My husband used to live a half a block from the WinterGarden Theatre, where Cats had its 533 year Broadway run.
My verdict: It’s a damn shame I’ll never get those 3 hours of my life back.
Cat’s isn’t taken seriously by the theater world. When I was in school it was used as a shorthand for what was wrong with theater. Now that I have been out of school for a few years and have had some of the snobbery drop off of me, I can sort of understand the appeal.
The costumes are fantastic, and sets are amazing, the lighting and effects are all great. There isn’t a plot, but there isn’t supposed to be, and the vingettes are all lots of fun. Webbers music sucks, but it sucks in all of his shows, and he is the most popular composer alive today, so nothing new there.
The show appeals to the side of us that doesn’t want to think, but does want to be entertained by the giant specticle of it all. There is a long and proud tradition of those kind of shows being popular in the theatre…and in film and television too.
So I guess the appeal of Cat’s is that it is easy. That isn’t bad, that is what it was intended to be; easy and spectacular. And it is is very good at being both.
Of course like all spectacular theatre it only works if you actually see it live. On TV it is just easy, which makes it dull and syrupy sweet. But on the up side at home you have the mute button to protect you from Webber’s music. (I am trying to be less snobbish, I am. But I really hate the show, and Webber is a hack.)
And where? The best version I saw was London, but the road show version was significantly worse than the Broadway one, even late in the run. On Broadway they at least try to get Mr. Mistofeles magic in time with the dance.
BTW, I think Memory is the worst song in the show. I hate that song.
The appeal is that it isn’t in any way challenging. If you lived in NYC and had relatives coming in from out of town who wanted to see a Broadway show, you could get tickets for CATS and you’d know they could go back to Podunk and feel good about it.
I saw Cats and Le Miz in London on back-to-back nights.
Cats was going to the ballet with music. It is one big dance number, and I certainly enjoyed the costumes. That is, I enjoyed my aisle seat and the female cats rubbing against me. Damn. Fun music, fun dancing, fun show. I don’t need to see it again, though.
Le Miz, on the other hand, hit every single emotion. It was a story, it had great sets, it had great music with stories in each song.
Seeing Le Miz the next night shoved Cats into the “eh” field for me. I would go see Le Miz again in a heartbeat. I would only see Cats if I had free tickets (or some other social push).
Les Miz sucks too.
Except for the part where it is unbelievably awesome.
Maybe about 15 years ago. All clips I’ve seen of it since then looked the same.
Cats was already in the “eh” field when I saw Les Miz. Not that was a great show. Better music than Cats by a long shot. “Master of the House” alone is better than anything Webber ever wrote.
I saw it live a few times when I live in NYC, and loved it. Since then, I’ve tried to recapture the experience with the video, and there’s no comparison.
About the criticism that there’s no plot: Well, how much plot should there be, it’s about ***cats. ***A plot would be: Fluffy goes to the vet and gets altered. Comes home and coughs up a fur ball. Goes to sleep. Wakes up, uses the litter box, scratches the sofa and goes back to sleep.
I would say that is the case for the vast majority of musicals. I don’t remember Rogers & Hammerstein being particularly difficult.
If you don’t want easy, there is always the opera or the ballet.
Jelly-filled cats.
Saw it in New York. Nauseating.
It’s something people have heard of. So when your relatives go home, and people ask them what they did in NYC, they can say “Cats” and people go “ooo, was it good?” Instead of “what’s that?”
I saw it performed live at London’s Drury Lane theatre. I’m one of those who just couldn’t, or can’t, see the point. I can think of many, many better shows to go and see. The way I see it, going to read the original T.S. Eliot poems may be a good idea, if that’s what you’re into. Getting ALW to type them over lots and lots of instantly and enduringly forgettable tunes (apart from That One), and then getting some luvvies to dress up in cat costumes and ‘sing’ the results at me… no, sorry, it doesn’t strike me as a good idea.
I did and do understand that it doesn’t have a plot or a story or indeed any kind of structure at all, and isn’t meant to, and that fans of the show are okay with that. Personally, I like people to work just a little bit harder than that for my money. If you want me to get out of my house, travel into town, pay London prices for a ticket (very, very expensive) and sit in your theatre for 2 hours, then I don’t think it’s asking too much for you to expend whatever time, talent and effort would be involved in embracing the concept of narrative structure. Just my 2 cents.
But yes, Memory is a darn good tune and I salute ALW for managing to hatch that one. Shame that in musical terms it’s the only memorable four minutes in a 2 hour show.
That isn’t true.
I’m not a huge fan of the show (saw it last night), but we had a good enough time watching it. There is definitely structure and a (slightly insignificant) plot.
Went to see it with a college girlfriend. Could feel my heterosexuality draining away with each second spent in the theater. Mainly it seemed to be about the actors enjoying posturing and prancing in the cat outfits.
Well to be sure, it’s best categorized as Theatre-Lite.
I think Cats is an easy target for the high-browed crowd to take pot shots as not ‘serious’ theatre but if you go in knowing what to expect really, you could do a lot worse.
I will say that Cats doesn’t suffer from Second Act Let Down that plagues many a musical. I can think of several shows that have a second act opening with a strong number and then dissolving into forgettable songs and plot lines that serve to merely run out the clock. Examples: Phantom of the Opera, Les Mis and especially Rent. Just MHO of course.
The second act of Cats opens with Gus the Theatre Cat and then almost a separate play-within-a-play as he gears up to reprise one last performance from his glory days. A couple of other decent numbers are featured and then the finale lead up to, if nothing else, a more balanced musical than most.
I saw the travelling show.
I fell asleep.
I don’t hate cats, but I hate Cats.
The original London production had a very hard time geting financed. When nobody would back it, Lloyd Webber got individual backings from about 5,000 to cover a quarter of the cost, mortgaged his house for a quarter, and had the theatre forgive the rest, banking on recouping later. It was a serious gamble that paid off, as they rarely do. Had it not, he would have lost his house and his reputation.
The original sets and costumes were so cheesy that the original book with photos of the Original London cast was deleted and replaced with one for Broadway.
I saw it on Broadway when I was young and should have enjoyed it, but I found in unbearably boring. The only good things I can remember were the dancers in the audience and intermission, where the kids in the audience could go onstage if they wanted to. Also I got to go backstage afterwards because my aunt knew one of the dancers–that part was the best part.