It baffles me that Hooper is super literal on all the props Mistoffoles mentions in his song, while ignoring Elliot's clear cues on what the cats are supposed to look like.
@@MusicalHell You know, I read somewhere that Taylor Swift had to explain to him on set what catnip actually was. If he was that dense about catnip, maybe he honestly didn't know what "ginger" meant.
@@Fiona_fml Not everyone has seen Gilligan's Island lol, seriously, how long ago was that? Also, from all I've gathered, red-haired people don't like being called ginger.
@@HappiestMango I believe this the same company that folded and all the workers were laid off a few weeks before Christmas and during thier lunch break.
Bustopher Jones in the musical is a little bit more than just a fat cat. He is dignified, like an upper class gentleman, and the cats around him respect him a lot.... but Corden's version doesnt go beyond "lol he fat"
Sounds like they gave Rebel Wilson's character the same treatment. Also, can I just say that as a fat person myself, I'm getting kind of pissed at Rebel Wilson for constantly taking roles that feed into the stereotype of fat people's purpose being the butt of jokes? Like seriously, I know it's hard for overweight people to find work in Hollywood, but this feels like a sellout and a betrayal.
@@dragongirl7978 the character of Jennyanydots was destroyed in this movie. She was a kindhearted cat that helped cockroaches and mouses do more with their lives than being vermin... bu here she enslaves them and eats them.... what???? And you are so right about the fat stereotype. It is not funny, it was never funny and its stupid and annoying. Hollywood, please update your ideals
@@galletasist As someone who struggled with my weight growing up, but grew up to be quite athletic-looking and 'normal' sized, it so annoys me when the only character trait they give to heavy characters is LAWL FAT. Which also seems increasingly the one-dimensional humour/character analysis both Corden and Wilson lean into lately >_> (Same with Corden in The Prom. Yeesh.).
that explains it. i really do feel bad for the special effects artists. sadly, for a film that was literally just finished the night of the premier, it's as good as it could have looked.
Allegedly, being an FX house is a crap shoot. The winning team for "The Life of Pi" declared bankruptcy just 11 days before winning the Academy Award for Best Visual Effects. Ive read that they are contracted for the movie and the director can demand any change (i.e. do-it-again) until they are happy.
@@auldthymer What's worse about that is that from my understanding FX houses will bid for a job like a construction company would do for a real estate project and any overages the FX houses experience for any reason have to come out of their own pockets.
@@auldthymer I remember that. The life-like effects in Life of Pi cost a lot of money and Rhythm and Hues were not paid enough to do the work that they did.
if some of the accounts of the artists are true (and really who can question them), universal also slashed their animation budget when the trailer hit and was disliked, meaning no extra compensation for the hours done.
_They didn't use mocap suits??????_ That must have been _beyond_ hellish for the vfx artists Not only did they need to place everything by eye but they also needed to guess how far the actors were from each other and painstakingly place _everything_ frame by frame....
Cats is also a proud “winner” of 6 Golden Raspberry Awards: • Worst Picture • Worst Supporting Actor - James Corden as Bustopher Jones • Worst Supporting Actress - Rebel Wilson as Jennyanydots • Worst Screen Combo - Any two half-feline/half-human hairballs • Worst Director - Tom Hooper • Worst Screenplay - Lee Hall and Tom Hooper It was also nominated for 3 more, but it didn’t “win” • Worst Actress - Francesca Hayward as Victoria (lost against Hilary Duff for The Haunting Of Sharon Tate) • Worst Supporting Actress - Judi Dench as Old Deuteronomy (lost against her colleague Rebel Wilson) • Worst Screen Combo - Jason Derulo and his CGI-Neutered Bulge (lost against the creepy cat people)
I hope that Francesca Hayward's career recovers from this cinematic disaster, as she's a talented dancer, and was one of the only actors who seemed to surpass the mediocre material here.👏🏾♥️
I do feel bad for Francesca. She’s a talented young lady, but this was the wrong cinematic debut for her. Hopefully Hollywood can offer her much better musicals
I would love it if Tom Hooper was there to receive the award like Halle Berry for Cat woman, but I feel like Tom is probably too much of a narcissist to not cause a tantrum over it😂
Can we agree that ALL the screen Combos were lame at the least? Stallone and his Ego are considered a screen combo? Jason Derulo and CGI are a Screen Combo?
All of these nominations and wins being understandable bar for Francesca Heyward. She was in a tough position for being a supposed lead here, but she did fine with the material given. Hilary Duff, on the other hand, totally deserved that Razzie. So did The Haunting of Sharon Tate, which is even worse that Cats. Cats is at least fun in a ''so bad it's good'' way. THOST is just excruciating.
I always thought the stage costumes were really clever because not only do they give the suggestion of cats rather than literally trying to *be* cats, but also because all the furry accents (the leg and arm warmers, the wigs, the shoulder floofs, etc.) help break up the human silhouette so it's less off-putting. In this movie, there's just... nothing *but* human silhouettes with nothing to sell the illusion of cat-ness except for really sleek fur, ears, and tails. The ears are especially weird because then you just have this flat surface where the actual human ears should be--the stage show got around this by fitting the wigs over the actors' ears.
Apparently Stephen Spielberg’s animation studio, Amblin Animation, was working on an animated adaptation of CATS back in the mid to late 90s, but the studio went under before it could be completed. There are some storyboards floating around the internet that are fairly easy to find if you’re at all interested, and they look pretty damn good
The concept art is so gorgeous (their Macavity design especially--he looks like a classic Disney villain, and I'm here for it), and it breaks my heart that we will never get that movie.
I feel so bad for the editors and animators that had to deal with the directors abuse and the sudden "you have to animate the entire movie now" they deserve better. A lot better
Plus then they rubbed salt in the wound and did that horrible 'stand up' with James Corden and Rebel Wilson at the Oscars and it just killed me. Ugh. Don't blame someone who obviously worked hard (even if it ended up being crap) for your crap standards and work environment. >_>
@@laurena9563 Honestly under the conditions they were working in, it wouldn't surprise me if they made it look crappy on purpose. I wouldn't blame them if that were the case
@@aj.s.photography Completely! As someone who has worked in graphic design, when managers don't understand the artistic process, like it sounds Hooper didn't, you honestly reach a certain point with their nit-picking over things that won't be seen in a final version, that you can be so demotivated that you'll put in LESS work overall, just because you're so discouraged. Not usually to this extent, but you can might submit something you might be more 'meh' about overall rather than an artistic product you love, because it doesn't matter to the manager either way.
@@laurena9563 I completely forgot about that cause it was just that awful! Then again I only watched that disaster cause I was sure 1917 was gonna win!
@@colleen4ever I felt honestly terrible at shaking my head and awkwardly chuckling at that 'joke' when watching, because I think literally the response after they made that 'joke' to save their own 'reputations' (such as they are) was to have the animators come out with the horrible conditions and direction they were given to work with. Only after being completely crapped on a national (arguably international) platform. Yuck. >_> Way to stay professional/classy, guys.
We could’ve had… a fully-animated adaptation of CATS… from the studio who gave us AN AMERICAN TAIL. As one who was 9 years old when they fell in love with the ’98 stage version & wanted exactly that in a CATS movie, I will NEVER forget that this is what we were given.
Animation is undoubtedly the way to go with adapting CATS because I think a lot of elements of the stage production (the dancing/movement, the designs of the cats, etc) that wouldn’t work in a live action version would work so much better
@@erikdaniels0n It breaks my heart. The studio had these gorgeous designs for Macavity, Deuteronomy & Grisabella & some nice background art. But that production was scrapped due to the studio having a string of box office disappointments like FIEVEL GOES WEST, WE'RE BACK: A DINOSAUR STORY & BALTO.
This review, Sideways' review and Lindsey Ellis' review of this travesty make for a great trilogy far more positively unironically entertaining than the film itself.
Personally, I strongly disagree for with Lindsey's final conclusion when it comes to movie musicals. They, by themselves, aren't the problem... it's the people in charge that keep FUCKING IT UP! In fact, a Cat's movie could ONLY work in animation, because it makes more sense! Even if it was CG, I think Spielberg had the right idea making this an animation. Hell, why didn't you give it to Illumination? At least THEY CARE about their output!
I feel like in the musical, or at least the 1998 version, the actors perform like “yeah we know this is pretty stupid but we’re gonna give it our all” and they play each scene with the right tone whether it be playful or serious. Meanwhile in the movie actors will either be too silly (mostly Corden and Wilson) or too serious for what’s happening in the scene.
I was never even a huge fan of the Cats musical, but this crapshow made me appreciate the original Broadway production so much more. And you're completely right- the way that the actors play it is like, "This might be ridiculous from an outsider's perspective, but OUR character believes it- and that's what matters." Rum Tum Tugger in the 1998 version is the perfect example of that- he's basically a Tim Curry cat who is fabulous and ridiculous, but gives it his all, lol. You have no choice but to go along with him.
@@barbarakirk3064 Honestly if anything the best part of this dumpster fire existing is I've fallen in love with the Cats soundtrack as I work from home xD
I've probably put way more thought into this than I should have, but you know what I reckon might've been a good way to translate what little story there was to screen? If the film began in a little boy's nursery (perhaps imply somehow that he is a young T.S. Elliot), and then his mother or governess enters to put him to bed. He says there are stray cats making noise outside, and this leads to the mother/governess to tell him the story of the Jellicle Ball. Then at the end after Grizabella ascends to the Heaviside Layer we fade back to the nursery where the boy is falling asleep while the mother/governess could be singing "The Ad-Dressing of Cats". Then finally, as the mother/governess turns the lights out, she leaves the door open a crack, just enough for a small kitten (not a human/cat hybrid like we've seen all throughout the film but an actual kitten) to enter and snuggle up on the boy's pillow, and the camera zooms in on its collar which has a small name tag that reads 'Grizabella'. Obviously this wouldn't fix this film's many other problems, but I reckon that it might've allowed the audience to suspend their disbelief a little if it were all suggested to be in the imagination of a child, but that's just me.
