Posted: 12/18/19 at 11:34pm
Impossible2 said: "A Director said: "From a critical standpoint, CATS is a FLOP!"
Sowas Avatar x"
Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! Read this. https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/avatar
Posted: 12/18/19 at 11:48pm
Posted: 12/18/19 at 11:49pm
Auggie27 said: "Can some one address the changes to the cat faces, post-trailer? It seems as if the look has been abandoned to allow the actors face to appear fairly unadulterated. I found Hudson's the most bizarre, with an almost unfinished look. The white under the eyes seemed un-feline. And then the head markings were tiger-ish but not attractive."
When they realized what a flop the film would be, they decided to change tack and market it as a musical version of The Island of Dr. Moreau.
Posted: 12/18/19 at 11:53pm
Posted: 12/18/19 at 11:54pm
Big Apple2 said: "It’s currently 17% from critics at Rotten Tomatoes. "
Updated On: 12/18/19 at 11:54 PM
Posted: 12/19/19 at 12:06am
Posted: 12/19/19 at 12:08am
Wow, the majority of the posters on this thread are cattier than the characters in the film!!!
Posted: 12/19/19 at 12:35am
Posted: 12/19/19 at 12:38am
16% on Rotten Tomatoes now out of 74 reviews.
"3/5 I didn't hate it" appears to be its best review so far.
Posted: 12/19/19 at 1:40am
Thing is, folks, that you know that tonight some producer is running the numbers for that proposed film version of FOLLIES or WICKED or KINKY BOOTS and asking him/herself if it's really worth it. Every time we seem to be getting a nice spate of film musicals, something comes along to trainwreck it — seemingly bullet-proof material like PHANTOM or THE PRODUCERS is released, and they're disasters, financially and creatively — and Hollywood being Hollywood, an industry that gets skittish really fast, I daresay the list of Things We'd All Love To See is gonna get a lot, lot shorter. So enjoy those "questionable source" videos of your favourite show, because right now that's probably about the best you're gonna get.
Posted: 12/19/19 at 1:44am
SeanMartin2 said: "Thing is, folks, that you know that tonight some producer is running the numbers for that proposed film version of FOLLIES or WICKED or KINKY BOOTS and asking him/herself if it's really worth it. Every time we seem to be getting a nice spate of film musicals, something comes along to trainwreck it — seemingly bullet-proof material like PHANTOM or THE PRODUCERS is released, and they're disasters, financially and creatively — and Hollywood being Hollywood, an industry that gets skittish really fast, I daresay the list of Things We'd All Love To See is gonna get a lot, lot shorter. So enjoy those "questionable source" videos of your favourite show, because right now that's probably about the best you're gonna get."
I have a feeling most producers are actually waiting to see the actual box office rather then speculation on BWW boards because of some critics (expected) pans of the film.
Posted: 12/19/19 at 1:51am
chernjam said: "SeanMartin2 said: "Thing is, folks, that you know that tonight some producer is running the numbers for that proposed film version of FOLLIES or WICKED or KINKY BOOTS and asking him/herself if it's really worth it. Every time we seem to be getting a nice spate of film musicals, something comes along to trainwreck it — seemingly bullet-proof material like PHANTOM or THE PRODUCERS is released, and they're disasters, financially and creatively — and Hollywood being Hollywood, an industry that gets skittish really fast, I daresay the list of Things We'd All Love To See is gonna get a lot, lot shorter. So enjoy those "questionable source" videos of your favourite show, because right now that's probably about the best you're gonna get."
I have a feeling most producers are actually waiting to see the actual box office rather then speculation on BWW boards because of some critics (expected) pans of the film. "
Do let me know when you see that rave that's going to put asses in seats. Thus far, the heavyweights like Variety and the NYTimes are not helping your case any. I've already said that my bet is it'll sputter along for a few weeks on the curiosity factor, but after that, it'll disappear pretty fast. And I stand by that.
Posted: 12/19/19 at 1:58am
Posted: 12/19/19 at 3:50am
SeanMartin2 said: "Thing is, folks, that you know that tonight some producer is running the numbers for that proposed film version of FOLLIES or WICKED or KINKY BOOTS and asking him/herself if it's really worth it. Every time we seem to be getting a nice spate of film musicals, something comes along to trainwreck it — seemingly bullet-proof material like PHANTOM or THE PRODUCERS is released, and they're disasters, financially and creatively — and Hollywood being Hollywood, an industry that gets skittish really fast, I daresay the list of Things We'd All Love To See is gonna get a lot, lot shorter. So enjoy those "questionable source" videos of your favourite show, because right now that's probably about the best you're gonna get."
It's a reasonable concern, but I am not sure it will really apply in this instance - if it ends up bombing. I have never actually seen Cats on stage or on film, but it certainly doesn't seem like a natural screen adaptation that would appeal to the masses or critics.. The musical has been mocked by theater people since it opened. I'll be more concerned if In The Heights does poorly, because that one seems like a more obvious choice for a film adaptation and its first trailer has drawn raves. (I don't think West Side Story will affect anything unless it underperforms, because the source material is so famous, and any success it has will be written off as unique to the show itself and Spielberg.)
Some successful Broadway musicals just don't translate to the screen, or are translated poorly. Cats may turn out to be an example of both.
