I like it. & I wasn't that crazy about the play, so for me the movie's a great improvement. But I seem to be in a tiny minority. However, I think it'll be a hit with kids & decades from now it'll be seen as a classic.
@@johnpjones182 Nope! Disagree! CATS, (the movie), will never be considered a Classic! In fact, I predict, like the previous Musical Trash, LA LA LAND, in a couple of years, it will not only be completely forgotten, but wiped from memory (excuse the pun)!
Mickeyjoe97, your comment makes no sense. The Cats musical is from the early 1980s, Wicked's from the early 2000s. The novel on which Wicked's based, Wicked : The Life and Times of The Wicked Witch of the West is only from the 1990s. Why would you think Wicked should have had an adaptation before Cats?
@Markus Olofsson it's played in UK, Switzerland, Germany ( 2 sit-down productions), Finland ( non replicate), Denmark ( non replicate), Prague, Holland, Ireland. It has a Portuguese and Spanish translation ( bc it was a hit in Mexico and Brazil, so I imagine it could easily play in Spain and Portugal). It's also been in South Korea, Japan ( for many many years), Singapore, Australia, Phillipines, Malaysia, and NZ
Cats is too overrated,the most important thing in a musical is the story.Cats does have the skeleton of a story,but its not enough....The songs are kind of random and the stage show is more like a dance show than a musical.This movie didn't need to exist.
I suggest that you see the 1998 video of the stage production to get a better idea of what this film *could* have been. I think if they'd kept closer to that, and done a better job of making the characters' faces look feline rather than something out of 'The Island of Dr. Moreau', it would have done better. Adding supposedly comedic touches (Jenny's hand caught in the mousetrap or Bustopher spitting out food) were totally unnecessary.
This is the most entertaining review that I've seen. Especially the beginning where you implied that they would've been better off using snapchat filter. Which is hilarious and also sad.
My wife and I enjoyed it, even though we are not cat people, or particularly musical people. It's not a narrative story. It's a collection of TS Elliot poems with music and choreography. If you've read TS Elliot, you know they don't make sense; if you have had a cat, you know they're not to be fully comprehended (which is a point of the movie). So TS Elliot poems about cats...fuggedaboudit. It's a variety show. It's a cat-themed version of "So You Think You Can Dance." It's an excuse for some very good dancers to sing and dance, and the singing and dancing was good. The CGI fur was well done. The tails and ears were very cool in their portrayal of emotion, especially the ears. Just watching the emotion of the ears was cool. It does suffer from the usual problem of dance in movies, which is that dance is always choreographed for live performance on a stage before an audience, but cinematographers screw up the experience with wrong angles and close-ups. That happens here too. That's why dance is best experienced from the audience as a live performance on a stage. But the cinematography here is not as atrocious as, say, the recent Disney "The Nutcracker and the Four Realms." I notice that the Rotten Tomatoes audience score is over 60%, so most viewers agree that it's not half bad.
Most people probably already decided not to watch this movie after seeing trailers and the review, so those who still go see it are already tolerate the CGI, hence the overall good audience review.
This is a good discussion and it brings up an interesting point in saying that the cgi, no matter how talented the artists are, can not save an idea that would never have worked. I have noticed a trend with the rise of heavy cgi films. They are mostly, visually excellent, as far as the talent used to create the imagery, but many of the applications are done on films that nothing could help (ie. Lion King reboot). It feels like there are a lot of people with some serious talent in working with cgi technology, but there's a lack in story tellers, etc. for that talent to be displayed.
I think you nailed it, theatre requires you to suspend disbelief and the appeal of Cats as a stage show was the vibrant costumes, the simple set design (it was all set in an alley) and the amazing choreography, which included parts where the cats would slink down the aisles and interact with the audience... the music, apart from Memory, was never really the appeal. Which makes it such a strange choice for a movie. When I first heard about it, I assumed that they were going to introduce a storyline, or make it out to be a fever dream, or do something to tie a narrative thread through the story. But no. There never was a story - Andrew Lloyd Webber read TS Eliot's Old Possum's Book of Practical Cats and set the poems to music - but that didn't matter onstage. There are so many other musicals that would work much better on film (where is the Wicked movie??).
I adore this movie. I love it SO much. let's not kid ourselves, the original musical is just as on LSD if not more so. the lyrics have ALWAYS been 99% gibberish, there's no plot worth mentioning, and it is just as weirdly sexual as the movie is. i mean, y'all lucked out that tom hooper didn't include the cat orgy, BECAUSE THERE IS TOTALLY A CAT ORGY IN THE MUSICAL. i'm a massive fan of the musical, and I knew the moment the movie was announced that it was going to crash and burn spectacularly. it is the funniest goddamn movie i've ever seen in my life.
The fact is, Cats as a stage musical is flawed in many ways. It has no actual plot & is overly long, & having no plot makes it seem even longer. But it has a huge following somehow likely because of the song "Memory". The film makers could've built on some of the stories & made a better movie but even if they had done that(I'm gathering they did not)the internet killed any chance of it succeeding with or without creepy CGI. People wanted it to fail & it did regardless of how good or bad it actually is & that's the biggest shame of Cats.
I was very young when the British stage production debuted. Then the American stage production. Both brilliant. Now the 2 dimensional production takes the story further. Loved it. The people I see complaining about relatively "nothing" are the ones not old enough to have at least seen the American stage production.
