Cats the Musical

Hooper before Cats had started to become somewhat divisive. Some viewers loved his films, other decried them as Oscar Bait. Some viewers liked the unusual cinematic techniques he used in Les Miserables, others thought they were poorly executed. And now this film marks the height of his taking a steep creative risk but having no real idea of how to pull it off, on top of alienating the actual experts in the field.

I'm getting major Josh Trank vibes from this.

Him deciding to capture live recording of the singing should have told everybody he didn't know what he was doing. It didn't work on Les Miz, and that show doesn't have dancing. Just look how out of breath the actor playing Skimbleshanks sounds; multiple takes of a complicated dance routine while singing is something that a competent musical director would NEVER do, but Tom knows better because a bunch of laymen thought it was neat that Ann Hathaway did I Dreamed a Dream all in one take! (Like the Broadway actress doesn't do that 8 times a week)

I think Hooper would be better suited for a vision of Hollywood and Cinema that doesn't exist; one that is allowed to experiment and practice with film far more than the rushed, scheduled, and enforced process of making a consumable product intended to generate money.

I don't think he has the worst ideas, but that there is no margin of error for the film industry and little to no time to experiment with what works, what doesn't, why it doesn't, and how to solve it short of just releasing the film and getting the criticism. Even things like 'Test Screenings' can only do so much to solve the problems of a film because the solutions at that point are in the editing room rather than larger and more structural of issues.

I don't think the idea of filming a musical number live for a film is impossible but that we'd have to try and fail to figure out how to make it work.

And, in general, we live in a world that is increasingly incapable of dealing with failure. NOTHING is allowed to fail. If it fails,the ENTIRE idea was terrible and we should never have done it in the first place and your career is completely fucked for it. And, to an extent, I understand why; it's a billion dollar industry and that kind of money is not something people take lightly for failure.

But it's also an insane way to try and develop film as a medium and, despite the logic of 'X failed, so never do x' and it attempting to draw clear data on what works and what doesn't, means that it will ultimately come to the exact OPPOSITE results of a bunch of things that never ever work, except when they do and basically no lessons or data to be learned from at all.

Judi Dench can't sing, the Gumbie Cat scene was just gross, Rebel Wilson just wasn't funny, and the size discrepancies bothered me a lot more than they should. Mice are not that small!

Rebel Wilson was horribly miscast as Jennyanydots; the character is supposed to be this cheerful, motherly type, capable of being stern and protective but overall makes you feel safe- not a cringe comedy fest. Julie Walters would've been a better fit, seeing as Jenny is basically Molly Weasley as a cat.

At least Idris Elba was still good as long as you ignore him being nude.

And even that might not put someone off if they just squint a little.

I do not like Rebel Wilson.

It seems like every role of hers is just cringe comedy related to her weight.

The Rum-Tum Tugger scene would've been decent if they had allowed the music to go all out instead of quietly playing in the background. That plus Rebel Wilson cutting every five minutes to make bad jokes just wasn't funny.

I'd like to note that in regards to Les Mis, live singing for musical films isn't actually that revolutionary. That's how all movie musicals used to be done, so it's not like it's totally crazy or something you can't expect actors to do; it at least works for a show like Les Mis that's not dance-heavy. I'd contest the argument that it doesn't work for Les Mis, as I actually quite like most of the singing in Les Mis (with a few exceptions.)

With Cats, on the other hand....if you want live singing in a show that dance-heavy, purchase yourself some tickets for your local theatre and go see the oldest form of 3D entertainment.

Edited by Spottedleaf on Apr 11th 2020 at 10:22:34 AM

I don't think the music in the Les Mis movie was that good, not only Russell Crowe, but Hugh Jackman and Eddie Redmayne also didn't sound anything spectacular in my ears.

I seem to be in the minority of those who like Les Mis. I think that it's Cosette is better than the play's version. Anne Hathaway was great. And I think Jackman was in top form.

I also find it silly when people try to claim Hugh Jackman can't sing, considering he had a full-fledged musical theatre career even before Les Mis (though I won't deny that there are better Valjeans).

Speaking of Rebel Wilson, I've already seen fetish art of her character eating Taylor Swift's.

You're welcome.

The internet never ceases to amaze me. That's not a complement.

You mean actually eating her, or...

Actually, yes.

Is it strange that I actually liked Javert the best in that version of Les Mis? His singing voice is a lot less grating to my ears than Valjean's.

I liked the recent Les Mis enough when I watched it (though it is certainly not without some BIG problems) but now when I hear it I can't help but think of its infamous YTP.

I liked Hooper’s Les Mis too, particularly that it added back some things from the book that the musical cut, like the scene where Javert asks the Mayor/Valjean to fire him and Valjean refuses, and the Chekhov's Gunman role of the guy that was hit by the cart.

I liked the Les Miserables film, though I don't watch many musicals. My biggest complaint was actually more with the plot, since the movie didn't really get into why the whole failed uprising happened in the first place.

The movie was packed enough as it was, but the uprising had the rough consequence of being crammed between "love triangle about a few characters we just met" and "all the revolutionaries died but these two characters got married so everything's fine".

Of course, it's a very long book and that has more time to develop Maurius as a lead character and why he matters apart from the events going on.

Edited by Tuckerscreator on Apr 11th 2020 at 3:53:57 AM

I also liked the Les Mis film for the most part and thought RE Valjean, Javert, and Eponine that even if the actors weren't up to par in terms of singing compared to the stage performers, they still acted those characters really well and the style of the singing worked as a choice.

Not really the biggest fan of the take on the Thenardiers.

Also, I'm ambivalent about how Hooper's version of Javert has a full-blown Heel Realization and My God, What Have I Done?, but still, of course, commits suicide, as in the stage musical and original novel.

Whereas I kind of thought the point in the musical and original book is that Javert kills himself because he refuses to change / can't live in a world in which his actions were wrong and Valjean's actions were right. If he actually felt remorse, then he would have become The Atoner like Valjean, not thrown himself in the Seine.

Edited by Hodor2 on Apr 11th 2020 at 5:59:42 AM

The book has an utterly HUEG LIEK XBOX section about Marius' backstory that completely got the axe from the musical, likely because it's comparatively uninteresting compared to the aforementioned love triangle and uprising plots involving him.