Stage Version: Chaotic bi Rum Tum Tugger praises his boyfriend who waves a rainbow scarf and force lighting for six minutes Movie: Why are we straight?
He didn't even sing it. As a Tugger/Misto I felt so betrayed. Heck, I felt betrayed the minute I saw what they did to RTT's number. But then again, I guess John Partridge spoiled the heck out of me.
Cats: Possibly the most Andrew Lloyd Weber musical he ever wrote. The characters may be one-dimensional and the plot shallow, but the music is catchy and the emotions it inspires strong (and intentional). And, as per Lord Andy tradition, the film adaptation has a director utterly unsuited for directing musicals, leading to a result that also inspires strong emotions...just not the same ones...
I saw Cats on Broadway and enjoyed it. It's not a Sondheim character drama and it's not trying to be. Just a whimsical, abstract spectacle of a show with some fantastic dancing, cool visuals and interesting music. If you go into the stage show and let your brain turn off and be swept away by it, it's a fun time. And hearing a Broadway caliber singer singing Memory (Mamie Parris in my case) gave me chills I still feel to this day. The movie takes away all the whimsy and abstractness and replaces it with dullness, literalness and nightmare fuel.
@@isabellp.5730 I think Lindsay Ellis said the movie should have leaned into that and been a revue like Fantastia instead of trying to hang a narrative plot on this mess. That probably could have helped a lot.
"Cats" was the show that inspired me to go into theater when I was eight years old--it's a fun escapist spectacle with great music and dancing, and that's all it ever needs to be. Seeing it get the Thooper treatment broke my heart.
@Rebecca Woolf Oh absolutely, but they wanted those Oscars. The fact it was so naked ambitious for awards makes its scathing reception all the more satisfying.
Nearly every bad outcome of the Cats movie is a direct result of Tom Hooper and it is mind-boggling. Thanks so much for letting me and Bailey play along, Diva!
In Hollywood, you're not only as good as your last movie, you ARE your last movie, and if it was a hit, you're expected to remake it for the rest of your career. (Qv. Rob Marshall trying to turn "Nine" into "Chicago".) And Hooper, as noted, was Mr. Les Miserables on demand.
@@ericjanssen394 I thought Tom Hooper's schtick was period drama with heavy emphasis on the acting. Hell the dude did another movie in between Les Miz and Cats that even won an acting Oscar.
@@bigbearkat2010 He is, but someone (ALW, Universal, somebody) didn't have that foresight gritty realism is his greatest strength. All they did was look at Les Miz and decided "This man directed this and won all the awards... give him all the musicals now!"
In defense of Hayward's singing, Webber and Swift apparently finished writing Beautiful Ghosts more or less right before filming it. Also, did it bother anyone else that Actually Professional Singer Taylor Swift was singing Macavity in this weird, breathy, speak-singing way?
To be honest, the big names in this movie are great singers. Even Corden and Wilson are good musical performers. But leave it for a dancer and Jennifer Hudson to be better. Steven McRae, a fucking dancer, had a better performance than a majority of the cast here
I thought Beautiful Ghosts wasn’t a bad song and is a pretty good addition to the musical. Put it right after Macavity’s defeat but before the reprise of Memory and I think that the song would have been better received.
@@anothermiddleschoolburnout8816 Like I said, move the song to right after Maccavity's defeat but before the reprise of Memory. That way you still have Beautiful Ghosts' message of wanting to belong somewhere without upstaging Grizabella's plight.
Fun fact -- Steven Spielberg was going to make an animated version of Cats in the '90s. He got as far as concept art before his animation studio went out of business. I have no idea if that film would have been successful or not, but at least it would have released closer to the musical's heyday and wouldn't have given us THIS uncanny valley nightmare.
Should've added the Macativty character change as a another sin, cause Macavity in the stage show and the 1998 film version was JUST A PARTY CRASHER CAUSING TROUBLE. Not trying to become the chosen one for the Jelicall ball!
The poems themselves are super cute. “Cats have big personalities like humans! Isn’t that charming, little Victorian child?” The jump to musical was weird, but this movie completely misses that twee whimsical energy which makes everything unsettling.
I had NO IDEA about the way the technical team was treated behind the scenes, so, I guess I'm gonna throw hands. Also, Tom. (18:03) You DON'T ZOOM OUT THAT FAR DURING A DANCE SEQUENCE
Only 35 seconds in and I'm already rolling my eyes at the tagline. "You will believe." What is that even supposed to mean? I already do believe in cats... when has belief ever been a big theme in the show? It's so generic and nonsensical.
To be fair, the entire stage show runs on nonsense, but I agree that the tagline makes ABSOLUTELY no sense, unless that was supposed to be the point?! 🤔
Um, I'm a Christian, and I'm pretty sure a lot of Cats is inspired by Christianity. Some stuff is obvious like jelicals being a stand in for either evangelicals or as a nod to the word angelic which refers to angels. And of course Deuteronomy being an actual book in the Bible (the fifth book of the old testament to be specific). Then there's the choosing where a jelical cat is lifted up from the ground or "earth" into the sky or "heavens" (as it used to be called) so as to live a better life. In my humble opinion Victoria being kicked out of her humans house is supposed to sort of refer to Adam and Eve getting kicked out of Eden. And being forced to now try and survive in the harsh wilderness. Since the human houses seem to be a sort of paradise, and the cold city streets being a modern day wilderness (like how sometimes New York is referred to as a concrete jungle). The jelical choosing isn't actually chosen by Deuteronomy, she's just a prophet speaking on behalf of God. Who then chooses one of the jelical cats to come up to heaven. Sort of dying but not really since due to Jesus dying for our sins our spirit lives and goes to heaven. And in fact when you accept God into your heart and Jesus as your lord and savior it's considered a sort of rebirth. The street cats represent mankind, with jelicals being Christians and non jelicals like the one cat who sings memory being non believers. And the cat who sings memories who used to be a jelical but left and then is later accepted into the group representing a sort of prodigal son situation. Where a member of the faith left, but later on returned. And of course, is rewarded for this by being accepted into heaven. I'm sorry if this comes across as preachy. I don't mean for it too. It's just I genuinely think that this is the best explanation for why Cats is the way it is.
@@katlyncoker8488 sorry if this will soud mean (really don't mean it), but nah, jellicas are something that had to do with elliots (daughter? niece?) and stands for "dear little cats" or something, and webber has said that the musical is really just about cats (I think Lindsey Ellis has a video on it)
@@SuperLoves4 It doesn't sound mean. And I get it if that's what webber says. But while I get that authorial intent matters, and it might not be intentional. Honestly webber saying it's just about cats makes the story make no sense. Like, how is any of the stuff shown in the musical cat stuff. Maybe it's not inspired by Christianity. But the fact that it's very easy to read it that way (I mean, really naming your kinda sorta religiously coded character Deuteronomy) is very interesting to me. Especially since it kinda allows the story make sense. Admittedly I might just be reaching as a way to explain the unexplainable, but that's how I view it. Because that way it at least it makes some kinda sense narratively.
It makes me mad how this movie could've EASILY avoided all of the scorn, if it was simply ANIMATED. Obviously, traditional animation would've been the best option and the studio behind American Tail *was* planning an animated adaptation... before it went bankrupt. Even MoCap would've been fine, since at least the characters could've actually looked like real cats. And don't get me with the "they wanted to keep the celebrities recognizable" excuse; many animated movies score with celebrity casts by voice and billing alone. Even if the characters usually end up looking like their actors.
I've heard that they actually did try to make a cartoon version of the musical in the 90s, but that fell through before they could get past the concept stage. It really is too bad.
People don't talk about it, but there's a bit of a taboo with animated interpretations of stage musicals, especially after 1999's The King and I bombed and was panned. Your options are either finding an inexperienced studio who never tried it or Disney, but if you know anything about P.L. Travers, you might be hesitant to work with them.
Thank you for pointing out that Hooper is also largely responsible for why it looks so bad. Too many people throw the visual effects team under the bus when it was hardly their fault.
Another musical review channel (Sideways) got into why the Skimbleshanks number works more than all the other numbers, which basically comes down to even with Hooper's horrible "we record singers live and have the poor orchestra work with any tempo changes that "inspire" them at the moment," the Skimbleshanks number is literally built around the tap line as basically a bass line that keeps the tempo in order for everyone to dance to it- so it's FORCED to keep up the energy and movement throughout the number and actually comes off as a bop because of it (But I totally agree- it's pretty much the only nugget of gold in this crap.)
@@spinningpeanut Honestly the more I've listened to it the more adorable it becomes. I love the visual it makes of this adorable tabby thinking he runs the trains and the trains can't start without him, because it's such a real CAT thing. xD Like I'd honestly watch an animated adventure movie about that cat.
She's either a kitten or just reaching adulthood, either her or Jemima are the youngest of the Jellicles in the musical. It works better since it's more of a ballet and the stage lets things be abstract. Having her be explicitly a kitten in the movie makes it really creepy how incredibly horny everyone is.
@@pinkcupcake4717 I don't think she's " _explicitly_ a kitten" in the movie. I don't remember any of the other characters referring to her as one, at least.