Some concepts are only meant to seen and experienced on stage. The theatrical productions of THE LION KING and CATS work as live productions on stage because one suspends reality and is awed by the experience. Film is a different medium and changes oftentimes need to made. There is a certain reality that film lends and that is the inherent difference here. Look at the differences between the stage version of THE SOUND OF MUSIC and the film. CATS is a horse of a different color however and might only work as an animated PIXAR film but little else. It seemed like I was watching a redux of THE ISLAND OF DR. MOREAU (the H.G. Wells’ story of that crazy doctor who combines the DNA of humans and animals). It was part horror, fantasy and musical but nothing meshed in a way that made it cohesive. And oddly sexual for what was intended as a family film, unless of course you’re one of those ‘farm boys’ into the family cow or in this case the ‘family cat.’ The whole thing was seriously creepy that might only make sense if you were stoned on peyote or that 60s chestnut, LSD. P.S. At a recent screening of CATS in Los Angeles they actually were giving audience members glasses of wine as they were entering the theater....before the film started. I kid you not. I think Universal Studios came to realize it’s better viewed if the audience is somewhat inebriated. I also know that Universal has made certain changes digitally to the film while in release, so what you saw on Friday was slightly different two days later on Sunday. The digital transmission of films today has made this possible, however in the case of CATS, I don’t think it will make any difference.
Cats the stage musical is a theatrical piece of pure spectacle, with an extremely thin, almost none existent plot clumsily threaded through it. Seeing it is like eating a small bowl of delicious whipped cream. You walk away feeling like that was really good, but twenty minutes later you feel emptily hungry for something substantial and begin immediately searching for some meat and potatoes. The movie should have been done as an animated musical for kids via Pixar or Dreamworks. There would be enough adult innuendo for adults to enjoy it while seeing it, but the kids would enjoy the singing & dancing and funny stuff. The movie CGI was a poor choice, as was making Idris Elba’s character Macavity a movie “villain”. Macavity isn’t threatening in the stage musical at all. He’s just mysterious and magical. Tom Hooper has stated he loved the musical as a child, so his perspective is misguided and he is unable to truly see the horny horror show he has “Frankensteined” to life.
Honestly all they had to do was create an animated version strongly basing the jellicle cats characters from the 1980s Broadway play including using the original familiar and beloved song recordings. It would have been a box office Nostalgia HIT!💰 I would have bought a copy if they did that.
As us Jellicles Have 9 Lives, It's a Celebration of Life as the 1 Who Ascends To The Heaviside Layer is Reborn into a Different Jellicle Life, or Weren't You Listening To Munkustrap.
Um ... are you seriously, SERIOUSLY trying to compare this monstrosity to The Producers movie?! 🤦🏻♀️🙄 Like, I get that you theater buffs always bitch & moan about the film, but it is light-years better than THIS.
As a huge fan of the original musical, I personally really liked the movie (aside from Wilson's and Corden's attempts at humor), but I would be surprised to find many people who aren't familiar with it to like it much at all. Honestly, I think Cats is better described as a concert rather than a story. When a band comes to town, if you like them you go see them, they play some songs and you're happy... the people that don't like the band or that type of music just won't go see them. There is no story, and you don't expect there to be one. Cats is just a collection of songs about cats, that's really it. And if you like the songs, you'll like the musical and maybe the movie, and you can sort of put in a bit of backstory for the cats or whatever if you like. As far as the visuals, I think it depends on how well you can give in to the ridiculousness. Expecting anything to really make too much sense is missing the point... It really is just all about the songs (and dancing). If you don't like that part of it, you won't like Cats (and a lot of people don't, which is fine).
After seeing so many bad reviews, I decided to bite the bullet and go and see it for myself. I've been a big Cats fan for years ... I first saw it live in the early 80's and have seen dozens of productions all over the world in quite a few different languages. I know the story and the characters like the back of my hand. I look at it from this perspective, on stage it's "humans with cat qualities", in the movie version, it's more "cats with human qualities". The CGI had been cleaned up quite a bit since the very first trailer, Jennifer Hudson looked absolutely awful in the trailer, but looked great in the "so called finished product". I think if you had seen the live show at least once or twice, you'd see that they actually did a very good job of a very difficult thing to bring to the screen. Personally I loved it. Ironically they have already issued a "patch" since its first day release, so now it's Cats 1.01. If you think the "sensuality" of it on screen is a shocker, see it live, real people, very close up to you, bumping and grinding and contorting themselves right in front of your eyes in very little more than a painted body suit where there's nothing left to the imagination. Go and see it live, you might have a different perspective. There is a filmed version of the live show, have a look at that, but again, it is still not the same thing as being there in the theatre.
It would have been better to make a completely animated movie with adorable and cute cats instead of this nightmarish human-cats hybrids. Financially speaking it was the biggest flop of all time!
There are quite a few musicals that cannot work as feature films, and quite a few feature films that don't translate well to musicals. This was definitely one of them. Cats is something that requires a theater - being able to run off stage for scene changes, blinding-fast switches from ballads like 'Memory' to happier songs like 'Mungojerry & Rumpleteaser', and genuine awe at how good the make-up is/the dancing and live performance. This was never gonna work as a movie, and that they didn't just animate it but went with these weird Frankenstein CGI mashups finished killing it before it premiered.
Weirdly as a fan of musicals but never one of Cats I didn't hate it. It was... fine. I'm sure if I was a fan of the musical I would've despised it. It made me want to watch the show itself.
