Posted: 12/23/19 at 8:59am
All I have to say is: When Judi Dench spreads her legs and points one high in the sky because of Ian McKellen... I had a moment of serenity that cannot be described. . A kindness. A joy. It washed over me. I couldn't shake the feeling that Old Deuteronomy? That cat? That cat was me.
Posted: 12/23/19 at 9:54am
Saw it. Loved it. Will see it (and love it) again.
Posted: 12/23/19 at 12:54pm
Posted: 12/23/19 at 1:18pm
I've been trying to gather my thoughts on the film since I saw it Saturday night. I am a performer and have seen productions of CATS, and it's one of those shows I really want to be in eventually. I have seen the 1998 filmed-stage version as well.
I actually really liked a lot of the ideas in this, I think they could have realized them better though.
For example, Judi Dench doesn't appear until after Jennyanydots and Bustopher Jones perform, so how would she see them to choose for the Jellice choice?
And the film insinuates that although Rum Tum and Mr. Mistofelees have solo-songs, they are not competing to be the choice, which is kinda of confusing. Mr. Mistofelees singing his own song was also very different but I didn't mind it.
I like the idea that Macavity is kidnapping them and making him an obvious villain, with Mungojerrie, Rumpleteazer, Bombalurina, and Growltiger as his minions (!!!). But the stakes still weren't that high, it doesn't make sense that he has magical powers to disappear and reappear and it's not explained how the rest of the kidnapped cats get back from the barge on the river after Mr. Mistofelees magically brings back Judi Dench.
I did not like Taylor Swift's version of Macavity which is my favorite song and the choice to make it a solo for Bombalurina.
I kinda wish they had included more/of Pollices and Growltiger's Last Stand, there was someone credited as Lady Griddlebone, so I think a scene got cut sadly.
Skimbleshanks had a great number, but because he just appeared out of nowhere, and we really didn't care about the character, maybe if a bigger celebrity had been cast in this part, it would have been featured more.
Overall I didn't care about the visual effects stuff, I liked the addtional dialoge and using Victoria as the main character, I liked the idea of giving her a song and having the whole night be like an induction into the Tribe of Jellicles. I think they could have added even more new dialogue so the story was easier to follow for newbies.
The running time only being 110 minutes when the stage musical is like 2 hours id disappointing. It feels like they could have added more to it and made use of the funds available. I do think some more things were filmed but cut. Maybe DVD extras!
Posted: 12/23/19 at 1:24pm
Not sure if this has been discussed, but there could have been an amazing version!!!
https://www.forbes.com/sites/marchershberg/2019/12/20/how-a-dog-film-killed-an-animated-version-of-cats/#4270d4b6beb8
Posted: 12/23/19 at 2:06pm
It honestly wasn't as bad as I was expecting. I was surprised how faithful it was to the stage version -- mostly because anyone who has seen the stage version knows that it wouldn't work as a film. And it doesn't. They kept most of the songs (even the boring ones like "Bustopher Jones" and "Moments of Happiness" that could have bee excised), and the basic plotlessness of the musical. They kept the Jellicle Ball, which I also never expected to see on the big screen.
I don't even think this film would have worked 20 years ago. Even during the heyday of this musical back in the 90s when an animated version was suggested, people understood that it would need to be completely reconceptualized for the big screen if such a movie were ever made. I still can't understand why anyone involved with this thought modern, cynical cinema audiences living in the age of memes would accept a film, based on a musical that has already become a dated parody of itself in the last two decades, that looked like this, with cat-human hybrids dancing en pointe and popping and locking with strange sexual undertones (?). And WHY did they spend so much money on this?? How out-of-touch were the people involved with this?
All that said, the only person whose career might be in jeopardy as a result of this are probably the poor CGI artists when the studio has to either close or downsize, and Tom Hooper, whose name will now forever be associated with this ill-conceived venture. The actors/actresses/dancer/singers in this are all talented enough and have enough else going for them that they can probably safely save face.
Posted: 12/23/19 at 2:16pm
Saw it Saturday night and I don't know if it's because I went in expecting to hate it, but in all honesty.......I didn't. Was it great? No. Was I bored in sections like I am with the stage show? Yes. Did I regret seeing it? Not at all. I mean, it's "CATS." What was everyone expecting?
The Skimbleshanks number was my favorite and Jennifer Hudson........gurl.........I have NEVER EVER cried at "Memory" before but I had actual tears fall out of my eyes during her rendition. Good on her.
