Worst Picture
Worst Screenplay
Worst Director (Tom Hooper)
Worst Supporting Actor (James Corden)
Worst Supporting Actress (Rebel Wilson)
Worst Screen Combo (for “any two half-feline/half-human hairballs”).
Maybe they should have made the award a statue of a giant hairball this year.
I’ve never understood why it’s ALW’s most popular musical (or at least, near the top). Sure, it’s got spectacle, but a lot of his plays have spectacle and plot, acting, and so on.
It involves women wearing form-fitting body socks rubbing against and pawing at the audience.
Well, rubbing against and pawing a very small percentage of the audience.
Do most people really like it for itself, or do they think they should like it because they like T. S. Eliot? At least it’s always fun to go to the theatre. But then you get something like that movie where it’s impossible to pretend.
Hell, if you’re lucky it could be you!
And on that prurient note – and I stand by position that Cats’s appeal is a prurient one – back in high school some of the girls staged a version of the play. I wasn’t even near the front row and I could distinctly see-- well, I’ll just say I was mystified that none of the faculty didn’t stop the production then and there and put ponchos on the players.
I thought the music was very good. And evocative - for example the sequence
Gus the theatre cat / Growltiger’s last stand / The ballad of Billy McCaw
I’ve wondered that many times. My wife went to see it on the night we got engaged… and we fell asleep!
Now you could argue that it was because it was the crash after the adrenaline rush from the proposal; or you could (my choice) just realize it’s not for everybody.
My wife is of the opinion you have to be a ‘cat person’ to enjoy; which neither of us are.
Pics or it didn’t happen.
(Never mind, I believe you)
JohnGalt, you do realize that you just asked for pictures of scantily-clad high schoolers?
Enright3, being a cat person makes it worse, not better. T. S. Eliot clearly understood cats very well, but Andrew Lloyd Weber equally clearly did not. Part of the problem with Cats is that none of the characters behave in the least like cats.
My working hypothesis is that ALW was a big fan of TSE’s depressing poetry, and wanted to make a whole show of that. But he knew that there was no way he could make that successful, so he had to make the play mostly upbeat poems. And Old Possum’s Book of Practical Cats is TSE’s only upbeat work.
…and if you’re not lucky, buy another ticket. That’ll make a musical popular.
j
Full disclosure: I have not seen Cats, neither the show or the movie. And I’m not going. To either.
Y’all realize that the Razzies are movie awards, right? I thought the stage musical was a fun bit of fluff, but that movie stunk worse than a three week old uncleaned litter box.
Of course - that’s why I said never mind. BUT, I can imagine 50 years from now when the grandkids find grandma’s high-school yearbook. “Grandma, what did you do while in high school? You were in a musical? Let me see. Grandma! Is that really you!!”
We actually saw Cats in the movie theater; there was one other couple there, and it was the first weekend. Obviously the word had gotten out. Frankly, I thought Victoria’s (Francesca Hayward) costume was pretty provocative. Most of the others were just bizarre. I was just wondering over the weekend when Razzies were coming out and knew that Cats would be at the top.
This seems as good a place as any to share this:
In the past few days, writer Jack Waz has told the story (on Twitter) that he knows a VFX producer who was brought in to work on the Cats film just before its release, specifically to “remove (the) CGI buttholes that had been inserted a few months before.” This has, thus, led Waz to believe that there must be a “Butthole Cut” of the film in existence, and the hashtag #ReleaseTheButtholeCut is now trending. :eek:
Source (among others): Cats Butthole Cut Explained: What Is It & Does It Exist?