Just home from seeing it. This is what I wrote... So... Cats. I'm still in pain. I have, without doubt, never seen such an ill conceived, disaster of a film. It's not even bad. It exists in its own universe of awfulness where concepts of good and bad aren't useful. I seriously don't know what I just endured. I never expected to see Judi Dench be gut-wrenchingly off mark. WTF is Ian McKellen doing here? Please, God, never let Taylor Swift do a movie again. Jennifer Hudson constantly looks like she has been constipated for a month. Rebel Wilson reaches new heights of annoying. The frantic editing is nausea inducing. Everything is out of scale. It's impossible to tell what is happening under the CGI. It goes on and on until it feels like you've been in the cinema for months. I'm glad I saw it because I really didn't believe that it could be suck a fuck up. It is. Approach with extreme caution.
my theatre was dead silent the entire time and 10 minutes in my mum turned to me and whispered in my ear “what the FUCK” yeah it was a surreal experience
Lol the cat suicide competition is a storyline from the original musical. Don't blame it on the film; they're just trying to stay accurate to the source But the CGI is terrifying, agreed. Fur suits were better
06:36 “paw designs” you say dude? 😏 Heh. Bailey, I don’t think I’ve ever seen you so conflicted about a movie before to the point where you’re actually struggling to even describe the experience! I do think you nailed it early on however when you discussed how due to the 2 mediums being so vastly different, the subject matter in Theatre often requires us to fill-in the blanks and project, to help build that world around what is being performed on stage. Still, the DP looks like they were on their A-game, so there’s that. With all these things in mind, I have a question for you: Would one’s viewing experience of this be vastly improved by dropping some LSD before watching it? Because it bloody seems like it to me! 😂
Great review man! I had virtually no interest in seeing this movie, but after reading and watching so many scathing reviews I feel like I NEED to see this movie as soon as possible. 🐱
People shy away from the "horrifying" images of people who look like anthropomorphized cats - yet they loved Avatar when half the time your lead characters are alien creatures with disproportionate bodies. The Alien series of movies involved xenomorphs, sometimes in large numbers, and they had big box office (or at least some of them did.) Some of our most beloved characters are totally alien: Yoda, E.T., Worf (from ST:TNG), ... Why is Cats so terrifying to you? WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? They are folks in cat makeup with CGI assistance. As to the story, if you bother to look it up, when the stage play first came out, Variety mentioned - and then DISMISSED - the fact that EVERYTHING was in song. All dialog in Cats IS musical except near the very end when Old Deuteronomy makes the Jellicle choice for the year. It is also clear that folks are comparing this movie incorrectly. EVERY Broadway musical is based on a weak storyline that is a miserable excuse for the principals to break out in song at every major scene. So... the play took it to the point of dropping pointless dialog and just got down to the music. Efficient, no? As to the sexuality, is that specifically Cats? Because ballet frequently gets very sensual and Cats, with its strong ballet overtones, was no different. Is the terror due to you deciding that despite her fur, you wanted to romp in the hay with Victoria? Francesca Hayward IS one sexy kitty, after all. Is it perhaps that it was done SO well that it took you past a boundary that you didn't realize you had?
Cats was my first musical experience as a kid (which I loved), so I kinda was interested in this movie. But having seen the trailer and now multiple reviews, I will surely skip it. Maybe months down the line, when it's on TV. However, as I was watching you talk, my mind kinda wondered more about your area and how affected you are by the fires happening. I hope it's safe enough.
people nagging about CATS being sexualised, well i must have missed that when I fell asleep for the 4th time. It made have done a better job when it was really 100 % sexualised, although I am not particulary curious for Jason Derulo's slingshot he is so proud of. Watch John Partridge performance in the video's that are made of the stage performance and then talk about sexualisation. The way they went halfway in the movie is like an empty bra in the dryer: "The best part has gone."
I'm so mad that they're fixing it because it sounds like watching for the errors the best day ever. And now that they're fixing the hands and the folding heads all desire I had to see this is gone.
I loved it , sorry , yes they say Jelical cat 1300 times . Jennifer Hudson wet snot , but I have snuck in several times and the movie was full , this could be a sleeper .
The movie is fine. It's not good, but it isn't horrifying in any way. It's not Freddy Got Fingered. All these reviewers are just being crazy over the top negative competing for views.
I LOVED it! What I wish i could understand is how did this show that was the longest running beoadway show , and flew off the shelves as a video of the play, scare so many movie goers! Especially when we live in an age of Alien movies everywhere. Lord of the Rings creatures! The show has always been human actors acting and made up as Cats . This has always been a super art piece. There isn't an artist that doesn't KNOW that poetry and Dance and then a Musical is a hard sell. So Here is the Deal ! If you saw the musical on Broadway( which clearly this guy never did) Then you will love it! The plot is stronger with the villian McCavity appearing throughout instead of once. Rather than have all the "Cats" talk to the audience,they extend the character of Victoria and tell the story to her as a young abondoned cat! Since TS Elliott is dead and the poetry is used in the play,a new song was written by TS . I wasn't a Super fan of Taylor Swift before this but, her ability to write a seemless poetic "TS ELIOTT" type of lyric has made me a fan. Her new song tells Grizabella, this life you have led is harsh and cruel but you have been in beautiful places with beautiful moments of "Memory" so dance with the beautiful ghosts in your memories and remember the good. Ian McKellan is brilliant as Asparagus the old Theater cat and uses his old character to triumph over the villian! It is a theater lovers tender justice. So THIS MOVIE REQUIRES IMAGINATION!!!!! oh and EMPATHY! it means you are going to believe the story of actors telling you about the inner circle of living as a cat which in a way parallels our own. It means thinking! So it is not going to be a simple dialouge with a laugh track.IT is POETRY. So admittedly it is for the king of person who appreciates Shakespeare. The kind of Person who understands why the Mona Lisa has it's own wall at the Louvre! So if you are used to paying 200 dollars to see Hamilton or Les Mis or Wicked on Broadway Pl:EASE Ignore the world who scoffed at the Eiffel Tower and come see innovative dance and Poetry ! MR. Mistoffoles is amazing!!!!! Skimbleshanks in a Broadway house would stop the show with his number,and Fancesca Hayward(The principal Ballerina for the Royal Ballet in London) as Victoria would amaze you! Someday this movie will hopefully get another life the way Van Gogh's paintings did. When the audience matured to see what was accompished.
