CATS Film Adaptation Thread — Page 31

CarlosAlberto said: "Yeah....you're 12. That explains everything..."

I feel sorry for you.

Updated On: 12/27/19 at 06:59 PM

clever2 said: "CarlosAlberto said: "Yeah....you're 12. That explains everything..."

I feel sorry for you."

Don't feel sorry for me. I'm not the one defending the poorly executed, couldn't get the CGI right the first time motion picture which has not only tanked at the box office but whose own studio has turned its back on....

clever2 said: "CarlosAlberto said: "clever2 said: "CarlosAlberto said: "Yeah....you're 12. That explains everything..."

I feel sorry for you."

Don't feel sorry for me. I'm not the one defending the poorly executed, couldn't get the CGI right the first time motion picture which has not only tanked at the box office but whose own studio has turned itsback on...."

It must be such a terrible burden to carry those buckets of bitterness on your back all the time."

It must be a terrible burden on you to continually defend the obvious....

18 Reviews for "Cats" that are comedy gold...

Updated On: 12/27/19 at 08:27 PM

clever2 said: "CarlosAlberto said: "clever2 said: "CarlosAlberto said: "clever2 said: "CarlosAlberto said: "Yeah....you're 12. That explains everything..."

I feel sorry for you."

Don't feel sorry for me. I'm not the one defending the poorly executed, couldn't get the CGI right the first time motion picture which has not only tanked at the box office but whose own studio has turned itsback on...."

It must be such a terrible burden to carry those buckets of bitterness on your back all the time."

It must be a terrible burden on you to continually defend the obvious...."

I hope one day you will be able to forgive whomever hurt you so badly so that you will stop trying to hurt others with your pain. God be with you, my friend. May he lead to toward the happiness so obviously lacking from your life."

Nice try...you can get over your superiority complex now...SMDH

Updated On: 12/27/19 at 08:33 PM

SweetLips22 said: "Clever2---Let me be your cuddlepuss--I will protect you from all these nasty people--my germs could wipe out a herd? possey ? of cats.

Curl up at my feet[or wherever else makes you comfy] and I will stroke your fur[if any] till your tummy is growling in pleasure and contentment.

Sweet Dreams of **** Heaven."

Hahaha that’s adorable!

Here are things I understand but still struggle to understand:

Before investing 100M in a film which is dependent on CGI, I assume (a dangerous thing) that Hooper did some test footage using the CGI technique he was selling to the Studio/Producers. The problems that were evident in the first trailer, version 1.0 and version 1.1 should have been apparent in the test footage - and fixed before full filming commenced. The dancing, in particular, frequently loses the human aspect and looks/seems fully animated (or has hesitations, blips and inexplicable movements), probably because the CGI artists couldn't keep up. Did Hooper just sell optimism of "don't worry, it will work" or did they not shoot test footage? Or, was the CGI not Hooper's idea - and the producers hired him to execute their vision? I also agree with others that opening an unfinished film did no one any favors - again, optimism must have ruled the day - I understand there is negative publicity from delaying a film, but other films have survived delaying their openings. Of course, I don't know what was in the studio's contracts with the production team and the movie theatres that worked against delaying the opening. Again, perhaps it was just optimism that ruled the day.

But did no one watch dailies or pieces and say "Tom, this just isn't working" - and did he respond "Well, wait till the CGI comes in" to which the response should have been "No, Tom, it's the acting and shot selection and rough edits"? Again, I'm completely speculating that Hooper (and others) thought they could fix everything in post production with the CGI. Optimism.

But, the lack of consistency in vision/tone from scene to scene is Hooper's responsibility. He's the director with the supposed vision for the film. Instead, it looks like different people directed different scenes - and not just in a second unit director filming action sequences way - Rebel Wilson is in a different film than Robert Fairchild. (I assume Wilson's dancing deficiencies is why Jennyanydots' tap number gets cut, and we get a tap number with Skimbleshanks) And, why, all of a sudden, at the end of the fim does Dame Dench start addressing the cinema audience - when that kind of approach has been absent through the rest of the film. The film is set up with the events being explained to Victoria - not to the cinema audience. On stage, everything was, in effect, addressed to the theatre audience - as the opening ("are you blind when you're born?) is directed to the theatre audience, but in the film those lines are directed to Victoria. Aargh. (One nit pick - isn't Macavity supposed to be a ginger cat?) I understand why, story wise - the final shot is Old Deuteronomy looking down lovingly at Victoria who is now a Jellicle cat - but, to me, that was unsatisfying - to me, the final shot should be after the loving look, we see the Phantom Chandalier Balloon disappear in a flash of light indicating it has made the journey to the Heaviside Layer and then the film cuts to the end credits.

Still, in my opinion, the film is not a total disaster - it has its moments.

James Corden and many of the film’s cast have said that they wore zero costumes during filming. Just the CGI capture dots on their faces and on their standard leotard. Everyone was told the CGI cat fur, ears, etc was going to be revolutionary. The dailies and all footage being seen on set had zero CGI effects so no one knew what it was going to look like until the first trailer was released. The global response to the CGI is shared by many who worked on the film.

I actually really like CATS the musical (so sue me!) and thought this was an extremely ill advised idea to begin with it. Seldom does live performance translate well to film or video (I also dislike the video with its close shots and mugging for the camera).

