![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
type_wildI'm not an objective critic here. My tendency for obsessing with fictional works slightly preceeded my entering fandom, and it was absolutely a THING before I found the TRHQ2 forums the autumn of the year of our lord 2000.
Because that summer, I attended some municipality-run class on making websites, and I made my very first one about the amazing Sunset Beach. And one afternoon, I had my dad videotape a film from the telly becaues I'd miss it because of said class, and also because I knew I knew I KNEW that I had to see it.
It's probably the most-watched VHS tape I've ever owned. I remember being vaguely confused by the lack of story, but who cares, becaues I was absolutely in love with the music, the dances, the costumes. I was fifteen. I still know the names of probably some 2/3 of all the named cats, even the ones without songs. I've seen a tour production live, I've bough the West End OST, and no derr was I going to see this film.
TL;DR IT IS AMAZING AND I LOVED IT.
For a bit more objectivity: My standard of measurement between an "okay" film and a GREAT film is whether or not I find myself checking the time at any point in it. Depending on genre, a further indication is going to be wether or not I catch myself grinning like an idiot at any point in it.
"La La Land" had my actively regretting the money I paid for the tickets, and that was nominated for bloody Best Picture. But Cats? Oh, Cats had no less than three "oh wow I'm really grinning like an idiot here" moments. And I'm totally going to see it again on Tuesday.
I haven't been reading a lot of the bad reviews this film has gotten, because I was going to see it anyway and I was more than willing to forgive it A LOT. I didn't have a lot of expectations, because adapting "Cats" as a feature film faces two fundamental problems that I did not see how they could overcome:
1. This show is about SHOW, not story. It has like three minutes of plot that's so pitiful that you just wonder why they even bothered in the first place. The theatre audience clearly embraced the musical for what it was (furries singing and dancing), but to court the mainstream film audience, you'll need a mainstream film. And "Cats" just... can't be that.
2. I've long suspected that my love of the theatre is connected to my love of animation. Where mainstream film is mimetic, both the theatre stage and the animated film KNOWS that they'll always be unrealistic, and so they embrace it. They get to exaggarate and blatantly disregard reality and to use symbolism and visual metaphors for carrying their themes, and that's why I love them both. This is why I'll always mentally pat you on the head for insisting that Harry Potter and the Cursed Child sucks because it read like fanfic. Oh sweaty, it might have, but it was a story that wasn't made to be READ in the first place, and I trust that the people giving the play all the awards know more about theatre than your average Harry Potter fan does. (also, you can wrestle Scorpio Malfoy out of my cold, dead hands) "Cats" obviously depends on the same suspension of reality: These aren't cats, they are people in unconvincing cat costumes singing and dancing on two legs. You can sell it on stage, or the film-of-the-stage, as the case might be. You could've sold it as animation, but animated cats would lose 50% of the appeal of the show - the dancing. It is exceedingly difficult to sell it as something working as live action film, so I can only admire the fact that they had the balls to even try.
As the reception of the trailer made clear, the last problem was the BIG one, since it became a meme in the bad way and probably most people less sentimentally hooked on the musical and/or less nerdy about non-mimetic narrative devices than me probably weren't inclined to ever give it the chance in the first place.
What truly surprised me was that the film in fact overcomes both these complaints, to a degree. The plot is still paper-thin, but expanded upon enough to give us somewhat of a narrative: Meet Victoria, who as the story starts is dumped by her owner in what turns out to be the Jellicles' territory. The run-up to the Jellicle Ball is given a twin motive: Introduce Victoria to the Jellicle cats as she observes the cats campaigning to be chosen for a new life, while Macavity lurks in the shadows (for a reason, not just be a troll! omg) The rest of it is pretty much singing and dancing, becaues that's what this is about.
My one criticism of the film would be the visual designs, but not what everyone else is complaining about. I didn't have any uncanny valley moments with neither the faces nor the two-legged dancing, but I did take a bit of issue with how the chorus cats were all a pretty uniform mass here. On stage, they're all distinct and infamously, a lot of them are named. In the film, I honestly don't know if it was Bombalurina and Demeter which sang "Grizabella", because they all looked the sodding same. The furry faces and the human dancing? Psh, I'd forgotten about them two minutes in.
- NGL a big part of my love for this film is probably that it got the hint and put Mistofelees in the centre from the beginning. I mean, one of the many reasons the stage musical feels like it has no plot is because said plot LITERALLY goes:
CAST: ~We have to find old Deuteronomy~
RUM-TUM-TUGGER: You ought to ask Magical Mr. Mistoffelees
*"Magical Mr. Mistoffelees" happens, some previously unnamed chorus cat loses his leg warmers as he's suddenly revealed to be the mystical conjuring cat, who has a dance solo and mystically conjures up Old Deuteronomy. Plot over, everyone go home*
And because said unnamed chorus cat was always my favourite for some reason, I've always adored Mistofelees, and I had very few problems loving this film. Even if the Mistofelees of the film is pretty different from the Mistofelees on stage, but rather more recognisable as Quaxo, the name of the on-stage unnamed chorus cat.