I was really looking forward to watching this film, but I think it is off my list now, so disappointed. How could Andrew Lloyd Webber let this happen, or maybe he did not have much sway in the decision making.
@@donaldvonglitchenberger4108 I didn't say I liked it, I said I loved it, stupid. Just because one does not agree with the majority, a majority that mostly didn't see the Broadway show or never liked the original to begin with, does not equate to having terrible taste. People have the right to love what they love. Maybe you're the one with no taste....your closed minded way is not the only way.
With all the people that need to decide if it was good or bad, it is much the way a mother looks at her child. She sees their flaws like everyone else, but also sees what is beautiful.
Was the 2019 directors motive to purposely destroy a classic. 1980s made a masterpiece with makeup and costumes. 2019 special effects don't seem so special anymore do they. 😂 special effects can't be that expensive if you can download a free app and do the same thing at least the app gives you a cat nose!😂 2019 was a catastrophe!
Let's see, take a popular musical with no plot. Film the musical and call it a movie resulting in everyone complaining that it's just a musical with no plot. Am I missing something?
Are the editors blind? Did they look at this art? Get a cast who can sing? How could they not have have known? If this film has a smell its a vindaloo fart, Were the people at mill film all fucking stoned? Because Cash grabbers are and Cash grabbers don't Cash grabbers don't and Cash grabbers did Cash grabbers dealt and Cash grabbers can Cash grabbers can so Cash grabbers did There's a fan over there with a look of surprise As much as to say "Well now, how about that?" Do I actually see with my own very eyes A fan who thinks it's not a blatant cash grab? What's a Cashgrabbing twat? What's a Cashgrabbing twat? Jellical cats in cgi Jellical fans come one come all the Jellical moon is shining bright Jellicals come to the cash grabbers call Jellical cats have creepy faces Jellical cats are CGI Jellical cats walk the uncanny valley they constantly fuck with your head and your eyes Jellical cats lack continuity Jellical cats are sometimes small Jellical cats are awkwardly green-screened and slide into shot as they're suddenly tall Jellical cats have tacked-on “story” Jellical cats are sometimes too big Jellical cats have mismatched bodies when actors can't do a gavotte or a jig until you see how they appear it's a sensation you just cannot know the robotical movements of tails and ears that somehow is never in time with their nose Jellical cats in CGI Jellical fans come one come all the Jellical moon is shining bright Jellicals come to the cash grabbers call
My Rise Of Skywalker review will be up by Monday for those wondering 👍
You mean 50 shades of Solo?
I've spent half my day watching cat reviews and feeling both histerical and nauseous
same
Same
The reviews are kind of addictive.
Oh tg! I thought i was the only one....
Sounds like everyone how’s seen Cats is experiencing post traumatic stress
I like it. & I wasn't that crazy about the play, so for me the movie's a great improvement. But I seem to be in a tiny minority. However, I think it'll be a hit with kids & decades from now it'll be seen as a classic.
@@johnpjones182 Nope! Disagree! CATS, (the movie), will never be considered a Classic! In fact, I predict, like the previous Musical Trash, LA LA LAND, in a couple of years, it will not only be completely forgotten, but wiped from memory (excuse the pun)!
Cannot believe we've gotten an adaptation of Cats before Wicked
I KNOW
Mickeyjoe97, your comment makes no sense. The Cats musical is from the early 1980s, Wicked's from the early 2000s. The novel on which Wicked's based, Wicked : The Life and Times of The Wicked Witch of the West is only from the 1990s. Why would you think Wicked should have had an adaptation before Cats?
THIS. 😭
Markus Olofsson Um, it was a smash hit on the West End, so... 🤔
@Markus Olofsson it's played in UK, Switzerland, Germany ( 2 sit-down productions), Finland ( non replicate), Denmark ( non replicate), Prague, Holland, Ireland. It has a Portuguese and Spanish translation ( bc it was a hit in Mexico and Brazil, so I imagine it could easily play in Spain and Portugal). It's also been in South Korea, Japan ( for many many years), Singapore, Australia, Phillipines, Malaysia, and NZ
Like putting human teeth in a blue hedgehog
Yes indeedy it sucked! Would’ve been significantly better if they just made it animated or left it as just a theatrical piece.
Honestly, Cats should have been stuck in Broadway and West End. That film version was just not working.
I can not stop laughing. You look traumatized.
I've always been terrified of CATS: The Musical even as a child.
"I wish I can unsee it" has to be one of the funniest comments I've ever heard/seen in a movie review!
Cats is too overrated,the most important thing in a musical is the story.Cats does have the skeleton of a story,but its not enough....The songs are kind of random and the stage show is more like a dance show than a musical.This movie didn't need to exist.
Alex P.D yes, i saw the musical in Cuba and thought it was awful. The dancers were amazing but not having a story is super boring
Yyyyep.
They should have made them look more cartoonish kind of cats instead of humanoid kind of cats imo
Yeah. The stage show didn't look freaky to me. They should have done it like that, or made it CGI.
I suggest that you see the 1998 video of the stage production to get a better idea of what this film *could* have been. I think if they'd kept closer to that, and done a better job of making the characters' faces look feline rather than something out of 'The Island of Dr. Moreau', it would have done better. Adding supposedly comedic touches (Jenny's hand caught in the mousetrap or Bustopher spitting out food) were totally unnecessary.
This is the most entertaining review that I've seen. Especially the beginning where you implied that they would've been better off using snapchat filter. Which is hilarious and also sad.
This only proves that cats will always be that complicated beautiful creature that cannot be predicted.
My wife and I enjoyed it, even though we are not cat people, or particularly musical people.
