here's why the critics are wrong !

Rating: 10/10 (2 April 2018)

I've seen TGS six times - about every 2 weeks since it opened. To me the film was an imaginative take on the man who created one of the most enduring forms of entertainment the world has ever seen. But the critical comments were not part of my experience. The following points seem to be the most repeated among the critics:
HISTORICAL ACCURACY: This criticism is easy to dismiss. Unless the film is a documentary, the "facts" are subject to interpretation. A long list of movies based on real people or events bears this out. Consider this: If a film (non-documentary) were made about Donald Trump, wouldn't there be very different versions, depending on who's telling the story?
THE REAL PT BARNUM: This can be addressed with my comment above. But I'll go ahead and answer those who feel that the man who was famous for having said "There's a sucker born every minute" had his character sugar-coated in the film. Those critics say he was portrayed as a saintly family man who championed inclusiveness. I don't know how they didn't see the same film I did. At a young age PT learns that honesty may not be the best policy when he is punished for admitting he made young Charity laugh. He subsequently steals, obtains a loan with false collateral, and embellishes his "circus freaks" to his liking. He even admits to being a fraud to the highbrow theater critic. And when he gains entry to high society via his partner Phillip Carlyle, he has hesitations about appearing in public with his human menagerie. I'm leaving out a few, but how many more character flaws do the critics need to see in a 2-hour film?
NO BACKSTORY: A few critics lamented that the secondary characters (the circus crew) were not given full backgrounds. I can only shake my head and wonder how they could expect to pull this off with a dozen or so characters. Would they have liked a 3-hour movie better?
THE SONGS ARE TRITE: Simple answer - one of the most revered songs in a film musical is about rainbows and bluebirds.
NO REAL DRAMA: Sure, it wasn't APOCALYPSE NOW, but PT faced enough challenges in the film to dismiss that criticism.
WEAK SCRIPT: Always a matter of taste, but I found it intelligent, engaging and very often humorous. I've laughed every time, particularly at the exchanges between PT and Phillip as they are trying to make the acquaintance of Jenny Lind in London. And the audiences I've been with laughed along with Queen V at the "reaching the top shelf" retort by Tom Thumb!
SUB-PAR CHOREOGRAPHY/MUSICAL STAGING: Again a matter of taste, but after 6 times seeing the film, the musical numbers still give me goose bumps. The Other Side number, staged in a bar, is no less impressive than anything from a Fred Astaire or Gene Kelly film.
TOO LITTLE/TOO MUCH: The Village Voice critic wrote that it was boring and exhausting - in the same sentence! So which one was it?!
I personally feel that a clinical dissection of the movie misses the point. Maya Angelou said something to the effect that people don't always remember what you do or say, but they will remember how you make them feel. I'm glad I'm one of the many viewers who got such an incredibly wonderful feeling from THE GREATEST SHOWMAN.