610 posts
|
Post by chernjam on Jan 5, 2020 22:58:01 GMT
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!!) Ive not given up complete hope on that. The reality that they can stream it without having to produce CDs/albums anymore could be a way of recouping some of their losses. Particularly since so many scenes were not included on the highlights. I get it that this is a Universal records release thing - but RUG and their recording decisions have been mind-boggling. Worst case -when it is released on DVD/blu ray you can probably stream it into an audio file and have a more or less complete recording. But I wonder if the soundtrack is different from the movie version? |
|
82 posts
|
Post by ada92 on Jan 6, 2020 18:31:01 GMT
Sooooo - my opinion of CATS. Not appalling by any means if you go with an open mind. It is nothing like as good as the stage show. I didn't like the "talk singing" but when people actually did sing, they sang well. I didn't like how they changed loads of the lyrics. I didn't like how they CGI'd the dancing in places - it looked almost animated. The jellicle ball was a farce - no energy, lots of rolling on the floor! Although they were all panting afterwards??? The Munkustrap did a great job as did Skimbles (providing he did the tap dancing himself). Mungo and Rump song was awful. But it was worth seeing, but would still prefer to see the stage show with original choreo and good singers!
|
|
378 posts
|
Post by ctas on Jan 6, 2020 19:07:04 GMT
as did Skimbles (providing he did the tap dancing himself). He absolutely did. I’m pretty sure all the dancers did, it looks like they were cast for dance first and there’s several world-class dancers in the mix (including McRae who played Skimbleshanks). |
|
1,997 posts
|
Post by distantcousin on Jan 7, 2020 12:05:56 GMT
I personally know about 10 people who have now seen the film and all of them enjoyed it (to a more or lesser degree).
|
|
155 posts
|
Post by synchrony on Jan 7, 2020 14:18:44 GMT
I saw Cats last week with my partner. He is a fan of the stage show, and also really liked the film. I am NOT a fan of the stage show and had mixed feelings about the film.
I don’t like the stage show because I need a good plot to care about the characters. A previous poster mentioned Company and Chorus Line and I don’t really like either of those for the same reason. I also don’t find most of the songs in Cats very good. So I went in without high hopes.
The good: I REALLY liked Victoria and Munkustrap. They were easily the highlights for me. I also liked Taylor Swift and a fair amount of the second half of the film. I liked that it had a LITTLE bit more plot than the stage show, and how they used Victoria. I loved the way the ears were animated.
The bad: I didn’t like most of the first half-hour. I found Bustopher rolling in rotting food and Jennyanydots skinning herself disturbing. I didn’t mind the CGI fur, but I actually wished they’d gone all the way and furred the hands and faces too, instead of half-half. There still isn’t enough plot for me; I don’t really care about who gets to the Heavyside Layer (or understand what it’s meant to even be). Also, although I thought the dancers were excellent, I didn’t like the choreography much. I particularly disliked the staging of The Ad-dressing of Cats, which seemed staged for a theatre rather than for film.
We went to an evening show on New Year's Eve. There were 4 other people in the cinema.
|
|
8,107 posts
|
Post by alece10 on Jan 9, 2020 17:24:34 GMT
Just watching the original Cats film that I recorded over Christmas.
Anyone know why it was filmed at the Adelphi Theatre and not the New London theatre?
|
|
1,997 posts
|
Post by distantcousin on Jan 9, 2020 18:22:27 GMT
Just watching the original Cats film that I recorded over Christmas. Anyone know why it was filmed at the Adelphi Theatre and not the New London theatre?
Because it was filmed 8 years after the New London production closed  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2020 18:37:18 GMT
Just watching the original Cats film that I recorded over Christmas. Anyone know why it was filmed at the Adelphi Theatre and not the New London theatre?
Because it was filmed 8 years after the New London production closed Cats closed at the New London in 2002. The film was recorded at the Adelphi in 1997. I don't know the answer for why they didn't film in the New London. Maybe they wanted to scale-up the set for the film, and the Adelphi is a better shape for filming. Or it could be because they didn't want to interrupt the running production, as I believe it was filmed over 18 days. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2020 19:19:42 GMT
IIRC it was filmed at the Adelphi because it offered more convenience. I imagine they wanted to do more than simply film a live performance from the auditorium, and using a separate set meant they could set up suitable lighting and platforms for the cameras and leave them in place overnight whereas at the New London they'd have had to spend a large part of each day setting up and clearing everything out.
|
|
1,997 posts
|
Post by distantcousin on Jan 9, 2020 19:36:21 GMT
IIRC it was filmed at the Adelphi because it offered more convenience. I imagine they wanted to do more than simply film a live performance from the auditorium, and using a separate set meant they could set up suitable lighting and platforms for the cameras and leave them in place overnight whereas at the New London they'd have had to spend a large part of each day setting up and clearing everything out. Interestingly, it was filmed at the Adelphi just after the original production of Sunset Boulevard closed. |
|
3,429 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by ceebee on Jan 12, 2020 19:06:36 GMT
Took my daughters to see this today. We really enjoyed it. Certainly not worthy of the terrible reviews. A fair 3 star film in my view, and a better narrative than the stage show. The music sounded fantastic. Glad we went - the cinema was probably 50% full.
