2,041 posts
|
Post by 49thand8th on Jul 19, 2019 16:28:00 GMT
?
|
|
4,799 posts
|
Post by The Matthew on Jul 19, 2019 17:51:03 GMT
I'm surprised at quite how many people are bashing the trailer and I think there's a certain amount of bandwagoning going on. After all, it's not as if a bunch of people who had never heard of film or theatre before stumbled across a mention of the entertainment industry and thought "Gee, that sounds fun. We should give it a go." With all the celebrity casting it was always going to be less than it could have been, but they'd never have got the funding if nobody involved knew what they were doing.
I suspect that in the end the reactions are going to be similar to the Joseph thread, and progress from "worst thing ever" to "not a total disaster" to "ok I guess" to "actually pretty enjoyable".
|
|
1,880 posts
|
Post by Marwood on Jul 19, 2019 19:14:56 GMT
Never mind Judi Dench in a fur coat - why is there no sign of Ray Winstone in that trailer? The whole thing looks dreadful to be honest, but the thought of Raymond singing and then dropping a few choice F and C bombs might just make it worth seeing (when copies show up in Poundland that is)
|
|
750 posts
|
Post by horton on Jul 19, 2019 19:27:51 GMT
Why is it that certain participants here are so averse to people expressing their dislike of shows/ performers/ movies etc?
The more I watch this trailer to see if I have missed the things some people are reporting adoring, the more it makes me think of The Island of Dr Moreau!
Please note I haven't called anyone mindless zealots for liking it. I haven't suggested they are jumping on a bandwagon because it's likely to be commercially successful. I haven't snarkily suggested they must be experts in CGI for liking the art direction on show here.
In my opinion, what has been presented- which as a trailer exists to provoke reactions- is as mis-conceived as the dreadful Les Mis film and utterly dreadful Phantom movie.
|
|
1,210 posts
|
Post by musicalmarge on Jul 19, 2019 19:40:11 GMT
People - the public have a right to say what is great and what is not! Many movies and musicals are wonderful and pure joy. Some are ill conceived and simply terrible. I worry this is the latter!!
|
|
73 posts
|
Post by digipal on Jul 19, 2019 20:16:32 GMT
So I saw the trailer last night, hadn't seen any comments prior and I have to be honest and say, I didn't like it, that's just my opinion. I'm not jumping on any bandwagon
In five months time when it hits the cinema I'll probably go and see it, I'm just not sure I'm feeling this artistic direction for now
I heard a movie critic on the radio tonight talking about Cats who was refreshingly candid saying "hey, what do we know, The Greatest Showman and Bohemian Rhapsody has proved the public decides whats a winner not a few people watching a movie for free in a private screening" ... or it was something to that effect
|
|
2,822 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Jul 19, 2019 20:19:32 GMT
Why is it that certain participants here are so averse to people expressing their dislike of shows/ performers/ movies etc? The more I watch this trailer to see if I have missed the things some people are reporting adoring, the more it makes me think of The Island of Dr Moreau! Please note I haven't called anyone mindless zealots for liking it. I haven't suggested they are jumping on a bandwagon because it's likely to be commercially successful. I haven't snarkily suggested they must be experts in CGI for liking the art direction on show here. In my opinion, what has been presented- which as a trailer exists to provoke reactions- is as mis-conceived as the dreadful Les Mis film and utterly dreadful Phantom movie. In your view...
|
|
875 posts
|
Post by daisy24601 on Jul 19, 2019 20:28:32 GMT
I couldn't make it through the trailer.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2019 20:49:27 GMT
Wowers - according to the guardian (so please take with a big mouthful of salt) this set Universal back £230,000,000!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
600 posts
|
Post by AddisonMizner on Jul 19, 2019 20:55:46 GMT
I don’t really see what everyone’s problem is with the trailer - it doesn’t look half as bad as I expected.
