724 posts
|
Post by basdfg on Dec 22, 2019 23:48:58 GMT
The stage production of Cats the musical worked in the early 1980’s despite it being a dance ballet without a solid plot or real storyline. The new idea of “concept musical” and theatre based on production values alone (with a strong musical score yet a very thin narrative) won millions of fans around the world and as a piece of live theatre on the West End stage, it became a global success. THAT SAID...... almost 40 years later, the creative objective and idea behind this piece DOESN’T work on film and the theatrical suspension of disbelief needed by the audience in real life is smashed into a million pieces. It’s mainy due to the anthropomorphism (the way cats are imbued with human traits, emotions, or intentions). It really doesn’t work and is just plain arkward and weird; human hands, human noses and teeth? Eek... It looks like a creepy horror film and in short, what worked on stage sadly DOESN’T always carry over to the larger silver screen. Are the actors meant to be feline creatures or a strange alien hybrid of humans or not? I also thought the biggest cat-astrophy was the confusing situation of scaling; sometimes the cats looked small and other times large in comparison to everyday objects. I despise the continuous casting of James bloody Cordon, I hated the odd race cards being played (the black man is a crook and there were no asian cats), I disliked the Woke-tastic Old Deuteronomy being turned into a female I can’t sing Judi Dench (like the recent Poppa to Mama casting female controversy in Starlight Express the musical) and I hated that the average “speak singing” that according to Director Tom Hooper is better than professional musical talent. I also didn’t like Jennifer Hudson as Grizabella (I laughed out loud at her constant snotty nose), I thought the Gumbie Cat routine eating the cockroaches was horrible and the new song Beautiful Ghosts was just naff.. A wonderful and tragic attempt at a theatrical dance Andrew Lloyd Webber institution that fails at many levels and really, should never have been produced as a film in the first place. I DID like the use of poetry (which of course the show is based from), the delightful dancing (though shoot the person who decided NOT to use the original Gillian Lynne choreography) and thought some of the cinematography and colour palette scheme used looked affective at times.... BUT the claws are out from most with this attempt of a dizzying pussy show, and it’s a far from purrfect 4/10 from me. Tom Hooper needs to be whipped with a cat-o-nine tails and then put down and banned from doing movie musicals ever again. 😂 Meoww 🐾 I think one of the backing cats was asian but I do wonder if the Sianmese issue was why no prominent asain cats appears. Directorally the camera work didn't annoy me unlike in Les Mis. |
|
1,087 posts
|
Post by alicechallice on Dec 22, 2019 23:55:06 GMT
Just seen this in Bristol. A few thoughts: - I felt the reviews were on the whole unfair. Although not always for the right reasons, it was very enjoyable. Yes, some of the cats are clothed and some aren’t. One wears a wedding ring. One has nail varnish. Sometimes they disappear into thin air. But this isn’t the real world - the cats are singing and dancing, so if we can accept that, we can surely accept these other factors. - The worlds they’ve created - primarily London at night - are impressive, varied and atmospheric. - Like the stage show, it’s lacking a narrative (although they’re tried to create a bit more of one). People seemed to be able to get past this fact in the stage show, but can see it wouldn’t be for everyone. - Jennifer Hudson’s snot is as distracting as the reviews suggest. Highly unnecessary. - An audience member burped during the closing notes of Memory. This added a certain something to proceedings. - A LOT of missed opportunities when it comes to dancing. Cats is essentially a dance show, and it was extremely lacking in thrilling dance sequences. Before Cats, we had a trailer for In the Heights, and it looks like they’ve done a much better job in terms of set pieces. There were some things I really missed from the stage show from a dance perspective - like the acrobatics from MungojerrIe & Rumpleteazer - they were totally absent. - The orchestrations are excellent. Quite up-to-date. But I really didn’t enjoy the vocal arrangements. The mix seemed off. Sometimes there would be a harmony line which was really amplified for no