I saw Cats on stage around the time the movie was announced. I really knew nothing about the play outside of the fact that it was about cats (because duh) and the song Memory. As anyone who has seen the play knows, there’s not really much of a plot, but the choreography was amazing. I’m pretty sure one of the cats was in heels. Why were they wearing heels? I have no idea, but they were leaping across the stage, and it was incredible. The costumes too were awesome, and to know that this was CGI is baffling, and to know Tom Hooper was a jackass to his team is... not at all shocking. I haven’t seen the movie, the trailers and this review are enough. Thank you for this, and here’s to your next 100 cases!
When you say "heels" maybe you mean the dancer that plays Jennyanniedots on stage, who is in fact wearing tap shoes because unlike the 2019 movie she does the Tap dance routine in the musical.
I would also recommend the RUclipsr Sideways's video in regards to Cats. He tackles how Tom Hooper ruins the music and the overall performance of the actors
In case anyone is wondering what the hell "Jellicle" even means, it's a shortened form of "Dear Little". It comes from a poem TS Elliott wrote his 4 year old nephew: Pollicle Dogs and Jellicle Cats. Pollicle is short for "Poor Little" and Jellicle is short for "Dear Little".
Dear Diva: Congratulations for your 100th session as the judge, jury and executioner on the Infernal Court of Musical Hell. I hope you have Cerberus prepared for this session, if your boss allows it.
You're gonna need the healing powers of a good Barbie musical after this one! (I recommend Princess & the Pauper...trust me, it's better than you think it is, Diva).
I was glad to watch a Cats (2019) review that went beyond “AAA CREEPY CGI” and described how the characters, relationships, tone and emotional core were botched beyond belief. Thanks, Diva. I love you more and more.
My mother loves the stage show and was really looking forward to the movie. She got annoyed when my sister and I couldn't stop laughing at the trailer. Then she watched the trailer for herself...and decided to give the movie a miss.
Tom Hooper really comes off like one of those IT managers whose convinced that any work on a computer should be dead easy because "you're just pushing buttons." 😒😿 On a more serious note, Hooper's inability to keep himself from slowing down nearly every song kills the crazy energy that the musical was noted for.
Cats is, at it's core, a revue show. It's a bunch of different songs tied together by a tenuous plot. And that's fine for the stage. That *works* on the stage. I love Cats. I love the music, I love the costumes, the dancing. It was the first musical my Mum and I watched together when I was nine. It started a tradition of us going to musicals together. I saw it again in a tent when I was in my twenties. I will always go to see Cats if the opportunity arises (no matter how much they fuck up certain characters) and I was really looking forward to this movie. I haven't even bothered to watch it. I won't waste my time or money on something so far divorced from the source material as to be well nigh unrecognisable.
Me: *sees the thumbnail* Oh no... I worked at a movie theater when this film was out and I would be shocked and baffled as to why some people paid good money to see it. Though I did hear that some people would storm out of the theater. As for me, I'm one of the fans of the musical and boy was I taken aback by this production. First off, you can't even tell the cats apart unlike, in the musical and 1998 movie. Second, they left out Jemima; I don't know if I should be disgruntled about that since she's a vital character to the story and that it would've made more sense to have her be the protagonist since this was her technically her first Jellicle Ball or happy because, at least, she wouldn't be derailed like the rest of the cast. And, while we're on the subject, why Victoria as the main focus when Demeter (the ex-girlfriend of Macavity), Jemima (the innocent newcomer), and/or Munkustrap (the main storyteller) would've been better choices? And why was the movie so...uncomfortable? It's already enough we had to put up with that CGI but then there's the sexual nature. I know the musical was risque but the cats would be playful and silly too (the Rum Tum Tugger playing bagpipes...need I say more?). And they wouldn't leave you feeling dirty after seeing watching the show. Then there's what they did to Bombalurina; she's supposed to be Demeter's loyal friend who (along with Munkustrap) would protect her. Why is she in cahoots with Macavity in the movie? Why couldn't we have gotten the 2D animated version with Spielberg? At least that version looked promising...
Sometimes I feel bad for Webber. He's had amazing success onstage and yet seems so, for lack of a better word, greedy for film recognition which only results in putting the flaws in his stage shows on blast.
I honestly blame universal more for that and in this case it’s universal and Tom Hooper who are to blame. Lloyd Webber not so much oh no wait wait wait no it’s Taylor Swift Universal and Tom Hooper not necessarily in that order. I say Taylor Swift because she wrote beautiful ghosts and well beautiful ghosts didn’t need to be the award bait song when you have memory already in the show for it both on stage and screen and plus yeah It was just mostly for that song it’s pretty but come on nothing compared to Lloyd Webber’s work.
@@CarolinaMouse Webber owns these IPs. When I say greedy I mean him historically picking directors who are famous for gritty realism or superhero movies when he knows that he doesn’t create those musicals. He wants the film recognition so bad that he’s willing to let someone who doesn’t understand his work, strip it for parts. So no I don’t blame universal or Taylor because the fact of the matter is these movies wouldn’t get made if he didn’t want them made. Between Joel Schumacher in Phantom and now this, he seems desperate. And this is coming from a fan.
One of Lloyd Webber's earliest backers was Robert Stigwood. After seeing Stigwood trash the Beatles with the 1978 'Sgt. Pepper movie,' I shudder to think that he could have produced a 'Cats' 'movie even worse then this!
One sentence that would have been fair is the following comment: TOM HOOPER MUST GO TO AN ANIMATION COURSE TO LEARN ABOUT BASIC ANIMATION PROCESS TO AVOID INSULTING to ARTISTS
Tom Hooper, Rebel Wilson and James Corden definitely deserved their Razzie wins. Let's hope the future film adaptation of Starlight Express won't repeat the mistakes of Cats.
Oh boy do I have a lot to say about this, for one thing there was originally going to be an animated version back in the 90's directed by Steven Spielberg and made by Amblin, but due to what happened this never came to fruition. Also the characters singing verses of the songs that are sung about them by other characters is a big problem, yes most of them do this in the show but they sing their own verses. The designs are...yeah, when you make the Sleepwalkers from Sleepwalkers look like the cute and cuddly felines they're supposed to be weak against seem tame by comparison, then you know you have problems. The Broadway musical's makeup is made to indeed look like they are stylized humanoid cats, and their graceful movements are evidence of this. I have no problems with Judi Dench as Old Deutronomy, although in my mind BRIAN BLESSED will ALWAYS be my Deutronomy (since he was him in the original 1981 stage play, and also performed a double role as Bustopher too). Grizzabella however, yeah too young to be singing about how she feels like she misses the good ol days, she is supposed to be elderly in the musical, not specifically mentioned as being elderly but used to beautiful but is now haggard or 'ancient looking' as in a fallen angel/fallen from grace and yes I am aware she has been made a bit younger in the musical as of recent, but still she's supposed to be elderly. Rum Tum Tugger is pretty much the Mick Jagger of Cats according to Webber. Also about Bustopher in this, there's more to him than his weight in the show, in the show Bustopher is a wealthy cat who enjoys the finer things in life and yes he has extravagant taste and isn't afraid to be proud of it either. Also...yeah, Macavity's song in the show is ABOUT Macavity, not sung by him unlike how it is here, speaking of Macavity...yeah, stage Macavity looks demonic and badass with his darth maul-esque markings and all, this Macavity on the other hand makes you question your sexuality, hey Macavity, that's Tugger's job.
I mean, I think Betty Buckley and Elaine Page were pretty young (30s) when they played Grizabella but the stage makeup is so much better than evoking age than the VFX here.
@@lillianward2810 Mmm...some recent revivals have shown Griz to be younger, and it's true that the original poem (or unfinished fragment thereof) never said that she was actually old. It's implied/coded that she's a "fallen woman", since Tottenham Court was well-known to be a hangout for hookers. So it could be simply rough living that's prematurely aged her, along with poor health/injuries from said life (notice the revival's Grizabella has a scar on her forehead).
Interesting side-note about the film's special effects: some technical glitches made their way into the release-day digital cinema package, so a separate package was sent out a week later that corrected these glitches. THAT'S how rushed the special effects were.
Why on earth was this not an animated movie? It would've been energetic and fun, not hideously frightening. I haven't even seen the movie, but it is freaky looking.
I'm still convinced that Starlight Express would have been the better gimmicky, incredibly 80s, Oddly-Sexual-For-A-Family-Show, Style-Over-Substance ALW musical to turn into a movie. At least it has somewhat of a plot. And train-human-hybrids might have been not quite as terrifying as the cat-human-hybrids we got
I remember when I saw this movie. I hated the music so much I had to see what the oringal music sounded like. So on the ride home I listed to the Bway cast recording and fell in love. I guess some good can come with the bad.
I went to see this 3x in theatres, but primarily because I fell asleep the first two times. I watched it again once I got the blu-ray, as well as the commentary.
Watch Sideways' video if you wanna know criticism about main things about the plot and ALL of the musical problems. Watch Lindsay Ellis' one to know more about the production itself
Did you know this musical was going to be a hand-drawn animated film back in the 90's? Steven Spielberg's Amblimation was going to make it and the concept art was beautiful, but the studio went bankrupt after their first three films bombed. Also back in the 70's, Disney asked T.S. Elliot's widow if they could adapt the poems into an animated film, but she said "NO!"
My sister and I were keeping our baffled amusement subdued as much as possible for the sake of other people, but absolutely lost it at Ian McKellen's 'Macavittyyyyyy......' when he got captured.