It's not a narrative story. It's a collection of TS Elliot poems with music and choreography. If you've read TS Elliot, you know they don't make sense; if you have had a cat, you know they're not to be fully comprehended (which is a point of the movie). So TS Elliot poems about cats...fuggedaboudit.
It's a variety show. It's a cat-themed version of "So You Think You Can Dance." It's an excuse for some very good dancers to sing and dance, and the singing and dancing was good.
The CGI fur was well done. The tails and ears were very cool in their portrayal of emotion, especially the ears. Just watching the emotion of the ears was cool.
It does suffer from the usual problem of dance in movies, which is that dance is always choreographed for live performance on a stage before an audience, but cinematographers screw up the experience with wrong angles and close-ups. That happens here too. That's why dance is best experienced from the audience as a live performance on a stage. But the cinematography here is not as atrocious as, say, the recent Disney "The Nutcracker and the Four Realms."
I notice that the Rotten Tomatoes audience score is over 60%, so most viewers agree that it's not half bad.
Most people probably already decided not to watch this movie after seeing trailers and the review, so those who still go see it are already tolerate the CGI, hence the overall good audience review.
Glad there's someone who has something positive about the movie.
It took me ten minutes to get use to their costumes.
This is a good discussion and it brings up an interesting point in saying that the cgi, no matter how talented the artists are, can not save an idea that would never have worked. I have noticed a trend with the rise of heavy cgi films. They are mostly, visually excellent, as far as the talent used to create the imagery, but many of the applications are done on films that nothing could help (ie. Lion King reboot). It feels like there are a lot of people with some serious talent in working with cgi technology, but there's a lack in story tellers, etc. for that talent to be displayed.
Nightmare fuel.
I think you nailed it, theatre requires you to suspend disbelief and the appeal of Cats as a stage show was the vibrant costumes, the simple set design (it was all set in an alley) and the amazing choreography, which included parts where the cats would slink down the aisles and interact with the audience... the music, apart from Memory, was never really the appeal. Which makes it such a strange choice for a movie. When I first heard about it, I assumed that they were going to introduce a storyline, or make it out to be a fever dream, or do something to tie a narrative thread through the story. But no. There never was a story - Andrew Lloyd Webber read TS Eliot's Old Possum's Book of Practical Cats and set the poems to music - but that didn't matter onstage. There are so many other musicals that would work much better on film (where is the Wicked movie??).
I adore this movie. I love it SO much. let's not kid ourselves, the original musical is just as on LSD if not more so. the lyrics have ALWAYS been 99% gibberish, there's no plot worth mentioning, and it is just as weirdly sexual as the movie is. i mean, y'all lucked out that tom hooper didn't include the cat orgy, BECAUSE THERE IS TOTALLY A CAT ORGY IN THE MUSICAL. i'm a massive fan of the musical, and I knew the moment the movie was announced that it was going to crash and burn spectacularly. it is the funniest goddamn movie i've ever seen in my life.
evilhopscotch I loved the movie.
The musical doesn’t have a plot. I didn’t expect the movie to either. It was what I was expecting and I liked it.
i haven't seen it , but totally agree with what u all said.
The fact is, Cats as a stage musical is flawed in many ways. It has no actual plot & is overly long, & having no plot makes it seem even longer. But it has a huge following somehow likely because of the song "Memory". The film makers could've built on some of the stories & made a better movie but even if they had done that(I'm gathering they did not)the internet killed any chance of it succeeding with or without creepy CGI. People wanted it to fail & it did regardless of how good or bad it actually is & that's the biggest shame of Cats.
Take your mum to see Little Women, to make up for it. I just fell in love with your channel.
I was very young when the British stage production debuted. Then the American stage production. Both brilliant. Now the 2 dimensional production takes the story further. Loved it. The people I see complaining about relatively "nothing" are the ones not old enough to have at least seen the American stage production.
They filmed a stage production of Cats in 1998. It’s over edited, but it does capture the spirit of the play.
You texted your mom after taking her to it and apologized... lol... aww Lawd 😬😂. Ima PASS - thanks for the heads-up
Some concepts are only meant to seen and experienced on stage. The theatrical productions of THE LION KING and CATS work as live productions on stage because one suspends reality and is awed by the experience. Film is a different medium and changes oftentimes need to made. There is a certain reality that film lends and that is the inherent difference here. Look at the differences between the stage version of THE SOUND OF MUSIC and the film.
CATS is a horse of a different color however and might only work as an animated PIXAR film but little else. It seemed like I was watching a redux of THE ISLAND OF DR. MOREAU (the H.G. Wells’ story of that crazy doctor who combines the DNA of humans and animals). It was part horror, fantasy and musical but nothing meshed in a way that made it cohesive. And oddly sexual for what was intended as a family film, unless of course you’re one of those ‘farm boys’ into the family cow or in this case the ‘family cat.’ The whole thing was seriously creepy that might only make sense if you were stoned on peyote or that 60s chestnut, LSD.
P.S. At a recent screening of CATS in Los Angeles they actually were giving audience members glasses of wine as they were entering the theater....before the film started. I kid you not. I think Universal Studios came to realize it’s better viewed if the audience is somewhat inebriated.
I also know that Universal has made certain changes digitally to the film while in release, so what you saw on Friday was slightly different two days later on Sunday. The digital transmission of films today has made this possible, however in the case of CATS, I don’t think it will make any difference.
Cats the stage musical is a theatrical piece of pure spectacle, with an extremely thin, almost none existent plot clumsily threaded through it. Seeing it is like eating a small bowl of delicious whipped cream. You walk away feeling like that was really good, but twenty minutes later you feel emptily hungry for something substantial and begin immediately searching for some meat and potatoes.
The movie should have been done as an animated musical for kids via Pixar or Dreamworks. There would be enough adult innuendo for adults to enjoy it while seeing it, but the kids would enjoy the singing & dancing and funny stuff.
