#my friend pointed out that there are a surprising number of similarities between Munk and the Trickster in design and role in their shows | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

the-risen-tide · 4 years

Text

OKAY SO, I finally went to see the new Cats movie in theaters. I wanted to give myself a bit to collect my thoughts, because HOO BOY are there thoughts. Not terrible ones though...like my reviews of everything else, I gave it a look with a level head.

Because I can’t really review without spoilers, I’m going to put my thoughts under a cut. Read at your own peril.

Now, I’d promised myself ages ago that I’d go into the movie with an open mind and a clear head. I’d already seen reviews that were divided greatly on it (mostly between people who’d already seen Cats on stage and those that have never seen it ever), but as usual it’s a good idea to have your own opinion.

That said.

I loved it.

The weird part is, at first, I came away from it thinking that I didn’t enjoy it as much as I thought I would. But everything about it from the visuals to the music (especially the new song, I’ll get to that in a bit) and the story, all of it was still sticking with me after I left the theater, and I began loving it more in hindsight than I did sitting there in the moment, if that makes sense.

Cats has always been one of those shows that breaks quite a few rules of what people think a show should be. More an opera than a musical, more a dance/ballet performance than a story, with a look that allows the audience to use their imaginations, and as such can put more than a few people off of it. It’s not everyone’s cup of tea, but despite that, it’s memorable, and has a great following. The movie seemed to try to take that feeling from the stage show, strange and mystifying and daunting (maybe even a bit awkward), yet charming and inspiring and heart-catching. In many ways it succeeded, and some ways it didn’t...and where it didn’t was probably mostly the fault of the presentation. And of course, opinions are going to vary wildly on it.

But anyway, for those that know and love the show, it’s a good idea to see this one as just another production, an alternate canon, because you can’t compare each production to each other (much less a movie to a stage show), as that’s where an adaptation fails in everyone’s minds. This one seemed to take inspiration from the original 1981 production and build a new story from the ground up, while of course still keeping the music and songs that everyone loves. The lyrics of some of the songs do call back to the original production (the version of Mungojerrie and Rumpleteazer used was from that one, and not from the 1998 video and subsequent performances, which I found surprising; but not displeasing, they did it very well), and while I was a little disappointed that Jemima/Sillabub wasn’t an important character as she is in the stage show, I remember Lloyd Webber at first wanting a kitten character with both Victoria’s dance prowess and Jemima’s singing prowess, who embodies the show as a whole. He got what he wanted in movie form with Victoria, and they took the character to a whole different direction than the original, which was interesting.

So, to sum up, one can see this movie as an adaptation of the original ideas for the stage show. It isn’t my personal canon concept, but it’s one I ended up liking just as much. Now, here are my personal likes and dislikes.

Dislikes: The background characters aren’t given as much personality as they are on stage, or at least, aren’t shown as much personality; and with many of them taking on different designs, it’s hard to tell who’s who until you see the credits, where everyone’s named. You only ever know a few of the main characters, their own stories, and that’s it. Not even Munkustrap gets named directly, and he’s still got his role as the sort-of narrator and introduction to the world of the Jellicles. Of course, this is probably a minor grudge, as background characters can’t be as prevalent in a movie version without it going on longer than needed. But, at least they’re still there, and still lend their charm to the setting, and perhaps in subsequent watches I’ll be able to see more of who everyone is and what they’re doing.

Still, leaving characters in the background also means leaving various character relationships behind, save for the main ones. Demeter, who in the stage show is still an ensemble character (but an important one for the subplot of Macavity), has been downgraded to another of many minor characters; Cassandra now mostly fills the role of a forefront ensemble singer, and nobody really seems to have anything that connects one to another emotionally. Basically it was like the relationships common to many of the productions were ret-conned or tossed altogether; the focus is on the main characters. But again, another minor grievance, as it is a movie, and a separate production, and no production is canon...and we still have our imaginations to go on. X3

Also, personally, I disliked that they made Bombalurina evil. On stage, though she’s presented as the “good-bad girl”, attractive and seductive, she’s still a beloved part of the ensemble, friend to quite a few of the queens, and protective in a sisterly way over Demeter. “Macavity” is meant as a duet with the two warning the others of his malevolent deeds; in the movie, she’s not seen until nearly the end, and the song is sung in praise of him while helping him bring the Ball to a halt. It was a good number, though, and the different take on the character probably had to be there plot-wise...but still, IMHO the character deserves better.

Plus, it’s no wonder why Munkustrap was thought boring by his actor; they didn’t really give him his “protector” role. The fight with Macavity is taken out entirely. Again, Munk as a character also deserves better.

