|
|
Post by anthem on Dec 30, 2019 11:08:36 GMT
I find it quite incredible that people are still attending sold out screenings of Cats. Worldwide box office for its 1st 2 weekends has only just reached what the thought they would take in USA opening weekend alone so this isn’t going to be some Greatest Showman sleeper, it’s a bona fire flop and yet there are sold out screenings (or near so) in UK Can I ask people that have attended these do you know the reason in local area?? (Eg only one cinema, etc) I thought the first projected US take for the first weekend was $17-$19m? Anyways the worldwide take for now is $38.4m; not denying that it’s underperforming significantly. www.boxofficemojo.com/release/rl2684847617/?ref_=bo_hm_rd |
|
|
|
Post by dontdreamit on Dec 30, 2019 12:02:12 GMT
I’ve just come out of a 9am showing- just me, my children, and 3 others. Although to be fair, it was first thing in the morning and on a day where a lot of people are back at work.
I really enjoyed it. The 6 year old enjoyed it so much, they want to back tomorrow and watch it again (to be fair they had the same reaction to Frozen 2 as well).
|
|
|
|
Post by FrontrowverPaul on Dec 30, 2019 14:23:02 GMT
I was listening to a conversation at a bus stop near Croydon on Saturday about Cats. Lady was recommending the film to her friend saying she had taken the family to see it and they all loved it and they were going again. The most interesting comment was that she had never seen the stage show and knew nothing about it.
I think people who haven't seen Cats on stage or TV, and so have no expectations and nothing to compare it with, may make the film less of a flop than all the negative reviews suggest. If it does end up losing umpteen millions, and fewer films musicals from stage musicals are made as a consequence, then we theatre fans are the losers.
|
|
751 posts
|
Post by horton on Dec 30, 2019 15:21:04 GMT
There is no inevitable connection between Cats failing and other movie musicals being affected.
|
|
7,183 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jon on Dec 30, 2019 15:39:37 GMT
There is no inevitable connection between Cats failing and other movie musicals being affected. Especially when you consider Aladdin, The Lion King and Frozen 2 have made over $3bn combined. |
|
|
|
Post by xanady on Dec 30, 2019 16:34:46 GMT
Just out of seeing it for second time and am warming to it more and more.Still wished they had just let the dancers dance and leave the breathless editing but must say that Judy Dench is wonderful and her singing directly to camera at the end is very emotional.Ian McKellen is imperious and the character of Victoria as the narrator figure who empathises with Grizabella is a clever move.A very full cinema at Resorts World in Brum.
A grower.
|
|
4,214 posts
|
Post by anthony40 on Dec 30, 2019 18:41:51 GMT
So Cats
(Pardon the pun) but what a strange beast this was.
Clearly the directors vision is not on par with the general public but for me this was a bit of a mish-mash.
I enjoyed it and am pleased that I saw it for myself but didn't love it
Firstly, I loved the image of the cat in the clouds in the first short.
i also like the way the story started with the human driving to dispose of the cat in the sack and that cat became the catalyst to meeting all the others.
I have to admit that by the endow the film the cat CGI won me over; the way you could still see the actors facial expressions and muscle definition. I was also really impressed the way the ears and their tails moved independently. I was also impressed by the whiskers on their faces and eyebrows.
Having now seen it, I understand why the film was transported out of the junk yard (as in the stage show) and why the sets and furniture was larger than like and in scale.
Of all the performances, I though Jason Durelo was outstanding- vocally and in dance. Don't know if those of you reading this are aware but (regardless of what you think of his music) he is operatically trained.
Rebel Wilson as Jennyanydots seemed to be having fun as was James Corden as Bustopher Jones. Their little interplay was humorous.
Mungojerry and Rumpleteaser was performed well- very slick.
Whilst I appreciate that she's a 'name' and no disrespect to Dame Judi Dench's wealth of experience but I am still unclear as to the reason that the gender of old Old Deuturonemy had to be changed.
And why is it that, despite being cats covered in fur that both she and Grizabella we costumed in fur coats?
There's no denying that Ms Hudson has a set of lungs, but that's not how Memory should be sung.
I really enjoyed Sir Ian MbKellan as Gus The Theatre cat.
Despite seeing Mr Mistofoles throughout the film, I kept on waiting for his big number. At one stage I actually thought that it had been cut and would appear as a (possible) DVD/Blue Ray extra and then it happened.
