This article from the New York Times is fairly typical of the reviews for "The Greatest Showman", the Hugh Jackman led showpiece released in December 2017, which tells the story of P.T. Barnam and the Barnam and Bailey Circus: <New York Times Review here>
I saw the trailer at the cinema, and thought that it looked pretty good, Hugh Jackman was in full flow and the songs and dance routines were very contemporary.
I said at the time that I would like to see it.
I finally the opportunity to watch via someone's Kodi box while I was visiting friends about a month ago and enjoyed the spectacle very much.
The look was appealing, the songs pretty good, dance routines too, sets looked terrific - almost stage production-like. But it was bigger than a stage musical, I thought that you couldn't put that on a stage, it was just too big.
The characters were maybe a bit two dimensional, there is little of the show performers back stories, parts of story were sketched over or rushed, many historical inaccuracies exist in the way the action is portrayed, but I loved it all the same and was very pleased to have seen it.
I heard of "Sing-Along" showings, "Greatest Showman" themed events and people genuinely extolling the virtues of the film.
Hugh Jackman was Oscar nominated, and songs won Golden Globes and were Oscar nominated.
This has been going on for a long time now.
So, the question is this:
Just how does a film which initially got quite stern and critical reviews become, well, maybe not quite not a cult movie, but one which has been riding a public driven tidal wave of love?
An article from the Daily Mail appeared a few weeks ago and seems to answer many of theese questions <Daily Mail Article here>
All I would say is that everyone should try this movie, ignore the critics and give it a chance.
I hope that you enjoy the spectacle - it is a lot of fun !!!