I actually wouldn't mind seeing it again with the improved CGI and in a theater with a better sound system because the one I was in was HORRIBLE.
Again, not mad that I saw it and I liked aspects while hating others (mainly Rebel Wilson and her annoying schticky self).
Updated On: 12/23/19 at 02:16 PM
Posted: 12/23/19 at 3:23pm
Griddlebone is in the film- she's the cat with the green beret that's part of Macavity's group. She's played by appropriately-named cabaret star Meow Meow (her stage name, at least).
Posted: 12/23/19 at 3:38pm
How out-of-touch were the people involved with this?
^^^^^^^
THIS!
I've been trying to figure how this was pitched to the studio(s) to get them aboard . I've been trying to go back and see the various early news on this to see just WHAT was expected. The only through thread I've been able to discern is akinda "hint" of something wonderful in the way of the technique or method of filming that would transform the experience. It certainly seems that was how they persuaded the "name" performers to climb on board.( well, except Taylor Swift who was prob promised a potential Oscar) Universal seems to have some of the companies who produced this not including ALW Really Useful. The others Working Title, Monumental Pictures I find myself wondering is some of these will survive . I wonder if Hooper had to give up his salary to try the CGI fix. Sad really, so many people trying to create something and it all went wrong.
Re the CGI fix- I feel like they are bailing an ocean liner with a bucket.
Posted: 12/23/19 at 4:18pm
Highland Guy said: "Saw it. Loved it. Will see it (and love it) again."
Me too!!! I saw it twice this past weekend and loved it both times! Have to go back after my podunk theater gets the improved version! Can't wait!!!
Posted: 12/23/19 at 4:52pm
Kad said: "Griddlebone is in the film- she's the cat with the green beret that's part of Macavity's group. She's played by appropriately-named cabaret star Meow Meow (her stage name, at least)."
hmm I'll have to keep an eye out for her next time I watch. Does she have speaking lines? or is she just on the barge on the river thames?
Posted: 12/23/19 at 4:54pm
I don't recall her having lines. She's on the barge and she's in "Macavity," dusting the cats with the cat cocaine.
Updated On: 12/23/19 at 04:54 PM
Posted: 12/23/19 at 5:31pm
Highland Guy said: "Saw it. Loved it. Will see it (and love it) again."
Broadway Bob* said: “Me too!!! I saw it twice this past weekend and loved it both times! Have to go back after my podunk theater gets the improved version! Can't wait!!!"
Just got off the phone and confirmed my little podunk town has now downloaded the new version and will begin playing it tomorrow. Looks like I’m heading back to the movies!
Posted: 12/23/19 at 6:21pm
Please tell me someone has a photo/screenshot/whatever of the cockroaches with human faces - I'm sure those were the first to go!
Posted: 12/23/19 at 6:32pm
Unfortunately, I don't feel the same way as everyone else. I saw it today with my friend and we walked out during the Gus song. I found the movie to be more dull, boring, and slow than a bizarre acid trip. I'll finish the rest when it comes out on Netflix/YouTube
Plus sides: The cast do look like that they're having fun and the dancing is very beautiful. I really loved the dancing while some of it didn't translate well on screen. And they had a nice attempt to give it a real plot.
Posted: 12/23/19 at 6:55pm
The cockroaches and the mice with the baby faces were nightmare inducing. I forgot to mention that in my post earlier. *shivers*
Posted: 12/23/19 at 7:53pm
sabrelady said: I've been trying to figure how this was pitched to the studio(s) to get them aboard . I've been trying to go back and see the various early news on this to see just WHAT was expected. The only through thread I've been able to discern is akinda "hint" of something wonderful in the way of the technique or method of filming that would transform the experience. It certainly seems that was how they persuaded the "name" performers to climb on board.( well, except Taylor Swift who wasprob promised a potential Oscar) Universal seems to have some of the companies who produced this not including ALW Really Useful. The others Working Title, Monumental Pictures I find myself wondering is some of these will survive . I wonder if Hooper had to give up his salary to try the CGI fix. Sad really, so many people trying to create something and it all went wrong.
Re the CGI fix- I feel like they are bailing an ocean liner with a bucket."
