CATS Film Adaptation Thread- Page 28

[sabrelady]

Posted: 12/24/19 at 10:59pm

qolbinau said: "It honestly sounds like this would be the perfect night out for those that lives in states or countries where marijuana is legal.

Said that from the beginning. I think this will actually gain a 2nd life like Fantasia did as a great film to watch while under the influence. 

 

[morosco]

Posted: 12/24/19 at 11:20pm

Stumbled across this video of Heather Headley singing "Memory".

[Kad]

Posted: 12/25/19 at 12:24am

dmwnc1959 said: "haterobics said: "The "improved" line was just marketing. It was just them fixing the unready version that they charged people for the previous week after they had extra time to tweakit."

It would still be nice to know specifics, now that I’ve seen both, that it might tweak my memory as to how they were different. But I’m sure that we’ll probably never know. Hoping someone else comes on in the next few days that saw Version 1 and Version 2 to highlight what was changed. I enjoyed it enough today to really want to see it again, if only for Beautiful Ghosts and Memory. In the context of the show, seeing it on the screen, they are spectacular.

"

I think you were / are expecting too much from this "improved" version. It wasn't ever going to be an overhaul, it was never going to cut things, it was never going to be a new edit. It was a patch job and a publicity tool.

[dmwnc1959]

Posted: 12/25/19 at 7:22am

^ ^ ^ That it was. And only that. After seeing the new Star Wars film today I’ll visit CATS one more time this weekend before heading back to work on Monday.

Updated On: 12/25/19 at 07:22 AM

[ggersten]

Posted: 12/25/19 at 5:01pm

So, I couldn't help myself. I had to go see it.  And now I have.  And, it's Cats.  A poorly done version with no central vision and too many WTF moments of direction and editing. And that's about all the time this deserves.

[Codeman109]

Posted: 12/25/19 at 6:47pm

Just saw the movie after eagerly awaiting it. I don’t understand all the hate. It’s Cats. It was the second show I ever saw back in the early 90s and I didn’t like it at all - there’s no story!! Still didn’t enjoy the revival a few years ago. But some of the songs have always been catchy.

But the movie is fun!!! It’s all over the place, it’s bizarre, it’s wild, it’s gorgeous. There’s still no story but if you know Cats ahead of time then you already know that! I wasn’t bored for a second, the majority of performances were well done. Was super impressed with Francesca’s voice, didn’t care for new melody of Mungojerrie, new song is meh (sounds like it should be in Phantom), liked Robert Fairchild’s performance for sure. Stuff like the cockroaches didn’t bother me, I have no clue what version we saw - we could see hands everywhere and Judi’s ring finger.

If you’re on the fence about seeing it - go see it !!!

[clever2]

Posted: 12/25/19 at 8:36pm

Just saw it for the second time. Packed house, much laughter, I could hear people sniffling all around me at certain moments. There is love for this film, and I happily share in it.

[trentsketch]

Posted: 12/25/19 at 9:00pm

My issues with the film are conceptual. The scale of the set is strange and inconsistent. The amount of digital effects in every scene, for me, takes away from the beauty of the dance. The attempts to add in a plot beyond using Victoria as an audience surrogate don't work for me at all. And I find the direction of the actors incredibly inconsistent. Yes, each character has their own story to tell, but they should exist in the same universe. Jennyanydots feels like she's in a completely different film than Macavity, who is in a completely different film than Grizabella, who is in a completely different film than Rumtumtugger, etc.. 

There are some wonderful moments. I really liked the concept of the Mungojerrie and Rumpleteazer sequence. Skimbleshanks: The Railyard Cat had excellent choreography. The aggression towards Grizabella by most of the cats made Memory feel more significant. Francesca Hayward, Robbie Fairchild, and Laurie Davidson felt like a cohesive trio in the moments they shared onscreen.

The overall effect is just so disorienting. It's very clear that different teams of animators and production designers worked on different scenes and musical numbers because the perspective shifts so much scene to scene. How can a cat be both the size of a car tire and the size of a fork and knife? How can the entrance to a theater be so large yet lead to a stage with stairs, backstage area, and furniture scaled perfectly to cats? I could go on. The use of light and color messed with my eyes (I have light sensitivity issues and struggle with strong contrast, to the point that I have to skip out on seeing shows that use op art effects or strobe lighting) and the inconsistent quality of the digital fur from cat to cat in any given scene just left me unnerved.

I'm actually seeing the film again tomorrow with friends. I'm hoping the updated effects fix some of the technical issues that really pushed me out of it (I hear the film's lighting looks considerably different in many scenes, and more of the textures that were missing are present). The visual inconsistencies are what turned me so heavily off the film from the start.

[Miserent]

Posted: 12/26/19 at 7:39am

does this mean no deluxe edition soundtrack

[BdwayLife]

Posted: 12/26/19 at 8:18am

Saw it last evening. Less than 20 people in the theatre. Five minutes before start time, a group of 20-30 year olds walked in. They laughed non-stop, which made it at times, difficult to enjoy.  "We're bored. I know... let's go see CATS and laugh at how stupid it is."  Despite this, my mother and I had a good time--we thought it was beautiful. :)

Updated On: 12/26/19 at 08:18 AM

[haterobics]

Posted: 12/26/19 at 10:08am

dmwnc1959 said: "Hoping someone else comes on in the next few days that saw Version 1 and Version 2 to highlight what was changed."

In software terms, I think you saw versions 1.0 and version 1.01, which is the version that cleans up the big problems in the recent release, whereas 1.1 would have a few features that didn't get shipped but were nearly ready.