Also, Jennyanydots deserves better. X3 She’s presented as a comedy-relief character, and honestly I think they tried a little too hard with that, along with Bustopher Jones; both of their segments were a tad cringey to me...but theirs were the only ones, really. The music in them was still superb, it was just the way they were presented. They could have probably just stuck Bustopher with the comic-relief role (as he is somewhat in the stage show), and that would’ve been sufficient.

I believe those were my only grievances. Now let’s get to what I liked.

THE MUSIC, first of all. STILL awesome. I feel like, really, the movie kept in what made the stage show important...and as with musicals, that was keeping the tones of the beloved songs, from the overture at the beginning all the way to The Ad-dressing of Cats. That plus the impressive dancing. I could still catch some little bits of choreography from the stage show in them, although mainly it was all revamped for the movie...but they kept the music, so that’s the biggest point (though some were edited down a bit to make time for dialogue; understandable, still). Skimbleshanks’ number has to be the most impressive, by far.

Adding to this, the new song, Beautiful Ghosts, written together by Lloyd Webber and Taylor Swift. Wow. You can tell they made a song that would really fit into the show...it’s haunting and sad, and yet hopeful, and the more I listen to it with Victoria’s story in mind, the more I tear up. It’s brilliant.

The story, I also liked. I admit, it has to be hard to try and make a plot out of a musical that has a fairly bare-bones presentation to it, and is mostly comprised of songs adapted from a poetry book about cats. There are many ways they probably could have taken the plot, but they did it very well, in my opinion; plus they still kept the most important events from the stage show: Grizabella’s redemption arc, and Macavity’s trying to derail things, straight down to kidnapping Old Deuteronomy and her being brought back through Mistofelees’ magic; I love how that bit was presented, too. He and the others are expecting a grandiose magic return, and instead it’s off-screen and softly sung, and as the music swells from solemn to joyous, you know it’s just as magical all the same.

I knew that Growltiger would make an appearance in this, but I didn’t realize he’d be made his own character, when in the play, he’s a character that Gus the Theater Cat played in the past...only the first few lines of his song was sung, too. But at least they kept his appearance from the play, down to the “somewhat-missing” ear. X3 That bit was clever, I liked it.

Also, Victoria and Mistofelees are adorable as heck in this one, can’t lie. XD

Speaking of the characters, the casting too is pretty great. Robert Fairchild, I could see actually playing Munkustrap on stage. He has the same cadence and comforting tone of voice and is a lovely singer. Sir Ian Mckellan, I couldn’t see anyone else playing Gus (he even has a very similar voice to the original 1981 cast member)...and Taylor Swift did make a good Bombalu, if in appearance and voice. X3 And of course we can’t forget Francesca Hayward’s performance as Victoria; hope to see her career expand. Dame Judi Dench made a very regal Deuteronomy (and yes, the thought of a female Deut has grown on me), and it’s good to see that she got to be in Cats, knowing her history. And as predicted, Idris Elba made a pretty sinister Macavity. X3

So, all in all?

This movie probably gets so many negative reviews from the general public, because most of the general public has never seen the musical, and really don’t know what to make of the adaptation. X3 This is definitely not for anyone who doesn’t like musical theater, let alone Cats...I feel that the movie was only made with the true fans in mind. And that’s just fine; not everything has to cater to the public at large, because if you try to do that, it’s not really a passion project. Cats has always been unique, and still is, and there are people out there who very much appreciate the hard work that has been put into it. The sets are phenomenal. The CGI could use work, but for an experimental style, it was done pretty well (yes, it’s possible to get past the uncanny-valley looks of the characters, at least it was for me, because they didn’t bother me in the first place). It shows that they tried hard to stay true to the spirit of the stage show, while also putting something completely new into it. And I think they nailed the spirit, which is the important thing in an adaptation: the spirit.

There’s a few things that could be changed, namely in presentation overall...they could have used another director, to be honest...but the casting, the music, the dancing...heck, some of the designs...that’s all good. Actually it’s funny to me to observe how easy it is to make a musical-type movie into a stage show, a-la The Lion King, but how hard it is to do it the other way around. XP

Would I watch it again? Heck yes. Buy the DVD? Heck yes (especially once they’ve put out the full version). Does it hold up to other productions? No, but I didn’t expect it to; it’s a movie. They took all the essential things and rebuilt it, simple as that.

And so, overall, I give the movie a score of 3.5 out of 5. It’s not my canon, but it’s still good, and you can ignore the hell out of the reviewers, they’re all plebs. XD

Thank you, my dears!

#text post #blog post #movie reviews #cats the movie #cats the musical #cats musical #cats 2019 #cats spoilers

8 notes · View notes