apparent reason. And (presumably because of the way that Tom Hooper seems to favour ‘natural’ vocals), it wasn’t always on pitch. Some poor decisions from a vocal arrangement perspective - like giving Rebel Wilson practically all of the female vocal lines in the Gumbie Cat: I really missed the 1930s close harmony. - It was a bit grotesque at times - the cats often seemed to be rolling around in old food or milk. It’s a little revolting. - The cats are pretty horny in early scenes, which makes for uncomfortable viewing. The young couple next to us lost interest half way through and spent the second half practically having sex with each other (perhaps inspired by earlier scenes). - Judi Dench was enjoyable, but looked like the sun from the Teletubbies. And her Mr Tumnus legs were highly disturbing. - But nothing was as disturbing as Idris Elba’s cat body. Needs to be seen to be believed. - James Cordon was just as annoying as you would expect. Actually much more so. - The script is banal trite, with a constant stream of poor jokes. - Ian McKellan drinking water from a plate should never have been allowed to happen. - Race is a bit of an issue - the black actors play a criminal, a pimp and an ex-sex worker. - Victoria has been made into a central character, but not sure it works - she’s not very interesting. - Mr Mistoffeles - one of the few openly gay cats on the West End stage - is now a straight love interest. We weren’t sure how we felt about that! If you’re hesitating, GO! It’s fantastic, and its misgivings make it even more so  I wish we got a into the heights trailer. You should have done really as having it before Cats was the main reason Universal had the trailer ready. I feel a strongly worded letter to you cinema manager is in order. |
|
724 posts
|
Post by basdfg on Dec 23, 2019 0:00:59 GMT
I wish we got a into the heights trailer. You should have done really as having it before Cats was the main reason Universal had the trailer ready. I feel a strongly worded letter to you cinema manager is in order. The trailers we got were Little Women, David Copperfield, Blythe Spirt and Military Wives. |
|
610 posts
|
Post by chernjam on Dec 23, 2019 2:41:26 GMT
I wonder what this will mean for the movie musical of Sunset Boulevard. Very different source material than Cats, and it's not necessarily the genre at fault here, but will Andrew Lloyd Webber/studios be reluctant to proceed? I was thinking the same, but Baz Bamigboye wrote this in his column on Friday: The next Andrew Lloyd Webber show to become a movie musical will be Sunset Boulevard.
The composer told me he’ll join Glenn Close, director Rob Ashford and studio chiefs at Paramount in February to plot their next move.
He said a screenwriter will be hired to add to the first draft by Tom MacRae, who wrote the story for Everybody’s Talking About Jamie.
Let's hope this whole debacle won't delay SB! Do you think they're planning CGI for Glenn  I agree... I was hoping Cats would do well just to get SB moving along (since back in February they were supposedly starting to film in October of this year) |
|
1,087 posts
|
Post by alicechallice on Dec 23, 2019 7:36:16 GMT
You should have done really as having it before Cats was the main reason Universal had the trailer ready. I feel a strongly worded letter to you cinema manager is in order. The trailers we got were Little Women, David Copperfield, Blythe Spirt and Military Wives. Ooh, how did BS look? Just checked and it's not online yet... |
|
|
|
Post by singularsensation on Dec 23, 2019 7:50:33 GMT
Predicted to open with $14-$17 million. A critical and commercial mauling it seems. That was predicted before any reviews came out, as Variety reported that on 10th Dec:
However, it possibly remains unchanged. The Greatest Showman only took $8.8 in it's opening weekend.
$6.5 million in the end, well below the initial projections. A shame to see a movie musical flop, but in this case I think it’s justified given the absolutely shambolic production. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2019 8:44:27 GMT
Having seen the weirder than weird trailer, i really dont think it will! I'd put my house on it. Very confident this film will fly. Il be over at lunchtime to pick up the keys....😝 |
|
|
|
Post by anthem on Dec 23, 2019 8:53:49 GMT
That was predicted before any reviews came out, as Variety reported that on 10th Dec:
However, it possibly remains unchanged. The Greatest Showman only took $8.8 in it's opening weekend.