Posted: 12/19/19 at 8:45am
Y’all gotta remember, the film adaptation of IN THE HEIGHTS was greenlit by Universal in November 2008, shortly after the Broadway production opened. Kenny Ortega was set to direct the film, which was slated to begin filming in Summer 2011. Then suddenly the project was canceled in March 2011 while casting was in full motion and preproduction had begun.
So, even if a project is announced and moving along, anything can happen. Until they are on set and cameras are rolling, nothing is confirmed 100%.
Posted: 12/19/19 at 9:27am
A Director said: "Impossible2 said: "A Director said: "From a critical standpoint, CATS is a FLOP!"
Sowas Avatar x"
Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! Read this.https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/avatar
"
Sorry I meant Batman Vs Superman LOL
How I mixed those 2 up I have no idea.
It was late 
Posted: 12/19/19 at 9:40am
Not for nothing... not a "Cats" apologist - (yes I'm an ALW fan, but Cats has been on the lower end of my preferences)
But all this talk about "Rotten tomatoes" - if you look, you'll find the film of the stage production got a "20" so take that for what it's worth...
Posted: 12/19/19 at 9:51am
People who care about rotten tomatoes and base their entertainment choices on it are idiots x
Posted: 12/19/19 at 9:51am
^Yes, but the filmed stage version only has 5 reviews, and none of them are from respected sources. The movie currently has 67 reviews, 24 from “Top Critics”.
This should’ve been an animated movie. Don’t know how/why Universal thought it could be a prestige film. It’s CATS. It ain’t that deep. Crazy to think that if things had gone differently, we’d be talking about the WICKED movie right now.
Posted: 12/19/19 at 9:53am
bear88 said: "I don't think West Side Story will affect anything unless it underperforms, because the source material is so famous, and any success it has will be written off as unique to the show itself and Spielberg."
His track record of late hasnt been the best (Ready Player One had a 175 mil budget and only did 134 mil US gross — yes, 134 mil is a lot of money, but it's not making back the production budget), and, given his revisionist take on it, coupled with the bizarre political climate in your country right now, I can see some issues coming along for the ride. It's in post now, which means it will be released on schedule, so I guess we wait and see what happens.
Look, to all of you, I hate being a Debbie Downer about all this, because I love musicals as much everyone else on these boards. I dont understand why Hollywood cant just trust the material as is and why it feels the need to "improve" on it. But sometimes we just have to accept that when a major production like CATS goes south, which it appears it will, it impacts all those other favourite projects we'd like to see. Sometimes things are just too theatrical to make the leap to film. Sometimes, in their rush to make them more "film-friendly", the studios make horrendous choices (Anyone else remember the almost-film of FOLLIES that was going to jettison three-quarters of the score in favour of clips from old MGM musicals? The all-Muppet version of INTO THE WOODS?). And I really, really cannot tell you how much I hate seeing this crap on the screen. And yet it happens, and then it screws things up for all those other hoped-for productions we want to see.
Sadly, that's life.
Posted: 12/19/19 at 9:56am
seaweedjstubbs said: "^Yes, but the filmed stage version only has 5 reviews, and none of them are from respected sources. The movie currently has 67 reviews, 24 from “Top Critics”.
This should’ve been an animated movie. Don’t know how/why Universal thought it could be a prestige film. It’s CATS. It ain’t that deep. Crazy to think that if things had gone differently, we’d be talking about the WICKED movie right now."
'Top critics' in this day and age are probably a few narcissists from youtube that know nothing about films in the first place.
Posted: 12/19/19 at 10:06am
I do have to say: Most of the reviews basically say "This movie is so insane, you have to see it to believe it. Zero stars." The negative reviews have people interested -- a couple of my friends have said that they now feel like they need to see it in theaters because they want to experience the trainwreck. I think it has the rare potential to become an instant cult classic.
Updated On: 12/19/19 at 10:06 AM
Posted: 12/19/19 at 10:12am
Posted: 12/19/19 at 10:13am
Impossible2 said: "seaweedjstubbs said: "^Yes, but the filmed stage version only has 5 reviews, and none of them are from respected sources. The movie currently has 67 reviews, 24 from “Top Critics”.
This should’ve been an animated movie. Don’t know how/why Universal thought it could be a prestige film. It’s CATS. It ain’t that deep. Crazy to think that if things had gone differently, we’d be talking about the WICKED movie right now."
'Top critics' in this day and age are probably a few narcissistsfrom youtube that know nothing about films in the first place.
"
........no, on Rotten Tomatoes “Top Critics” are film critics from major news publications or websites.
Posted: 12/19/19 at 10:16am
seaweedjstubbs said: "Impossible2 said: "seaweedjstubbs said: "^Yes, but the filmed stage version only has 5 reviews, and none of them are from respected sources. The movie currently has 67 reviews, 24 from “Top Critics”.
This should’ve been an animated movie. Don’t know how/why Universal thought it could be a prestige film. It’s CATS. It ain’t that deep. Crazy to think that if things had gone differently, we’d be talking about the WICKED movie right now."
'Top critics' in this day and age are probably a few narcissistsfrom youtube that know nothing about films in the first place.
"
........no, on Rotten Tomatoes “Top Critics” are film critics from majornews publications or websites.
"
Yes but most audiences and 'critics' always disagree anyways. Some of the highest grossing films of all time did not get great reviews. In the end it's the public who decides if a movie is a hit or not.
