CATS | DIGITAL FUR TECH TO LOSE 113.2M IN LITTER BOX | December 20, 2019 | #ReleaseTheButtholeCut

[Lucas]

It's so fucking terrifying, I love it.

[Poseidon]

I really don't understand, why they didn't go with "Memories" for this trailer, as it was the only selling point for the first and for the musical overall. 

 

 

Universal for sure didn't pull a Disney here.

They turned it around with a stunning second trailer, where they threw in the main selling point: Jasmin and Aladdin on the carpet singing the Billion Dollar Song.

 

Universal gave us 2 overweight cats doing jokes that worked in the 60s. 

And no one sang. In a Musical!

[marveldcfox]

Did this really cost £230 million.....that's like close to 300 million...🤯

[Nova]

17 minutes ago, marveldcfox said:

Did this really cost £230 million.....that's like close to 300 million...🤯

Getting Miss Taylor Alison Swift to shake what her momma gave her isn’t cheap okay 

[BoxOfficeFangrl]

 

[antovolk]

49 minutes ago, marveldcfox said:

Did this really cost £230 million.....that's like close to 300 million...🤯

Fake news 

 

[Krissykins]

5 minutes ago, antovolk said:

Fake news 

 

Yeh I knew it seemed way off. 
 

I guessed around $100m so if they kept it under that, it’s fine. 
 

Would anyone be surprised if this pulled a Charlie’s Angels and opened to like $8m? 

[CoolioD1]

4 minutes ago, Krissykins said:

Would anyone be surprised if this pulled a Charlie’s Angels and opened to like $8m? 

well hey... so did Greatest Showman.

[Krissykins]

3 minutes ago, CoolioD1 said:

well hey... so did Greatest Showman.

Haha true, but I can’t see that level of lightning striking twice 

[Poseidon]

19 minutes ago, Krissykins said:

Yeh I knew it seemed way off. 
 

I guessed around $100m so if they kept it under that, it’s fine. 
 

Would anyone be surprised if this pulled a Charlie’s Angels and opened to like $8m? 

 

Kind of reminds me of Speed Racer. Visual Risk, that didn't connect with audiences. 

[Krissykins]

3 minutes ago, Poseidon said:

 

Kind of reminds me of Speed Racer. Visual Risk, that didn't connect with audiences. 

Yeh! Looks like this cost less though. 
 

I remember when Speed Racer flopped at the start of summer, it was a bit of a surprise on the BOM forums. 

Edited November 19, 2019 by Krissykins

[TLK]

I think it will do great business in New York because of the Broadway connection. Everything else will depend on reviews.

[dudalb]

32 minutes ago, Krissykins said:

Yeh I knew it seemed way off. 
 

I guessed around $100m so if they kept it under that, it’s fine. 
 

Would anyone be surprised if this pulled a Charlie’s Angels and opened to like $8m? 

Not surprised at all.

I just think this looks too bizarre to be a big hit.

And it's not like being a musical is a guarantee of success.

[dudalb]

25 minutes ago, Krissykins said:

Haha true, but I can’t see that level of lightning striking twice 

Greatest Showman did not have the weirdness factor that Cats does.

 

[dudalb]

2 hours ago, marveldcfox said:

Musicals generally do very well during Christmas season even if the opening is low. This is a different beast though. Will the audience be interested in watching live action humanoid cats singing and dancing?

That is pretty much it. I think it just looks too weird for the general audience. The humans dressed as cats worked on stage where you did not have to worry about close ups but in films you do;and it's the close ups that make this look like something out of a nightmare.

[marveldcfox]

40 minutes ago, Krissykins said:

Yeh I knew it seemed way off. 
 

I guessed around $100m so if they kept it under that, it’s fine. 
 

Would anyone be surprised if this pulled a Charlie’s Angels and opened to like $8m? 

No. 

[ViewerAnon]

Every shot in this has a CG element. There's no way it only cost $100 million.

[Ithil]

21 minutes ago, ViewerAnon said:

Every shot in this has a CG element. There's no way it only cost $100 million.

There are numerous 100% CG films with budgets under 100 (Illumination's films for instance). I can easily see the film costing in the range 80-120 million and no more.

 

That 300 million number is absolute BS, that's for sure. The Lion King cost 230 million and that's every frame of a two hour film with the most extensive and state of the art CG possible.

[filmlover]

This feels like it's gonna see grosses much closer to The Phantom of the Opera ($51M) than to Les Misérables ($148M). There's enough curiosity that it should avoid reaching the "embarrassing flop" levels of Nine or The Producers but I'm struggling to think of who is gonna flock in massive numbers to something that looks so completely bizarre visually at such a crowded time of year. Star Wars and Jumanji will take up most of the blockbuster attention, and it feels like the needle is moving in the direction that if anything is a strong #3, it's gonna be Little Women (which is the movie it shares the strongest audience crossover with in the first place). Phantom adjusts to just over $70M today, which seems like a reasonable benchmark to expect for this unless buzz really improves by the time it opens (considering it's not being seen until middle of December, missing all the awards deadlines except the Oscars in the process, that remains to be seen).

Edited November 20, 2019 by filmlover

[Cap]

10 hours ago, Nova said:

@captainwondyful we are being FED with this movie! 

I feel this is an excellent time to remind people:

• Tom Hooper is a fraud
• I'm hosting a Top Fifty Musicals on Cats OW and lists are due in less than a week