I think it probably made sense on paper to some studio exec who was not at all in touch with either the musical theatre world post-90s or meme culture post 2010. CATS was the biggest, longest-running musical on the West End and Broadway for a long while. It was a huge phenomenon. Then you had Tom Hooper on board, who had LES MIZ under his belt. It seems like a logical undertaking... if you have no idea what the musical CATS actually is like. I'm convinced that the people who greenlit this had never seen this musical (or saw it decades ago, and had foggy memories of it), and had no idea how difficult it would be to turn into a salable film. They got their name property, name director, and a bunch of stars, and probably threw their money at it in hopes of another LES MIZ.
But what I'm just confounded by is how Tom Hooper and the creative crew thought at any point that what they were doing was going to work. It's like they all had a fit of collective madness and completely lost touch with what the moviegoing public is like in 2019. Like, no one looked at this thing and thought: "Gee... this all looks REALLY WEIRD." How is it possible that they just kept chugging along as if everything was okay after they saw what the final product would look like if they continued down this route?
The critical and audience response to the style of this film, even among musical theatre fans, has been so unanimously negative. I can't believe there weren't people working on this who didn't see it coming. Surely, there must have been people on board who had similar misgivings about this as the general public has.
Posted: 12/23/19 at 7:59pm
Posted: 12/23/19 at 8:05pm
This film was garbage. Worse than A Chorus Line.
It's telling that many who are saying they loved it also say they had to drive from their tiny little towns to see it elsewhere. I'm sure this film will play strongest to middle america.
All that money spent on this. Such a waste.
Posted: 12/23/19 at 9:06pm
Posted: 12/23/19 at 9:51pm
disneybroadwayfan22 said: "Unfortunately, I don't feel the same way as everyone else. I saw it today with my friend and we walked out during the Gus song. I found the movie to bemore dull, boring, and slow than a bizarreacid trip. I'll finish the rest when it comes out on Netflix/YouTube
Plus sides: The cast do look like that they're having fun and the dancing is very beautiful. I really loved the dancing while some of it didn't translate well on screen. And they had a nice attempt to give it a real plot."
I don't know if it's fair to judge a movie or provide a full opinion on a movie if you leave before it's over. I've see endless people lament about how bad it looks when people wall out at intermission, but do it all the time with movies. By the point you left the movie, the two best reviewed parts of the movie were still to come.
Posted: 12/24/19 at 12:27am
OK I'm gonna cut and paste this From Vanity Fair cos The Swift quotes r too too much
All the Ways the Cats Cast and Crew Have Quietly Distanced Themselves From Cats
Taylor Swift would like to “dislocate the end result” from her experience. And executive producer Steven Spielberg? He can't comment on what he hasn't seen.
G#d bless Cats, the horrific movie adaptation of the hit musical that slumped its way into theaters over the weekend. Ever since the first trailer was released, it was clear that Cats was going to be an experience not unlike ayahuasca, but more like the part when you’re about to vomit on yourself, not the part when you ascend toward a revelatory high. And while the rest of us could openly mock it or philosophize the more mysterious elements of the confounding final product, the Cats cast and crew has had to promote it with smiles on their faces, silently begging viewers to please just go watch this thing they made. They went to cat school for this.
However, now that the movie has been unleashed and subsequently drubbed by critics and audience members alike, it’s clear that some of the cast and behind-the-scenes team want people to know, in their own various, subtle ways, that they know this movie is bonkers. Take Taylor Swift, for example, one of the many big names attached to this project. In a recent interview just before the film opened, Swift reminded people that she had a great time making the movie and was in no way aware of how the cats of Cats would end up looking.
“I said yes right away,” she told Variety. “You have to dislocate the end result with your experience and you have to commit to doing it only based on what you think the experience will be and if the experience will teach you things that enrich your life.”
She also remarked that while filming, they would have to redo choreography quite frequently in order to hit the desired cat-meets-human balance. “It just was so funny because regardless of what the end result is, there’s just never been a movie made like this, which is why it was so fun to be a part of,” Swift added.
Similarly, star Jennifer Hudson also told Variety that she had to suspend her disbelief to play the role of Grizabella, the glamour cat.
“It was a discovery for us because while we were filming we didn’t get to see those things,” Hudson said of the effects. “We had to use our imagination, and I think that’s another thing we all tapped into and realized, ‘Oh wow, I have an amazing imagination to embody this without fully seeing what I’m supposed to be.’”
Hudson also, for good measure, tweeted out a clip of her upcoming performance as Aretha Franklin in the biopic of the soul singer on the same day that Cats was released in theaters. A bit of clever marketing capitalizing on the Cats blitz? Sure! And also a bit of counter programming to remind people that Hudson has another musical movie coming out in which she is not covered head to toe in digital fur technology? Definitely.
