Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

NightWatcher

(39,343 posts)
1. Anyone who takes small children to this movie is setting them up for winged-monkey levels of night
Sat Dec 21, 2019, 01:46 AM
Dec 2019

terrors.

That was harsh but accurate sounding from the description of floating faces CGI'd onto the furry bodies.

Dem2theMax

(9,650 posts)
12. I'm 63 years old.
Sat Dec 21, 2019, 10:58 PM
Dec 2019

(Geez, I hate admitting that to myself.)

Anyway, I'm still afraid of the flying monkeys!

They freaked me out a good 50+ years ago, and I still cringe when I see them today.

hlthe2b

(102,192 posts)
4. That site doesn't let you read ANYTHING without registering. Can't you please excerpt SOME of it?
Sat Dec 21, 2019, 06:13 AM
Dec 2019

Damn. Even the abysmal WSJ, lets you see a paragraph when you hit the link and I always thought it had the worst paywall.

Donkees

(31,366 posts)
5. Just do a very quick Copy All as the page is loading...here's an excerpt:
Sat Dec 21, 2019, 07:47 AM
Dec 2019
When I saw “Cats” at a preview screening the other night, something happened toward the end that I’ve never actually experienced at a movie before. It came as the legendary British actress Judi Dench, digitally pixelated into a giant orange tabby named Old Deuteronomy, spoke-sung the lyrics of the final number, “The Ad-dressing of Cats.” As Dame Judi carefully enunciated each verse, then paused, then started a new verse, the audience began to titter. Then laugh. Then roar. Because each pause seemed to signal — at long last — the film’s end, each new verse became a fresh source of hilarity. It was that rare occurrence: a packed theater going the full “Springtime for Hitler” and giving release to blessed, hard-earned mockery.

I truly believe our divided nation can be healed and brought together as one by “Cats” — the musical, the movie, the disaster. In other news, my eyes are burning. Oh God, my eyes.

You’ve heard of the “uncanny valley” effect? The eeriness or revulsion felt when looking at a humanoid figure that’s not quite human? The digital era has given us many examples of the uncanny valley, but “Cats” is the first movie to entirely set up shop there. Based on the hardy Andrew Lloyd Webber musical, first staged in 1981 and still running somewhere on the planet, the film represents a further reworking of the original source, T.S. Eliot’s 1939 poetry collection, “Old Possum’s Book of Practical Cats.” Instead of the stage version’s costume and make-up, however, director Tom Hooper (“The King’s Speech,” “Les Miserables”) has chosen to CGI and green-screen his talented cast of dancers and stars into furry bodysuits with whiskers, cat ears, and prehensile tails.

The effect just doesn’t take. With certain players — Jennifer Hudson as Grizabella, Robbie Fairchild as Munkustrap, even Francesca Hayward of the Royal Ballet as the naïve newcomer Victoria — the faces seem to eerily float atop the faux fur, never quite jelling into one plane of vision. Some cats wear clothes, some don’t; all are, um, neutered. As Macavity the Mystery Cat, Idris Elba has been villainized with green contact lenses and a trench coat; when in one dance number he appears without the coat, it’s like suddenly seeing him naked. Except not. None of this seems conducive to the hoped-for air of whimsy and wonder.

In fact, there are moments in “Cats” I would gladly pay to unsee, including the baby mice with faces of young girls and the tiny chorus line of cockroach Rockettes — again, with human faces — that Jennyanydots gleefully swallows with a crunch. Anyone who takes small children to this movie is setting them up for winged-monkey levels of night terrors.

jmowreader

(50,546 posts)
9. Here's the part I can't figure out
Sat Dec 21, 2019, 03:23 PM
Dec 2019

The movie uses CGI to superimpose the cat looks on the human actors - and, apparently, doesn’t track the people as well as it should. This makes one wonder...why did they not either just do the whole thing in CGI, or do it with makeup like they’ve done it on the stage for 38 years?

sarge43

(28,941 posts)
10. A couple of reviews mentioned production was rushed
Sat Dec 21, 2019, 06:57 PM
Dec 2019

Further, first take of the CGI was even worse than what wound up in the theater. So, at almost the last moment they had to go back and try to correct.

One reviewer IMO nailed it -- human bodies just can't be made to look like cat's bodies. Humans moving around on all fours just don't have the supple look that cats have, thus the unnatural creepy factor.

I've only seen clips, but that low level lighting really ruined the dance scenes. Could barely see them.

CGI still can't effectively capture the movement of organic bodies or even movement we're used to observing. The folding buildings and streets in Inception or Dr Strange is something we never seen in real world, so we have no preconceived reference to compare it to and we accept it. However, we damn well know what cats look like and how they move.

I agree with you. They should have gone with the stage costumes. Not same ones, something even more eye catching. God knowth they had the budget. Keep the CGI for the sets.

A shame because they had A list talent to work with.

jmowreader

(50,546 posts)
11. With the budget they had, they should have done little if any CGI
Sat Dec 21, 2019, 09:59 PM
Dec 2019

The show is set in an alley. We all know what they look like. Save the CGI for elevating Grizabella to the Heaviside Layer, and do the rest of the show as practical effects.

They spent $95 million on this thing, and they could have pulled it off for half that without the CGI.

sarge43

(28,941 posts)
13. CGI is like the little girl with the curl in the middle of her forehead.
Sat Dec 21, 2019, 10:58 PM
Dec 2019

When it's good, it's very, very good. When it's bad, we get Cats.

Latest Discussions»The DU Lounge»The Boston Globe movie re...