|
|
1,736 posts
|
Post by fiyero on Jan 12, 2020 19:10:24 GMT
I saw the film this afternoon for the 3rd time. Judi's hand was still distinctly human with a wedding ring in that famous bit at the end of which a shot was shared when the new updated version was released. Does that mean I've still not seen the updated version or is it more subtle than I'd expect? In the bit at the end at least 2 others had rings so it feels like they are messing with me!
|
|
214 posts
|
Post by Rozzi Rainbow on Jan 12, 2020 20:46:18 GMT
I saw it again this afternoon, my mum's opinion was "it's still weird" (she also saw it with me the first time) and my thought was "yes, but it's beautiful". I enjoyed it just as much, if not more the second time around. I was able to notice other bits I'd missed before, such as the ears twitching.
I love the harmonies in Old Deuteronomy, and the poignancy of Beautiful Ghosts, especially when Victoria sings "all that I wanted, was to be wanted". I loved Skimbleshanks' tap dancing again, pleased to read above he did all the dancing himself.
My two local cinemas are no longer showing it, so I went to a Vue. It also still had Judi's ring (although not on her wedding finger, I noticed it on her right hand when she was in the basket judging the Jellicle Ball) so I'm also confused as to whether we saw the updated version or not. It didn't detract from my enjoyment though.
|
|
214 posts
|
Post by Rozzi Rainbow on Jan 12, 2020 21:16:55 GMT
I forgot to say - if I'd been the only person there I would have definitely been singing along! I was silently singing Mr Mistoffelees to myself. Maybe they can do a sing along version ...
|
|
|
|
Post by crabtree on Jan 12, 2020 22:31:15 GMT
now our various knee jerk outrages have subsided, it's still a peculiar movie, and a clumsily made especially next to the masterclass that is 1917, but if you have time do look at this....
|
|
632 posts
|
Post by ncbears on Feb 3, 2020 22:26:43 GMT
And you knew it was coming - the midnight screening cult of Cats - being advertised as Rowdy Cats. Rowdy Cats in LA and NYC |
|
|
|
Post by intoanewlife on Feb 3, 2020 23:18:52 GMT
I saw this last week...the reviews were far too kind.
|
|
|
|
Post by crabtree on Feb 3, 2020 23:48:39 GMT
What do we make of Rebel Wilson destroying this film that she starred in, at the BAFTAS's last night. I guess she's under no obligation to the film now, and I suspect there may not be a sequel (the balloon comes back, and picks them all off one by one, like an Agatha Christie)
|
|
|
|
Post by intoanewlife on Feb 4, 2020 0:17:56 GMT
What do we make of Rebel Wilson destroying this film that she starred in, at the BAFTAS's last night. I guess she's under no obligation to the film now, and I suspect there may not be a sequel (the balloon comes back, and picks them all off one by one, like an Agatha Christie) It's kinda interesting that the 2 people who were by far the worst in it are the only to 2 to slag it off publicly. Says a lot about them really. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2020 8:15:31 GMT
What do we make of Rebel Wilson destroying this film that she starred in, at the BAFTAS's last night. I guess she's under no obligation to the film now, and I suspect there may not be a sequel (the balloon comes back, and picks them all off one by one, like an Agatha Christie) It's kinda interesting that the 2 people who were by far the worst in it are the only to 2 to slag it off publicly. Says a lot about them really. What does it say about them?! whats more flabbergasting is that man with all the hair on his face in the audience during her speech! Wowsers! |
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Feb 4, 2020 11:24:15 GMT
Rebel's speech at the BAFTA's was amazing, and was subsequently widely shared on social media over the days after it aired and for me, was probably the highlight of the whole evening! Making jokes about the film bares no correlation to her as a person whatsoever. The film absolutely flopped - no one was really any good in it, so it can't be down to Wilson and Corden (if anything I’d say Ray Winston nailed the coffin shut for me 😂), they're just the only people who have taken the mic out of it, good for them. Hardly life or death!
|
|
19,676 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Feb 4, 2020 13:00:03 GMT
Rebel Wilson proves once again that she isn’t funny.
|
|
837 posts
|
Post by duncan on Feb 4, 2020 15:37:59 GMT
Has she (or indeed Corden) ever proved that they were funny?
I do always laugh at the UK medias insistence that Corden is a smash hit over there when he hosts the 5th most popular late night talk show. Every time I see his success mentioned I cant help but think that an equivalent of us sending someone over to the states and them overhyping themselves would be Charlie from Casualty going to Hollywood and getting media publicity claiming he's the UK's Dr McDreamy.
|
|
5,142 posts
|
Post by TallPaul on Feb 4, 2020 15:43:24 GMT
For $4 million a year, I'd happily host the 5th most popular late night talk show in the US! 💲🙂
|
|
1,578 posts
|
Post by anita on Feb 5, 2020 10:50:29 GMT
Available to preorder in DVD on Amazon.
|
|