[robbie_731]

Posted: 12/26/19 at 10:26am

James Corden on 'Cats': "I’ve heard it’s terrible”; says he hasn't seen it yet, which means he skipped out after photos for the premiere:

https://www.tmz.com/2019/12/25/james-corden-cats-review-terrible/

[chernjam]

Posted: 12/26/19 at 10:34am

robbie_731 said: "James Corden on 'Cats': "I’ve heard it’s terrible”; says he hasn't seen it yet, which means he skipped out after photos for the premiere:

https://www.tmz.com/2019/12/25/james-corden-cats-review-terrible/"

Not for nothing - that's a ****ty thing for him to say/do.  Had it been a huge hit he would've loved basking in all the praise.  Suck it up that it was a mis-step that didn't go well.  In the arts - it happens.  Cats was a juggernaut on stage and obviously not in the movies.  Chicago first go round on stage was a flop - revival is still running.  It happens...  

[TheSassySam]

Posted: 12/26/19 at 10:43am

For those who saw the film, did anybody catch the Phantom of the Opera reference at the end? 

 

I wonder if there were other ALW references embedded in the film. 

[BrodyFosse123]

Posted: 12/26/19 at 11:09am

Chicago first go round on stage was a flop - revival is still running. It happens...

The original 1975 Broadway production of CHICAGO ran for 2 years.  

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 12/26/19 at 12:02pm

For those who saw the film, did anybody catch the Phantom of the Opera reference at the end?

I did not. 

[Miserent]

Posted: 12/26/19 at 1:08pm

I think the Phantom reference in question would be the chandelier. That was my first thought as well.

[musicalfandukie]

Posted: 12/26/19 at 3:49pm

I did not enjoy how Tom Hooper directed Les Miserables so i am not surprised this has questionable direction as well. Not that the source material of Cats is great in the first place but I don't think Tom understands how to make a musical work on the big screen. 

[Highland Guy]

Posted: 12/26/19 at 4:12pm

clever2 said: "There is love for this film, and I happily share in it."

 

Me, too!  There was nothing I didn't like about this movie. 

 

[clever2]

Posted: 12/26/19 at 4:51pm

Highland Guy said: "clever2 said: "There is love for this film, and I happily share in it."



Me, too! There was nothing I didn't like about this movie."

I don’t think the premature summer trailer helped its case. It did look a mess and I, admittedly, jumped on the bandwagon, delighting at what a tragedy it was promised to be. I went into my first viewing of it with the same attitude, but the film immediately put me in my place. I was hooked the second the “camera” panned down from the moon and the first notes of the overture began. I don’t know, something happened to me then. Like a voice whispering, “Stop being such an a**hole and go with it.” And I did. And I loved it. 

It’s nice to love things. It feels good. Just saying. 

No matter what this film was going to be — animation, Pixar, live action — people were going to hate it. It was a decision made and stuck to probably even before Paul promised Ouisa and Flanders cameos in Sidney Poitier’s alleged version in SIX DEGREES OF SEPARATION. The hatred of CATS is a proud and long legacy. 

It’s failing miserably at the box office, which means not enough people are seeing it to even have an opinion. And boy, those critics sure did have a blast coming up with cute little quips as they massacred it. As if it were......planned? There has been so much garbage on the stages of New York in recent years that critics have been very kind to. Shows that didn’t (and don’t) deserve the golden tickets they’ve been given. So, it was very bizarre to read review after clever review, most slaughtering it, and then sitting in that theatre, finding myself adoring it with no guilt whatsoever. Because it’s good. Good is a subjective opinion, yes, but my subjective opinion is that it is good. Spellbinding even. 

It’s also revolutionary in regard to special effects and CGI. 

Bottom line is most (I said most, not all) of the people who are blissfully hating it would have done so no matter what. I’m blissfully loving it and, as I said, loving things is nice. It feels good. 

Carry on. 

Updated On: 12/26/19 at 04:51 PM

[dmwnc1959]

Posted: 12/26/19 at 5:04pm

^ ^ ^ Love this.

[sabrelady]

Posted: 12/26/19 at 6:19pm

loving things is nice.

 

To quote the Witch "Just nice".

I get peoples love musical theatre and want to see more  and if this meets your standards OK. For YOU.

BUT it doesn't meet others standards on SO many levels - not a blind irrational hatred but a a deep hurt disappointment over the quality instead of what could have been.

Carry On.

[chernjam]

Posted: 12/26/19 at 6:22pm

sabrelady said: "loving things is nice.



To quote the Witch "Just nice".

I get peoples love musical theatre and want to see more and if this meets your standards OK. For YOU.

BUT it doesn't meet others standards on SO many levels- not a blind irrational hatred but a a deep hurt disappointment over the qualityinstead of what could have been.

Carry On."

Wow - so carry on offers a contrary opinion and points out (accurately) how some have been sharpening their knives for this for months... and you have to crap all over it...   This board can be insufferable at times

[clever2]

Posted: 12/26/19 at 6:24pm

sabrelady said: "loving things is nice.



To quote the Witch "Just nice".

I get peoples love musical theatre and want to see more and if this meets your standards OK. For YOU.

BUT it doesn't meet others standards on SO many levels- not a blind irrational hatred but a a deep hurt disappointment over the qualityinstead of what could have been.

Carry On."

Thanks for the proof!

EDIT: I’ll go you one better. Loving things is WONDERFUL. 

Updated On: 12/26/19 at 06:24 PM

[sabrelady]

Posted: 12/26/19 at 6:52pm

Y'all need to hook up w Patti Murin