After the release of the initial trailer for Cats, the reaction was overwhelmingly negative. Audiences were frightened by the computer-generated imagery that turned the human actors into cats and ultimately didn’t have high hopes for the film’s finished product.
Though most audience skepticism turned out to be correct, there are some redeeming parts of the film that don’t make it much different from the mastery of the original Broadway production.
The fact of the matter is, the musical version of Cats doesn’t have much of a great reputation either. It’s one that audiences either love or hate, so it’s only natural that the film adaptation would follow the same pattern.
The audience’s relationship with Cats isn’t the only similarity between the two. The costuming, or more accurately the CGI, was almost a direct representation of the costume style in the theatrical production. It’s a bold choice given the controversy, but it more accurately captures the emotions of the actors and the integrity of the production it’s based after.
Where the film should be commended is its fresh take on the story. Not only is the show’s plot significantly clearer in the film, but Tom Hooper’s direction provides new opportunities for relationships between the cats and a more intimate sense of how each cat feels.
Where the film should be criticized is its inaccurate proportions. The cast and Hooper have talked about how they used a set with giant pieces to make it feel more like they were cat-sized, which is appropriate enough. The proportions, however, are completely inaccurate. Between a women’s rings being able to fit loosely over a cat’s paw to chicken wings looking almost half the size of the cats, the proportions greatly detract from the viewing experience because of how absurdly inaccurate they are. With a film that’s already pushing the limit on absurdity, that’s an issue that should’ve been avoided.
Another huge problem with the film is that some of the actors play the characters as more of a farce, rather than an actual serious role like the actors portray in the staged production. That isn’t so much a problem with the film — rather, the lack of appropriate casting.
The biggest offender is Rebel Wilson, who plays Jennyanydots. Her introductory song is the first one the audience hears, so it sets the tone for the rest of the film. It takes a special kind of director to know how to use Wilson properly, like Taika Watiti in Jojo Rabbit, and unfortunately, Hooper is not that director. Her lack of seriousness and uncomfortable commentary greatly injures the integrity of the film. James Corden and Jason Derulo join Wilson with disappointing performances, after not bringing the type of energy the show requires.
Though Cats is riddled with a few weak links, there are several bright spots in the cast. Some notable performances include Ian McKellen as Gus the Theatre Cat, Taylor Swift as Bombalurina, Judi Dench as Old Deuteronomy, Idris Elba as Macavity and Jennifer Hudson as Grizabella. It’s always entertaining to see serious actors out of their element in such whimsical films, and they all do a wonderful job at maintaining the film’s integrity. Even Swift, who isn’t known for acting, does a wonderful job in her role.
Arguably the best part of the film is the introduction of new faces like Robbie Fairchild as Munkustrap, who essentially narrates the entire film, Laurie Davidson as Mr. Mistoffelees and especially Francesca Hayward, who leads the film as Victoria. These three actors have a theatrical background already and haven’t been in any widely-regarded productions until Cats.
Cats is always going to be a production that audiences either love or hate. Though Hooper’s film is extremely flawed, it’s certainly admirable to see someone try to conquer the beast that is the Tony Award-winning musical. If for nothing else, everyone should see the film at least once to hear the cast, especially Hudson, perform their individual songs.
