Definitely not purr-fect, but also not the cat-astrophe I was expecting - 4/10

by Movies-Graded

Performances: 6/10
Screenplay: 2/10
Special Effects: 4/10
Editing: 5/10
Cinematography: 5/10
Score/Soundtrack: 7/10
Entertainment Factor: 5/10

Verdict: As soon as the trailer for Tom Hooper's adaptation of the Broadway musical "Cats" was released, the movie was doomed. Endless mockery about the effects used to transforms the actors into human-feline hybrids buried the film before it was even released. The overwhelmingly negative reviews and disappointing box office numbers only came to confirm the inevitable. But is "Cats" as bad as people are making it out to be? I personally didn't think it was.
Don't get me wrong, the musical has its fair share of issues, but it also had quite a few redeemable factors that truly made the experience a... special one, whether in an intentional way or not. The production design, choreography, soundtrack, and most of the performances worked remarkably well for me. I experienced a lot of feelings while watching the film but boredom certainly wasn't one of them. Most of the film's problems fall, however, in its incomprehensible and bizarre script flooded with endless supporting characters, each more over-the-top than the other. I couldn't explain what the story was about even if you paid me to do so, and as far as I'm concerned, 80% of it was about different cats introducing themselves through song and dance. The CGI, which for many is the main talk of "Cats", didn't bother me personally. Sure, it wasn't perfect in many places but it also never really took me out of the movie, and I even found some of it to be impressive.
In the end, no, "Cats" was not a good movie, but the 2.8 rating on IMDb (making it the 38th worst rated movie of all time) for me is a massive exaggeration. I honestly can think of at least 10 other movies released in 2019 that were worse in every aspect.

Connect with Movies-Graded

View other reviews by Movies-Graded