Saw the film yesterday and beyond the whole CGI debacle (which warrants its own discussion), why did they take a show known primarily for its dance and basically strip most of the dancing out of it? I normally like Andy Blankenbuehler’s choreography and enjoyed his updates to the revival, but what was that? Did the budget only allow four qualified dancers or did you just waste what you had. The Jellical Ball is usually the dance highlight of the show and it was virtually non-existent. I think I heard poor Gillian Lynne turn over in her grave.

Further, the vocals were ok in some places but not nearly as strong as they needed to be or always were in the Broadway casts. Hell, I’ve seen touring production vocals better than that. Even Jennifer Hudson was disappointing. Give me back Mamie Parris or any of the strong ladies playing that role over the years.

Taylor Swift added zero to the production, while replacing what is usually a strong performer in both voice and dance. She was worthless, as was that extra song.

Rebel Wilson took a charming, grandmotherly Jennyanydots and turned it into a crude, unlikeable character that exhibited no talent. James Cordon was ok but over the top and distracting.

That brings me to Judi Dench. I was ok with her playing Old Deuteronomy, even though it is typically a male role and I thought she brought a certain charm to the role, but what was with the vocals? She was originally cast as the first Grizabella. What happened to her voice? Old Deuteronomy has always been a strong vocalist. This was awful spoke-singing.

Mr Mistofolees was gutted down to a non-dancing, weakling of a character. Wtf? Other songs were changed, watered down, or messed with in a way that lessened the enjoyment. Full sections were cut from the poems and pacing was destroyed.

Overall, I’m sorry it is out in the ethers. It is a very poor representation of the show. The producers deserve to lose their shirts over this one (something I don’t think I have ever said before).

Updated On: 12/28/19 at 01:53 PM

clever2 said: "ggersten said: "- to me, the final shot should be after the loving look, we see the Phantom Chandalier Balloon disappear in a flash of light indicating it has made the journey to the Heaviside Layer and then the film cuts to the end credits."

That is how the film ended both times I saw it."

That's odd … and interesting. I was pretty sure the chandelier disappears and then we're back to Dench. Not that I'm going to go back to see if my memory is faulty - but perhaps I'll sneak in near the end.

This message may get lost in the shuffle or fall on deaf ears or both but I felt I needed to write this because my spirit is telling me so. I truly want to apologize to clever2 for my rude comments to him on this thread.

I had absolutely no right to be rude to him. I have absolutely no right to be rude to anybody for their differences of opinion.

Everyone has a right to voice their opinion or their differences but with respect.

I did not do that...and for that I am truly, truly sorry.


I am extending an olive branch to clever2 and for that matter to anyone else I may have offended with my rudeness on this forum.

Updated On: 12/28/19 at 05:41 PM

CarlosAlberto said: "This message may get lost in the shuffle or fall on deaf ears or both but I felt I needed to write this because my spirit is telling me so. I truly want to apologize to clever2 for my rude comments to him on this thread.

I had absolutely no right to be rude to him. I have absolutely no right to be rude to anybody for their differences of opinion.

Everyone has a right to voicetheir opinion or their differences but with respect.

I did not do that...and for that I am truly, truly sorry.


I am extending an olive branch to clever2 and for that matter to anyone else I may have offended with my rudeness on this forum."

Thank you so much for doing this. We’re all here because of our passion and our love for theatre. Sometimes that passion becomes heated and gets the better of us. It’s certainly happened to me! We feel so deeply for all of these shows. In many ways, we are like their protectors. I get it. Thank you, CarlosAlberto. It means a lot you would take the time to say this.

Not a fan of the show which I find cold and brittle and bizarre.
So it shocked me, esp given these horrible reviews, that I liked the movie.
Liked it far more than the show and also far more than Hooper's Les Mis.

I loved the change of Victoria newly arriving among the Jellicles and her journey as the clawder and the night of the ball is explained to her. This gave it all an Alice in Wonderland quality which lends the narrative much needed tenderness. I liked Hayward (Victoria), Robert Fairchild (as her primary guide) and especially Laurie Davidson as Mistoffeles. Unlike Olivia F., I loved that Misto is now a magician with a crisis of confidence who achieves, with encouragement, a major feat of legerdemain.

In the show Victoria's duet with Grizabella is, a I recall, a one off; there is no dynamic between the characters. Here there is an arc to their relationship and when Dench's Deuteronomy notices it I was as genuinely moved as Dench was.

I loved the silliness of the production and its absurdities. Wilson eating the humanoid cockroaches and unzipping herself out of her own fur, the general weirdness of the CGI and Moreau cat people madness, Dench looking like Bert Lahr and in her cat coat, Hudson's abject physicalization... I mean it's a movie of CATS, "bad taste" doesn't really exist as a major obstacle in my mind.

In short Hooper - a director I don't usually like (I HATED the Les Mis film) - with Hall's script and Blankenbuehler's dances has given CATS heart and makes it move. The editing and staging of the numbers is far superior to that of Les Mis.

Sue me but I found the movie very enjoyable and as good a movie as I can imagine of this very hard to imagine on film show.

Updated On: 12/28/19 at 08:08 PM