lacked a bit and the movie felt a bit all over the place with so many things happening, but I understand they didn't want to cut much out of the movie because these plot elements made way for some really great song and dance performances. Hugh Jackman is such a legend, being a quadruple threat with acting, singing, dancing, and being a great action hero. The songs really make this film, and I know what I'll be singing for the next month or so.