$6.5 million in the end, well below the initial projections. A shame to see a movie musical flop, but in this case I think it’s justified given the absolutely shambolic production. It’s too early to write it off completely; The Greatest Showman opened at around $9m and look how that turned out. Admittedly, it had better reviews and most likely better word of mouth. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2019 9:49:41 GMT
$6.5 million in the end, well below the initial projections. A shame to see a movie musical flop, but in this case I think it’s justified given the absolutely shambolic production. It’s too early to write it off completely; The Greatest Showman opened at around $9m and look how that turned out. Admittedly, it had better reviews and most likely better word of mouth. GS also opened $2.5 million more in uk opening weekend than Cats has.... |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2019 9:58:02 GMT
That was predicted before any reviews came out, as Variety reported that on 10th Dec:
However, it possibly remains unchanged. The Greatest Showman only took $8.8 in it's opening weekend.
$6.5 million in the end, well below the initial projections. A shame to see a movie musical flop, but in this case I think it’s justified given the absolutely shambolic production.
I think you might be over exagerating slightly..... nothing shambolic about the production, given that filming was done on time and in budget. Most movie musicals flop.
They made changes after the initial trailer, which isn't unheard if, but it was too late and people already hated it. Apart from scrapping the whole thing, nothing could be done to save it, regardless of what they have tried.
Phantom Of The Opera only made 6.5milllion in its opening weekend. Both are terrible film adaptations.
|
|
364 posts
|
Post by tysilio2 on Dec 23, 2019 10:03:55 GMT
Cats and the Movie Musical - today at midday on Sky One.
|
|
364 posts
|
Post by dazzerlump on Dec 23, 2019 10:38:18 GMT
|
|
3,430 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Dec 23, 2019 12:11:10 GMT
I'd put my house on it. Very confident this film will fly. Il be over at lunchtime to pick up the keys....😝 Let's wait and see what the total take is before I call the removal firm. |
|
|
|
Post by singularsensation on Dec 23, 2019 13:11:49 GMT
$6.5 million in the end, well below the initial projections. A shame to see a movie musical flop, but in this case I think it’s justified given the absolutely shambolic production.
I think you might be over exagerating slightly..... nothing shambolic about the production, given that filming was done on time and in budget. Most movie musicals flop.
They made changes after the initial trailer, which isn't unheard if, but it was too late and people already hated it. Apart from scrapping the whole thing, nothing could be done to save it, regardless of what they have tried.
Phantom Of The Opera only made 6.5milllion in its opening weekend. Both are terrible film adaptations.
The film very didn’t nearly even make it to its scheduled release date due to last minute recording and incomplete visual effects. They have even had to send out a new version with updated effects after its opening weekend. Shambolic is absolutely the right word to use. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2019 13:35:52 GMT
So now that they are distributing the ‘better’ version to every cinema in the world where do we stand with getting a refund/free tickets to the proper version?!?
Obviously the version I saw the other day wasn’t finished to the filmmakers specification so why were we allowed to buy a shoddy product?!?!
|
|
1,481 posts
|
Post by steve10086 on Dec 23, 2019 14:47:15 GMT
So now that they are distributing the ‘better’ version to every cinema in the world where do we stand with getting a refund/free tickets to the proper version?!? Obviously the version I saw the other day wasn’t finished to the filmmakers specification so why were we allowed to buy a shoddy product?!?! Got nothing better to do? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2019 15:11:01 GMT
So now that they are distributing the ‘better’ version to every cinema in the world where do we stand with getting a refund/free tickets to the proper version?!? Obviously the version I saw the other day wasn’t finished to the filmmakers specification so why were we allowed to buy a shoddy product?!?! Got nothing better to do? .....than come on a forum and post a comment? or go see Cats twice?! i think it’s obvious I don’t! ☹️ |
|
|
|
Post by intoanewlife on Dec 23, 2019 15:20:48 GMT
So now that they are distributing the ‘better’ version to every cinema in the world where do we stand with getting a refund/free tickets to the proper version?!? Obviously the version I saw the other day wasn’t finished to the filmmakers specification so why were we allowed to buy a shoddy product?!?! Then everyone who saw Black Panther at the cinema can also get refunds, because they did tonnes of FX work on it between its cinema and home media release. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2019 15:33:35 GMT