- But thanks to "Bustopher Jones", Quaxo seems to exist as an independent character here (playing the same part as he does in the 1998 version), though he's not named in the credits
- More fascinating choices for adapting a musical: To focus the plot on the two primary dancing parts, one with no song solos (Victoria), one with very few ones (Quaxo/Mistoffelees). Victoria is given a new song (which I really really liked both on its own and in how it relates to "Memory"), whereas Mistoffelees gets to sing his own song, which I've gathered he mostly doesn't in newer productions of the stage musical.
- Talking about songs Mr. Mistoffelees no longer sings: They went with the original version of "Mungojerrie and Rumpleteazer" (though sung by them), which I on the one hand regret because I like the new one tons better, but on the other I really see why they did, from a musical perspective.
- Other cats I always adored a bit more than the rest for reasons I enver knew how to articulate: Skimbleshanks. His song is great, the stage choreography less so, so I was excited to see what the film made out of it. And without spoilers, let's just say that it DID NOT DISAPPOINT, oh my god. My spiritual love of everything railways symbolises + this musical number = yes thank you I might've found Jesus and he's a cat in red suspenders.
- Onto Victoria: Yes, of course she's conflated with Jemima. As she should be, but the part of me that always gets goosebumps at 2. act reprise of "Memory" in the 1998 version is still sad to see Jemima go.
- I don't think they could've put Ian McKellen into any meta part and not have someone profess their admiration for his work on-screen, at this point.
- I'm always up for genderswapping and Judi Dench as Deuteronomy can never be wrong
- The film made something out of Jennyanydots and Bustopher Jones and I can appreciate that, even if feels like it fundamentally did not understand what "The Old Gumbie Cat" is about
- For a bright, hopeful minute, I actually thought we'd get the whole of "Growltiger's Last Stand", which I adore and which I had not expecte thanks to the entire "cats of foreign name and race" thing. But Growltiger exists in this film and I'm happy indeed.
- Between clearly showing Quaxo as a separate character, Rule 69-ing Old Deutoronomy, and giving the line which spawned a thousand Misto/Tugger fic a completely different context, it feels like this film went some distance in no-homo-ing Mistoffelees. Mostly to the part of me that's still fifteen and giggly about how interested he seeems to be in potential sugar daddies, but I still noticed okay.
- If you care: The grinning-like-an-idiot moments were the second half of "Skimbleshanks", the moment Mistofelees truly becomes the Magical Mr., and the end of "The Adressing of Cats". Also that one hopeful minute I thought we'd get "Growltiger's Last Stand", which I'm disinclined to count because that is ENTIRELY my love of the opera solo, not meaningful joy for anyone else.
Because that summer, I attended some municipality-run class on making websites, and I made my very first one about the amazing Sunset Beach. And one afternoon, I had my dad videotape a film from the telly becaues I'd miss it because of said class, and also because I knew I knew I KNEW that I had to see it.
It's probably the most-watched VHS tape I've ever owned. I remember being vaguely confused by the lack of story, but who cares, becaues I was absolutely in love with the music, the dances, the costumes. I was fifteen. I still know the names of probably some 2/3 of all the named cats, even the ones without songs. I've seen a tour production live, I've bough the West End OST, and no derr was I going to see this film.
TL;DR IT IS AMAZING AND I LOVED IT.
For a bit more objectivity: My standard of measurement between an "okay" film and a GREAT film is whether or not I find myself checking the time at any point in it. Depending on genre, a further indication is going to be wether or not I catch myself grinning like an idiot at any point in it.
"La La Land" had my actively regretting the money I paid for the tickets, and that was nominated for bloody Best Picture. But Cats? Oh, Cats had no less than three "oh wow I'm really grinning like an idiot here" moments. And I'm totally going to see it again on Tuesday.
I haven't been reading a lot of the bad reviews this film has gotten, because I was going to see it anyway and I was more than willing to forgive it A LOT. I didn't have a lot of expectations, because adapting "Cats" as a feature film faces two fundamental problems that I did not see how they could overcome:
1. This show is about SHOW, not story. It has like three minutes of plot that's so pitiful that you just wonder why they even bothered in the first place. The theatre audience clearly embraced the musical for what it was (furries singing and dancing), but to court the mainstream film audience, you'll need a mainstream film. And "Cats" just... can't be that.
2. I've long suspected that my love of the theatre is connected to my love of animation. Where mainstream film is mimetic, both the theatre stage and the animated film KNOWS that they'll always be unrealistic, and so they embrace it. They get to exaggarate and blatantly disregard reality and to use symbolism and visual metaphors for carrying their themes, and that's why I love them both. This is why I'll always mentally pat you on the head for insisting that Harry Potter and the Cursed Child sucks because it read like fanfic. Oh sweaty, it might have, but it was a story that wasn't made to be READ in the first place, and I trust that the people giving the play all the awards know more about theatre than your average Harry Potter fan does. (also, you can wrestle Scorpio Malfoy out of my cold, dead hands) "Cats" obviously depends on the same suspension of reality: These aren't cats, they are people in unconvincing cat costumes singing and dancing on two legs. You can sell it on stage, or the film-of-the-stage, as the case might be. You could've sold it as animation, but animated cats would lose 50% of the appeal of the show - the dancing. It is exceedingly difficult to sell it as something working as live action film, so I can only admire the fact that they had the balls to even try.