What was the whole Macavity kid(cat)napping the cats thing? Having seen the film I understand his reason for doing so, but was all that necessary? And Ray Winstone-I didn't even know he was in the film- as Growltiger. he always plays a criminal, doesn't he?
And speaking of Macavity (again, no disrespect to her talent) but why Taylor Swift? I realise that she's also a 'name' however, any well established stage performer could have sung that. And it wasn't as if she was in the film throughout- well if she was, I didn't recognise her.
It was great that every cat was a character. Did anyone recognise Zizi Strallen?
I also really enjoyed the whole Skimbleshanks tap dance routine.
However for me throughout the whole time there was just too much green screening, from the cats themselves to the cockroaches.
And whilst I appreciate every cats desire to be selected, going to the heavy side layer involves sitting in a disassembled chandelier and floating away on a blow-like structure just doesn't make any sense.
Hmm. At the risk of reporting myself for me this was a bit of a mish-mash.
|
|
|
|
Post by crabtree on Dec 30, 2019 19:40:18 GMT
With so much talk of being chosen and reborn, might it have be good, and emotional, to at the end have been introduced to the reborn cat?
|
|
|
|
Post by FrontrowverPaul on Dec 31, 2019 12:48:26 GMT
There is no inevitable connection between Cats failing and other movie musicals being affected. Especially when you consider Aladdin, The Lion King and Frozen 2 have made over $3bn combined. Of course I hope you are right and one loss maker won't impact on the resurgence of the film musicals genre, whether they be based on stage shows, Disney films, or be originals like La La Land and Greatest Showman. I think it's too soon to deem Cats a flop movie anyway. If Cats does recoup its investment I would have thought that similar big-budget films are more likely to be made than if it ends up losing the backers many milllions from their investments. There again it will hopefully be considered a "can't win 'em all" scenario and won't affect future film production. Time will tell. |
|
|
|
Post by crabtree on Dec 31, 2019 15:16:21 GMT
Whatever happens to Cats, I hope it has raised a few questions about the knee jerk reaction of the use of technology. Personally I would have preferred to have seen the cats as 100% human performer.
Interesting that people have worried about the lack of plot in Cats - did people worry about the lack of plot in Company, or Chorus Line or Act Two of The Nutcracker and many others where there's a gathering at which each character tells their story, and perhaps get chosen. If you want a glorious example of this, look at sir David Bintley's Still Life at the Penguin Café, where there is a gathering, each character presents themselves, and then as opposed to one getting chosen, one gets left behind. To feel the emotion of this piece and the theme you do need to see it. It's a structure family in all arts.
My problem with Cats the movie is not the content but that it is so clumsily made, and edited and not consistent.
|
|
4,988 posts
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Dec 31, 2019 16:32:58 GMT
Whatever happens to Cats, I hope it has raised a few questions about the knee jerk reaction of the use of technology. Personally I would have preferred to have seen the cats as 100% human performer. Interesting that people have worried about the lack of plot in Cats - did people worry about the lack of plot in Company, or Chorus Line or Act Two of The Nutcracker and many others where there's a gathering at which each character tells their story, and perhaps get chosen. If you want a glorious example of this, look at sir David Bintley's Still Life at the Penguin Café, where there is a gathering, each character presents themselves, and then as opposed to one getting chosen, one gets left behind. To feel the emotion of this piece and the theme you do need to see it. It's a structure family in all arts. My problem with Cats the movie is not the content but that it is so clumsily made, and edited and not consistent. I have yet to see the film version of Cats I never liked the stage show so I can wait till it comes on 'telly. I really like all the shows you listed and to me they work brilliant and keep me interested, perhaps Cats would work for me if the score was stronger or the piece was shorter. To me it's just one big long snooze fest. One of its problems is that's so obvious who gets to ride up on the trye. No element of suprise is required. |
|
|
|
Post by sagiirl on Jan 2, 2020 0:08:36 GMT
Went this afternoon to see this. We were only 16 people in the cinema. A couple walked out after half an hour and another couple not much longer after that which left only 12 of us still watching.
To start off with I really wasn't enjoying it but as it moved along amd you got used to the cats it did improve for me. So although I never hated it I won't be rushing back to see it again.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nicholas on Jan 2, 2020 19:52:40 GMT
Andrew Lloyd Webber: We didn't need words, we had faces.
