(Weary Sigh....Spoilers)
I'm unable to comprehend the fact that the majority of viewers of this film give nothing less than perhaps a 6-8 out of 10. I finally watched it. I am a cat lover. I'll get that fact out of the way right now. I am also pushing middle age (46 this October), so by no means am I a kid, alright?
I thought this was a crock of excrement. And it really didn't have to be. It could have been SO many things. THE PLAGUE DOGS? THAT is a compassionate statement against the evils of humans using, enslaving, exploiting, torturing and murdering animals.
They wanted to make a movie about cats and have it be realistic with some disturbing content? It could have been a historical account of the evolution of cats, from their glory in ancient Egypt to their persecution during the ages of superstition to present day.
I'm not opposed to "adult animated" flicks. I rode my first dragon at the age of 12 when I watched WATERSHIP DOWN and THE SECRET OF NIMH for the first times. And both of those movies fascinate me to this day. I just re-watched the bunnies the other day and they still hold up. John Hurt rocks!
I am not a prude. I write erotica, and as a matter of fact, I found the kitty style scene LOL funny, especially when they both...um...finish...and yell out, "Aw yeah!" Besides, what do you SEE? No boobies or man-bits, right? The sex was so much less offensive to me than the other content. I found it hilarious that some reviewers have praised the gore and violent images but said the mating scene went "a bit too far."
Not even some of the gruesome imagery or nightmarish visions that Francis had were so horrid that they bothered me. At least not the nightmares. We'll go further on that in a moment.
OK so what's my problem? My problems are multiple with this film:
First and most obvious, is that unless Francis suddenly changed his name to Freddy Kreuger, there's no way he could EVISCERATE Pascal/Claud, with ONE swipe of his claws. It is ABSOLUTELY LUDICROUS that a cat's guts will spill out everywhere, and that you can see his rib cage, AND THAT HE IS STILL TALKING!
I love and respect cats, and I find them clever, personable, even trainable in some cases, but a cat "learning" to type on a computer by watching a human? A cat keeping a DATABASE of all the cats in the neighbourhood? JUST HOW MUCH DOES THIS "FILM NOIR" THINK IT CAN INSULT MY INTELLIGENCE? I wish I was allowed to cuss on IMDb because I have a few choice words. It is an understatement to say that this movie is an inconsistent spazz. It can't decide what to do with itself. It wants to be a murder mystery, a horror, a eugenics sci- fi...WHAT?! A super-intelligent cat who made a premeditated decision to kill a human, then constructs a plan to "breed out" all inferior cats, and take cats back to their "roots"? Give me a break!
As if we didn't have enough crazy to contend with, a completely different character is a cat "preacher" who leads some cult of cats who worship some deceased legend. These felines gather in honour of their diety and yell out, "Hallelujah!" and some of them commit suicide by throwing themselves into some electrical shock device...And I thought the Jonestown and Heaven's Gate people were nuts.
Yet a couple more characters are supposed cats depicted in idiotic fashion. One of them, Kong (how original) looks more like a mutant bulldog, his lower jaw hanging way past his upper. And pray tell, are the "neutered" cats INTENTIONALLY drawn to look like inbred, cross- eyed psychos? What is this film trying to say to everyone? That spaying/neutering is "immoral"? Believe you me, I've had psychos TELL me that! I poop you not!
I had no problem with the plot. New cat moves into neighborhood, meets a gruff neighbor cat named Bluebeard. Francis appoints himself the neighborhood "Sherlock" and interviews different cats, has some horrific visions, learns about Darwinism, meets a seductive but odd looking cat who tells him that her kind are a breed both "old and new".
Intriguing stuff, honestly, but the execution of this story is FAIL. It's like 2 films I like (WATERSHIP DOWN and NIMH) got together and this mutant child came out. This movie was trying so hard to be "dark, twisted, gory, adult," etc. It was so transparent how "cool and edgy" the film was trying to be, using a few cuss words and clumsy dark humour.
I'm not an idiot. I know when there is a sincere use of gore to tell a story and when gore is being used purely for shock value. And why a gruesome decapitation of the sweetest, most likable character in the movie???
Cats might be clever and independent and retain some feral qualities even in their lives with humans, but cats don't type, don't read, don't spell, and don't concoct elaborate plans to conquer or destroy humans, they don't go around "murdering" because someone "knows too much".