I am super happy you are covering this case! I never got to see Cats live but I adore the filmed staged version because it's just the right amount of weird and the dancing is fantastic. I will never ever forgive Hooper for what he put the SFX team through and the fact that all the blame for everything was put at their feet when it was not their fault in any way seeing as they did the best with what little they were given
Pro: everyone is making videos shit on Cats and they never fail to entertain. Con: I have to listen to slippets of the torturous renditions of several numbers in the film.
From what I've heard, Webber actual had little to no control over the creative team for the movie and even spoke out (as politely britishly passive aggressively as he could) that he was not pleased with any of it. I wouldn't be surprised if Hooper got brought in at the behest of a producer, and Webber found out somewhere after the fact, simply due to how long this movie has been in production hell.
I’ve always felt they screwed up big time not making this an animated movie. If I wanted to watch people dressed as cats prancing around and singing on stage, I’d go see the musical. The whole point of making a film from a stage production is to show and do things you can’t in the theatre. Things like actual cats singing and dancing.
The idea behind Bustopher Jones is that he is able to eat so well in this junkyard. He is admired (at least in the stage musical) by the other cats because he lives so well. The fact that he is fat is not an insult per se, he is the only cat that is fat in the musical because he is the only cat who is able to become fat. But the movie just went "Whahaha, fat person is fat cat lol".
I can't exactly pinpoint the source of this claim, but I recall that apparently Tom Hooper grew up with the audio recording of the musical, which contained the first version of Mungojerrie and Rumpleteazer. ALW reportedly hates the first version and would prefer it gone (even in his commentary to 1998 version he made a few comments on how much more he enjoys that 7/8 tempo), so I think it's safe to assume that it was Tom Hooper who was responsible for the choice to include the inferior version in the movie.
I try not to blame the actress too much for her lacklustre ‘beautiful ghosts’, since according to interviews she didn’t get the lyrics til the morning of filming and didn’t actually know the song very well
Macavity scared me as a child when I watched my mom's anniversary DVD of cats. When I saw him pretty much turned into a comedic character really pissed me off. And the fact they wasted an amazing actor like that argh!
@@HappiestMango right?! The whole climactic fight in the actual musical between him and munkustrap (however you spell it) was intense with the horns and drums plus some choreography. But here it was "meh it's macavitiy, ignore him maybe he will go away"
I'd love to see you do an At The Source for Cats...covering not just Old Possum's Book of Practical Cats, but the backstory behind the unfinished and unpublished Grizabella poem and the other Eliot poems that inspired both her story and "Memory."
You know your movie is bad when Andrew Lloyd Webber, the creator & songwriter of the original play and lifelong cat lover, decides to _adopt a dog_ for the first time in his entire life after its release.
Diehard cats fan here. it's been my favorite musical for a good two decades, and though it IS among the weirdest and stupidest musicals ever, I still love it. from the moment it was announced though, i knew this movie would be absolutely terrible. you can't adapt this shit. theater is the only place Cats works. but it was SO mind-bogglingly awful in so many ways that i can't help but adore it. I've watched it more times in quarantine than i'm willing to admit.
With the song numbers they had a machine that switched a click track to the orchestra trying to make a soundtrack on the fly to match the actors winging it.
One of the best ways I've heard someone explain the issue with the character design in the movie is this: In the stage play, the characters were Humans as cats. In the movie, they were cats as humans.
Highly recommend the video on cats by Sideways. He dives deep into how the music choices are fundamentally broken. This video was more about the visuals and story, so Sideway's audio focused video is a perfect pairing
I found the epilogue particularly distressing: furry Judy Dench staring directly into my soul for several full minutes while the sun rises, brightening the lighting and making all the terrible animation all the more apparent.
Oh how most of us called this one...and how fitting, since Sideways just did a video on CATS 2019 music as well. 😆 Happy 100th episode, Diva, here's to 100 more! 🥂
Taylor Swift-Cat: "Macavity's a ginger cat-"
Macavity: *is Idris-Elba-naked colored*
It baffles me that Hooper is super literal on all the props Mistoffoles mentions in his song, while ignoring Elliot's clear cues on what the cats are supposed to look like.
to think I'd just watched this Crap on HBO MAX and Boy did it SUCK
@@MusicalHell You know, I read somewhere that Taylor Swift had to explain to him on set what catnip actually was. If he was that dense about catnip, maybe he honestly didn't know what "ginger" meant.
@Rebecca Woolf We know that Ginger means Redhead in America, we had Gilligan’s Island
@@Fiona_fml Not everyone has seen Gilligan's Island lol, seriously, how long ago was that? Also, from all I've gathered, red-haired people don't like being called ginger.
If there's one thing I do not like about this whole thing is the fact that the VFX team was blamed for all this and ridiculed at the Oscars. Classy.
That left such a bad taste in my mouth
@@HappiestMango I believe this the same company that folded and all the workers were laid off a few weeks before Christmas and during thier lunch break.
i was just about to mention that! classless move on their part.
The Oscars that year was a big joke anyway!
@@colleen4ever The ceremony, yes. But honestly, the nominees and winners were mostly satisfying that year imo.
Bustopher Jones in the musical is a little bit more than just a fat cat. He is dignified, like an upper class gentleman, and the cats around him respect him a lot.... but Corden's version doesnt go beyond "lol he fat"
SOMEONE WHO SAYS IT.
This right here is everything I hate about the film version.
Sounds like they gave Rebel Wilson's character the same treatment. Also, can I just say that as a fat person myself, I'm getting kind of pissed at Rebel Wilson for constantly taking roles that feed into the stereotype of fat people's purpose being the butt of jokes? Like seriously, I know it's hard for overweight people to find work in Hollywood, but this feels like a sellout and a betrayal.
@@dragongirl7978 the character of Jennyanydots was destroyed in this movie. She was a kindhearted cat that helped cockroaches and mouses do more with their lives than being vermin... bu here she enslaves them and eats them.... what????
And you are so right about the fat stereotype. It is not funny, it was never funny and its stupid and annoying. Hollywood, please update your ideals
@@galletasist As someone who struggled with my weight growing up, but grew up to be quite athletic-looking and 'normal' sized, it so annoys me when the only character trait they give to heavy characters is LAWL FAT. Which also seems increasingly the one-dimensional humour/character analysis both Corden and Wilson lean into lately >_> (Same with Corden in The Prom. Yeesh.).
Those poor special effects artists. I didn't realize they were treated so poorly. The visuals of the movie make so much more sense now.
that explains it. i really do feel bad for the special effects artists.
sadly, for a film that was literally just finished the night of the premier,
it's as good as it could have looked.
Allegedly, being an FX house is a crap shoot. The winning team for "The Life of Pi" declared bankruptcy just 11 days before winning the Academy Award for Best Visual Effects.
Ive read that they are contracted for the movie and the director can demand any change (i.e. do-it-again) until they are happy.
@@auldthymer What's worse about that is that from my understanding FX houses will bid for a job like a construction company would do for a real estate project and any overages the FX houses experience for any reason have to come out of their own pockets.
@@auldthymer I remember that. The life-like effects in Life of Pi cost a lot of money and Rhythm and Hues were not paid enough to do the work that they did.
if some of the accounts of the artists are true (and really who can question them), universal also slashed their animation budget when the trailer hit and was disliked, meaning no extra compensation for the hours done.
_They didn't use mocap suits??????_ That must have been _beyond_ hellish for the vfx artists Not only did they need to place everything by eye but they also needed to guess how far the actors were from each other and painstakingly place _everything_ frame by frame....
As if the visual effects staff didn’t suffer enough.
Cats is also a proud “winner” of 6 Golden Raspberry Awards:
• Worst Picture
• Worst Supporting Actor - James Corden as Bustopher Jones
• Worst Supporting Actress - Rebel Wilson as Jennyanydots
• Worst Screen Combo - Any two half-feline/half-human hairballs
• Worst Director - Tom Hooper
• Worst Screenplay - Lee Hall and Tom Hooper
It was also nominated for 3 more, but it didn’t “win”
• Worst Actress - Francesca Hayward as Victoria (lost against Hilary Duff for The Haunting Of Sharon Tate)
• Worst Supporting Actress - Judi Dench as Old Deuteronomy (lost against her colleague Rebel Wilson)
• Worst Screen Combo - Jason Derulo and his CGI-Neutered Bulge (lost against the creepy cat people)
I hope that Francesca Hayward's career recovers from this cinematic disaster, as she's a talented dancer, and was one of the only actors who seemed to surpass the mediocre material here.👏🏾♥️
I do feel bad for Francesca. She’s a talented young lady, but this was the wrong cinematic debut for her. Hopefully Hollywood can offer her much better musicals
I would love it if Tom Hooper was there to receive the award like Halle Berry for Cat woman, but I feel like Tom is probably too much of a narcissist to not cause a tantrum over it😂
Can we agree that ALL the screen Combos were lame at the least? Stallone and his Ego are considered a screen combo? Jason Derulo and CGI are a Screen Combo?
All of these nominations and wins being understandable bar for Francesca Heyward. She was in a tough position for being a supposed lead here, but she did fine with the material given. Hilary Duff, on the other hand, totally deserved that Razzie. So did The Haunting of Sharon Tate, which is even worse that Cats. Cats is at least fun in a ''so bad it's good'' way. THOST is just excruciating.
Victoria: you dont have it as bad as me tho✨
Grizzabella: miss, this is a Wendys
Oh, Sideways really did a number on this movie.
Steven Spielberg wanted to make _Cats_ an animated feature back in the day, but it never got off the ground.
This movie should have been animated...I mean it worked for "Shinbone Alley".
If only he could find a way to rework the play into a proper story.
That would’ve been better.
That single fact all those years back is the reason why everyone is miserable now.