Also Andrew Lloyd Webber: 
  
(For what it's worth, the fact that a massive, big budget, CGI ballet movie exists makes me happy. The fact that it's a movie in which humanoid tap-dancing cockroaches get eaten by Rebel Wilson, playing a masturbating cat who literally tears her skin off twice, is quite the world we live in. The existence, the sheer audacity, the balls-to-the-wall joy of this movie is something to behold. The fact that our triumphant finale is a badly rapping magical cat successfully teleporting CGI Judi Dench who quotes Taylor Swift and kills Jennifer Hudson... Ray Winstone plays a singing cat who gets killed by tap dancing! This movie got made - got made on this scale. This movie goes all out. I laughed at it. I laughed with it. I cried at Memory. I genuinely LOVE this movie) |
|
354 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by properjob on Jan 2, 2020 20:29:31 GMT
I've never been a huge fan of cats. I saw a production as a small child and one of the cats tickled me which put me off
I've seen a couple of tours as an adult and enjoyed it more (from that very low base) but still wasn't that keen but I liked the film.
I felt that for the first time I actually understood what was going on with the plot so actually quite liked it.
I do think the cgi was largely a mistake. They were clearly humans portraying cats which I am fine with and would have been fine with just costumes and makeup like the original with just a little touching up in cgi for closeups if really necessary.
It certainly wouldn't have been done this way if it wasn't a stage show first.
Wayne Sleep mentioned on the recent Radio 2 "First Cast" documentary how pleased he was to have costumes for the orginal cats that allowed people to see peoples bodies properly and I agree if you are going to put athletic, skilled and attractive dancers in a thing you want to be able to see what they can do with there amazing bodies.
You get that cgi thing were the actors weren't quite attached to the floor properly. I assume the cobbles were actually flat for dancing and the ballet dancers were wearing point shoes.
I still much prefer this to the recent Lion King or Jungle Book CGI remakes which I found weirder than this.
|
|
654 posts
|
Post by ptwest on Jan 2, 2020 21:19:54 GMT
Interesting that people have worried about the lack of plot in Cats - did people worry about the lack of plot in Company, or Chorus Line or Act Two of The Nutcracker and many others where there's a gathering at which each character tells their story, and perhaps get chosen. If you want a glorious example of this, look at sir David Bintley's Still Life at the Penguin Café, where there is a gathering, each character presents themselves, and then as opposed to one getting chosen, one gets left behind. To feel the emotion of this piece and the theme you do need to see it. It's a structure family in all arts. I think this is a fair point. For me the difference is that in "A Chorus Line" (the only one on the list that I've actually seen) is that with the interactions between the characters and each one having their moment, I actually cared about what happened, and also couldn't fully predict it. In Cats, the only character development is in each cat's one song and then nothing more; I haven't watched the film but in the stage version we all knew how it was going to end, and I personally couldn't invest in any of the characters. |
|
297 posts
|
Post by fossil on Jan 3, 2020 16:52:29 GMT
This made me laugh. (I hope the authors of this Facebook posting do not mind my reposting it).
27 December 2019 at 04:50
Just finished watching/surviving "CATS: The Movie" with friends. I'm not even going to try and review it. Instead, I am just going to share random observations from throughout the film:
- Audience of roughly 25 people. For "Cats," apparently this is a packed house.
- The first cats appear onscreen. Holy crap. I have never done acid. Is this what it feels like?
-THIS MOVIE HAS DANCING COCKROACHES. WHY GOD? AND WHY DO THEY HAVE FACES?
- 10 minutes in, someone down the aisle actually cried out "No, no, please stop." I am not making that up.
- "Rum Tum Tugger": This is the first time I have ever seen Jason Derulo start a song without singing his own name at the start of the song. Suddenly the universe feels out of balance.
- We are 25 minutes into this movie, and Rebel Wilson's line of "Stop milking it" has arrived 24 minutes too late.
- Oh, Jennifer Hudson, you deserve better than this.
- Oh, James Corden, you don't.
- ... aaaaaand James Corden just did a crotch-hit joke.
- How did they talk the cast into this? Seriously, Dame Judi Dench looks pissed off and ready to fire her agent from the moment she enters.