The movie CGI was a poor choice, as was making Idris Elba’s character Macavity a movie “villain”. Macavity isn’t threatening in the stage musical at all. He’s just mysterious and magical.
Tom Hooper has stated he loved the musical as a child, so his perspective is misguided and he is unable to truly see the horny horror show he has “Frankensteined” to life.
An animated version with their voices would have been better.
Honestly all they had to do was create an animated version strongly basing the jellicle cats characters from the 1980s Broadway play including using the original familiar and beloved song recordings. It would have been a box office Nostalgia HIT!💰 I would have bought a copy if they did that.
I just realized what this movie reminds me of. The music video for Where's Your Head At by Basement Jaxxx. Cats is just a bit creepier though
I just went and watched the clip.. haha. Now I get why people are saying Cats is creepy
As us Jellicles Have 9 Lives, It's a Celebration of Life as the 1 Who Ascends To The Heaviside Layer is Reborn into a Different Jellicle Life, or Weren't You Listening To Munkustrap.
Surprisingly, this movie is bringing some very interesting conversations about movies... and also hilarious!!!! Can’t wait to see it
It's like no one has ever seen The Producers...
Um ... are you seriously, SERIOUSLY trying to compare this monstrosity to The Producers movie?! 🤦🏻♀️🙄 Like, I get that you theater buffs always bitch & moan about the film, but it is light-years better than THIS.
@@KabbalahSherry .........no. I'm saying that THIS is film equivalent of Spring Time for Hitler and WHY it was made.
My theory is the *5* companies involved made this movie in order to lose money, and lower their worldwide tax bills.
Or money laundering.
@@mainchannel1566 precisely
As a huge fan of the original musical, I personally really liked the movie (aside from Wilson's and Corden's attempts at humor), but I would be surprised to find many people who aren't familiar with it to like it much at all.
Honestly, I think Cats is better described as a concert rather than a story. When a band comes to town, if you like them you go see them, they play some songs and you're happy... the people that don't like the band or that type of music just won't go see them. There is no story, and you don't expect there to be one. Cats is just a collection of songs about cats, that's really it. And if you like the songs, you'll like the musical and maybe the movie, and you can sort of put in a bit of backstory for the cats or whatever if you like.
As far as the visuals, I think it depends on how well you can give in to the ridiculousness. Expecting anything to really make too much sense is missing the point...
It really is just all about the songs (and dancing). If you don't like that part of it, you won't like Cats (and a lot of people don't, which is fine).
After seeing so many bad reviews, I decided to bite the bullet and go and see it for myself. I've been a big Cats fan for years ... I first saw it live in the early 80's and have seen dozens of productions all over the world in quite a few different languages. I know the story and the characters like the back of my hand. I look at it from this perspective, on stage it's "humans with cat qualities", in the movie version, it's more "cats with human qualities". The CGI had been cleaned up quite a bit since the very first trailer, Jennifer Hudson looked absolutely awful in the trailer, but looked great in the "so called finished product". I think if you had seen the live show at least once or twice, you'd see that they actually did a very good job of a very difficult thing to bring to the screen. Personally I loved it. Ironically they have already issued a "patch" since its first day release, so now it's Cats 1.01. If you think the "sensuality" of it on screen is a shocker, see it live, real people, very close up to you, bumping and grinding and contorting themselves right in front of your eyes in very little more than a painted body suit where there's nothing left to the imagination. Go and see it live, you might have a different perspective. There is a filmed version of the live show, have a look at that, but again, it is still not the same thing as being there in the theatre.
It would have been better to make a completely animated movie with adorable and cute cats instead of this nightmarish human-cats hybrids. Financially speaking it was the biggest flop of all time!
At what point does a movie like this with so much CGI tip over into the animated film category?
I came to watch a Cats review, not falling in love... Man, you are handsome.
You can call it “Scats, the Movie”!
I like your digital cat face technology there. Universal should pay you $100 million to remake every scene of CATS!
We really enjoyed it.
From the look of the metacritic and IMDB. Its just you.
There are quite a few musicals that cannot work as feature films, and quite a few feature films that don't translate well to musicals. This was definitely one of them. Cats is something that requires a theater - being able to run off stage for scene changes, blinding-fast switches from ballads like 'Memory' to happier songs like 'Mungojerry & Rumpleteaser', and genuine awe at how good the make-up is/the dancing and live performance. This was never gonna work as a movie, and that they didn't just animate it but went with these weird Frankenstein CGI mashups finished killing it before it premiered.
Please do the most anticipated movies of 2020
Idk.. you with the cats eye make-up from the filter is kinda scary, too, though in a pretty way. Pretty scary...? 😂
Well, the Lion in the Wizard Of Oz works, and that's basically a pantomime costume. Costumes might have worked.
0:04 true quality 🐈🐱
I was waiting for a huge cucumber 🥒 to make a surprise cameo
Weirdly as a fan of musicals but never one of Cats I didn't hate it. It was... fine.
I'm sure if I was a fan of the musical I would've despised it.
It made me want to watch the show itself.
A Book of Poems, the Title "OLD POSSUM'S BOOK OF PRACTICAL CATS" and some of Mr. Eliot's Unpublished Poems.
Just home from seeing it. This is what I wrote...
