Friday 20 December 2019

Film: 'Cats'

After the most unappealing of trailers, followed by a glut of negative, even atrocious reviews, I was bracing myself to hate this. (I know you'll have already glanced forward to my rating score, haven't you?)

I must put my cards on the table. The theatrical experience(s) of seeing this Andrew Lloyd Webber-composed musical (based on poems from T.S.Eliot's 'Old Possum's Book of Practical Cats) is one of the highlights of my theatre-going life. I saw it three times, first in a London pre-run, pre-press performance in 1981 with original cast of Paul Nicholas, Elaine Paige, Wayne Sleep and, as Old Deuteronomy, Brian Blessed. Elaine Paige had just been shipped in at very short notice to replace Judi Dench as Grizabella who, in rehearsals, had snapped her Achilles. Also in the cast was a then largely unknown name, one Sarah Brightman, whom Webber met for the first time in rehearsal, resulting in divorce to his then wife and marriage to her - and raising his 'new' wife, for a while, to such a stratospheric level of fame that I myself did not think her 'talents' justified, Brightman in addition being the inspiration for his 'Phantom'. which I also saw (with Michael Crawford) early in its lengthy run.  
As for 'Cats' on stage, I was so overwhelmed the first time that I went to see it again - and then once more towards the end of that decade in a quite spectacular production in Amsterdam (also in English).
I know it's 'fashionable' to sneer at and belittle Andrew Lloyd Webber's music, but I've never been one of those who do. I still think that his very best were the three early musicals he wrote with Tim Rice ('Joseph', 'Superstar' and 'Evita') but his subsequent efforts have virtually all been worthily notable (I'd especially cite 'Sunset Boulevard') and 'Cats' is very nearly also in the top flight.

So it was going to be a tall order for the film to please me. However, against the odds it managed it. Several times the thrill of the music got my adrenalin pumping, and even got my eyes more than a little wet. Of course it helps in being familiar with the music, both those sung and the uniformly exhilarating and splendid dance numbers. If you're not familiar or simply dislike A.L.W. full stop, then this film isn't going to convert you.  
I thought the cast almost uniformly good, Idris Elba (as Macavity) most of all. He and Judi Dench (as a sex-shifted Deuteronomy), together with Taylor Swift as Bombalurina share longest screen time. (Subsequent correction: It is, in fact, Royal Ballet member Francesca Hayward as 'Victoria' whom I should have named here as having extended screen presence and not Taylor Swift's Bombalurina, who's actually on-screen for only a few minutes quite well into the film when introducing Macavity). Other well-known names have little more than cameo appearances with one song each (James Corden, Rebel Wilson, Ian McKellan) - and, of course, Jennifer Hudson with that song, one which was done to death through the 1980s, but I still think is a really wonderful number. Pity that Ray Winstone's gangster-cat appearance is so short when he's about the funniest thing in the film.

Prominent comments have been made about the fur-covered bodies of the cast - the stage version eschewed the obvious feline characteristics of fur and whiskers but went instead for smooth sleekness, and that worked. Some say that this film's cast just don't look like anything like real cats and, frankly, I agree that they don't very much, but then in the theatre the fur-less 'cats' looked even less so and no one complained about it. I got around this by taking on the conceit one adopts in the theatre - one of accepting make-believe. Film demands a more literal look than what is considered acceptable on the stage. I gather that in this film much of the fur is CGI-d. It could have been distracting but although it was a little, by doing what I did it wasn't such a enormous put-off. I've also seen mention that the mostly erect tails in the film (surely also CGI) seem to protrude from the cats' anuses. I looked carefully and it's simply not true. Were they looking for things to criticise?

Director Tom Hooper (who also did the even more successfully realised screen version of 'Les Mis') was stung by hostile reaction to the trailer and has made some adjustments to the visuals of the released version. One in particular was the alarmingly changing differences in the scale of the cats' sizes when seen against their domestic surroundings. This hasn't been entirely removed but being prepared for it helped me to dismiss it without dwelling on it. But other than that I think Hooper's done well for a difficult job despite not quite succeeding in imposing a cohesion to the film's story when the original stage show's weakish continuity presents us with little more than a succession of musical presentations. 

If you wanted to see this but have been put off as I had been by the damning reviews (or if you're taking notice of one of the current average ratings I quote below) I would suggest that you still go with an open mind and, hopefully, you might, despite what's been said, enjoy it as much as I did, or perhaps nearly so.............7.5.

(IMDb.................3.2 - Rott.Toms..........3.8/5 )










24 comments:

  1. RTG and I saw the preview for this last weekend. meh. not interested.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If by 'preview' you mean what we call 'trailers', W.Q., then I'm not surprised. Even I myself thought it looked dire, but that turned out to be very far from how I felt about the actual film. I'd only add that if one is hostile to or just not favourably disposed towards ALW, then it's one to avoid.

      Delete
    2. yes, previews = trailers. I don't mind ALW. guess I'd rather watch my own cats tell their story to me.

      Delete
    3. There's nothing, but NOTHING, that beats watching our own pussycats living out their lives - even if they're sleeping.

      Delete
  2. This sounds ace Ray. I will have to wait for it on DVD though, or drive a long way to go to the cinema.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I;m getting the sense, Sol, that because of all the vituperation being piled on it it might soon be pulled from the cinema circuit - unless it achieves a curiosity status with people going to find out if it really is that bad.