So now that they are distributing the ‘better’ version to every cinema in the world where do we stand with getting a refund/free tickets to the proper version?!? Obviously the version I saw the other day wasn’t finished to the filmmakers specification so why were we allowed to buy a shoddy product?!?! Then everyone who saw Black Panther at the cinema can also get refunds, because they did tonnes of FX work on it between its cinema and home media release. That’s different thou. That wasn’t 3 days after it opened |
|
|
|
Post by intoanewlife on Dec 23, 2019 15:56:41 GMT
Then everyone who saw Black Panther at the cinema can also get refunds, because they did tonnes of FX work on it between its cinema and home media release. That’s different thou. That wasn’t 3 days after it opened It isn't, they still techincally saw an incomplete film... I actually agree with you. Anyone who has already paid to see it should be able to see it the new version for free as a gesture of good will, clearly the theatres aren't so full they couldn't fit them in... How many people would actually want to put themselves through it again just to see a paw instead of a human hand? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2019 15:57:34 GMT
Well as a huge fan of the stage musical (the New London version along with the original Starlight Express is what got me in to musical theatre) this is a fascinating topic. I saw the film on Friday and have been trying to compose my thoughts since then. Certainly it's not amazing and I think that the fact that the mode, median and mean of our poll above is 3 stars is much more accurately representative of the product than the absolute savaging it's getting in the media. The CGI is probably the least worthy thing of comment for me but as the world feels differently let's start with that. I think it's fine. Yes it's a bit weird but it's fine. I got used to it in the first 5 minutes as I am sure anyone actually watching the thing would have too if they were honest. Yes they have gone with human faces and figures morphed into Cats and yes it can be odd. No doubt there are things which stick out and look daft (Dame Judy's hand complete with wedding ring; a few very human feet) and I assume these are being addressed in the ongoing work. But the constant tinkering with the CGI is going to make such a minuscule difference to the overall feel of the thing, as to be almost irrelevant. Cats has to have a leap of imagination and faith. It works in the theatre. How do you do this on film? I honestly don't know. And I think part of the problem is that this is a film that should never have been made. Theatre is a different beast and Cats is SO inherently theatrical, I just can't see how you can translate that to film. So people don't like the CGI. I understand. But what are the options? Well, at one extreme you have no CGI and you have humans dressed up as Cats, just as the stage show. That of course has been done already with the straight to DVD film in the 90s. And it's great. Probably couldn't be bettered. The other extreme is you ditch the humans altogether and have actual CGI Cats - like the Lion King re-make. But all the choreography was designed for human Cats so it would never have worked either. So I do think they were stuck where they ended up. My own personal opinion is that the CGI was OK. So on to other things...... The story. This is my biggest bug bear. In 1981 you had people at the top of their theatrical game bringing this Cats world to life. ALW, Trevor Nunn, Gillian Lynne, John Napier, David Hersey. It's creative Heaven. An iconic set of poems by TS Elliot. Different characters presenting themselves. Trevor Nunn understood the material and with ALW wove a very vague narrative through the poems and of course wrote Memory but all based on scraps of TSE's unpublished work. A vague concept of a Kitty Heaven and a new life was integrated. It was dreamy, spiritual, deeply creative. Essentially a ballet but with rockier music. At the climax, strings of fairy lights, enough dry ice to drown half the Stalls, a flying tyre, a descending staircase and EP disappearing in to the roof of the New London as the music crescendos - you can't get much more theatrical than that. Now of course it wasn't for everyone. People would come out and say "there's no story." But I think they just didn't get it. It wasn't for them and that's fine. But I think there is a beautifully simple spiritual story about redemption and rebirth. And whatever people's personal opinion, enough people 'got' Cats to give it 21 years in the West End. So for the film, of course the producers are thinking, they are going out to the masses. And the masses can't cope with a vague ballet like story. It has to be obvious. So we have them constantly spelling it out. Not in TSE's words but someone else's. And it's jarring. We have to have a baddie. So Macavity wants to be the one to go to the Heaviside Layer so he kidnaps Rebel Wilson, James Corden etc etc and shoves them on a barge in