I am no fan of Cats, but will see this out of interest.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2019 20:58:59 GMT
(If true) that means they will have to make just shy of £500,000,000 to break even. Why oh why oh why are they pitting it against Star Wars! !??
|
|
2,822 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Jul 19, 2019 21:33:31 GMT
(If true) that means they will have to make just shy of £500,000,000 to break even. Why oh why oh why are they pitting it against Star Wars! !??It'll def make $500m over lifespan. Doubt 230m budget though.
|
|
696 posts
|
Post by cheesy116 on Jul 19, 2019 21:42:17 GMT
I must be one of the few that thinks it looks pretty good from the trailer.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2019 21:42:59 GMT
(If true) that means they will have to make just shy of £500,000,000 to break even. Why oh why oh why are they pitting it against Star Wars! !??It'll def make $500m over lifespan. Doubt 230m budget though. What makes you think that (genuine question, you have said you have worked within movie CGI so you obviously have knowledge)?
|
|
736 posts
|
Post by dippy on Jul 19, 2019 21:51:58 GMT
I very highly doubt it had that budget too, I mean massive massive action films have that kind of budget but not a Working Title musical. Working Title are not known for splashing money around in ways they don't need to.
|
|
2,822 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Jul 19, 2019 21:52:30 GMT
It'll def make $500m over lifespan. Doubt 230m budget though. What makes you think that (genuine question, you have said you have worked within movie CGI so you obviously have knowledge)? It'll make the money because of its familiarity, longevity and demographic reach. I doubt the budget for two reasons: (1) The Guardian is the source for the figure (2) I think 130m would be overpriced tbh but there are some big-name performers and producers on board, so never say never. When I did it we had units/labour in cheaper markets and it was in its infancy compared to today. It was also independent rather than big studio. The money went on the voiceover talents.
|
|
4,048 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Jul 19, 2019 21:55:38 GMT
Movies lie about their budget to make themselves sound more impressive all the time, so any figure in the press should be taken with a pinch of salt. It’s doubtless a very expensive film to make, though.
|
|
2,979 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Jul 19, 2019 21:55:54 GMT
Just seen an animator / illustrator I follow on Twitter comment that this could have been great done as a Fantasia-style animated film, with lots of different animation styles.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2019 22:11:20 GMT
Movies lie about their budget to make themselves sound more impressive all the time, so any figure in the press should be taken with a pinch of salt. It’s doubtless a very expensive film to make, though. Do you know if they ever “tell the truth” about the budget or is it always an inside secret? I always go by Wikipedia or Mojo or the like but who knows? I always find the financial side of things super interesting. I mean, to me, how do they ever think they will get the best profit they can if they pit it against the biggest/2nd biggest film of the year? Put it back 3 weeks and (IMO) they will make more money as they will be the biggest film of that week! obviously, they know what they are doing, I’m just an amateur enthusiast
|
|
|
Post by d'James on Jul 19, 2019 22:24:56 GMT
I think everyone who goes to see this should take a cat. It would be awesome. Nah my cat would be creeped out.
|
|
544 posts
|
Post by amp09 on Jul 19, 2019 22:47:23 GMT
Movies lie about their budget to make themselves sound more impressive all the time, so any figure in the press should be taken with a pinch of salt. It’s doubtless a very expensive film to make, though. Do you know if they ever “tell the truth” about the budget or is it always an inside secret? I always go by Wikipedia or Mojo or the like but who knows? I always find the financial side of things super interesting. I mean, to me, how do they ever think they will get the best profit they can if they pit it against the biggest/2nd biggest film of the year? Put it back 3 weeks and (IMO) they will make more money as they will be the biggest film of that week! obviously, they know what they are doing, I’m just an amateur enthusiast Putting it back three weeks puts them into weeks which are bulging with other Oscar contenders, which can make or break a film. It’s a completely different target audience, and definitely the film I want playing in my cinema over Christmas otherwise I’d have empty seats as Star Wars simply doesn’t work.
|
|
649 posts
|
Post by ptwest on Jul 20, 2019 4:43:15 GMT
Just watched the trailer; I've made no secret of the fact that the stage version is one of my least favourite shows, but actually, I thought the trailer looked a lot better than I expected. The CGI is in keeping with the stage costumes, and the change of setting makes things more interesting. To be honest, in my own opinion, the CGI is no less creepy than the original was anyway. It still might be a big push for me to actually go and see this, but feel pleasantly surprised.
