Cats

[42ndBlvd]

Interesting that they filmed the last performance of the original production. Maybe one day it'll be released in full.

[steve10086]

May 16, 2021 21:58:36 GMT 42ndBlvd said:

Interesting that they filmed the last performance of the original production. Maybe one day it'll be released in full.

Wow, can clearly see myself in the circle in that opening shot. What a night that was.

[David J]

Finally get to see, if briefly, those revolving seats and set at work

[ceebee]

May 16, 2021 23:06:31 GMT David J said:

Finally get to see, if briefly, those revolving seats and set at work

Hi David - which point in the video is it? I couldn't see it... Thanks.

[David J]

You see those sets in their pre-show position. During the overture it is dark but you can see movement and at 0:42 there is the silhouette of a moving seat

[inthenose]

www.theguardian.com/culture/2021/oct/08/andrew-lloyd-webber-says-he-hated-the-film-cats-so-much-he-bought-a-dog

[Oliver]

Oct 8, 2021 18:39:33 GMT inthenose said:

www.theguardian.com/culture/2021/oct/08/andrew-lloyd-webber-says-he-hated-the-film-cats-so-much-he-bought-a-dog

It's the only good film adaptation of any of his musicals. He wouldn't be saying any of this if the film had been a success. It's not a perfect adaptation but hugely underrated. I would go as far as to say it's one of the best film adaptations of a stage musical, though there are relatively few that are good. How can he lambast this adaptation but not have a single bad thing to say about Joel Schumacher's woefully miscast and tasteless Phantom film? He's doing himself no favours by trying to side with the film critics since their reaction to it had more to do with their dislike of him than the film itself.

[Oliver]

Oct 8, 2021 18:39:33 GMT inthenose said:

www.theguardian.com/culture/2021/oct/08/andrew-lloyd-webber-says-he-hated-the-film-cats-so-much-he-bought-a-dog

It's the only good film adaptation of any of his musicals. He wouldn't be saying any of this if the film had been a success. It's not a perfect adaptation but it is hugely underrated. I would go as far as to say it's one of the best film adaptations of a stage musical, though there are relatively few that are good. How can he lambast this adaptation but not have a single bad thing to say about Joel Schumacher's woefully miscast and tasteless Phantom film? He's doing himself no favours by trying to side with the film critics since their reaction to it had more to do with their dislike of him than the film.

[TallPaul]

Except in the original Variety article, which is several times longer than The Guardian reprint, he does lambast the casting of Gerard Butler. "The Phantom was too young, and the whole point of the Phantom is he needs to be quite a bit older than Christine."

He's also "not a huge fan" of the 1973 adaptation of JCS.

Variety article

[singingbird]

Oct 8, 2021 22:13:29 GMT Oliver said:

Oct 8, 2021 18:39:33 GMT inthenose said:

www.theguardian.com/culture/2021/oct/08/andrew-lloyd-webber-says-he-hated-the-film-cats-so-much-he-bought-a-dog

It's the only good film adaptation of any of his musicals. He wouldn't be saying any of this if the film had been a success. It's not a perfect adaptation but it is hugely underrated. I would go as far as to say it's one of the best film adaptations of a stage musical, though there are relatively few that are good. How can he lambast this adaptation but not have a single bad thing to say about Joel Schumacher's woefully miscast and tasteless Phantom film? He's doing himself no favours by trying to side with the film critics since their reaction to it had more to do with their dislike of him than the film.

I'll defend the Cats movie, too. I preferred it to the stage show because it turned the piece into a kind of dream, set in a vividly depicted, half-remembered post-war London. It wasn't perfect but I thought it had a lot of atmosphere and an uncanniness which suited the material. It also gave me an underlying subtext that the original show didn't quite have - which is that, perhaps, these figures that appear after dark and dance in the ruins are actually ghosts (the new song, which is my favourite melody ALW has composed in a long long time, certainly suggests this might be possible). Souls in purgatory, perhaps, in a bombed-out London, hoping to move on? I think it was hugely underrated and a lot of the response was a knee-jerk reaction. But equally, maybe, other people just didn't get from it what I did! Perhaps one day it will be re-evaluated. 

I also love the Evita movie and hate the Phantom one. JCS feels hard to compare because it feels quite basic, like the central conceit wasn't quite followed through, but it's a great idea to frame it as travelling players, who then leave Jesus on the cross and depart at the end. Pretty powerful stuff, really.

I doubt we'll see any other ALW shows turned into feature films now.

