Yes, it was always Tom Hooper directing. I believe there was a tense atmosphere on set a lot of the time. I don't think Tom Hooper is a pleasure to work with.I know someone who was a dancer on this. Likewise, not keen on musicals at all, apart from Jungle Book. Was kinda tempted to go watch it, but I don't think I will! I heard they changed directors* half way through and that wasn't seen as a good thing by some of the cast. Original director = good atmosphere on set, New director = tense atmosphere on set.
*Note: it might have been change of choreographer, rather than director... Not sure actually Come to think of it, makes more sense it was a change of choreographer...
mostly women I would presumeBut some people loved the musical, and some people will love the film ...
Making candles?
The Sound of Music is the only musical worth watching. Rocky Horror is OK too though.The only musical I remember enjoying was The Umbrellas of Cherbourg. I can’t remember anything about it specifically though.
mate.mostly women I would presume
mate.
Well no.mostly women I would presume
Am I missing something here? Some sort of in joke or current issues reference maybe?
Cos to me this looks dangerously nasty.
Top class crawling.
There was a thread about counting cat nipples, IIRC by the urban expert in such things - Spymaster.
Spymaster was very insistent that I'd find may cat's nipples when I said I couldn't find any any. When I finally found them, I felt dirty and used. Groomed on Urban !
^^^^Part of the problem, beyond the “uncanny valley” CGI cat boobs, is surely because the stage play doesn’t really have a story to speak of. Because it’s true to the TS Elliot source, it’s a succession of set-piece solo numbers for a large cast. Each cat gets a number either sung by or about them. On stage that works with a flimsy narrative conceit stringing them together, because it feels a bit like a music concert. Film has different expectations. Too many characters, each getting their brief and one-off spotlight means that it neither works as a classical narrative, nor an effective ensemble piece.
As a stage show, Cats was popular with people who didn’t like plays. It wouldn’t be my choice.
This looks like the most WTF movie to come out of Hollywood in quite some time. The first trailer became the laughing stock of the interwebs when it got posted a few months ago. I sort of can't wait to see this, fur-titties and all...
^^^^
This.
Theatre isn’t film. The two don’t always cross over.
La La Land was great. I've still no idea if Ryan Gosling and Ryan Reynolds are legitimately different people though.It is La La Land. I always mix them up because so did Faye Dunaway at the oscars.
I find the way people feel the need to outdo each other here when it comes to being vitriolic about Corden a little weird. I’m no fan, I don’t watch his show, but he’s been fine in the few things I‘ve seen him in. He appears to be skilled when it comes to musical theatre stuff because he’s had that sort of training and that‘s why he gets cast in musicals. So far I haven’t noticed him being singled out in the many terrible reviews the film is getting.
What’s he done to you lot, set a bunch of kittens on fire ?
There's a run-down of reviews here:
And especially Cats review – a purr-fectly dreadful hairball of woe | Peter Bradshaw's film of the week, which is in rhyme.
That doesn’t mean you can’t do an theatrical adaptation by changing it to fit another medium, it’s been done successfully many times. The way they did here was just thoroughly daft. Also, Cats as a musical sucks.^^^^
This.
Theatre isn’t film. The two don’t always cross over.
Those reviews make me want to watch it in the way that good or mediocre ones never would.
I got it mateIt is La La Land. I always mix them up because so did Faye Dunaway at the oscars.