|
|
4,608 posts
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Jul 20, 2019 7:16:19 GMT
If they just put legwarmers on the animals then all would be fine again
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2019 7:38:43 GMT
Putting it back three weeks puts them into weeks which are bulging with other Oscar contenders, which can make or break a film. It’s a completely different target audience, and definitely the film I want playing in my cinema over Christmas otherwise I’d have empty seats as Star Wars simply doesn’t work. The only film that’s announced to be released 3 weeks later currently is Sam Mendes 1917 which I don’t think is going to be aimed at children, unlike Star Wars. Regardless of whether you enjoy Star Wars or not (and I’m firmly in the not category) I hardly think it will playing to empty seats over Christmas. I mean, just look at the box office receipts for the last few! Toby Hooper (director of Cats movie) made the Les Mis movie and that didn’t break the $500,000,000 mark and LM is widely more successful than Cats
|
|
2,822 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Jul 20, 2019 8:56:04 GMT
Cats will easily outgun Les Mis at the box office. Broader demographic appeal, affordability (compared to a west end/broadway show for a family of four for example), no underlying narrative to bore the kids for three hours (and I love Les Mis!) - many reasons why Cats will score big on screen.
|
|
4,458 posts
|
Post by poster J on Jul 20, 2019 8:58:33 GMT
Toby Hooper (director of Cats movie) made the Les Mis movie and that didn’t break the $500,000,000 mark and LM is widely more successful than Cats The success of them both as a musical is completely irrelevant. It is the cast of Cats that will drive the box office receipts and mean it will make vastly more money.
|
|
544 posts
|
Post by amp09 on Jul 20, 2019 10:52:06 GMT
Putting it back three weeks puts them into weeks which are bulging with other Oscar contenders, which can make or break a film. It’s a completely different target audience, and definitely the film I want playing in my cinema over Christmas otherwise I’d have empty seats as Star Wars simply doesn’t work. The only film that’s announced to be released 3 weeks later currently is Sam Mendes 1917 which I don’t think is going to be aimed at children, unlike Star Wars. Regardless of whether you enjoy Star Wars or not (and I’m firmly in the not category) I hardly think it will playing to empty seats over Christmas. I mean, just look at the box office receipts for the last few! Toby Hooper (director of Cats movie) made the Les Mis movie and that didn’t break the $500,000,000 mark and LM is widely more successful than Cats There’s a lot more films that are planned for release around that time that haven’t been announced yet. All with Oscar buzz surrounding them. I never said it would play to empty seats everywhere, but as a cinema manager, I know it would play to empty seats in my cinema, whereas Cats would be sold out. Not every cinema has the same demographic. So all I’m saying really is I’d rather have Cats at Christmas and then remain busy over January-March with the large slate of Oscar films, instead of having to find space for Cats in January and being quiet at Christmas. I also disagree on the BO receipts. We’re expecting it to outperform Les Mis. I guess we wait and see, anything could happen between now and then to derail it, but it’s currently a strong contender in a lot of categories for the Oscars.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2019 11:02:17 GMT
Toby Hooper (director of Cats movie) made the Les Mis movie and that didn’t break the $500,000,000 mark and LM is widely more successful than Cats The success of them both as a musical is completely irrelevant. It is the cast of Cats that will drive the box office receipts and mean it will make vastly more money. Les Mis had Hugh Jackman, Russell Crowe, Anne Hathaway etc all bona fire movie stars who have and do open movies. Yes Taylor Swift is in Cats and she has a massive following in music but she is an unknown quantity when it comes to movies. Neither does judi or Ian. To say Cats will sell way more than les mis coz of the cast doesn’t ring try to me and I do feel both of them being musicals is relevant. Remember lots of people aren’t like us and won’t go coz it’s a musical, that’s why musicals aren’t such a prevalent gene at the cinema as say horror
|
|
544 posts
|
Post by amp09 on Jul 20, 2019 12:10:54 GMT
The success of them both as a musical is completely irrelevant. It is the cast of Cats that will drive the box office receipts and mean it will make vastly more money. Les Mis had Hugh Jackman, Russell Crowe, Anne Hathaway etc all bona fire movie stars who have and do open movies. Yes Taylor Swift is in Cats and she has a massive following in music but she is an unknown quantity when it comes to movies. Neither does judi or Ian. To say Cats will sell way more than les mis coz of the cast doesn’t ring try to me and I do feel both of them being musicals is relevant. Remember lots of people aren’t like us and won’t go coz it’s a musical, that’s why musicals aren’t such a prevalent gene at the cinema as say horror Put Judi and Ian in any film and I promise it sells out at my cinema every night. No matter whether it’s good or bad.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2019 12:15:34 GMT
Yes Taylor Swift is in Cats and she has a massive following in music but she is an unknown quantity when it comes to movies. She's already been in several movies, even if you discount her cameo in the Hannah Montana movie. None of them will go down in history as all-time greats but it's not like she's entirely new to the medium.
|
|