Director Tom Hooper, meanwhile, has emphasized that he was working up until the last minute to finish the film and so was leaving it in the audience’s hands.
“I finished it at 8 a.m. yesterday after 36 hours in a row, putting the finishing touches on it,” Hooper told the Daily Mail at the film’s world premiere. “So I'm very happy to be here with it fully finished, and we'll let the audience decide.”
He also added that when the responses to the first trailer came out, he and the effects team actually tried to tweak the appearance of the cats. Bless their hearts. They tried!
Is that "Nearer my G#d to thee" the band is playing on the upper deck?
Posted: 12/24/19 at 12:32am
sabrelady said: "OK I'm gonna cut and paste this From Vanity Fair cos The Swiftquotes r too too much
All the Ways theCatsCast and Crew Have Quietly Distanced Themselves FromCats
Taylor Swift would like to “dislocate the end result” from her experience. And executive producer Steven Spielberg? He can't comment on what he hasn't seen.
G#d blessCats,the horrific movie adaptation of the hit musical that slumped its way into theaters over the weekend. Ever since thefirst trailerwas released, it was clear thatCatswas going to be anexperiencenot unlike ayahuasca, but more like the part when you’re about to vomit on yourself, not the part when you ascend toward a revelatory high. And while the rest of us could openly mock it or philosophizethe more mysterious elementsof the confounding final product, theCatscast and crew has had to promote it with smiles on their faces, silently begging viewers to please just go watch this thing they made. They went tocat schoolfor this.
However, now that the movie has been unleashed and subsequentlydrubbed by criticsand audience members alike, it’s clear that some of the cast and behind-the-scenes team want people to know, in their own various, subtle ways, that they know this movie is bonkers. TakeTaylor Swift, for example, one of the many big names attached to this project. In a recent interview just before the film opened, Swift reminded people that she had a great time making the movie and wasin no wayaware of how the cats ofCatswould end up looking.
“I said yes right away,” she toldVariety. “You have to dislocate the end result with your experience and you have to commit to doing it only based on what you think the experience will be and if the experience will teach you things that enrich your life.”
She also remarked that while filming, they would have to redo choreography quite frequently in order to hit the desired cat-meets-human balance. “It just was so funny because regardless of what the end result is, there’s just never been a movie made like this, which is why it was so fun to be a part of,” Swift added.
Similarly, starJennifer Hudsonalso toldVarietythat she had to suspend her disbelief to play the role of Grizabella, the glamour cat.
“It was a discovery for us because while we were filming we didn’t get to see those things,” Hudson said of the effects. “We had to use our imagination, and I think that’s another thing we all tapped into and realized, ‘Oh wow, I have an amazing imagination to embody this without fully seeing what I’m supposed to be.’”
Hudson also, for good measure, tweeted out a clip of her upcomingperformance as Aretha Franklinin the biopic of the soul singer on the same day thatCatswas released in theaters. A bit of clever marketing capitalizing on theCatsblitz? Sure! And also a bit of counter programming to remind people that Hudson has another musical movie coming out in which she isnotcovered head to toe in digital fur technology? Definitely.
DirectorTom Hooper,meanwhile, has emphasized that he was working up until the last minute to finish the film and so was leaving it in the audience’s hands.
“I finished it at 8 a.m. yesterday after 36 hours in a row, putting the finishing touches on it,” Hooper told theDaily Mailat the film’s world premiere. “So I'm very happy to be here with it fully finished, and we'll let the audience decide.”
He also added that when the responses to the first trailer came out, he and the effects team actually tried to tweak the appearance of the cats. Bless their hearts. They tried!
Is that "Nearer my G#d to thee" the band is playing on the upper deck?
"
That's the best way for career preservation.
Posted: 12/24/19 at 8:28am
ColorTheHours048 said: "Saw it last night. It is neither as fun or as epically bad as critics have painted it. It’s mostly uninspired and clumsy, reeking of bad decisions from its very conception. An undeniable piece of movie trash that will be forgotten in a year."
How can “an undeniable piece of movie trash” be anything other than “epically bad.”
If you read a punpished review calling CATD “an undeniable piece of movie trash” would your takeway be that the movie is less than “epically bad”?
Posted: 12/24/19 at 9:26am
At the mall now to see CATS 2.0
Anyone been able to catch both versions to see what differences to look for?