      Delete
  3. It appears that the trailer is a major turnoff for many people, myself included.

    To me the only one that can do justice to "that" song is Betty Buckley (also the best Norma ever). I was fortunate to see her in "Cats" and that made me her biggest fan. However, I envy your seeing Elaine Paige. She also gave a good performance as Norma Desmond, but Betty's performance was an unforgettable experience.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't know the name of Betty Buckley, Anon, though clearly in the light of what you say I ought to.
      I've always thought Elaine Paige is okay but no more than that, especially sometimes with her ugly tendency to become nasal in her singing. But I know it doesn't trouble many people that much, if they notice it at all.

      Delete
  4. I for your sake am glad you enjoyed the piece. I don't think, I'll be seeing this one. Im no to big on musicals...and if I do, I like the stories more like Meet Me in St Louis and the such. And I just can not take Taylor Swift, while no doubt has some talent, but she still seems to be a glorified performer that is mass produced. I do agree the trailer doesn't help either...and Im a HUGE Judi Dench fan, so I can't believe I'm not seeing this.

    Hope you have a good weekend over there dear. And stay warm. We are to hit a warming spell again....followed by a mild yuletide week, I hear. I'll take that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Although I know the name of Taylor Swift, because she achieved fame only after I'd given up on 'pop' music (on the grounds of my age being so out of tune as to fail to appreciate the current crop of singers) I would not recognise either her looks from a photograph or, indeed, the sounds of her voice. In this film she's fine without setting things alight.
      I wasn't expecting Judi Dench to have such a large part in this, far more than in the stage 'Deuteronomy' as I remember. I suspect she might have been given this rof ole as a very belated recognition and compensation for her failure to appear as one of the 'Cats' original cast, through no fault of hers.

      Thanks for your wishes, M.M., which I'm happy to reciprocate to you.
      As I age I detest more and more this cold weather - and with all Jan and Feb yet to go. Yes, looks like it could be relatively mild from now until at least the start of 2020 which suits me fine. Stay like that, please!

      Delete
  5. No offense to your review (and yes, you must have been talking to me who looked at your rating number first) , but not amount of accolades could get me in the door to see this. I hope Dame Judi gets paid handsomely, but that's about where i hope it ends.

    I am very glad you enjoyed it. As much as I admire real felines, this one just would not be my cup of tea.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your honest p.o.v. is fine with me, B. Equally, I can't pretend that I disliked this in order just to be on the same side as the majority. If others want to think I must be crazy, that my judgement and critical capacity suck and that I write utter tosh, that's up to them.
      Btw: The players in this film (and, indeed on the stage) are so far removed from appearing like real cats that my profound loving regard for the actual animals played no part in my liking for this film or for the musical.

      Delete
  6. Thanks for this. I found the preview a bit creepy AND quite intriguing. The size inconsistencies were something that bugged me. As for the rest, it’s a fantasy! I might even like it. Again, thanks!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I thought precisely the same as you, Mitch, after seeing the trailer - or, rather, the 'creepy' part. I don't think I've ever seen one with such a disparity between it and the final product. I did, however, carry expectations in knowing the score of the musical well, unexpectedly largely fulfilled, so that rather maybe skewed it for me. But if you see it, however you see it, watch with an open mind and you MAY be pleased.

      Delete
  7. Saw it on Broadway and in Washington DC in the ‘80s. So, like you, know it by heart. I have a feeling I’ll enjoy it despite the critics.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'll be more surprised if you don't than if you do, Mitch. I don't think you need pay too much attention to the "they don't even look like cats" criticism when you'll know that in the theatre they looked even less feline, and that hadn't spoilt my own enjoyment. In addition, I think that overall the music is darned good.

      Delete
  8. I don't really enjoy musicals and may skip it at the cinema. Your positive review though means I will watch it when it makes it onto iTunes or the tv.

    Merry Christmas.

    Julie

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If the thought of thus didn't excite you as it did, only initially, for me, then t's almost certainly not for you, Poppy. But if and when you get the chance do think about giving it a go.

      Delete
  9. I was so hoping you would review this one.
    You do a fine job being objective; I like your points.
    I may go see it. Probably not given lack of time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My opinion of this is one in a tiny minority, Dr Spo. I can't fib that I agree with most. I'm sure they're equally sincere. If one isn't honest there's no point in saying anything at all.
      Despite your pressures I hope you will manage to see it.

      Delete
    2. Guess what! I saw it! And I liked it a lot ! I found it entertaining and it was actually better than the musical in matters of flow and story.

      Delete
    3. Well, that really IS one hell of a surprise - or rather two - that you saw it at all AND that you liked it! Well done!
      The film did provide some kind of cohesion which was lacking in the stage show, though of course one can't emulate on the cinema screen the 'electricity' emanating from a live performance with real audience responses. But I did really think that the film didn't deserve a fraction of the brickbats it got, and is still getting.

      Delete
  10. I saw Cats in Sydney, loved it and had been put off by the trailers but may well give it a go. Not usually a cinema-goer. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was quite appalled the first time I saw the trailer, Susan, but the film turned out to be nowhere near as bad as I'd feared. Whether you like the film or not - and you may well detest it - it won't displace your precious memory of having seen it live. I'd rather see it on stage again than to watch this film once more, though I'd still say the latter is well worth it.

      Delete