- Also -- is Old Deuteronomy the 'Cats" version of Buffalo Bill in "Silence of the Lambs?" Because she is wearing a fur coat. Which means she is wearing the skin of another cat. Which means ... we need to put some lotion in the basket.
- As soon as Rumpleteaser appeared, I flashed back to "Team America: World Police." Suddenly that monologue about going backstage at "Cats" is far more disturbing.
- Why. Is. There. So. Much. Licking?
- Finally, 45 minutes in, the cat orgy begins.
- This is the weirdest way to start an orgy I have ever seen. And I've seen "Eyes Wide Shut."
- Wait. Is that cat wearing pants?
- TAYLOR SWIFT, WHERE ARE YOU? WE CAME TO THIS MOVIE FOR YOU, BUT SO FAR ALL I SEE ARE BLANK SPACES
- The cats have shoes. And are breakdancing. I don't know what anything means anymore.
- Jennifer Hudson is singing and emoting her heart out on "Memory,' and trying her best to bring some actual gravitas to this movie. If only someone would give her a snot rag. Seriously. Guys. Get her a tissue, for the love of god.
- Sir Ian McKellan. Lapping milk out of a bowl in the closet. I ... I don't even know what to say.
- The scale of the cats in this movie makes no sense. One minute the cats are half the height of a human doorway. Next they are so small that they are tap-dancing IN ROWS while standing on the rails of a railway track. Are they two feet tall, or two inches? I question the science here.
- Despite all the madness going on, the lead actress in all this is rather striking. She's even kinda hot OH MY GOD THIS MOVIE IS MESSING WITH MY BRAIN
- Taylor Swift is finally here. Riding in on the DreamWorks logo while spraying catnip glitter. No, I did not make that up.
- Why does Taylor-Cat have giant cat-boobs? None of the other cats do. I have even more questions about the science going on here.
- I was not prepared for the Idris Elba/Taylor Swift cat-suit sex dance.
- I kid you not -- by now, this audience is treating the movie like Rocky Horror and yelling things at the screen. "Try again!" they shout at Mister Mistoffeles, after his fourth straight attempt at magic fails. And when he finally pulls the magic feat off, the whole theater bursts into applause and hooting.
- Covered in fur and snarling, Ian McKellan just pushed another cat off of a boat. Someone in the audience yells "YOU SHALL NOT PASS!" Whole theater loses it.
- Jennifer Hudson, what are you doing? You.are giving a sincere, genuine, heartfelt performance. Good for you, except ... Look around! No one else got the memo! For God's sake, you just sang your heart out and Judi Dench's response is to start RUBBING HER HEAD ON YOU
- Again, not making that last one up!
- Hey, what the sh*t? There is an actor in the background who they forgot to put cat hair on! Just some random pre-CGI dude! Did we not get the update patch on our version of the movie? Or does this mean they have to do ANOTHER fix? God, those poor bastards in animation. They probably never want to see another dancing cat-person as long as they live.
- A few years ago, Idris Elba complained that he hated working on the Avengers movies because he felt they were beneath his dignity. That just popped into my head as I watched him.dangling from Jennifer Hudson's birdcage while wearing a skintight fur suit and growling. No reason.
- DAME JUDI DENCH, STOP BREAKING THE FOURTH WALL, IT'S CREEPING ME OUT WHEN YOU STARE AT ME LIKE THAT WHILE LECTURING ME THAT A CAT IS NOT A DOG
- At last, the credits. Wait -- "Produced by Amblin Entertainment?" Steven Spielberg ... knew? He knew this movie was happening? And didn't try to stop it?
- The movie got a standing ovation. Holy sh*t. People were chanting "Cats are not dogs!"
- Now we want to see if there is a post-credit scene that has dogs. The world needs an Andrew Lloyd Webber Shared Cinematic Universe.
- I wonder if this is what it felt like for the very first audiences to ever see "The Rocky Horror Picture Show."
- If this becomes the next Rocky Horror, I don't even want to think about the props that will.be thrown at the screen. Surely milk, catnip and Taylor Swift CDs will be involved.
- It is over. And all I want to do is go home, pet and cuddle Jackie, Danica and Max, and beg for their forgiveness. I hope they do not kill me in my sleep for my species having inflicted this film upon theirs.