@@cartooncritique6625 From a certain perspective, it _was_ animated. Post-production was basically Rotoscoping Hell for the VFX teams.
I still think they should've either gone full animated or bigger budget version of the Broadway outfits (Like Jim Henson's Creature Shop territory).
I always thought the stage costumes were really clever because not only do they give the suggestion of cats rather than literally trying to *be* cats, but also because all the furry accents (the leg and arm warmers, the wigs, the shoulder floofs, etc.) help break up the human silhouette so it's less off-putting. In this movie, there's just... nothing *but* human silhouettes with nothing to sell the illusion of cat-ness except for really sleek fur, ears, and tails. The ears are especially weird because then you just have this flat surface where the actual human ears should be--the stage show got around this by fitting the wigs over the actors' ears.
But animated movies don't win real awards!
Apparently Stephen Spielberg’s animation studio, Amblin Animation, was working on an animated adaptation of CATS back in the mid to late 90s, but the studio went under before it could be completed. There are some storyboards floating around the internet that are fairly easy to find if you’re at all interested, and they look pretty damn good
The concept art is so gorgeous (their Macavity design especially--he looks like a classic Disney villain, and I'm here for it), and it breaks my heart that we will never get that movie.
Hell, I would even take Labyrinth-style gross puppets over this!
I feel so bad for the editors and animators that had to deal with the directors abuse and the sudden "you have to animate the entire movie now" they deserve better. A lot better
Plus then they rubbed salt in the wound and did that horrible 'stand up' with James Corden and Rebel Wilson at the Oscars and it just killed me. Ugh. Don't blame someone who obviously worked hard (even if it ended up being crap) for your crap standards and work environment. >_>
@@laurena9563 Honestly under the conditions they were working in, it wouldn't surprise me if they made it look crappy on purpose. I wouldn't blame them if that were the case
@@aj.s.photography Completely! As someone who has worked in graphic design, when managers don't understand the artistic process, like it sounds Hooper didn't, you honestly reach a certain point with their nit-picking over things that won't be seen in a final version, that you can be so demotivated that you'll put in LESS work overall, just because you're so discouraged. Not usually to this extent, but you can might submit something you might be more 'meh' about overall rather than an artistic product you love, because it doesn't matter to the manager either way.
@@laurena9563 I completely forgot about that cause it was just that awful! Then again I only watched that disaster cause I was sure 1917 was gonna win!
@@colleen4ever I felt honestly terrible at shaking my head and awkwardly chuckling at that 'joke' when watching, because I think literally the response after they made that 'joke' to save their own 'reputations' (such as they are) was to have the animators come out with the horrible conditions and direction they were given to work with. Only after being completely crapped on a national (arguably international) platform. Yuck. >_> Way to stay professional/classy, guys.
We could’ve had… a fully-animated adaptation of CATS… from the studio who gave us AN AMERICAN TAIL.
As one who was 9 years old when they fell in love with the ’98 stage version & wanted exactly that in a CATS movie, I will NEVER forget that this is what we were given.
Animation is undoubtedly the way to go with adapting CATS because I think a lot of elements of the stage production (the dancing/movement, the designs of the cats, etc) that wouldn’t work in a live action version would work so much better
@@erikdaniels0n It breaks my heart. The studio had these gorgeous designs for Macavity, Deuteronomy & Grisabella & some nice background art. But that production was scrapped due to the studio having a string of box office disappointments like FIEVEL GOES WEST, WE'RE BACK: A DINOSAUR STORY & BALTO.
TS Elliot said he never wanted that CATS movie but... he’s wrong. That would have been awesome
@@erikdaniels0n It could have been done like the dance fight scene in Puss in Boots.
@@erikdaniels0n The concept art looked fantastic.
Diva: Hooper is a very prosaic director
Me: That’s a nice way of saying ‘incapable of abstract thought’
AND YOU'RE CORRECT
This review, Sideways' review and Lindsey Ellis' review of this travesty make for a great trilogy far more positively unironically entertaining than the film itself.
I agree. Not that it's difficult to come up with something more entertaining than the film itself.
Personally, I strongly disagree for with Lindsey's final conclusion when it comes to movie musicals. They, by themselves, aren't the problem... it's the people in charge that keep FUCKING IT UP! In fact, a Cat's movie could ONLY work in animation, because it makes more sense! Even if it was CG, I think Spielberg had the right idea making this an animation. Hell, why didn't you give it to Illumination? At least THEY CARE about their output!
Oh yes.
I feel like in the musical, or at least the 1998 version, the actors perform like “yeah we know this is pretty stupid but we’re gonna give it our all” and they play each scene with the right tone whether it be playful or serious. Meanwhile in the movie actors will either be too silly (mostly Corden and Wilson) or too serious for what’s happening in the scene.
I was never even a huge fan of the Cats musical, but this crapshow made me appreciate the original Broadway production so much more. And you're completely right- the way that the actors play it is like, "This might be ridiculous from an outsider's perspective, but OUR character believes it- and that's what matters." Rum Tum Tugger in the 1998 version is the perfect example of that- he's basically a Tim Curry cat who is fabulous and ridiculous, but gives it his all, lol. You have no choice but to go along with him.
@@laurena9563 Yes! Paul Nicholas played the role early on.
@@barbarakirk3064 Honestly if anything the best part of this dumpster fire existing is I've fallen in love with the Cats soundtrack as I work from home xD
First Sideways now this! Yeees, give me the Cats content.
Huh so it wasn't only me who thought that
I'm pretty excited too!!!
This, sideways’s vid, and Lindsay Ellis’s will go down as the legendary trilogy critiquing Cats (2019).
TEAR THIS BITCH APARTTTTT!!!!! This case makes me so upset. I love cats 98 and I cant stomach that this was the last film I saw in theaters
Kami Lee, I literally just created a playlist called “The Cats Trifecta” with all three videos on it
I've probably put way more thought into this than I should have, but you know what I reckon might've been a good way to translate what little story there was to screen?
If the film began in a little boy's nursery (perhaps imply somehow that he is a young T.S. Elliot), and then his mother or governess enters to put him to bed. He says there are stray cats making noise outside, and this leads to the mother/governess to tell him the story of the Jellicle Ball. Then at the end after Grizabella ascends to the Heaviside Layer we fade back to the nursery where the boy is falling asleep while the mother/governess could be singing "The Ad-Dressing of Cats". Then finally, as the mother/governess turns the lights out, she leaves the door open a crack, just enough for a small kitten (not a human/cat hybrid like we've seen all throughout the film but an actual kitten) to enter and snuggle up on the boy's pillow, and the camera zooms in on its collar which has a small name tag that reads 'Grizabella'.
Obviously this wouldn't fix this film's many other problems, but I reckon that it might've allowed the audience to suspend their disbelief a little if it were all suggested to be in the imagination of a child, but that's just me.
It sounds amazing!
dude you have just figured out what a team of highly paid screenwriters and script doctors never could
@@hayleighhanekom3598 That actually sounds fantastic, and MUCH more coherent of a plot that this movie!
I'd personally have enjoyed a fully animated version
That... actually sounds amazing.
Stage Version: Chaotic bi Rum Tum Tugger praises his boyfriend who waves a rainbow scarf and force lighting for six minutes
Movie: Why are we straight?
He didn't even sing it. As a Tugger/Misto I felt so betrayed. Heck, I felt betrayed the minute I saw what they did to RTT's number. But then again, I guess John Partridge spoiled the heck out of me.
They no-homo'd this movie so hard, it's more than a little bit embarassing.
Movie Tug and Misto were kinda in a love triangle with Victoria... sorta...
The show I sent to see, Mesto had a jacket with LED rainbow lights and it was the most fantastic thing I've seen on stage
We could've have a chaotic bi cat?!
Cats: Possibly the most Andrew Lloyd Weber musical he ever wrote. The characters may be one-dimensional and the plot shallow, but the music is catchy and the emotions it inspires strong (and intentional).
And, as per Lord Andy tradition, the film adaptation has a director utterly unsuited for directing musicals, leading to a result that also inspires strong emotions...just not the same ones...
It’s a fun spectacle show with the core of it being an emotional climax
Timothy McLean To be fair, the 70's "Jesus Christ Superstar" and the 90's "Evita" were good adaptions.
@@thecinematicmind I’m going to butt in and say Love Never Dies is his worst musical.
Starlight Express is all the problems with Cats but with all trains and less heart. I think it’s definitely worse than Cats
@@EternalYorkieMom I’ve so wanted to see it (Starlight Express) but I know ALW has meddled with it pretty hard from what I understand
I saw Cats on Broadway and enjoyed it. It's not a Sondheim character drama and it's not trying to be. Just a whimsical, abstract spectacle of a show with some fantastic dancing, cool visuals and interesting music. If you go into the stage show and let your brain turn off and be swept away by it, it's a fun time. And hearing a Broadway caliber singer singing Memory (Mamie Parris in my case) gave me chills I still feel to this day. The movie takes away all the whimsy and abstractness and replaces it with dullness, literalness and nightmare fuel.
agreed! i saw the tour of the revival production, and it's campy, flashy, and fun!
Yes! The point of Cats isn’t to make sense, but to be a spectacle.
@@isabellp.5730 I think Lindsay Ellis said the movie should have leaned into that and been a revue like Fantastia instead of trying to hang a narrative plot on this mess.
That probably could have helped a lot.
"Cats" was the show that inspired me to go into theater when I was eight years old--it's a fun escapist spectacle with great music and dancing, and that's all it ever needs to be. Seeing it get the Thooper treatment broke my heart.
