CATS Film Adaptation Thread- Page 24

[SeanMartin2]

Posted: 12/20/19 at 4:41pm

LOL — sure it's not.

Forgive the eyeroll. It's just a tic, I assure you.

[broadwaybabywannabe2]

Posted: 12/20/19 at 5:16pm

i snuck in to a theatre showing CATS after seeing the movie BOMBSHELL...which is great btw...and caught Jennifer Hudson singing Memory...as with all the musical numbers in the movie version of Les Miz, she acted the song while singing it and i found it very affective. But the last few minutes of the movie made me realize that i did not want to see the whole feature in one sitting...

Updated On: 12/20/19 at 05:16 PM

[Impossible2]

Posted: 12/20/19 at 5:28pm

SeanMartin2 said: "LOL — sure it's not.

Forgive the eyeroll. It's just a tic, I assure you."

CGI work is outsourced to FX companies who give a quote for their work on the film. That is the amount of money they get no matter how long it takes them to complete the job. Now if the remit of their agreement changes, yes maybe they will get more money ie for example after the trailer backlash (much like the Sonic trailer fiasco) they decided they wanted to give the film or characters a whole new look, then yes they would probably get more money thrown their way, but that has not happened here. The CGI is more polished, but it is still the same look and feel as the trailer. The fact they are working on it up to the day of release means nothing, they are fulfilling their contract and doing it for the same amount they agreed upon initially until the job is completed. Many films continue to have work done on them after cinema release. Even some of the Marvel films had further CGI work done because the job was not completed before the cinema release date. They work until the job is finished and the director/film company is happy with their work.

As far as your Peanut Movie comparison goes, Blue Sky (and Illumination) are well known for outsourcing their animation work to foreign countries where the work is done on the cheap so their budgets are much lower than animated films made in the states by Pixar/Disney etc

 

[Sho-Tunes-R-Us]

Posted: 12/20/19 at 5:40pm

Variety says box office is very weak, but could uptick over Christmas week.

https://variety.com/2019/film/news/box-office-star-wars-rise-of-skywalker-cats-flops-1203450085/

[guitarperson]

Posted: 12/20/19 at 6:43pm

I thought it was very enjoyable!  Absolutely bonkers, but so is the stage show.  A lot of the negative reviewers seemingly just didn't know what they were in for.  I think if you can get past the CGI  (I could--clearly some can't), it's pretty much the same as the show, which also has numerous flaws and requires a huge suspension of disbelief/willingness to subscribe to a non-existent plot.  Could it have been better?  Sure--for one they could have cut Bustopher Jones and Jennyanydots, easily the weakest numbers in the piece and Corden/Wilson did them no favors.  Why they used the original melody (if you can call it that) for Mungojerry and Rumpleteaser is beyond me.  Taylor Swift's new song "Beautiful Ghosts" serves absolutely no purpose and is a huge tonal shift from the rest of the numbers.   Jason Derulo was truly uninspired. Overall though? I can't wait to see it again (especially Ian McKellen's Gus).

[Gorlois]

Posted: 12/20/19 at 7:12pm

Well, I bought my tickets for tomorrow! There’s a video of a showing on Twitter where the audience turned it into a “Rocky Horror” type thing. I think that’s probably a good fate for this film.

[sabrelady]

Posted: 12/20/19 at 10:28pm

Beautiful Ghosts" serves absolutely no purpose 

 

Yes it does. An Oscar Nomination for Best Original Song. Probably the only one it will get. (For Your Consideration)  ( Not for ALW I know) 

[InTheBathroom1]

Posted: 12/20/19 at 10:42pm

I went to the theatre this afternoon expecting a Rocky Horror Style Romp and got a bunch of people who took this movie way too seriously. It was not fun.

[VotePeron]

Posted: 12/20/19 at 11:07pm

sabrelady said: "Beautiful Ghosts" serves absolutely no purpose



Yes it does. An Oscar Nomination for Best Original Song. Probably the only one it will get. (For Your Consideration) ( Not for ALW I know)"

Beautiful Ghosts did not make the Oscar shortlist, therefore it is not eligible to be nominated.

 

[sabrelady]

Posted: 12/21/19 at 12:14am

That it did not achieve its purpose. U r Correct

BUT that was the only reason for its existence.

[Sally Durant Plummer]

Posted: 12/21/19 at 1:01am

Does the movie cut The Jellicle Ball?

[Sho-Tunes-R-Us]

Posted: 12/21/19 at 3:20am

Jellicle Ball is in. Growltiger's Last Stand and Pekes And Pollicles is excised.
May have forgotten others.

[TheatreFan4]

Posted: 12/21/19 at 11:11am

Growltiger has a few lines to his song, but he's an actual character and not a part Gus plays on stage. Then he gets undercut by James Corden Cat coming for his rhyme scheme... God i hate this movie...

[dmwnc1959]

Posted: 12/21/19 at 2:35pm

As mentioned before I have never seen CATS in any previous version or rendition. And I really haven’t even been able to listen to the OBCR because I couldn’t get past the first two songs. Sounded awful. I was sure it would be better in context and in person. So I basically went into this movie blind knowing the bare, very basics of the storyline.

As for the movie, I didn’t hate it. It’s definitely different, and I think that I just sat there for a while basically stunned (30 plus minutes) just absorbing and trying to digest what I was looking at. I think after the first hour - which were basically introductions of all the cats and their stories and origins, etc. - did it really find its footing. This happened around the first singing of Memory and Beautiful Ghosts. Both are fantastic songs. After that it was much better and focused.

And I really didn’t care that they had human fingers and noses, human feet, or the snot/tears trail running down Jennifer Hudson’s face/upper lip. At those moments I just tried to focus on her eyes. And I certainly didn’t find any of this creepy. 