[Oliver]

Oct 9, 2021 8:07:34 GMT TallPaul said:

Except in the original Variety article, which is several times longer than The Guardian reprint, he does lambast the casting of Gerard Butler. "The Phantom was too young, and the whole point of the Phantom is he needs to be quite a bit older than Christine."

He's also "not a huge fan" of the 1973 adaptation of JCS.

Variety article

I didn't know he said that. It's puzzling to me because that was the one movie where he could have had a big say. His friend was directing it and RUG owned the rights I believe. Also, Gerard Butler had to audition for Lloyd Webber in person so he could have easily said no to his casting (Butler's lack of singing ability would be ample justification). And didn't ALW say that Michael Crawford was too old? I wasn't one of the people who thought MC should or shouldn't play Phantom in the movie incidentally but what ALW says in Variety seems contradictory to me. 

[Oliver]

Oct 9, 2021 8:53:27 GMT kit66 said:

"Knowing" ALW I can't believe he didn't have a say in the movie of Cats before it was released.

He had no control over the movie because he had sold the rights decades ago. The only say he had over the live action was what the director allowed (and that was very little). He had a say over the music as composer and was responsible for the new orchestrations.

[max]

Oct 9, 2021 8:58:02 GMT singingbird said:

Oct 8, 2021 22:13:29 GMT Oliver said:

It's the only good film adaptation of any of his musicals. He wouldn't be saying any of this if the film had been a success. It's not a perfect adaptation but it is hugely underrated. I would go as far as to say it's one of the best film adaptations of a stage musical, though there are relatively few that are good. How can he lambast this adaptation but not have a single bad thing to say about Joel Schumacher's woefully miscast and tasteless Phantom film? He's doing himself no favours by trying to side with the film critics since their reaction to it had more to do with their dislike of him than the film.

I'll defend the Cats movie, too. I preferred it to the stage show because it turned the piece into a kind of dream, set in a vividly depicted, half-remembered post-war London. It wasn't perfect but I thought it had a lot of atmosphere and an uncanniness which suited the material. It also gave me an underlying subtext that the original show didn't quite have - which is that, perhaps, these figures that appear after dark and dance in the ruins are actually ghosts (the new song, which is my favourite melody ALW has composed in a long long time, certainly suggests this might be possible). Souls in purgatory, perhaps, in a bombed-out London, hoping to move on? I think it was hugely underrated and a lot of the response was a knee-jerk reaction. But equally, maybe, other people just didn't get from it what I did! Perhaps one day it will be re-evaluated. 

I also love the Evita movie and hate the Phantom one. JCS feels hard to compare because it feels quite basic, like the central conceit wasn't quite followed through, but it's a great idea to frame it as travelling players, who then leave Jesus on the cross and depart at the end. Pretty powerful stuff, really.

I doubt we'll see any other ALW shows turned into feature films now.

Wouldn't you just love to edit out some of the excruciating 'comedy' from Rebel Wilson and James Corden?  Just amazed me that Tom Hooper didn't have more taste than that, (ALW has said he begged for 'comic lines' to be cut) and more of an appreciation for the world and linguistic register of T.S.Eliot.  Unfortunately much of that is early on, so there's a big barrier to get past in order to enjoy the things about it that are good (though the opening sequence is good too).   It's a real shame.  I feel someone could have said 'this can be saved' and just cut out what was most crude and crass.  Override the director, and never allow him a director's cut later on! lol

[max]

I remember seeing the huge TV van outside the theatre on the day of the final performance. It's great to see these clips. I think Film is over rated generally. Sweeping statement, but I'm so often disappointed by film, and amazed what a tough ride theatre gets critically in comparison to what they get away with in the cinema.

When it comes to recording stage I think it's even better when it's 'just' video rather than film (or video graded to look more like film). Just 'TV quality' is great, and I don't care if it's lower status - it feels live and immediate, as do these clips of the final performance).

[singingbird]

Oct 9, 2021 13:32:32 GMT max said:

Oct 9, 2021 8:58:02 GMT singingbird said:

I'll defend the Cats movie, too. I preferred it to the stage show because it turned the piece into a kind of dream, set in a vividly depicted, half-remembered post-war London. It wasn't perfect but I thought it had a lot of atmosphere and an uncanniness which suited the material. It also gave me an underlying subtext that the original show didn't quite have - which is that, perhaps, these figures that appear after dark and dance in the ruins are actually ghosts (the new song, which is my favourite melody ALW has composed in a long long time, certainly suggests this might be possible). Souls in purgatory, perhaps, in a bombed-out London, hoping to move on? I think it was hugely underrated and a lot of the response was a knee-jerk reaction. But equally, maybe, other people just didn't get from it what I did! Perhaps one day it will be re-evaluated. 

I also love the Evita movie and hate the Phantom one. JCS feels hard to compare because it feels quite basic, like the central conceit wasn't quite followed through, but it's a great idea to frame it as travelling players, who then leave Jesus on the cross and depart at the end. Pretty powerful stuff, really.

I doubt we'll see any other ALW shows turned into feature films now.

Wouldn't you just love to edit out some of the excruciating 'comedy' from Rebel Wilson and James Corden?  Just amazed me that Tom Hooper didn't have more taste than that, (ALW has said he begged for 'comic lines' to be cut) and more of an appreciation for the world and linguistic register of T.S.Eliot.  Unfortunately much of that is early on, so there's a big barrier to get past in order to enjoy the things about it that are good (though the opening sequence is good too).   It's a real shame.  I feel someone could have said 'this can be saved' and just cut out what was most crude and crass.  Override the director, and never allow him a director's cut later on! lol

Absolutely agree!

[Oliver]

Oct 9, 2021 13:32:32 GMT max said:

Oct 9, 2021 8:58:02 GMT singingbird said:

I'll defend the Cats movie, too. I preferred it to the stage show because it turned the piece into a kind of dream, set in a vividly depicted, half-remembered post-war London. It wasn't perfect but I thought it had a lot of atmosphere and an uncanniness which suited the material. It also gave me an underlying subtext that the original show didn't quite have - which is that, perhaps, these figures that appear after dark and dance in the ruins are actually ghosts (the new song, which is my favourite melody ALW has composed in a long long time, certainly suggests this might be possible). Souls in purgatory, perhaps, in a bombed-out London, hoping to move on? I think it was hugely underrated and a lot of the response was a knee-jerk reaction. But equally, maybe, other people just didn't get from it what I did! Perhaps one day it will be re-evaluated. 

I also love the Evita movie and hate the Phantom one. JCS feels hard to compare because it feels quite basic, like the central conceit wasn't quite followed through, but it's a great idea to frame it as travelling players, who then leave Jesus on the cross and depart at the end. Pretty powerful stuff, really.

I doubt we'll see any other ALW shows turned into feature films now.

Wouldn't you just love to edit out some of the excruciating 'comedy' from Rebel Wilson and James Corden?  Just amazed me that Tom Hooper didn't have more taste than that, (ALW has said he begged for 'comic lines' to be cut) and more of an appreciation for the world and linguistic register of T.S.Eliot.  Unfortunately much of that is early on, so there's a big barrier to get past in order to enjoy the things about it that are good (though the opening sequence is good too).   It's a real shame.  I feel someone could have said 'this can be saved' and just cut out what was most crude and crass.  Override the director, and never allow him a director's cut later on! lol

I agree about Rebel Wilson, she was miscast, a less than adequate singer, and the presentation of her song was in poor taste. You're right that this causes a lull very early on which is unfortunate. However, James Cordon was an inspired choice in my opinion, he is a fine singer and I see nothing wrong with his performance. I like his comic touches, I don't think these were excessive at all, except perhaps the eating out of bins which presumably wasn't his idea. These comic touches are not laugh out loud funny of course but they add a touch of lightness which works well on film for this kind of sequence. It's not as if the theatre performance is entirely free of camp, it is a humorous piece in CATS so I think it was appropriate here. Any more than that would have been too much though. 

[Oliver]

Oct 9, 2021 14:07:41 GMT Oliver said:

Oct 9, 2021 13:32:32 GMT max said:

Wouldn't you just love to edit out some of the excruciating 'comedy' from Rebel Wilson and James Corden?  Just amazed me that Tom Hooper didn't have more taste than that, (ALW has said he begged for 'comic lines' to be cut) and more of an appreciation for the world and linguistic register of T.S.Eliot.  Unfortunately much of that is early on, so there's a big barrier to get past in order to enjoy the things about it that are good (though the opening sequence is good too).   It's a real shame.  I feel someone could have said 'this can be saved' and just cut out what was most crude and crass.  Override the director, and never allow him a director's cut later on! lol

Double post

[steve10086]

Oct 9, 2021 12:33:22 GMT Oliver said:

but what ALW says in Variety seems contradictory to me 

Well there’s a shock!

New project: “It’s the best thing I’ve ever seen”

5 years later: “It was $hit”

Am sick of his routine now.