‘Cats’ Will Miss Awards Deadlines As It Rushes to the Holiday Finish Line
With no screenings planned until mid-December, Universal may find it difficult to see an awards boost for Christmas release "Cats."
Nov 8, 2019 5:13 pm
Every year, a much-anticipated Christmas release provokes speculation about whether it can be finished in time at all. Think Quentin Tarantino’s “Django Unchained” in 2012, followed a year later by Martin Scorsese’s “Wolf of Wall Street.” These movies screened for the first time dripping wet over the Thanksgiving weekend. They came within a hair’s breadth of missing the deadlines for Golden Globes, National Board of Review, the New York Film Critics Circle, the Los Angeles Film Critics Association, and the Screen Actors Guild Awards.
This year’s late-breaking movie is “Cats,” and at this writing it appears that the film will blow multiple awards deadlines. Members of the New York Film Critics have been told by the studio that it shouldn’t expect to see the film before mid-December, after the group votes December 4 — and leaving little lead time before opening December 20. However, the final Globes screening is also December 4. National Board of Review announces its winners December 3. SAG nominations close December 8, and the list goes on.
The Academy Yanks Nigeria's Oscar Submission, and Proves That Hollywood Still Can't Take African Cinema Seriously Directed by Tom Hooper, who won an Oscar as Best Director in 2011 for Best Picture-winner “The King’s Speech,” “Cats” is a furry VFX musical extravaganza that’s engendered plenty of curiosity — as well as a decidedly mixed response to its promo materials. Based on the T.S. Eliot poetry-turned-global musical phenomenon, Universal is counting on “Cats” to drive the level of attendance achieved with “Mamma Mia!” and its sequel (a combined $1 billion worldwide), not to mention Hooper’s own “Les Miserables” ($442 million worldwide).
Even if the film is finished in time for SAG, breaking late can hurt the chances for the starry “Cats” ensemble, which includes Jennifer Hudson, Judi Dench, Ian McKellen, Taylor Swift, and Idris Elba. On the other hand, given the right support in other quarters, a strong entry can usually catch up where the later-voting Oscars are concerned.
But of all the years to be tardy, this is not a good one: The Oscar timetable is moved up, earlier than they’ve ever been, with nominations due January 7 (inspiring the Academy to make online screeners available for everyone) and the telecast held on February 9.
While veteran filmmaker Clint Eastwood is notorious for his late-year entries, including Best Picture and Actress-winner “Million Dollar Baby,” Warner Bros. will start screening this year’s “Richard Jewell” (Warner Bros.) on November 20, the night it screens at AFI Fest, following the Oscar-bound playbooks for Eastwood’s “American Sniper” and Steven Spielberg’s “Lincoln.”
On the other hand, “Cats” may be a strictly commercial play with no need of an awards boost. In which case, an onslaught of ads should pull moviegoers into multiplexes.
6. "This is going to make so much money." In response to Reply # 0
People forget how much old people fucking LOOOOOVE the musical Cats. The Les Mis movie made 450 mil! And Cats is inarguably a more successful, more famous stage musical than Les Mis. Add in the names of multiple actors old people love (Judi Dench, Ian McKellen, James Corden) and the Swifties? Yeah, this joint's gonna clean up.
12. "lol..I hate that for you fam...reminds of when I had to sit through Ice ..." In response to Reply # 10
1 & 2..yeesh..
It's like...looking at it (and I don't know how old your daughter is), as an adult...this looks AWFUL..and if you're willing to still give your money for this, then you should be taxed playa..you already know what it is.
And don't complain that is was bad after you watch it..you went in eyes wide open.
13. "PSA: Rotten Tomatoes doesn't "give" scores/ratings" In response to Reply # 11
Not trying to be a dick but I'm probably overly-sensitive to people saying this since I'm a comic book guy and comic book fans tend to wield Rotten Tomatoes scores like a cudgel, regardless of is they "agree" or "disagree" with it.
Sadly, the film was fine. And the musical is not plot driven so what they added for a plot was also fine.
Sure the CGI was distracting and unnecessary in many, many cases. The worst CGI stuff was speeding up or reversing dance moves in a way that looked very fake.
I think J Hud was good, so was Ian McKellan, and the woman who played Victoria. James Corden and Rebel Wilson did their normal shtick and they were good enough.
I think it was fine - but a more traditional kind of film-making where you place a camera in a spot and watch a great dancer uninterrupted for longer than 3 seconds would have served the material better - in the same way a Hong Kong made Jackie Chan film has minutes of stationary camera during a fight scene, where a Hollywood production cuts so often that you lose track of the action spatially (and sometimes chronologically.)
It was fine - I think theater nerds might get more pleasure out of the screw ups - but I don't think it's bad enough to get a Rocky Horror Picture Show audience participation movement going for longer than a few months.