- And yet at the same time, I am strangely impressed by the sheer bollocks that it must have taken to put something this totally bonkers on the screen. For all its faults -- and oh, there are so.many faults -- there is a certain charm.in a movie that waves its freak flag without an ounce of shame.
- Still, I am going to see some really weird sh*t in my dreams for many nights to come, thanks to this experience. Thanks so much for that, Tom Hooper.
|
|
|
|
Post by intoanewlife on Jan 3, 2020 18:00:33 GMT
And yet I bet if he'd just watched robots beat each other up for 3 hours he'd have been in heaven...
|
|
|
|
Post by NorthernAlien on Jan 4, 2020 0:44:08 GMT
Just seen this. Nowhere near as terrible as I was expecting. I am fairly sure we saw the version with the 'corrected' CGI - which was still off at a couple of points, most noticeably in the McCavity song.
There were somewhere between 12 and 20 people in the screen at my town centre cinema for a 19.50 Friday evening showing. I'm not sure of precise numbers as we got there almost exactly as the lights dimmed for the adverts etc, and then there were some arrivals and departures. 4 of those tickets had been sold in advance (I looked at the ushers info board on the way out). I have rarely been to anything at this cinema that has been very busy - the new Star Wars film the other week had maybe 50 people in attendance.
I wonder whether a version known to have dodgy CGI was released at first, firstly because they had the release date confirmed and *had* to have something to fill the screens, and secondly because it allowed the critics to rip into the CGI, the scaling etc, and therefore overlook some of the actually problematic issues (bullying is endemic in the cat community, there's some fat-shaming, and a black man plays the villain being some of the ones that I recall the most). I also doubt that the CGI could be rescued to the extent it appears to have been, as quickly as it seems to have been.
I solidly predict that in 60 years time, my nephew and nieces will gather around their Viewing Unit with their children and grand-children during Twixt-mas for the annual viewing of The Cats Musical Movie - this is destined to be The Sound of Music for the next generation.
|
|
|
|
Post by anthem on Jan 4, 2020 1:57:13 GMT
^
I wasn’t sure if the above comment is sincere or not so I apologise if I’ve missed the mark either way.
I don’t think the corrections to the ‘dodgy’ version were all that significant- a few touch ups here and there. I also think, with respect, that it would be a bit wild to release a shoddy version to distract from wider problems with the piece (some of which originate in the show)- e.g. Bustopher Jones being “remarkably fat.”
I didn’t understand the point about bullying in the cat community at all. With respect, is a fantastical musical theatre piece, not a David Attenborough documentary on cat behaviour.
As for Idris Elba playing the villain, for me it is too simplistic to write it off as problematic per se. Jennifer Hudson plays Grizabella, Jason DeRulo is Rum Tum Tugger, Les Twins are in the supporting cast, and as far as I understand Francesca Hayward who plays Victoria is mixed race; also there are other people of colour in the supporting cast. Just my opinion though and others may differ.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2020 9:46:14 GMT
I found the fat shaming thing weird - several weeks ago James Corden did this serious piece on his US chat show about fat shaming. It “came from his heart” and seemed genuine. Fast forward a few weeks until we find out his totes fine with fat shaming if he gets enough money to do it! Suppose it just goes to help his reputation that little bit more.....