@Rebecca Woolf Oh absolutely, but they wanted those Oscars. The fact it was so naked ambitious for awards makes its scathing reception all the more satisfying.
Nearly every bad outcome of the Cats movie is a direct result of Tom Hooper and it is mind-boggling.
Thanks so much for letting me and Bailey play along, Diva!
In Hollywood, you're not only as good as your last movie, you ARE your last movie, and if it was a hit, you're expected to remake it for the rest of your career. (Qv. Rob Marshall trying to turn "Nine" into "Chicago".)
And Hooper, as noted, was Mr. Les Miserables on demand.
@@ericjanssen394 I thought Tom Hooper's schtick was period drama with heavy emphasis on the acting. Hell the dude did another movie in between Les Miz and Cats that even won an acting Oscar.
@@bigbearkat2010 He is, but someone (ALW, Universal, somebody) didn't have that foresight gritty realism is his greatest strength. All they did was look at Les Miz and decided "This man directed this and won all the awards... give him all the musicals now!"
In defense of Hayward's singing, Webber and Swift apparently finished writing Beautiful Ghosts more or less right before filming it. Also, did it bother anyone else that Actually Professional Singer Taylor Swift was singing Macavity in this weird, breathy, speak-singing way?
To be honest, the big names in this movie are great singers. Even Corden and Wilson are good musical performers. But leave it for a dancer and Jennifer Hudson to be better. Steven McRae, a fucking dancer, had a better performance than a majority of the cast here
I thought Beautiful Ghosts wasn’t a bad song and is a pretty good addition to the musical. Put it right after Macavity’s defeat but before the reprise of Memory and I think that the song would have been better received.
@@kenthuang436 I don't like in on account of it being an Oscar bait song that undermines and invalidates Grizabella's character.
@@anothermiddleschoolburnout8816 Like I said, move the song to right after Maccavity's defeat but before the reprise of Memory. That way you still have Beautiful Ghosts' message of wanting to belong somewhere without upstaging Grizabella's plight.
Fun fact -- Steven Spielberg was going to make an animated version of Cats in the '90s. He got as far as concept art before his animation studio went out of business. I have no idea if that film would have been successful or not, but at least it would have released closer to the musical's heyday and wouldn't have given us THIS uncanny valley nightmare.
Should've added the Macativty character change as a another sin, cause Macavity in the stage show and the 1998 film version was JUST A PARTY CRASHER CAUSING TROUBLE. Not trying to become the chosen one for the Jelicall ball!
Not to mention, he was a Darth-Maul looking cat.
Taking away Mistoffelees' sparkle and slowing down the pace of his song are criminal offences.
Ugh for real that’s one of my favorites songs of the musical
I was so mad
The poems themselves are super cute. “Cats have big personalities like humans! Isn’t that charming, little Victorian child?” The jump to musical was weird, but this movie completely misses that twee whimsical energy which makes everything unsettling.
I'm so glad you counted James Corden as a sin. Because he is a sin.
It baffles me that he's still getting work. He was fine in Into The Woods, but every other role he played since then made me want to shoot him.
The only role I liked him in was Small Foot.
@@reasyrandom I only tolerated him in Doctor Who!
@@reasyrandomAnd he wasn't even that good in Into The Woods! He was merely tolerable, when he needed to be inspired
the fact that he has a talk show position is disturbing.
I had NO IDEA about the way the technical team was treated behind the scenes, so, I guess I'm gonna throw hands.
Also, Tom. (18:03) You DON'T ZOOM OUT THAT FAR DURING A DANCE SEQUENCE
Let's be real, Tom *hates* dancers. He wouldn't allow the actors to decide what meter each song was in if he appreciated dancers.
(Daffy Duck voice) This is a close up?...... A CLOSE UP, YA JERK! A CLOSE UP!!!!
Did we learn nothing from The Wiz?
Especially when they aren’t human sized!
@@thais_cdm I'm sorry WHAT?!
Only 35 seconds in and I'm already rolling my eyes at the tagline. "You will believe." What is that even supposed to mean? I already do believe in cats... when has belief ever been a big theme in the show? It's so generic and nonsensical.
To be fair, the entire stage show runs on nonsense, but I agree that the tagline makes ABSOLUTELY no sense, unless that was supposed to be the point?! 🤔
Um, I'm a Christian, and I'm pretty sure a lot of Cats is inspired by Christianity.
Some stuff is obvious like jelicals being a stand in for either evangelicals or as a nod to the word angelic which refers to angels. And of course Deuteronomy being an actual book in the Bible (the fifth book of the old testament to be specific). Then there's the choosing where a jelical cat is lifted up from the ground or "earth" into the sky or "heavens" (as it used to be called) so as to live a better life.
In my humble opinion Victoria being kicked out of her humans house is supposed to sort of refer to Adam and Eve getting kicked out of Eden. And being forced to now try and survive in the harsh wilderness. Since the human houses seem to be a sort of paradise, and the cold city streets being a modern day wilderness (like how sometimes New York is referred to as a concrete jungle).
The jelical choosing isn't actually chosen by Deuteronomy, she's just a prophet speaking on behalf of God. Who then chooses one of the jelical cats to come up to heaven. Sort of dying but not really since due to Jesus dying for our sins our spirit lives and goes to heaven. And in fact when you accept God into your heart and Jesus as your lord and savior it's considered a sort of rebirth.
The street cats represent mankind, with jelicals being Christians and non jelicals like the one cat who sings memory being non believers.
And the cat who sings memories who used to be a jelical but left and then is later accepted into the group representing a sort of prodigal son situation. Where a member of the faith left, but later on returned. And of course, is rewarded for this by being accepted into heaven.
I'm sorry if this comes across as preachy. I don't mean for it too. It's just I genuinely think that this is the best explanation for why Cats is the way it is.
@@katlyncoker8488 As another Christian... Well now I'm just uncomfortable.
@@katlyncoker8488 sorry if this will soud mean (really don't mean it), but nah, jellicas are something that had to do with elliots (daughter? niece?) and stands for "dear little cats" or something, and webber has said that the musical is really just about cats (I think Lindsey Ellis has a video on it)
@@SuperLoves4 It doesn't sound mean. And I get it if that's what webber says. But while I get that authorial intent matters, and it might not be intentional. Honestly webber saying it's just about cats makes the story make no sense.
Like, how is any of the stuff shown in the musical cat stuff. Maybe it's not inspired by Christianity. But the fact that it's very easy to read it that way (I mean, really naming your kinda sorta religiously coded character Deuteronomy) is very interesting to me. Especially since it kinda allows the story make sense. Admittedly I might just be reaching as a way to explain the unexplainable, but that's how I view it. Because that way it at least it makes some kinda sense narratively.
It makes me mad how this movie could've EASILY avoided all of the scorn, if it was simply ANIMATED.
Obviously, traditional animation would've been the best option and the studio behind American Tail *was* planning an animated adaptation... before it went bankrupt.
Even MoCap would've been fine, since at least the characters could've actually looked like real cats.
And don't get me with the "they wanted to keep the celebrities recognizable" excuse; many animated movies score with celebrity casts by voice and billing alone. Even if the characters usually end up looking like their actors.
They should have done it like the dance fight scene in Puss in Boots.
I've heard that they actually did try to make a cartoon version of the musical in the 90s, but that fell through before they could get past the concept stage. It really is too bad.
@@Troublethecat Puss in Boots is proof that Cats could have worked wonders in animation.
@@gamestation2690 Never said it wouldn't work. Just saying they tried, but it didn't end up happening.
People don't talk about it, but there's a bit of a taboo with animated interpretations of stage musicals, especially after 1999's The King and I bombed and was panned. Your options are either finding an inexperienced studio who never tried it or Disney, but if you know anything about P.L. Travers, you might be hesitant to work with them.
Thank you for pointing out that Hooper is also largely responsible for why it looks so bad. Too many people throw the visual effects team under the bus when it was hardly their fault.
Thankfully many saw through that BS.
I believe in Skimbleshanks the Railway Cat supremacy.
Another musical review channel (Sideways) got into why the Skimbleshanks number works more than all the other numbers, which basically comes down to even with Hooper's horrible "we record singers live and have the poor orchestra work with any tempo changes that "inspire" them at the moment," the Skimbleshanks number is literally built around the tap line as basically a bass line that keeps the tempo in order for everyone to dance to it- so it's FORCED to keep up the energy and movement throughout the number and actually comes off as a bop because of it (But I totally agree- it's pretty much the only nugget of gold in this crap.)
@@laurena9563 That was my favorite song in the Broadway show too!
Easily the best song from the 98 tape. The singer is so peppy and makes me think of adopted mascot cat that lives on a train.
@@spinningpeanut Honestly the more I've listened to it the more adorable it becomes. I love the visual it makes of this adorable tabby thinking he runs the trains and the trains can't start without him, because it's such a real CAT thing. xD Like I'd honestly watch an animated adventure movie about that cat.
@@spinningpeanut That's basically what the poem is about. The train station mascot cat who walks around like he owns the place.
Victoria singing Beautiful Ghosts to Grizzabella was akin to telling an orphan "I wish I had parents once.....You're so lucky!"
9:56 “In fact, never play this again.”
Never has a clip been more appropriately used.
Victoria is supposed to be a kitten?
And everyone she meets wants to jump her bones....ew.
She's supposed to be "coming of age" during the Jellicle Ball, if that helps any
@@elsie8757
There's no good way to sugarcoat implied jailbait, fam.
@@chesterstevens8870 I mean... they _are_ cats. Cats reach maturity at like a year old.
