CATS Film Adaptation Thread — Page 11

This trailer played before the Lion King today and being in a room with so many people watching it together is an experience.

There were laughs and gasps but a general sense of shocked confusion. I can't wait to watch it unfold!

BrodyFosse123 said: "kofler22 said: "Any notice about the time we will be able to see the trailer?

I hope it´s a good trailer and not a meeeh trailer in which you don´t see anything..."

Its a teaser trailer so you won’t be seeing diddly squat. Footage will be used for the first trailer, not the teaser trailer.

Updated On: 7/20/19 at 01:03 AM

The trailer has been released, ok now haters go...…………………………..

CT2NYC said: "bryan2 said: "The trailer has been released, ok now haters go...………………………….."

The trailer was released on Thursday, and people have been posting about it since then."

and so far YOUTUBE has recorded OVER 5 million views of this trailer...so i would say interest is very high...we shall see in December if this translates to box-office $$$

broadwaybabywannabe2 said: "CT2NYC said: "bryan2 said: "The trailer has been released, ok now haters go...………………………….."

The trailer was released on Thursday, and people have been posting about it since then."

and so far YOUTUBE has recorded OVER 5 million views of this trailer...so i would say interest is very high...we shall see in December if this translates to box-office $$$"



The bit with Rebel Wilson was hilarious! That scene alone will bring people to the theaters.

And there's one important demographic that can't be overlooked: cat lovers. A movie about dancing and singing cats? They're in (and I count myself in that group).

JBroadway said: "I'm not an animal person, so I can't speak for that group of people. But I would think that if you are a cat person and really want to see a movie about cats, wouldn't you want them to...I don't know...look like CATS and not nightmarish human-cat abomination hybrids? Like, isn't the appeal of seeing animals on scream supposed to be that they're cute, and remind you of your own beloved pets? Even if we ignore the fact that the CGI is absolutely horrifying, they are clearly designed to look more on the human side in terms of their body shape, faces, and even behavior. I just don't see how they could possibly remind people of their own pets."



No.

Though I don't think the trailer looks any good, most of the complaining about stuff is the usual 'who can be the funniest person on the internet' style childish boy humour bull**** that usually accompanies these sorts of films..

As someone who LOATHED the stage version, the only thing that was even remotely iconic and memorable about it for me (apart from a few songs) was the choreography and the way the cats moved.

In fairness to Hooper, who is always unfairly judged on this board, what he has done is really the only way he could've gone to commit the only enjoyable aspect of the show to film.

While it is true the best way to do it would've either been with traditional hand drawn animation or CGI cats as far as the story, music and visuals go, there is no way to do it in either of those formats and retain the iconic choreography, just like there is no way to make photo realistic animals emote like humans in The Lion King. Fully CGI'd or animated cats in their original scales doing that choreography would've looked 100 times more ridiculous than this does.

Everyone is whinging about the CGI in the trailer, but trailers never have finished CGI in them. They have literally edited the trailer with raw footage and quickly CGI'd those shots to get something out. The completed version I'm sure will look very different, especially after all the criticism.

The cats in the stage version also wore fur coats so that criticism is just stupid.

Lastly, just like Avatar and the like that have weird looking CGI creations in them, the cats may look weird at first in a 2 minute trailer, but you will soon get used to their appearance in their world if you're watching a whole 2 hour film.

JBroadway said: "Feel free to expand "



No.

Should've just animated it. This is beyond disturbing. Where are their cat eyes? Where's their muzzle? Where are their cat teeth?

The issue is that they've left these characters halfway between human and cat, which makes them look creepy as hell. JHud's weird human lips are floating all over this furry face that looks like it's been glued to the body of an oversized cat. It looks horrible.

The It2 trailer wasn't even this disturbing looking.

That being said, the cinematography looks nice and it was good to hear that they've used actual set pieces as opposed to just CGIing everything. But unfortunately, when you CGI the actors, everything looks false, so they might as well have just CGIed the set too. Kind of a waste.

I'm still seeing it, but I'm expecting a fiery trainwreck.

It just looks like the stage version with more locations. I don't find the "cats" disturbing or creepy, so much as just underwhelming. They look like the stage costumes, but with less commitment to looking like actual cats.

I agree with everyone saying it should have just been animated. It wouldn't even have to be a photo-realistic style ala Favreau's LION KING. They could have gone the Dreamworks or Pixar or Disney Animation Studios route of 3D cartoon characters. I think the style of Pixar's shorts would work well for this material. Yes, the choreography is the best part of the stage version, but they could have found something else to showcase in an animated version. They wouldn't have to have the cats dancing elaborate choreography, but have actual narrative going on instead.

I think the biggest issue is that I don't really understand the cinematic universe this is supposed to be taking place in. It occupies a weird realm between cartoon (animals wearing clothes and with an elaborate society) and real life (they're not stylized cartoon cats; they're... humans in leotards?). I just don't understand why anyone thought this would be a good idea. It just looks ridiculous on film.

Magnificent Donkey said: "MikeInTheDistrict, I think their universe is random and hardly has any laws or principles of existence. For instance, they've got a milk bar which I think no one attends but cats, but for some reason everything init is human-sized."

I missed that the Milk Bar was only for cats. I thought it was a human bar. It just leaves me with a ton of questions. Are there even humans in this universe? How do they interact with these "cats" that look and move like humans in body suits?

Impossible2 said: "While it is true the best way to do it would've either been with traditional hand drawn animation or CGI cats as far as the story, music and visuals go, there is no way to do it in either of those formats and retain the iconic choreography, just like there is no way to make photo realistic animals emote like humans in The Lion King. Fully CGI'd or animated cats in their original scales doing that choreography would've looked 100 times more ridiculous than this does."

I don't think this is true. The original Disney animators improved their skills for decades working to draw emoting animals with realistic features and readable expressions. And adapting body language and, yes, choreography, to four-legged animals was another discipline that took years to develop. The difference now is that these photorealistic characters are being rushed into films before anyone has had time to work out how to animate their acting. Or maybe the animators are asked not to make them move with personality in the same way, or maybe the skills of character animators just aren't being transferred over to the big visual effects studios doing 'live action' CGI. (Full disclaimer: I don't actually know the industry, this is all from what I've read and seen.)

Gillian Lynne isn't credited as a choreographer on the film, so if they're adapting the choreography anyway they could have tried making it work on actually catlike bodies. I mean, in Fantasia you have ostriches and hippos doing ballet and dancing mushrooms. And in The Aristocats the cats play instruments and dance on two and four legs. Come on, choreographers, take a risk!

CarlosAlberto said: "In what world is a knife and fork bigger than a cat?!? The perspective is just way off...I take that back. EVERYTHING about this film is way off!



"

I completely agree with this, and this is my main issue with the trailer. The perspective is all over the place, and this is a perfect example.

Some of the other issues people are bringing up for me are minor quibbles in my opinion (e.g. why are some of the cats wearing clothes and not others, who makes the cat shoes, etc.). But it feels like much of the fundamental issues such as perspective and the cat design have not been thought through thoroughly.

I have so many questions: Did any of the actors wear makeup at all? Why are so many people saying the only way to do this movie would have been via traditional animation or CGI? I know we have the filmed stage version, but like any filmed stage version, it's bound to the limited location of the stage.

I don't understand why there wasn't a third (or fourth) option: Just take the way the cats were originally portrayed on stage w/ the orginal costumes and makeup, and then place them in an opened-up version of their world, exactly as it is in Hooper's version? Then we get everything we want: the beautiful choreography, the beautiful (now opened-up sets), the gorgeous cinematography. Why do we need CGI at all? I don't get it.