|
|
|
|
Post by NorthernAlien on Jan 4, 2020 10:39:50 GMT
^ I wasn’t sure if the above comment is sincere or not so I apologise if I’ve missed the mark either way. I don’t think the corrections to the ‘dodgy’ version were all that significant- a few touch ups here and there. I also think, with respect, that it would be a bit wild to release a shoddy version to distract from wider problems with the piece (some of which originate in the show)- e.g. Bustopher Jones being “remarkably fat.” I didn’t understand the point about bullying in the cat community at all. With respect, is a fantastical musical theatre piece, not a David Attenborough documentary on cat behaviour. As for Idris Elba playing the villain, for me it is too simplistic to write it off as problematic per se. Jennifer Hudson plays Grizabella, Jason DeRulo is Rum Tum Tugger, Les Twins are in the supporting cast, and as far as I understand Francesca Hayward who plays Victoria is mixed race; also there are other people of colour in the supporting cast. Just my opinion though and others may differ. I do try to be sincere - I also try to think deeply about the theatre, films etc I see. Because I'm heading towards being an academic, with a research focus on culture and how it influences communities (often very subconsciously, and over an extended period of time through repeated viewings), I also often end up musing about what the piece might *mean* in a wider sense. The industry pulls all sorts of tricks, and who knows exactly why they released the first version - which I haven't seen, but from the reviews I read, the CGI sounded absolutely terrible - whereas the version I saw was mostly OK. I appreciate those critics have done a hatchet job on it, but if there's not a lot of difference, why did they feel the need to rip into it to quite the extent they did? It's really not that bad - yes there are some moments that are still bad (the mice in particular with Jennyanydots), but as has also been commented up thread, they'll almost certainly sort that out for home release, and in a few years time we'll all have forgotten about the 'original'. BIB - They are all horrible to Grizabella. They do the equivalent of slut-shaming. They exclude her repeatedly until Victoria (who is the equivalent of 'the new hot girl in class') brings her into the Egyptian to perform, and when she's good, then they're nice to her. It is indeed not a 'David Attenborough documentary on cat behaviour' - it is, in my opinion, a piece commenting on human behaviour, but with all the characters as Cats, which makes it 'cute', and easy to dismiss as just a 'fantastical musical piece'. The race issue is indeed complex, and needs someone more versed than me to write a piece dissecting it - but just because people of colour are in the cast of anything, doesn't give it a free pass to be able to wave away any problems around race. It's not just about casting people of colour - it's what characters you cast them as, and a whole host of other considerations. |
|
625 posts
|
Post by chernjam on Jan 5, 2020 6:51:26 GMT
So I've yet to go see this. Have to be honest, I rarely get to the movies anyway and Christmas holidays are a busy time. I was never a fan of the stage show - liking a lot of the music but not really caring about the dancing and need to have a story to get connected to. But I've been rooting for this just to continue the good-vibes ALW has had in the last 3-4 years here and crossing my fingers it would help greenlight Sunset and other projects.
The mauling it has taken in the U.S. and all really took my interests away from plunking down $15 and committing to a couple hours out. Will definitely see it when it comes on-demand or DVD released. Really bummed by this. A couple of thoughts:
- James Corden's an ass - saying he never saw the final product and commenting that he heard it's a disaster - way too back up the creative team... he couldn't desert this soon enough.
-I forget who one of the actors was pretty emphatic in defending it which was pretty admirable and what a group of artists should do... Look - art is a very subjective thing. And CGI is still a new "art form." We can all Monday-morning quarterback here and say what a misstep it was. Had it worked, Hooper would've been considered a genius, groundbreaking, etc. And who can blame them for trying. Cats is a known property with decades of popularity. Add an all star cast, it would've seemed critic proof. And the trailer reaction I seriously dismissed as just social media echo chamber. But in hindsight, it seems the first impression put people off.
- Marketing wise things seemed a mess. Perhaps it was because of there working up to the last second for the premiere - but they really let the critics have there first word on everything rather than really utilizing their cast to drum up enthusiasm. Especially once there were the delays costing them any possibility for consideration in the upcoming Awards.
- I downloaded the music the night it came out. The soundtrack does sound beautiful (although not having the journey to the heavyside layer? that was just weird) I too hoped that they were going to release a full version - which is probably the saving grace from this whole thing, but who knows now.
- All that being said, it does seem to be fairing better on your side of the pond. Even gross wise, they seem to be doing better business than here.
When they announced the film was going to be out this December in 2018, Never imagined this Christmas season would be such a difficult one for ALW. Really awkward that he's not been heard or seen from and that his team has given up trying to promote the movie themselves.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2020 7:11:21 GMT
- James Corden's an ass - saying he never saw the final product and commenting that he heard it's a disaster - way too back up the creative team... he couldn't desert this soon enough. I found it a rather unfortunate comment too. I understand that his career is not primarily as an actor and that if he never got cast in a role again he'd still make a lot of money, but that's definitely a way of helping to ensure that directors aren't banging down his door in the future. It's one thing to make these types of comments years down the line, but quite another to make them while the film is still in cinemas and trying to make its budget back. I'm surprised that there was seemingly no agreement that the actors were not to badmouth the film to the press. |
|
217 posts
|
Post by Rozzi Rainbow on Jan 5, 2020 17:22:48 GMT
I really enjoyed this, more than the stage show. It's not my favourite stage show, but I was intrigued to see it. I loved the dancing, and the music, and I was able to follow what little storyline there is better with the film. I thought the new song fit in well and is a good addition. Yes the film was weird, but Cats is weird, so I expected that. I liked the development of Victoria and that Old Deuteronomy is female - it got me thinking that most of the cats could probably be portrayed by any gender, which is interesting.