As the reception of the trailer made clear, the last problem was the BIG one, since it became a meme in the bad way and probably most people less sentimentally hooked on the musical and/or less nerdy about non-mimetic narrative devices than me probably weren't inclined to ever give it the chance in the first place.
What truly surprised me was that the film in fact overcomes both these complaints, to a degree. The plot is still paper-thin, but expanded upon enough to give us somewhat of a narrative: Meet Victoria, who as the story starts is dumped by her owner in what turns out to be the Jellicles' territory. The run-up to the Jellicle Ball is given a twin motive: Introduce Victoria to the Jellicle cats as she observes the cats campaigning to be chosen for a new life, while Macavity lurks in the shadows (for a reason, not just be a troll! omg) The rest of it is pretty much singing and dancing, becaues that's what this is about.
My one criticism of the film would be the visual designs, but not what everyone else is complaining about. I didn't have any uncanny valley moments with neither the faces nor the two-legged dancing, but I did take a bit of issue with how the chorus cats were all a pretty uniform mass here. On stage, they're all distinct and infamously, a lot of them are named. In the film, I honestly don't know if it was Bombalurina and Demeter which sang "Grizabella", because they all looked the sodding same. The furry faces and the human dancing? Psh, I'd forgotten about them two minutes in.
- NGL a big part of my love for this film is probably that it got the hint and put Mistofelees in the centre from the beginning. I mean, one of the many reasons the stage musical feels like it has no plot is because said plot LITERALLY goes:
CAST: ~We have to find old Deuteronomy~
RUM-TUM-TUGGER: You ought to ask Magical Mr. Mistoffelees
*"Magical Mr. Mistoffelees" happens, some previously unnamed chorus cat loses his leg warmers as he's suddenly revealed to be the mystical conjuring cat, who has a dance solo and mystically conjures up Old Deuteronomy. Plot over, everyone go home*
And because said unnamed chorus cat was always my favourite for some reason, I've always adored Mistofelees, and I had very few problems loving this film. Even if the Mistofelees of the film is pretty different from the Mistofelees on stage, but rather more recognisable as Quaxo, the name of the on-stage unnamed chorus cat.
- But thanks to "Bustopher Jones", Quaxo seems to exist as an independent character here (playing the same part as he does in the 1998 version), though he's not named in the credits
- More fascinating choices for adapting a musical: To focus the plot on the two primary dancing parts, one with no song solos (Victoria), one with very few ones (Quaxo/Mistoffelees). Victoria is given a new song (which I really really liked both on its own and in how it relates to "Memory"), whereas Mistoffelees gets to sing his own song, which I've gathered he mostly doesn't in newer productions of the stage musical.
- Talking about songs Mr. Mistoffelees no longer sings: They went with the original version of "Mungojerrie and Rumpleteazer" (though sung by them), which I on the one hand regret because I like the new one tons better, but on the other I really see why they did, from a musical perspective.
- Other cats I always adored a bit more than the rest for reasons I enver knew how to articulate: Skimbleshanks. His song is great, the stage choreography less so, so I was excited to see what the film made out of it. And without spoilers, let's just say that it DID NOT DISAPPOINT, oh my god. My spiritual love of everything railways symbolises + this musical number = yes thank you I might've found Jesus and he's a cat in red suspenders.
- Onto Victoria: Yes, of course she's conflated with Jemima. As she should be, but the part of me that always gets goosebumps at 2. act reprise of "Memory" in the 1998 version is still sad to see Jemima go.
- I don't think they could've put Ian McKellen into any meta part and not have someone profess their admiration for his work on-screen, at this point.
- I'm always up for genderswapping and Judi Dench as Deuteronomy can never be wrong
- The film made something out of Jennyanydots and Bustopher Jones and I can appreciate that, even if feels like it fundamentally did not understand what "The Old Gumbie Cat" is about
- For a bright, hopeful minute, I actually thought we'd get the whole of "Growltiger's Last Stand", which I adore and which I had not expecte thanks to the entire "cats of foreign name and race" thing. But Growltiger exists in this film and I'm happy indeed.
- Between clearly showing Quaxo as a separate character, Rule 69-ing Old Deutoronomy, and giving the line which spawned a thousand Misto/Tugger fic a completely different context, it feels like this film went some distance in no-homo-ing Mistoffelees. Mostly to the part of me that's still fifteen and giggly about how interested he seeems to be in potential sugar daddies, but I still noticed okay.
- If you care: The grinning-like-an-idiot moments were the second half of "Skimbleshanks", the moment Mistofelees truly becomes the Magical Mr., and the end of "The Adressing of Cats". Also that one hopeful minute I thought we'd get "Growltiger's Last Stand", which I'm disinclined to count because that is ENTIRELY my love of the opera solo, not meaningful joy for anyone else.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}