She's either a kitten or just reaching adulthood, either her or Jemima are the youngest of the Jellicles in the musical. It works better since it's more of a ballet and the stage lets things be abstract. Having her be explicitly a kitten in the movie makes it really creepy how incredibly horny everyone is.
@@pinkcupcake4717 I don't think she's " _explicitly_ a kitten" in the movie. I don't remember any of the other characters referring to her as one, at least.
I saw Cats on stage around the time the movie was announced. I really knew nothing about the play outside of the fact that it was about cats (because duh) and the song Memory. As anyone who has seen the play knows, there’s not really much of a plot, but the choreography was amazing. I’m pretty sure one of the cats was in heels. Why were they wearing heels? I have no idea, but they were leaping across the stage, and it was incredible. The costumes too were awesome, and to know that this was CGI is baffling, and to know Tom Hooper was a jackass to his team is... not at all shocking. I haven’t seen the movie, the trailers and this review are enough. Thank you for this, and here’s to your next 100 cases!
I have a feeling this is going to impact his career negatively and I hope it does. The CGI team didn't deserve this treatment.
@@rbfloat Guy was a hack, anyway.
When you say "heels" maybe you mean the dancer that plays Jennyanniedots on stage, who is in fact wearing tap shoes because unlike the 2019 movie she does the Tap dance routine in the musical.
I would also recommend the RUclipsr Sideways's video in regards to Cats. He tackles how Tom Hooper ruins the music and the overall performance of the actors
@@ezelfrancisco1349 Thanks for the recommendation, guess I should rethink my wording. I’ve watched their review, along with Lindsay Ellis’. :)
In case anyone is wondering what the hell "Jellicle" even means, it's a shortened form of "Dear Little". It comes from a poem TS Elliott wrote his 4 year old nephew: Pollicle Dogs and Jellicle Cats. Pollicle is short for "Poor Little" and Jellicle is short for "Dear Little".
Dear Diva: Congratulations for your 100th session as the judge, jury and executioner on the Infernal Court of Musical Hell.
I hope you have Cerberus prepared for this session, if your boss allows it.
I’m sure Cerberus would have more than a few bones to pick with this.
I admire Cats the musical because of how nonsensical it is but this version is just nuts, Thanks Diva!
“Munkstrap the Exposition Cat”
You're gonna need the healing powers of a good Barbie musical after this one! (I recommend Princess & the Pauper...trust me, it's better than you think it is, Diva).
Omg I LOVE Princess & the Pauper and all my theatre friends at well. We always say that it would be an amazing stage musical.
I like that one and Barbie in the Nutcracker with Tim Curry as the Mouse King
I'd pay to see a RUclipsr with a large audience talk about Barbie in a positive light.
They tend to review the bad ones, if they review them at all.
THIS NEEDS TO HAPPEN
I actually want to see what the dogs look like in this universe.
Mostly to see them tear everyone apart.
Swift didn’t deliver Francesca’s song until the literal last hour so I don’t really feel like she’s wholly to blame.
Especially because, from what I know, she's not a singer.
I was glad to watch a Cats (2019) review that went beyond “AAA CREEPY CGI” and described how the characters, relationships, tone and emotional core were botched beyond belief.
Thanks, Diva. I love you more and more.
My mother loves the stage show and was really looking forward to the movie. She got annoyed when my sister and I couldn't stop laughing at the trailer. Then she watched the trailer for herself...and decided to give the movie a miss.
Tom Hooper really comes off like one of those IT managers whose convinced that any work on a computer should be dead easy because "you're just pushing buttons." 😒😿
On a more serious note, Hooper's inability to keep himself from slowing down nearly every song kills the crazy energy that the musical was noted for.
Cats is, at it's core, a revue show. It's a bunch of different songs tied together by a tenuous plot. And that's fine for the stage. That *works* on the stage. I love Cats. I love the music, I love the costumes, the dancing. It was the first musical my Mum and I watched together when I was nine. It started a tradition of us going to musicals together. I saw it again in a tent when I was in my twenties. I will always go to see Cats if the opportunity arises (no matter how much they fuck up certain characters) and I was really looking forward to this movie. I haven't even bothered to watch it. I won't waste my time or money on something so far divorced from the source material as to be well nigh unrecognisable.
Me: *sees the thumbnail* Oh no...
I worked at a movie theater when this film was out and I would be shocked and baffled as to why some people paid good money to see it. Though I did hear that some people would storm out of the theater. As for me, I'm one of the fans of the musical and boy was I taken aback by this production. First off, you can't even tell the cats apart unlike, in the musical and 1998 movie. Second, they left out Jemima; I don't know if I should be disgruntled about that since she's a vital character to the story and that it would've made more sense to have her be the protagonist since this was her technically her first Jellicle Ball or happy because, at least, she wouldn't be derailed like the rest of the cast. And, while we're on the subject, why Victoria as the main focus when Demeter (the ex-girlfriend of Macavity), Jemima (the innocent newcomer), and/or Munkustrap (the main storyteller) would've been better choices? And why was the movie so...uncomfortable? It's already enough we had to put up with that CGI but then there's the sexual nature. I know the musical was risque but the cats would be playful and silly too (the Rum Tum Tugger playing bagpipes...need I say more?). And they wouldn't leave you feeling dirty after seeing watching the show. Then there's what they did to Bombalurina; she's supposed to be Demeter's loyal friend who (along with Munkustrap) would protect her. Why is she in cahoots with Macavity in the movie? Why couldn't we have gotten the 2D animated version with Spielberg? At least that version looked promising...
You'd think if T.S. Elliot knew of this version he would've allowed Disney to adapt his poems?
And to think we could’ve had the beautiful 2d animated movie with Spielberg at the helm... Truly, we live in a timeline most dark.
Sometimes I feel bad for Webber. He's had amazing success onstage and yet seems so, for lack of a better word, greedy for film recognition which only results in putting the flaws in his stage shows on blast.
I honestly blame universal more for that and in this case it’s universal and Tom Hooper who are to blame. Lloyd Webber not so much oh no wait wait wait no it’s Taylor Swift Universal and Tom Hooper not necessarily in that order. I say Taylor Swift because she wrote beautiful ghosts and well beautiful ghosts didn’t need to be the award bait song when you have memory already in the show for it both on stage and screen and plus yeah It was just mostly for that song it’s pretty but come on nothing compared to Lloyd Webber’s work.
@@CarolinaMouse Webber owns these IPs. When I say greedy I mean him historically picking directors who are famous for gritty realism or superhero movies when he knows that he doesn’t create those musicals. He wants the film recognition so bad that he’s willing to let someone who doesn’t understand his work, strip it for parts. So no I don’t blame universal or Taylor because the fact of the matter is these movies wouldn’t get made if he didn’t want them made. Between Joel Schumacher in Phantom and now this, he seems desperate. And this is coming from a fan.
@@TajFaerie So what you're saying is that we need an adaptation of Love Never Dies directed by Denis Villeneuve?
(sorry sorry sorry)
One of Lloyd Webber's earliest backers was Robert Stigwood. After seeing Stigwood trash the Beatles with the 1978 'Sgt. Pepper movie,' I shudder to think that he could have produced a 'Cats' 'movie even worse then this!
One sentence that would have been fair is the following comment: TOM HOOPER MUST GO TO AN ANIMATION COURSE TO LEARN ABOUT BASIC ANIMATION PROCESS TO AVOID INSULTING to ARTISTS
Either that or be issued a restraining order keeping him far away from all musicals for the rest of his life.
Robert Fairchild was my mom's childhood friend! They went to dance school together :)
He was one of the only good things about the movie. I just wish he was given more of a chance to dance.
Tom Hooper, Rebel Wilson and James Corden definitely deserved their Razzie wins. Let's hope the future film adaptation of Starlight Express won't repeat the mistakes of Cats.
It’s a shame for Lee Hall because he did an outstanding job on Billy Eillot and the musical adaptation.
That "authentic", Tom Hooper-directed style of live movie musical singing sets off my fight or flight response dear lord
Oh boy do I have a lot to say about this, for one thing there was originally going to be an animated version back in the 90's directed by Steven Spielberg and made by Amblin, but due to what happened this never came to fruition. Also the characters singing verses of the songs that are sung about them by other characters is a big problem, yes most of them do this in the show but they sing their own verses. The designs are...yeah, when you make the Sleepwalkers from Sleepwalkers look like the cute and cuddly felines they're supposed to be weak against seem tame by comparison, then you know you have problems. The Broadway musical's makeup is made to indeed look like they are stylized humanoid cats, and their graceful movements are evidence of this. I have no problems with Judi Dench as Old Deutronomy, although in my mind BRIAN BLESSED will ALWAYS be my Deutronomy (since he was him in the original 1981 stage play, and also performed a double role as Bustopher too). Grizzabella however, yeah too young to be singing about how she feels like she misses the good ol days, she is supposed to be elderly in the musical, not specifically mentioned as being elderly but used to beautiful but is now haggard or 'ancient looking' as in a fallen angel/fallen from grace and yes I am aware she has been made a bit younger in the musical as of recent, but still she's supposed to be elderly. Rum Tum Tugger is pretty much the Mick Jagger of Cats according to Webber.
Also about Bustopher in this, there's more to him than his weight in the show, in the show Bustopher is a wealthy cat who enjoys the finer things in life and yes he has extravagant taste and isn't afraid to be proud of it either. Also...yeah, Macavity's song in the show is ABOUT Macavity, not sung by him unlike how it is here, speaking of Macavity...yeah, stage Macavity looks demonic and badass with his darth maul-esque markings and all, this Macavity on the other hand makes you question your sexuality, hey Macavity, that's Tugger's job.