I'm unable to comprehend the fact that the majority of viewers of this film give nothing less than perhaps a 6-8 out of 10. I finally watched it. I am a cat lover. I'll get that fact out of the way right now. I am also pushing middle age (46 this October), so by no means am I a kid, alright?
I thought this was a crock of excrement. And it really didn't have to be. It could have been SO many things. THE PLAGUE DOGS? THAT is a compassionate statement against the evils of humans using, enslaving, exploiting, torturing and murdering animals.
They wanted to make a movie about cats and have it be realistic with some disturbing content? It could have been a historical account of the evolution of cats, from their glory in ancient Egypt to their persecution during the ages of superstition to present day.
I'm not opposed to "adult animated" flicks. I rode my first dragon at the age of 12 when I watched WATERSHIP DOWN and THE SECRET OF NIMH for the first times. And both of those movies fascinate me to this day. I just re-watched the bunnies the other day and they still hold up. John Hurt rocks!
I am not a prude. I write erotica, and as a matter of fact, I found the kitty style scene LOL funny, especially when they both...um...finish...and yell out, "Aw yeah!" Besides, what do you SEE? No boobies or man-bits, right? The sex was so much less offensive to me than the other content. I found it hilarious that some reviewers have praised the gore and violent images but said the mating scene went "a bit too far."
Not even some of the gruesome imagery or nightmarish visions that Francis had were so horrid that they bothered me. At least not the nightmares. We'll go further on that in a moment.
OK so what's my problem? My problems are multiple with this film:
First and most obvious, is that unless Francis suddenly changed his name to Freddy Kreuger, there's no way he could EVISCERATE Pascal/Claud, with ONE swipe of his claws. It is ABSOLUTELY LUDICROUS that a cat's guts will spill out everywhere, and that you can see his rib cage, AND THAT HE IS STILL TALKING!
I love and respect cats, and I find them clever, personable, even trainable in some cases, but a cat "learning" to type on a computer by watching a human? A cat keeping a DATABASE of all the cats in the neighbourhood? JUST HOW MUCH DOES THIS "FILM NOIR" THINK IT CAN INSULT MY INTELLIGENCE? I wish I was allowed to cuss on IMDb because I have a few choice words. It is an understatement to say that this movie is an inconsistent spazz. It can't decide what to do with itself. It wants to be a murder mystery, a horror, a eugenics sci- fi...WHAT?! A super-intelligent cat who made a premeditated decision to kill a human, then constructs a plan to "breed out" all inferior cats, and take cats back to their "roots"? Give me a break!
As if we didn't have enough crazy to contend with, a completely different character is a cat "preacher" who leads some cult of cats who worship some deceased legend. These felines gather in honour of their diety and yell out, "Hallelujah!" and some of them commit suicide by throwing themselves into some electrical shock device...And I thought the Jonestown and Heaven's Gate people were nuts.
Yet a couple more characters are supposed cats depicted in idiotic fashion. One of them, Kong (how original) looks more like a mutant bulldog, his lower jaw hanging way past his upper. And pray tell, are the "neutered" cats INTENTIONALLY drawn to look like inbred, cross- eyed psychos? What is this film trying to say to everyone? That spaying/neutering is "immoral"? Believe you me, I've had psychos TELL me that! I poop you not!
I had no problem with the plot. New cat moves into neighborhood, meets a gruff neighbor cat named Bluebeard. Francis appoints himself the neighborhood "Sherlock" and interviews different cats, has some horrific visions, learns about Darwinism, meets a seductive but odd looking cat who tells him that her kind are a breed both "old and new".
Intriguing stuff, honestly, but the execution of this story is FAIL. It's like 2 films I like (WATERSHIP DOWN and NIMH) got together and this mutant child came out. This movie was trying so hard to be "dark, twisted, gory, adult," etc. It was so transparent how "cool and edgy" the film was trying to be, using a few cuss words and clumsy dark humour.
I'm not an idiot. I know when there is a sincere use of gore to tell a story and when gore is being used purely for shock value. And why a gruesome decapitation of the sweetest, most likable character in the movie???
Cats might be clever and independent and retain some feral qualities even in their lives with humans, but cats don't type, don't read, don't spell, and don't concoct elaborate plans to conquer or destroy humans, they don't go around "murdering" because someone "knows too much".