The final rendition of Memory is stunning. I’d even say breathtaking. I definitely teared up and got watery-eyed.

Our theater auditorium had all of 17 people in it, and was next to the one showing Star Wars. It was loud. I’m sure it was packed. 

They had a small souvenir CATS popcorn bucket and plastic cup for 8$ which I bought but didn’t fill, opting to get the giant popcorn/drink in regular packing as well.

Overall, I’m glad I went. This really isn’t a movie for everyone, and definitely not so much the average kid - I think they be bored out of their minds. I’d at least see it on the big screen instead of television, think it’ll lose much more in a miniature version. 

A quick question for those who have seen it or may know. At the very end of the credits it mentioned The Shubert Organization. What was that for, because I totally missed reading it. 

Updated On: 12/21/19 at 02:35 PM

[jacobsnchz14]

Posted: 12/21/19 at 2:41pm

dmwnc1959 said: "A quick question for those who have seen it or may know. At the very end of the credits it mentioned The Shubert Organization. What was that for, because I totally missed reading it."

It was basically a "produced on the New York stage by Cameron Mackintosh, Geffen, Shubert..." credit.

[Globefan]

Posted: 12/21/19 at 2:44pm

I was shocked when I discovered how minimal Taylor Swift's role was. She's probably one of the bigger names in the cast, and they do nothing with her until the end. 

[dmwnc1959]

Posted: 12/21/19 at 2:45pm

^ ^ ^ Thanks!

[dmwnc1959]

Posted: 12/21/19 at 2:48pm

Globefan said: "I was shocked when I discovered how minimal Taylor Swift's role was. She's probably one of the bigger names in the cast, and they do nothing with her until the end."

 

I was even more surprised at how big Robert Fairchild’s role is (amount of screen time) and he’s not even credited in most/all of the previews. At least I think I was looking at the right cat. LOL

 

Updated On: 12/21/19 at 02:48 PM

[Gorlois]

Posted: 12/21/19 at 7:10pm

It is a bad film. This is mostly because of the horrible design of the cats. I predicted that as the film went on, I would grow used to them but that wasn’t the case. I kept noticing strange choices and inconsistencies in the designs (why did some cats have fur covered hands and other have flesh colored ones?). Instead of being focused on the emotionality of, say, Jennifer Hudson’s performance, I was distracted looking at the strange CGI face. Other times it is frankly discomforting to see an appealing human form packaged in a realistically furry vestibule. All in all, a truly horrible choice of design.

Not to mention the whole issue of scale. The creatives must have realized what a disaster that was. Sometimes they looked cat sized, other times they looked miniscule (so tiny on those railway tracks!) or gargantuan next to mice that were same size as roaches. It felt like the whole project was so unwieldy, it could not be controlled.

The performers were competent, although Wilson and Corden are unfairly saddled with terrible comic material. I enjoy Webber’s music which coupled with Eliot’s poetry is still pretty, strange, and mysterious. The attempts to band-aid over the plot were pretty unsuccessful.

It’s a bad movie. But it is marvelously, uncommonly strange and I’m glad it exists in this form so that we can gawk at it. I saw a matinee with a mostly quiet audience, but it could be glorious fun with the right group of people.

[ACL2006]

Posted: 12/21/19 at 7:27pm

Only $7 million for its opening weekend? That's really sad. I'm sure it'll do okay during Christmas break, but this is 100% a flop.

[jacobsnchz14]

Posted: 12/21/19 at 7:35pm

“Sources are telling THR that this move, which is practically unheard of this soon after the actual release date, is being done ‘at [director Tom] Hooper's request’ as the film's visual effects were barely completed in time for release.”

https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/12/21/cats-movie-gets-improved-visual-effects-rerelease-days-after-hitting-theaters-taylor-swift

[dmwnc1959]

Posted: 12/21/19 at 7:49pm

^ ^ ^ Looks like I’ll definitely be seeing it again right after Christmas Day. Was actually going tomorrow, but this announcement will postpone that for a few days. Will be interesting to see what they’ve changed. It won’t be enough to save the film from still being burned at the stake, but it’ll give me something to do besides sit around the house.

[Sally Durant Plummer]

Posted: 12/21/19 at 8:07pm

Just got out of the theatre.

This is a terrible film - the CGI has pushed it into the pantheon if legendary all-star disasters, but even without that factor, this movie is truly horrible.

Hooper is an incompetent director, who seeming randomly splices together extreme close-ups with extreme wide-shots that almost never work to tell a story. Because the CGI doesn’t allow many of the actors to... act, the lengthy close-ups, particularly on Judi Dench and Francesca Hayward, tell us zero about the characters or their motivations. Instead, they are plodding vamps in search of a way to frame the film.

Hooper also refuses to allow any dance sequence to focus on the dancers, instead using complex shots that further distract from the already dizzying movement of the CGI cats and the aforementioned lengthy close-ups.

The attempts to add plot are unsuccessful and serve only to prove how shallow the story is.

Maybe Jennifer Hudson’s snot can snag a Best Supporting Actress nod.

[morosco]

Posted: 12/21/19 at 9:29pm

This note was reportedly sent to movie theater operations staff and managers: “DCDC and Deluxe-Technicolor will be sending updated FTR-20 SMPTE DCPs of Cats which will include some improved visual effects. The runtime is unchanged.”

[jacobsnchz14]

Posted: 12/21/19 at 9:29pm

morosco said: "This note was reportedly sent to movie theater operations staff and managers: “DCDC and Deluxe-Technicolor will be sending updated FTR-20 SMPTE DCPs ofCatswhich will include some improved visual effects. The runtime is unchanged.”"

More details in the link I posted above.