Why Cats Bombed At The Box Office


Let’s all pay our condolences to Cats as it
fades away to the Heaviside Layer. The film adaptation of the famous Andrew Lloyd
Webber stage musical finally hit theatres on December 20th, 2019, and audiences have
been passionately avoiding the film ever since. Here’s what went wrong with Cats. Well, the box office numbers have rolled in
for director Tom Hooper’s misguided movie-musical, and let it suffice to say, they aren’t exactly
the cat’s meow. In fact, they’re absolutely abysmal. Initial box office estimates predicted that
Cats would earn about $15 million on its opening weekend. But when the film opened – against Star Wars:
The Rise of Skywalker, no less – it pulled in a dismal $6.5 million domestically. That is to say, the box office returns were
effectively in the litter box. “Cats! Barely scratching by. The star-studded film managed just $6.5 million
dollars.” “Mrrrw!” Such numbers would be acceptable for, say,
a limited-release art film. But it’s completely unacceptable for a tentpole
Christmas release packed with triple-A talent – particularly since the film cost approximately
$100 million to make. A poor outcome for Cats was rather expected,
but the severity of its opening weekend failure is still rather surprising. Not to put too fine a point on it, but this
is a serious box office bomb we’re talking about here… a major cinematic cat-astrophe. $2.2 million dollars on a wide-release opening
day means that basically no one saw this movie. Meanwhile, pretty much everyone on the planet
knew the film was happening. Seems like morbid curiosity just wasn’t enough
to get people into those seats. That lack of curiosity killed Cats. We can’t talk about Cats without talking about
that soul-bending teaser trailer, which was released back in July 2019. What a day that was for social media. They say that “all press is good press,” but
they clearly hadn’t seen the Cats teaser trailer before making that statement. Many people reacted with abject horror when
they got their first look at the sprightly CGI cats, recoiling in horror at all the chirpy
celebrity faces grafted onto furry bodies. Some folks hoped against hope that the film
was still very much a work in progress. “I’m not sure, are they not done? Like some of the shots, the one shot of Jennifer
Hudson right at the ending, it looks really bad. I’m wondering, have they not done the visual
effects yet?” A film is basically doomed if the trailer
becomes a meme based on how dreadful it is – especially if that trailer is released less
than six months before the movie comes out. And people weren’t exactly won over when the
second full Cats trailer was released in November 2019. We imagine they were still trying to process
what they’d witnessed over the summer. When a film relies heavily on post-production
VFX, it takes a lot of time to get just right. Rushing the process is a really bad idea,
particularly when the filmmakers are busy hailing the special effects as game-changing
and groundbreaking. Well, it sounds like a very special kind of
technology was used for this film: “We’ve used digital fur technology to create
the most perfect covering of fur.” “These are people… but they’re cats! And this is kind-of blowing my mind.” Pixar movies have an average development cycle
of four to seven years from concept design to finished animation. On the other hand, Cats only had seven months
of post-production to render everything. Principal photography began back in December
2018 and wrapped in April 2019. Universal Pictures released the teaser trailer
a mere three months after that, and Cats was released to theatres in December 2019 – just
a little over a year after principal photography commenced. That’s an absolutely insane schedule – particularly
for a film that requires so much post-production work. Reviews for Cats aren’t just disparaging – they’re
devastating. Upon its release, critics pounced upon the
film with sheer sadistic glee, and you can’t really blame them. As of the making of this video, Cats’ Rotten
Tomatoes score stands at a resolutely sad-making 18 percent – and the selected pull quotes
are essentially an all-you-can-eat buffet of brutality. Even Rolling Stone’s overly precious reviewer
Peter Travers had his claws out, writing: “This all-star, all-awful screen take on the
smash Broadway musical easily scores as the worst movie of the year and arguably the decade. Cats shouldn’t happen to a dog.” And Variety’s chief film critic Peter Debruge
certainly wasn’t any kinder: “It is ugly. It is badly directed. It is an eyesore. And these cats look terrible.” Shortly after Cats was released, the absolutely
unthinkable happened. As Gizmodo put it: “In an unprecedented move, Universal is sending
theaters a patched version of Cats.” You heard that correctly. On the same day the film hit theaters, Universal
emailed thousands of theaters and let them know that a rush package containing an updated
version of the film would be arriving sometime in the next couple of days. “Seems like they scrambled and they rushed
to re-edit the film.” In fact, as of the making of this video, there’s
even a viral tweet that shows viewers how to know whether they’re watching Cats 1.0
or what we’ll go ahead and call Cats 1.01. The tweet reads: “How do you know if you have the old version? Look for Judi Dench’s human hand, wedding
ring and all.” What a time to be alive. Check out one of our newest videos right here! Plus, even more Looper videos about your favorite
movies and TV shows are coming soon. Subscribe to our YouTube channel and hit the
bell so you don’t miss a single one.