So... Cats. I'm still in pain. I have, without doubt, never seen such an ill conceived, disaster of a film. It's not even bad. It exists in its own universe of awfulness where concepts of good and bad aren't useful. I seriously don't know what I just endured. I never expected to see Judi Dench be gut-wrenchingly off mark. WTF is Ian McKellen doing here? Please, God, never let Taylor Swift do a movie again. Jennifer Hudson constantly looks like she has been constipated for a month. Rebel Wilson reaches new heights of annoying. The frantic editing is nausea inducing. Everything is out of scale. It's impossible to tell what is happening under the CGI. It goes on and on until it feels like you've been in the cinema for months. I'm glad I saw it because I really didn't believe that it could be suck a fuck up. It is. Approach with extreme caution.
my theatre was dead silent the entire time and 10 minutes in my mum turned to me and whispered in my ear “what the FUCK” yeah it was a surreal experience
I focused on how cute the reviewer is to relieve the pain of contemplating this shudder-inducing monstrosity
Lol the cat suicide competition is a storyline from the original musical. Don't blame it on the film; they're just trying to stay accurate to the source
But the CGI is terrifying, agreed. Fur suits were better
Reminds me of the Cat In The Hat movie
Thanks for the review! Just a heads up that your Instagram handle shouldn't have the underscore in it.
06:36 “paw designs” you say dude? 😏 Heh.
Bailey, I don’t think I’ve ever seen you so conflicted about a movie before to the point where you’re actually struggling to even describe the experience!
I do think you nailed it early on however when you discussed how due to the 2 mediums being so vastly different, the subject matter in Theatre often requires us to fill-in the blanks and project, to help build that world around what is being performed on stage.
Still, the DP looks like they were on their A-game, so there’s that. With all these things in mind, I have a question for you:
Would one’s viewing experience of this be vastly improved by dropping some LSD before watching it? Because it bloody seems like it to me! 😂
Well. congratulations to dogs, I guess.
I agree about the filter!
He's directing "His Dark Materials" on BBC/HBO and it's class.
Well I saw it live on stage for my 15th birthday. Why would I go to the theatre and see this movie? So I just stuck with the original broadway show.
Great review man!
I had virtually no interest in seeing this movie, but after reading and watching so many scathing reviews I feel like I NEED to see this movie as soon as possible. 🐱
Me too, but I will rent it. I can't take this on a big screen. :) I saw the trailer in 3D before Frozen 2 and I was horrified.
People shy away from the "horrifying" images of people who look like anthropomorphized cats - yet they loved Avatar when half the time your lead characters are alien creatures with disproportionate bodies. The Alien series of movies involved xenomorphs, sometimes in large numbers, and they had big box office (or at least some of them did.) Some of our most beloved characters are totally alien: Yoda, E.T., Worf (from ST:TNG), ...
Why is Cats so terrifying to you? WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? They are folks in cat makeup with CGI assistance. As to the story, if you bother to look it up, when the stage play first came out, Variety mentioned - and then DISMISSED - the fact that EVERYTHING was in song. All dialog in Cats IS musical except near the very end when Old Deuteronomy makes the Jellicle choice for the year. It is also clear that folks are comparing this movie incorrectly. EVERY Broadway musical is based on a weak storyline that is a miserable excuse for the principals to break out in song at every major scene. So... the play took it to the point of dropping pointless dialog and just got down to the music. Efficient, no?
As to the sexuality, is that specifically Cats? Because ballet frequently gets very sensual and Cats, with its strong ballet overtones, was no different. Is the terror due to you deciding that despite her fur, you wanted to romp in the hay with Victoria? Francesca Hayward IS one sexy kitty, after all. Is it perhaps that it was done SO well that it took you past a boundary that you didn't realize you had?
What a GREAT movie to end a decade......?
Now I know why Jay Sherman, the Critic, bags on this musical.
I thought the stage show was a load of old boring rubbish, there is no way I would pay more money to sit through this crap again.
Cats was my first musical experience as a kid (which I loved), so I kinda was interested in this movie. But having seen the trailer and now multiple reviews, I will surely skip it. Maybe months down the line, when it's on TV.
However, as I was watching you talk, my mind kinda wondered more about your area and how affected you are by the fires happening. I hope it's safe enough.
I'll just watch musical numbers on youtube when they release them.
Milo Nanni the ENTIRE film is musical numbers my dude
@@emialice3825 Your dude is aware of that. But I'm not gonna buy a ticket to see the whole thing.
No Your Filter is More Uncanny Valley Than Tom Hooper's Film, Try watching the 1998 Version SIR! I have Reviewed CATS 2019, 1998, and1987.
It was bad, tho I thot the last third was better. What's a jellicle cat anyway and where was she going?
Tom Hooper Kept To the Source Material, Now if Your NOT going to watch the 1998 Version, or any Stage Version On RUclips, Then At least Read The Book.
Love your videos bruh.... thanks!
Evey review i watch, it makes me more interested to watch it.to see how bad it is.
The Sets Are NOT CGI They Built Them, Those Sets Are REAL.
people nagging about CATS being sexualised, well i must have missed that when I fell asleep for the 4th time.
It made have done a better job when it was really 100 % sexualised, although I am not particulary curious for Jason Derulo's slingshot he is so proud of. Watch John Partridge performance in the video's that are made of the stage performance and then talk about sexualisation. The way they went halfway in the movie is like an empty bra in the dryer: "The best part has gone."
and what do you think about FANTASIA?
I'm so mad that they're fixing it because it sounds like watching for the errors the best day ever. And now that they're fixing the hands and the folding heads all desire I had to see this is gone.
I loved it , sorry , yes they say Jelical cat 1300 times . Jennifer Hudson wet snot , but I have snuck in several times and the movie was full , this could be a sleeper .
Bailey makes a cute cat. . . while Cats makes cats creepy AF.
Cats is Awesome, saw it last night, going to see it again.
My cat hasn’t yet forgiven me for leaving him for 2 hours to go and watch this movie.
You should check out Uncut Gems.
The movie is fine. It's not good, but it isn't horrifying in any way. It's not Freddy Got Fingered. All these reviewers are just being crazy over the top negative competing for views.
