Top 10 Reasons Why Cats is the WORST

10 Reasons Why Cats is the WORST

Memory, all alone in an empty theater watching “Cats.” Welcome to WatchMojo and today we’ll be counting down our picks for the 10 Reasons Why “Cats” is the WORST.



For this list, we’re taking a look at why the cinematic version of “Cats” is a shoddily made, borderline incoherent mess of a movie. We acknowledge that this is destined to become a “so bad, it’s good” cult classic, but that’s clearly not what the filmmakers or studio had intended.

#10: It’s Creepy

Remember that live-action version of “The Cat in the Hat” starring Mike Myers? You know how some people have recut it with footage from horror movies like “The Babadook” and “It?” Well, Tom Hooper basically made the feature-length equivalent to those fake trailers. Imagine if parents unwittingly brought their kids to see this movie, assuming it’d be about cute kittens and cat stuff. Chances are all those kiddies darted out of the theater screaming the second they laid eyes on these grotesque cat people like something from The Island of Doctor Moreau. For those who stuck it out, the eeriest moment is saved for last when Judi Dench cryptically addresses the audience. It’s like something out of “Funny Games,” except with a literal cat lady… which is infinitely creepier!

#9: Way Too Many Character Introductions

This movie is about as focused as a cat being distracted by a laser pointer, aimlessly jumping from one musical set piece to the next. The plot is structured like this: a new cat is introduced and sings a song, another cat is introduced and sings a song, yet another cat is introduced and sings… oh, you get the idea. “Cats” springs so many different characters on us that none of them are given enough time to be fleshed out… or perhaps we should say furred out. In fairness, it is trying to stay true to source material, but it winds up feeling less like a major motion picture and more like an extended episode of “The Masked Singer.” Of course, we’d much rather watch obscure celebrities in mascot costumes than a never-ending parade of “Jellicle Cats”.

#8: Some Songs Are Really Annoying

We get that “Cats” is one of the most influential stage musicals ever and Andrew Lloyd Webber is a respected composer, but let’s be honest. For every timeless song like “Memory,” there are several others that come off as dated, repetitive, or just plain strange. This film’s most obnoxious example is probably “Jellicle Songs for Jellicle Cats,” which is essentially five minutes of the ensemble belting out the words, “Jellicle Cats,” over and over and over again. Keep in mind that this is the opening number, which sets a cringe-worthy tone for the remainder of the runtime. A lot of these show tunes may’ve been celebrated back in their heyday, but they’ve since entered self-parody territory. So, why exactly did Hollywood choose now to bring “Cats” to the silver screen?

#7: The Pointless Live Singing

Just as he did in “Les Misérables,” Tom Hooper had all of his actors sing live on set for “Cats.” Although this approach came off as kind of gimmicky in “Les Mis,” it did amount to a few powerful moments, such as Anne Hathaway’s performance of “I Dreamed a Dream.” In “Cats,” however, the live singing is not only pointless, but does a disservice to some of the cast members. “Cats” is very choreography-heavy, but it appears as though not every actor here seems comfortable dancing and singing simultaneously. This could’ve been corrected if the vocals were recorded in a studio, but no, the movie is just too artsy for that. More than anything else, why have the cast sing live if you’re going to give them digital makeovers anyway?

#6: Too Sexy!

It’s hard to say if the sexual undertones were intentional or not, but this movie plays out like “Puss in Boots” meets “Showgirls.” Jason Derulo in particular gives a weirdly sexual performance as Rum Tum Tugger, whose name is already pretty suggestive in itself. It doesn’t help that most of the characters prance around seemingly naked while others confusingly get to wear clothes. We’re not sure if that makes things more or less awkward. All we do know is that when Idris Elba takes off his pimp coat, no-one’s really sure where to look! How did this get away without even a PG rating?

#5: The Bland Characters

As mentioned before, this movie is nothing but cats introducing themselves one by one. With so much exposition, there’s no room for anybody to really have a character arc, and none of the cats evolve beyond the one trait or quirk they’re given. Victoria is a wide-eyed innocent and that’s about it. Mr. Mistoffelees is a modest magician, although there’s nothing else to him. Grizabella is arguably a carbon copy of Fantine from “Les Mis”, albeit with more fur and whiskers. Since everyone’s a one-note archetype, it’s hard for the audience to get invested in these Jellicle Cats, their Jellicle Ball, or who will be the Jellicle Choice. Come to think of it, what does “Jellicle” even mean? These characters say it like a million times and we’re still clueless.

#4: It Wastes a Talented Cast

Ever since “Cats” hit theaters, more and more of its cast members have been distancing themselves from the project. James Corden even admitted that he never bothered watching the film because he heard it was “terrible.” That said, based on interviews and behind the scenes footage, the cast seemed to have had a ball making this movie… seemingly without any of them realizing quite how the final product could be received. It’s a shame since every performer here isextraordinarily talented, from Oscar-winners like Jennifer Hudson to rising stars like Francesca Hayward. When they’re hidden under all of that “digital fur,” though, the stars aren’t allowed to flourish. Also, how dare you take Sir Ian McKellen, a Shakespearean-trained, legendary actor, and reduce him to licking milk out of a saucer!

#3: The Painful Humor

Don’t get us wrong. “Cats” is a hilarious cinematic experience, but for all the wrong reasons. As you may’ve guessed, this movie contains so many lame cat gags that it almost makes Halle Berry’s Catwoman look subtle. The facepalmingly awful puns are just the tip of the litter box, though. One of the first cats we meet is Rebel Wilson’s Jennyanydots, who queues up a barrage of “fat cat” jokes. Then, if you think that’s lame and behind the times, James Corden appears shortly after as Bustopher Jones, another cat whose weight is constantly used as a punch line. What’s with this movie and fat cat shaming? We’d call it a cat-astrophe, but we’ve already heard one too many cat puns today.

#2: The Non-existent Story

So, what is the story exactly? The short version is that there isn’t one. The long version, well… there’s this tribe of Jellicle Cats – whatever that means – and one of them will be chosen by Old Deuteronomy to take a hot air balloon to the Heaviside Layer, thus starting a new life. We know that “Cats” is based on a collection of poems by T. S. Eliot… Saying the movie’s synopsis out loud, however, it sounds like something that some kinda cult leader could’ve come up with. Come to think of it, the Jellicle Cats behave in a very cult-like fashion, don’t they? Let’s just say that to fully understand this movie’s plot, you probably need a bit of catnip first, which we don’t recommend.

#1: That CGI

People knew that this movie was in trouble after the first trailer dropped, revealing the cats in all of their eye-gouging CGI glory. The filmmakers slightly tweaked the effects prior to the film’s release and even fixed a couple glitches while it was still in theaters. They needed to do A LOT more than just remove Judi Dench's human hand, though. Every character could’ve used a full redesign, ala “Sonic the Hedgehog.” Seriously, why would you give the cast fur, tails, and cat ears, but no cat noses or paws? Oh, and we haven’t even mentioned the mice or cockroaches. We feel bad because the visual effects team clearly tried to deliver something innovative. Alas, that ambition was lost on this dog of a film.