the Thames. Dame Judi says to Victoria 'do you want to come and watch me make the Jellicle choice' and it sounds plain wrong. You can't take poetry that people will use their own feelings to interpret and make it so literal. Whereas in the show the concept of the Jellicle choice and the Heaviside layer work; when they are rammed down out throats in the film they just sound ridiculous. The next thing I felt it lacked was spectacle. So much of it takes place inside that disused theatre, it is claustrophobic. One of the great creatively releasing parts of film compared to the stage is that action can take place anywhere. I really liked the sections in Piccadilly Circus and for example when Skimble goes across the Thames with Big Ben behind him. Yes please to more London scenery! Then the Jellicle Ball - in the theatre, half way through, all the fairy lights come on and it looks gorgeous. Coupled with Lynne's amazing choreography it was just amazing. Here we had no extra light and no big ensemble dancing. All the Cats seemed to dance a bit on their own, with everyone else watching. Just felt a bit flat. Mr Mistoffeles, another very visual moment in the show, in the film kept stopping and starting and was just a bit boring. And as for the high point on the whole piece, Journey To The Heaviside Layer, most kids doing GCSE computing could have probably designed something more exciting. The cast? Well, anyone that has heard me talk on here will know that I'd love nothing more than to have musical theatre actors belting things out note perfect; but of course we have to have names! But in fairness most were better than expected. Wilson and Corden I was most worried about but they seemed to sing ok (helped by auto-tune no doubt). That said they were still the weakest. Also wasn't Bustopher meant to be an aristocrat rather than a slob in a bin? Rest of the cast were pretty good though. Dame Judi and Sir Ian can't sing so they speak sing. I really don't like speak singing but I didn't mind it here - they are both absolute legends so let them do what they want I say. That's all the negative. Despite all that I DID enjoy it and will go again. I'd give it three stars I guess. Not a patch on the stage show, but given this was always going to be flawed, I think they gave it a good go and I was entertained. The music I thought was great. Listening to the CD at home, with none of the distraction of the visuals I really liked it. Some of the updated orchestrations and the new rhythms in for example Jellicle Songs and Bustopher I really liked. Skimbleshanks too in fact. Memory, given it was never going to be sung pure MT style is very good. (Though Heaven knows, Scherzinger must be relieved she never got involved. Oh and that reminds me, I am waiting for #EP to break her silence!). The music being one of the big plusses, I really hope they do release a double CD of the whole soundtrack. Have to say given all the media negativity, I do think they might not bother now. Thinking about taking sung through musicals to film in general, Les Mis and Phantom were also big disappointments. For me the problem is this. You have people like ALW who understand musical theatre entirely. It is their world. But they do NOT understand film. It is a completely different medium. Then you have directors who work in film, but they really do not understand (sung through) musicals. Then you combine this with the perception (I have no idea if it's true) that the vast filmgoing public cannot cope with (and do not want) sung through musicals, sung as written in the score. So you have added talking and the dire speak singing of Les Mis. And it's a combination that cannot work. It pleases nobody. For me personally, I would like to see films of sung through musicals admitting before they are made that they are going to be niche (for musical lovers), having a lower budget, and staying as close as possible to the source material. While they may not make mega bucks, they would be artistically great, have longevity and I honestly think producers might be pleasantly surprised that they do better than expected. I wonder how this will affect ALW's enthusiasm for bringing other shows to film. It's certainly not gonna improve it. But whether or not he decides to stop doing it altogether remains to be seen. Sunset if they do make it I passionately feel MUST be a film of the musical in it's purest sense. It is never gonna have mass appeal so please let them go with something faithful to the stage show with those glorious songs sung to perfection with a huge film orchestra (I think it's beyond ridiculous to cast Glenn now, but that's, not for here). No idea what's happened to Elton John's Joseph (nothing, I expect). Off topic, but I also agree with everything Dave25 has said about the possible Miss Saigon film. Pleeeeeease just sing it and act through song, not in spite of it. I also wonder how this will affect ALW generally. Despite the people that see Cats giving it 3 stars, the media have decided they hate it. Which is odd. I guess we live in a world of