Your version was pleasant intragram won the best cgi award of the year
I LOVED it! What I wish i could understand is how did this show that was the longest running beoadway show , and flew off the shelves as a video of the play, scare so many movie goers! Especially when we live in an age of Alien movies everywhere. Lord of the Rings creatures! The show has always been human actors acting and made up as Cats . This has always been a super art piece. There isn't an artist that doesn't KNOW that poetry and Dance and then a Musical is a hard sell. So Here is the Deal ! If you saw the musical on Broadway( which clearly this guy never did) Then you will love it! The plot is stronger with the villian McCavity appearing throughout instead of once. Rather than have all the "Cats" talk to the audience,they extend the character of Victoria and tell the story to her as a young abondoned cat! Since TS Elliott is dead and the poetry is used in the play,a new song was written by TS . I wasn't a Super fan of Taylor Swift before this but, her ability to write a seemless poetic "TS ELIOTT" type of lyric has made me a fan. Her new song tells Grizabella, this life you have led is harsh and cruel but you have been in beautiful places with beautiful moments of "Memory" so dance with the beautiful ghosts in your memories and remember the good. Ian McKellan is brilliant as Asparagus the old Theater cat and uses his old character to triumph over the villian! It is a theater lovers tender justice. So THIS MOVIE REQUIRES IMAGINATION!!!!! oh and EMPATHY! it means you are going to believe the story of actors telling you about the inner circle of living as a cat which in a way parallels our own. It means thinking! So it is not going to be a simple dialouge with a laugh track.IT is POETRY. So admittedly it is for the king of person who appreciates Shakespeare. The kind of Person who understands why the Mona Lisa has it's own wall at the Louvre! So if you are used to paying 200 dollars to see Hamilton or Les Mis or Wicked on Broadway Pl:EASE Ignore the world who scoffed at the Eiffel Tower and come see innovative dance and Poetry ! MR. Mistoffoles is amazing!!!!! Skimbleshanks in a Broadway house would stop the show with his number,and Fancesca Hayward(The principal Ballerina for the Royal Ballet in London) as Victoria would amaze you! Someday this movie will hopefully get another life the way Van Gogh's paintings did. When the audience matured to see what was accompished.
7:32 Deceased! Ahaha!
WATCH CAROL BY TODD HAYNES (2015 film)
An all time favorite
I was really looking forward to watching this film, but I think it is off my list now, so disappointed. How could Andrew Lloyd Webber let this happen, or maybe he did not have much sway in the decision making.
I loved CATS! I will never understand the negativity this movie is receiving.
I totally agree!
Of course there’s going to be some folks out there with terrible taste that like it. Kudos
@@donaldvonglitchenberger4108 I didn't say I liked it, I said I loved it, stupid. Just because one does not agree with the majority, a majority that mostly didn't see the Broadway show or never liked the original to begin with, does not equate to having terrible taste. People have the right to love what they love. Maybe you're the one with no taste....your closed minded way is not the only way.
With all the people that need to decide if it was good or bad, it is much the way a mother looks at her child. She sees their flaws like everyone else, but also sees what is beautiful.
Was the 2019 directors motive to purposely destroy a classic. 1980s made a masterpiece with makeup and costumes. 2019 special effects don't seem so special anymore do they. 😂 special effects can't be that expensive if you can download a free app and do the same thing at least the app gives you a cat nose!😂 2019 was a catastrophe!
great review, love the accent
I love the musical and the 1998 version is dope af, but this movie looks like terrifying hot garbage
Did I like Cats? I liked YOU!
Athletic soldier
Let's see, take a popular musical with no plot. Film the musical and call it a movie resulting in everyone complaining that it's just a musical with no plot. Am I missing something?
Grow up people! The CGI isn’t terrible it’s not scary or whatever! People are so dumb
You know that other people can see things different to the way you do, right?
And that's it! You need therapy with that. They should give a 10 hours of therapy with every cinema ticket when u go to see cats.
When it comes to the singing, Rebel Wilson sounded awful. And her depiction of Jennyanydots was even more awful.
But is it at least funny bad?
Not at all
Are the editors blind?
Did they look at this art?
Get a cast who can sing?
How could they not have have known?
If this film has a smell its a vindaloo fart,
Were the people at mill film all fucking stoned?
Because Cash grabbers are and Cash grabbers don't
Cash grabbers don't and Cash grabbers did
Cash grabbers dealt and Cash grabbers can
Cash grabbers can so Cash grabbers did
There's a fan over there with a look of surprise
As much as to say "Well now, how about that?"
Do I actually see with my own very eyes
A fan who thinks it's not a blatant cash grab?
What's a Cashgrabbing twat?
What's a Cashgrabbing twat?
Jellical cats in cgi
Jellical fans come one come all
the Jellical moon is shining bright
Jellicals come to the cash grabbers call
Jellical cats have creepy faces
Jellical cats are CGI
Jellical cats walk the uncanny valley
they constantly fuck with your head and your eyes
Jellical cats lack continuity
Jellical cats are sometimes small
Jellical cats are awkwardly green-screened
and slide into shot as they're suddenly tall
Jellical cats have tacked-on “story”
Jellical cats are sometimes too big
Jellical cats have mismatched bodies
when actors can't do a gavotte or a jig
until you see how they appear
it's a sensation you just cannot know
the robotical movements of tails and ears
that somehow is never in time with their nose
Jellical cats in CGI
Jellical fans come one come all
the Jellical moon is shining bright
Jellicals come to the cash grabbers call
What's a 'paypal" . "Most of the paypal"
Usually people would leave it at "I can't understand your accent, sorry", but thank you for persisting
@@BreakingBanter - Sorry. I was bored last night.
Super Woke Taylor Swift is not gonna be happy.