My favourite bit was the tap dancing down Waterloo bridge. As others have said, I thought it a bit strange that Jenny Anydots unzipped her fur to reveal her outfit. I loved Mr Mistoffelees' hat and jacket. I also really liked James Corden.
I'm actually hoping to see it again soon, primarily for the music and dancing, which are both brilliant in my opinion. I wasn't expecting to enjoy it quite that much.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2020 17:35:51 GMT
So I've yet to go see this. Have to be honest, I rarely get to the movies anyway and Christmas holidays are a busy time. I was never a fan of the stage show - liking a lot of the music but not really caring about the dancing and need to have a story to get connected to. But I've been rooting for this just to continue the good-vibes ALW has had in the last 3-4 years here and crossing my fingers it would help greenlight Sunset and other projects. The mauling it has taken in the U.S. and all really took my interests away from plunking down $15 and committing to a couple hours out. Will definitely see it when it comes on-demand or DVD released. Really bummed by this. A couple of thoughts: - James Corden's an ass - saying he never saw the final product and commenting that he heard it's a disaster - way too back up the creative team... he couldn't desert this soon enough. -I forget who one of the actors was pretty emphatic in defending it which was pretty admirable and what a group of artists should do... Look - art is a very subjective thing. And CGI is still a new "art form." We can all Monday-morning quarterback here and say what a misstep it was. Had it worked, Hooper would've been considered a genius, groundbreaking, etc. And who can blame them for trying. Cats is a known property with decades of popularity. Add an all star cast, it would've seemed critic proof. And the trailer reaction I seriously dismissed as just social media echo chamber. But in hindsight, it seems the first impression put people off. - Marketing wise things seemed a mess. Perhaps it was because of there working up to the last second for the premiere - but they really let the critics have there first word on everything rather than really utilizing their cast to drum up enthusiasm. Especially once there were the delays costing them any possibility for consideration in the upcoming Awards. - I downloaded the music the night it came out. The soundtrack does sound beautiful (although not having the journey to the heavyside layer? that was just weird) I too hoped that they were going to release a full version - which is probably the saving grace from this whole thing, but who knows now. - All that being said, it does seem to be fairing better on your side of the pond. Even gross wise, they seem to be doing better business than here. When they announced the film was going to be out this December in 2018, Never imagined this Christmas season would be such a difficult one for ALW. Really awkward that he's not been heard or seen from and that his team has given up trying to promote the movie themselves. Great post - I pretty much agree with everything you've said here. James Corden is generally pretty annoying anyway, but he really HAS been an idiot here - slagging off a film he's in on it's week of release, I mean what-the-actual!? I agree, they DID give it a go, and I can also see how the reaction COULD have been completely different. Won't go through my thoughts on the actual movie again, other than to reiterate it's nothing like as bad as the media have whipped people into thinking and had some great moments. Never should have been a film. They put in a good effort. Which leads as you correctly say to the marketing - a TOTAL mess. Which sadly became clear early December. And as you say RUG/ALW (not main producers but still responsible for promoting ALW's work) have seemingly given up on it. ALW's silence is increasingly deafening. Am sure we will hear his thoughts one day (Vol 3 of the autobiography....? Vol 2 will hopefully mainly be devoted to PattiGate lol). And yes, a saving grace to the whole shambles is a great recording of the score and it would be a TRAVESTY if they don't release the whole thing on double CD. But sadly that is exactly what I think is going to happen as the producers don't wanna draw any more attention to things.... Sad. (Ironically, the straight to DVD Cats in the 1990s also didn't have a CD release, where Joseph and JCS in the same era did - another wasted opportunity. Cats IMO was crying out for a release - orchestrations had changed since 1981 and they had a full orchestra - in a way JCS and Joseph were not; we'd just had the Lyceum JCS and Palladium Joseph CDs which were so much better than the DVD soundtracks. Anyway someone will correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't the last English language official Cats complete-ish recording the Australian one in the mid 80s? 35 odd years ago; I need a new complete Cats recording in my life!!) |
|