hyperbole. Politics in this county (well, everywhere) is going to the far Left and the far Right when what is logical and right for most people is something in the Centre. Is it driven by the social media world that we have to have such strong opinions? Some of the American stuff is so vastly overrated (Hamilton - good, but for me nothing like the hype) and Cats is laughably underrated. At worst it could be tedious and boring. It it wasn't your thing. But the critics are acting as if Cats is personally responsible for the death of Lady Diana. So yes, I hope it doesn't affect ALW too much. (I know, I know, he's a multi-millionaire and the most successful living musical composer so he doesn't need sympathy...... but creatives are sensitive. And purely from a selfish perspective - I want him to keep writing musicals - I hope it's not too hard a knock). I remember reading in an ALW biography about 20 years ago that when Jeeves flopped and closed it didn't matter at all - anyone can have a failure. But when Starlight Express on Broadway was utterly savaged and then DIDN'T close (it ran for 18 months having taken a huge advance) it affected him badly. He hated what it had become apparently (it was so different to the London version) and it was there on Broadway, being panned, but he was powerless to do anything about it. The Cats film is like that. It is everywhere and he can't escape the reception it's getting. Stephen Ward for example came and went and really wasn't on the world's radar. It was a personal project and I don't think ever expected to be a big success. So I really don't think he minded it's short run. But this is really quite different. So I think I hope he sticks to stage shows from now and draws a line under film. And when the Cats hoo-hah has died down, I am greatly looking forward to ALW's Cinderella :-) (Gosh that post went on forever - apologies!) |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2019 16:00:37 GMT
So now that they are distributing the ‘better’ version to every cinema in the world where do we stand with getting a refund/free tickets to the proper version?!? Obviously the version I saw the other day wasn’t finished to the filmmakers specification so why were we allowed to buy a shoddy product?!?! Then everyone who saw Black Panther at the cinema can also get refunds, because they did tonnes of FX work on it between its cinema and home media release. Home media is a fundamentally different experience and you can't really complain if it isn't identical. There are region-specific edits in both the cinema and home releases, for example. (Also, if there was a director's commentary in the cinema you'd get incredibly annoyed that they refused to shut the hell up and let you watch the film.) The Cats situation is more akin to paying full price to see a show on stage and only finding out during the performance that you're watching a preview. |
|
|
|
Post by intoanewlife on Dec 23, 2019 16:04:58 GMT
The Avatar characters were far weirder looking than this and people got used to those in 2 minutes. Of course that was a big dumb 'boy' movie though, so it didn't cop any backlash.
If this was a film where the cats looked exactly the same but were all running around with machine guns shooting each other, their appearance would not be a problem I'm sure...
|
|
|
|
Post by intoanewlife on Dec 23, 2019 16:12:23 GMT
Then everyone who saw Black Panther at the cinema can also get refunds, because they did tonnes of FX work on it between its cinema and home media release. Home media is a fundamentally different experience and you can't really complain if it isn't identical. There are region-specific edits in both the cinema and home releases, for example. (Also, if there was a director's commentary in the cinema you'd get incredibly annoyed that they refused to shut the hell up and let you watch the film.) The Cats situation is more akin to paying full price to see a show on stage and only finding out during the performance that you're watching a preview. The film was not complete. The FX work was not finished. They didn't fix anything for home release, they simply completed the original work. It is exactly the same thing. FX work is farmed out to different FX companies who are contracted to do a job, it is not done by the studios. This has nothing to do with Hooper or Universal. The FX company could not complete the work on time. It happens everyday in film and television. The only reason this became public knowledge is because someone leaked the cinema memo, so Universal were forced to make an official announcement. This is usually not the case. It happens all the time. |
|
1,481 posts
|
Post by steve10086 on Dec 23, 2019 16:31:06 GMT
The Cats situation is more akin to paying full price to see a show on stage and only finding out during the performance that you're watching a preview. Isn’t the version released to cinemas the same as seen by the critics? Therefore it isn’t the same situation as a preview. This is more like the tinkering that continues to happen after opening night. |
|