100 thoughts on “Why Cats Bombed At The Box Office

  1. If you're going to go CGI, give them actual CAT faces, not those human monstrosities on cat bodies. Otherwise, do it using nothing but practical make-up, like the broadway musical. No CGI. The choice to go with the mix was the biggest mistake.

  2. Its all about portraying the roles right, this happen because they give the roles to humans instead of real cats, smh stop peoplewashing give the roles to actual cats.

  3. All that hard ass work, dancing, singing, building sets for a 100 million dollar movie that is based on a weird cat theater fetish. ?
    I'm a dog person. ??

  4. Ahh Hollywood..I wouldn’t expect anything less. This is a perfect example with how out of touch Hollywood is with reality and basically everything going on in the real world. Can’t California just sink into the ocean already. ?

  5. Animated would’ve done much better for them. These actors and actresses would’ve prefer voice overs than getting this kind of public rejections of their live work. Sad.

  6. The same 6 million people that saw this movie are the same 6 million that saw this over & over on live theater ? ?
    I’d watch this if it were only Taylor Swift in a cat woman outfit.

  7. Studios of the world if your film is going against one of the biggest franchises in the world like say star wars, don't just don't kung-fu panda 3 knew that so delayed its self a month

  8. Cat's was always weak, even back in the day, it's embarrassing to say you'd even want to watch this. It's one of those things everyone knows about but never talks about and would never want to admit they love it or want to watch it… I've never in my entire life heard one person say "I love Cats, omg, easily the best play I've ever watched! You're missing out" … never once heard anything even remotely resembling this… I've heard more people tell me Phantom is the best play they've ever seen and that was like a hand full, and I must admit until Book of Mormon came out, I agreed with that statement.

    Cats was always shit… So whoever thought spending $100 million dollars to make a live action version of this is either A) Really dumb and doesn't know how to research information or B) Too young to understand that this entire concept sucked ass 40 years ago.

  9. I feel bad to what happened to one of the most beautiful West End and Broadway productions ever made. I feel sad for my kids who are excited to watch this with expectations so high.

  10. Hollywood remakes aren’t interesting anymore even Korean movies have better production value, acting, with new, exciting and interesting content nowadays

  11. Also, I don't think there was enough marketing for it. I barely saw any promotional advertisement. Extremely poor build up and cast involvement to spread the word

  12. Here's my idea for a Cats movie. One human actor is the owner of an animated but not at all humanoid feline. That feline disappears at the same time every year and this year the owner follows him. The trail leads to a junkyard where the human's cat is joined by several other normal looking cats. Once they're all gathered, they start singing in a kind of call to prayer. This keeps up until the absolutely freaked out owner is spotted. "There's a man over there!" After the name song, the cats scatter. Then, the human's cat approaches him.
    "What are you doing here?"
    "Why are you taking!?"
    After that, the human functions as the audience…

  13. I still don't think Star Wars was a reason why Cats bombed. If the movie was good, it would've got that 15-20M opening weekend.

  14. I think that first trailer was so bad that I seriously don't remember what the fur thing initially looked like, but I remember it been really bad.

  15. Maybe if they had gone the route of animating animals like The Lion King, perhaps they coulda gotten some attention. What where they thinking?

    This is an insult to our Cat overlords.

  16. Star Wars isn't the reason. Even they are not making as much as older Star Wars. Movies bomb for one reason only: it'a not a good movie.

  17. They should have spent more time working on the special affects.

    I think they need to start delaying films when they look bad

  18. Because no one asked for this movie and the box office reflects that. Plus, the trailers were more than enough to show me and others that it wasn't worth the waste of money.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *