Cats (1998)

I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Purely Joyful Movie!

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

This is a dark and sometimes deeply uncomfortable drama

"We liked it a lot. It was better than 'Cats'", theater audiences on a TV comedy sketch show proclaimed in a monotone voice after seeing the latest theatrical spectacular. Certainly, "Cats" has gone onto become one of the most financially successful musicals ever, but does that make it good? According to the billions who have seen it, yes, but to a small majority of those involved in the theater, it is a joke, the type of show one would sneak into like an alcoholic sneaking a drink. The music is mediocre (with the exception of one Broadway standard that everybody has probably heard, even those who hate musical theater), the story non-existent, and the premise manipulative. It's like the movies of today, all style-no substance, and after seeing the TV version and the new Broadway revival, I concur that indeed, this show has given me "Cat Scratch Fever".T.S. Elliott's book of poems was just that, poetry, and when put into the premise of a big spectacular musical, is a two hour pretentious ball of fur. It's mesmerizing to watch, and I feel for the talented performers who get put into all sorts of twisted positions, much like Julie Taymor did with her dancers in the stage version of "The Lion King". But unlike the king of the jungle, this kitty is about as emotionally involved as commercial cat Morris and cartoon cat Garfield. At least with those two, you could count on the commercial being over in less than a minute (and usually laughed at his cynical commentary) and the comic strip had wry comments on life, pet and human relations and with a 10 second reading, much more to give to the world than this has done in the past 35+ years.The premise of this show is simple: It's the jellicle ball for jellicle cats, and a song indicating what a jellicle cat is really gives no complete definition. Old Deuteronomy is sort of the great God like old cat who must choose which one of the jellicle cats will go on to start another life, and within the span of two hours, various cats of no varying personalities (with the exception of a few) audition for that honor. Ken Page is one of the great character performers of the theater, and makes a lovable and commanding Deuteronomy. The problem, then, is not in the performances, but within the show itself. Elaine Page repeats her London role as the aging glamour cat Grizabella who sings the poignant anthem "Memory" at the climax of act one, then repeated throughout act two, and she provides the only poignant moment for me that rendered any kind of emotion.There's a show-stopping John Mills as the "theater cat" who claims to have performed for Queen Victoria, giving one analogist the idea that "Cats" was a metaphor for the relationship between Queen Victoria and Disraeli. Original director Harold Prince summed it up best when he replied to that inquiry, "It's about cats." So even the director knows that it's pointless entertainment, manipulating theater goers for decades and certainly packing in the tourist trade in both London and on Broadway. Of course, everybody who has seen this show or knows about it knows "Memory" and characters like Rum Tum Tugger and Jenny Any-Dots (who would name their cat that?), and after seeing this, I needed a double shot of Rum Tum Tugger.The staging is impressive, but after a while, the dance numbers do nothing but take away the notion of any plot, and one number in particular reminded me of the 2002 disaster "Dance of the Vampires" where the living dead danced at the vampire ball in front of a mirror, with no reflection. The staging is corny, sometimes tacky, and when I saw this on Broadway, I realized that everybody around me with the exception of me had drunk the "Cats" kool-aide. I was happy to get this off my bucket list, but I certainly will laugh more every time I see a comic jab at this show, like Woody Allen did in "New York Stories" and what Marc Cherry did on the short-lived "The Five Mrs. Buchannans" when Eileen Heckart rushed her daughter-in-law Harriet Harris out of a store, claiming, "I'm not going to be late for Rum Tum Tugger just because of you." Like those two great theatrical ladies who obviously got the joke (Harris's character referred to it as technically amazing but artistically empty), I too am not taken in by over-stuffed smelly costumes and junk yard modern art when there is no point to the show in the first place.

Having seen Starlight Express, Phantom Of The Opera and Cats all live on stage, it's good to see the stage show more or less as it was back in the day visually (wish they'd do Starlight Express as it was back in the 90's) but that will never happen i guessThis DVD imo is ruined by the lyrical change to the detriment of flow even Memories is only saved by Elaine Page's brilliant goosebump performance in the reprise.I don't see why directors, musicians take perfect scores and decide to change the lyrics or the backing music and put in corny music instead. Don't mess with what worked. The same can be said for Phantom Of The Opera, Starlight Express my 2 all time favourite stageshows with Cats being in 3rd, sure you need to evolve the show to keep interest but the original lyrics or even the Australian versions were masterpieces then they change critical songs and its not on the same level anymore.

I know that most others will strongly disagree with my comments, and I have waited quite some time to to express them.Very poor camera work. (Always a problem with musicals on film.) I expected far more from this cast. Despite the most welcome presence of Elaine Paige and John Mills, there are some truly disappointing performances.The intentional omission of some pieces was a deplorable decision. (As was re-working the score.)Having seen other staging and casts I am shocked at this presentation by Andrew Lloyd Webber.

Compared to other stage productions by Webber, this one is the most frenetic and confusing. It is no surprise that the 1998 Video (VHS) was equally confusing; since then I have read that the VHS was made for TV Release. It was patched together from various earlier productions but that editing was too subtle for me to notice.Sometime during the 1990's my wife asked me to accompany her to see CATS on the Stage, in the Curran Theater in San Francisco. I remember the 260 mile round trip drive very well but came home without a clue as to what had happened up there. What I retained was the unending scenes of huge athletic cats writhing all over the place; in very good costumes, too. At least I could accept the characterizations but, then, I have always liked "Tom & Jerry" cartoons. The primary reason for my inability to enjoy the stage play is that I could not understand a word they were singing except "...Up, Up, Up, ..." They handed out programs but they were useless because of the dim light. Afterward, we got a copy of the CD Release - not a bit of help because I still could not understand the words except for most of those in the song "Memory". (Played full blast on our stereo of course.)Thus prepared, I was happy to hear of the Video Release and that we had obtained a copy. Now, I could try again to redeem myself. With more time to study the list of acts, I began to comprehend a few things but the language barrier was still there!To illustrate my predicament, I thought I was hearing about a "Jellicoe" Cat but, just today, I saw that it was really a "Jellicale" One. I have dismissed the play altogether - there is no hope for me.