I mean, I think Betty Buckley and Elaine Page were pretty young (30s) when they played Grizabella but the stage makeup is so much better than evoking age than the VFX here.
@@lillianward2810 Mmm...some recent revivals have shown Griz to be younger, and it's true that the original poem (or unfinished fragment thereof) never said that she was actually old. It's implied/coded that she's a "fallen woman", since Tottenham Court was well-known to be a hangout for hookers. So it could be simply rough living that's prematurely aged her, along with poor health/injuries from said life (notice the revival's Grizabella has a scar on her forehead).
@@jenniferschillig3768 true, she has the 'used to be beautiful/attractive but now is rather dishevelled due to a rough life'
Interesting side-note about the film's special effects: some technical glitches made their way into the release-day digital cinema package, so a separate package was sent out a week later that corrected these glitches. THAT'S how rushed the special effects were.
Thank you for not blindly criticizing the original. It doesn't try to be overly serious or plot-driven, and it works for the show.
How does the 2003 Cat in the hat movie has a better looking cat than this 2019 film ?.😑
They at least had actual makeup and physical effects for The Cat In The Hat
Because they actually embraced the weirdness in TCITH instead of trying to make a serious-ish adaptation
At least "Cat in the Hat" had practical makeup effects, impressive for 2003 standards. This makes the garish, 2019 CGI cats all the more creepy! 🙀
You just put another nail in the coffin of this movie with this comment xD
Amen
“All I wanted was to be wanted” Taylor basically already used this lyric in Fifteen with “when all you wanted was to be wanted”
Yeah, you can really tell she got this one in at the last minute.
Why on earth was this not an animated movie? It would've been energetic and fun, not hideously frightening. I haven't even seen the movie, but it is freaky looking.
I'm still convinced that Starlight Express would have been the better gimmicky, incredibly 80s, Oddly-Sexual-For-A-Family-Show, Style-Over-Substance ALW musical to turn into a movie. At least it has somewhat of a plot. And train-human-hybrids might have been not quite as terrifying as the cat-human-hybrids we got
Sonic's "Uh, meow?" line was a warning sign for this movie. Thanks Sonic.
I remember when I saw this movie. I hated the music so much I had to see what the oringal music sounded like. So on the ride home I listed to the Bway cast recording and fell in love. I guess some good can come with the bad.
The part about the cursed monkey's paw had me pausing to laugh for a solid minute.
I need a playlist of Cats movie essays. I've seen the movie a handful of times even though I agree with all the criticisms.
Watch Sideways!
Lindsay Ellis has a great one
@@sodapop81 I've seen Sideways, Maggie Mae Fish and Lindsey Ellis' videos so far. Possibly more, but I'd need to look.
I went to see this 3x in theatres, but primarily because I fell asleep the first two times. I watched it again once I got the blu-ray, as well as the commentary.
Watch Sideways' video if you wanna know criticism about main things about the plot and ALL of the musical problems. Watch Lindsay Ellis' one to know more about the production itself
Did you know this musical was going to be a hand-drawn animated film back in the 90's?
Steven Spielberg's Amblimation was going to make it and the concept art was beautiful, but the studio went bankrupt after their first three films bombed.
Also back in the 70's, Disney asked T.S. Elliot's widow if they could adapt the poems into an animated film, but she said "NO!"
This is gonna be GOOD
Yep, 2021 is looking rosy already, if only because Diva is giving this musical disaster the beat down it SO deserves! 😎❣️
Garfield is what you would call an anthropomorphic cat, not these creatures.
@@trinaq Don;t get so perky already,. that's what people said about Jan 2020!
I saw this in theatres accompanied with a Star-Wars themed cocktail. I cackled more often than not.
My sister and I were keeping our baffled amusement subdued as much as possible for the sake of other people, but absolutely lost it at Ian McKellen's 'Macavittyyyyyy......' when he got captured.
I am super happy you are covering this case! I never got to see Cats live but I adore the filmed staged version because it's just the right amount of weird and the dancing is fantastic. I will never ever forgive Hooper for what he put the SFX team through and the fact that all the blame for everything was put at their feet when it was not their fault in any way seeing as they did the best with what little they were given
And now, let's hope that there will never be a trilogy of Tom Hooper musicals.
Please don’t let him adapt Sunday in the park with George.
Pro: everyone is making videos shit on Cats and they never fail to entertain.
Con: I have to listen to slippets of the torturous renditions of several numbers in the film.
From what I've heard, Webber actual had little to no control over the creative team for the movie and even spoke out (as politely britishly passive aggressively as he could) that he was not pleased with any of it. I wouldn't be surprised if Hooper got brought in at the behest of a producer, and Webber found out somewhere after the fact, simply due to how long this movie has been in production hell.
You know, I wouldn't be surprised if this was the case tbh. 🤔
I’ve always felt they screwed up big time not making this an animated movie. If I wanted to watch people dressed as cats prancing around and singing on stage, I’d go see the musical.
The whole point of making a film from a stage production is to show and do things you can’t in the theatre. Things like actual cats singing and dancing.
I hope they never let Tom Hooper near a musical ever again. I am so glad the guy who did Crazy Rich Asians is doing Wicked
He also did in the heights
The idea behind Bustopher Jones is that he is able to eat so well in this junkyard. He is admired (at least in the stage musical) by the other cats because he lives so well. The fact that he is fat is not an insult per se, he is the only cat that is fat in the musical because he is the only cat who is able to become fat.
But the movie just went "Whahaha, fat person is fat cat lol".
I feel like even though it's one of my least favorite musicals, the musical deserved better than this movie by far.
The video is up for 4 minutes and I already know it's going to be gold.
Edit: yes it's gold
I can't exactly pinpoint the source of this claim, but I recall that apparently Tom Hooper grew up with the audio recording of the musical, which contained the first version of Mungojerrie and Rumpleteazer. ALW reportedly hates the first version and would prefer it gone (even in his commentary to 1998 version he made a few comments on how much more he enjoys that 7/8 tempo), so I think it's safe to assume that it was Tom Hooper who was responsible for the choice to include the inferior version in the movie.
I try not to blame the actress too much for her lacklustre ‘beautiful ghosts’, since according to interviews she didn’t get the lyrics til the morning of filming and didn’t actually know the song very well
Macavity scared me as a child when I watched my mom's anniversary DVD of cats. When I saw him pretty much turned into a comedic character really pissed me off. And the fact they wasted an amazing actor like that argh!
Exactly
I don't recall any of the characters being afraid of him the way they were in the musical, they just seemed annoyed
@@HappiestMango right?! The whole climactic fight in the actual musical between him and munkustrap (however you spell it) was intense with the horns and drums plus some choreography. But here it was "meh it's macavitiy, ignore him maybe he will go away"
As much as this musical confounds me, I have to say, “Cats: Candidates for the Heaviside Layer” sounds like the title to a kickass anime...
OK, there's probably a Cats anime out there *_SOMEWHERE_* ....
I'd love to see you do an At The Source for Cats...covering not just Old Possum's Book of Practical Cats, but the backstory behind the unfinished and unpublished Grizabella poem and the other Eliot poems that inspired both her story and "Memory."
You know your movie is bad when Andrew Lloyd Webber, the creator & songwriter of the original play and lifelong cat lover, decides to _adopt a dog_ for the first time in his entire life after its release.
I’ve been on ketamine for pain management and the things I saw then were less frightening than the things I saw watching Cats 2019
The fact that this was made by the same guy who did FREAKING LES MISERABLES amazes me
Diehard cats fan here. it's been my favorite musical for a good two decades, and though it IS among the weirdest and stupidest musicals ever, I still love it. from the moment it was announced though, i knew this movie would be absolutely terrible. you can't adapt this shit. theater is the only place Cats works. but it was SO mind-bogglingly awful in so many ways that i can't help but adore it. I've watched it more times in quarantine than i'm willing to admit.
The 1998 direct to video version is the REAL live action adaptation. Fight me
We **Knew** it was coming....We were prepared for it! We weren't disappointed!
2020: Cats is the worst musical movie ever made.
Sia: Hold my beer.
With the song numbers they had a machine that switched a click track to the orchestra trying to make a soundtrack on the fly to match the actors winging it.
One of the best ways I've heard someone explain the issue with the character design in the movie is this:
In the stage play, the characters were Humans as cats.
In the movie, they were cats as humans.
I absolutely expected for this movie to have 10 sins like Love Nevers Dies
I expected it to have more
I think it was hard to point out individual sins because the whole mess was one big sin from start to finish.
Highly recommend the video on cats by Sideways. He dives deep into how the music choices are fundamentally broken. This video was more about the visuals and story, so Sideway's audio focused video is a perfect pairing
21:48 Munkustrap looks like he ate way too many catnip brownies and is trying really hard to focus on not dying
I found the epilogue particularly distressing: furry Judy Dench staring directly into my soul for several full minutes while the sun rises, brightening the lighting and making all the terrible animation all the more apparent.
Judi Dench is in the movie because she was meant to be in the original stage cast. But she snapped her Achilles tendon and had to pull out.
Thanks for doing the movie and not the stage musical. I think we all would have rioted. Lol.
I’d say Skimbleshanks is the best part of the movie. I love the song and the tap dancing is awesome. I wish I got to SEE the tap dancing though,
A milestone that is well deserved. Congratulations to Diva and the bailiff!!
Oh how most of us called this one...and how fitting, since Sideways just did a video on CATS 2019 music as well. 😆
Happy 100th episode, Diva, here's to 100 more! 🥂
Well to be fair to this movie. It did get me to watch the 1998 filmed stage version again.