I've seen Cats three times now (televised Broadway play, non-Broadway play, and now the movie), and this movie was just as miserable as any of the other versions. Obviously, Cats isn't for me, but I'm surprised that it would be rated so low considering it's just an adaptation of the play with some embellishments.
shareApparently the horrific visuals in this version had a negative impact.
shareI bet this project was conceived after a night of heavy 'fun'
shareThe visuals are, well, i can certainly see how it can be horrific for people not accustomed to seeing anthropomorphic animals. It certainly does not help that they cheaped out on a lot of it. However if you can look past to them being very weird furry humans, theres actually a movie down there.
shareAll I can think of is it was because everyone was disappointed that it didn't star Donald Sutherland.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TImaL1TzlFk
because its a horrid thing that shouldn't even be called a movie.
It’s a terrible movie, but I’m surprised there aren’t more diehard fans of it (like those who adamantly defend bad movies like The Last Jedi), especially since Taylor Swift is the star and many use her mere presence as a reason to think something is the “best movie ever.”
share