Cats (2019): Memory, turn your face to the moonlight

[DeadMech]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtSd844cI7U

So this trailer for an adaptation of Cats was released and I've just found out about it today. The youtube comments and like/dislike ratio aren't good. But perhaps I'll give a controversial opinion. I don't hate it.

Elephant in the room seems to be the cg applied to the actors and the uncanny valley effect. Many seem to feel it's uncomfortable and creepy. Of course that takes me back to my first memories of the televised performance I saw when I was young. I didn't particularly like that the first time I saw it either and always struck me as as being at some level uncomfortable. It bothers me less now and I honestly have a hard time imagining the visuals to a new version of the play that doesn't anger someone. I've seen suggestions of pixar style animated cartoon characters which I think would take away from the human performance of the theater. Or using similar physical costumes to the stage performance which I don't see making movie going crowds all that happy either with what would be likely, very obvious costumes.

As for the design of the characters in this outing I don't think it looks that bad. Maybe it's me watching it on a not so great computer monitor. Maybe it's my not so great eyes. I can tell that the cg isn't quite there but that's also common with trailers, the movie still being in the phase where editing may not be complete and cg still being tinkered with. A trailer release isn't a theatrical release. Though maybe it won't improve as much I would hope either.

I casually like a musical now and then though I'll admit I don't have the ear for music. I've heard at least some people say a performer in this trailer is flat but it sounds alright to me. Not an expert. I've heard people rumbling that some of the performers aren't known for being trained dancers and others aren't known for being trained singers. I can't comment per-say ther, I recognize almost all these names but ask me to tell you about their careers and I probably won't be able to tell you their biographies.

Being a screenplay instead of a stage play there are probably going to be alterations to the story and pacing as with any adaptation. There seems to be some hint to that in the trailer but I haven't seen the full play in a long time so I can't be sure. Though changes I'm not completely against. The first time I watched Cats I don't think I have a full understanding of what was going on and it's not something people would consider a plot heavy story. Though diving deeper into the Cats lore there seem to be allot of things that just watching the play I never would have picked up on but go on to explain quite a bit.

It's looking like a strange and maybe mesmerizing movie for what is admittedly a strange and mesmerizing play. Anyway. I'd love to read some other people's thoughts.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

Honestly, it looks like some sort of wild faerie romp, complete with requisite strangeness and alienness. I'm digging that quite a bit.

[False God]

Personally I thought it looked fine and only really bothered me when I forced myself to ignore what was going on and analyze people's faces. If I just sit back and enjoy it I don't even notice.

And frankly, "Cats" was always weird, like if a bunch of furries put on a KISS concert.

[Clertar]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D_ygMxjWwAEQ1y2?format=jpg&name=small

[Sermil]

I didn't think much of the singing. Memory has a LOT of high notes, and the singer didn't hit them, or she kinda talk-sang them.

You can be a great, professional singer and still not be able to sing soprano -- there's nothing wrong with that -- but they should get a soprano to sing Memory.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by DeadMech
Elephant in the room seems to be the cg applied to the actors and the uncanny valley effect. Many seem to feel it's uncomfortable and creepy.

huh. I watched it, wasn’t especially interested, but it never came across as creepy or uncomfortable. I’m not sure why people would think of it that way.

There are musicals I enjoy, but Cats was never one of them. My disinterest is just from a lack of any connection to the original. I like the CGI for its own sake; it reminds me of catfolk, which is hardly a bad thing.


Originally Posted by DeadMech
It's looking like a strange and maybe memorizing movie for what is admittedly a strange and memorizing play.

I think you mean “mesmerizing.” :smallsmile:


Originally Posted by CarpeGuitarrem
Honestly, it looks like some sort of wild faerie romp, complete with requisite strangeness and alienness.

Looked fairly tame and bland to me. People in CGI catsuits singing and dancing. Nothing like a real faerie revel.

[DeadMech]

I think you mean “mesmerizing.” :smallsmile:


Yeah probably. It was late when I was finishing this up and just trusting autocorrect to have my back.

[Bohandas]

The problem with the CGI isn't the uncanny valley, the problem is that they inexplicably chose not to use the CGI to make the characters actually look like cats.

There's also the seperate unrelated issue that the play, and presumably also this adaptation, gives undue focus to characters that weren't in the book.

[Darth Credence]

The problem with the CGI isn't the uncanny valley, the problem is that they inexplicably chose not to use the CGI to make the characters actually look like cats.

There's also the seperate unrelated issue that the play, and presumably also this adaptation, gives undue focus to characters that weren't in the book.

The choreography of the play precludes them actually looking like cats - it was made for humans in cat suits, so they are going to ultimately look like humans in cat suits.

[False God]

The choreography of the play precludes them actually looking like cats - it was made for humans in cat suits, so they are going to ultimately look like humans in cat suits.

Honestly a Zootopia-esque 100% CGI would at best relegate this to 'Cats Dont Dance pt2'.

[sleepy hedgehog]

I agree, I thought it looked purrfectly fine.

I think my only complaint is about how pronounced the lips are.
It looks fine/blends in on most of the calico characters.
And on the older characters it gets toned down.
But it's excessive, going on distracting, when it doesn't match the fur color; like on the pure white, (main?), character.

Can't comment on the sound since I don't have speakers at work.

(Unrelated but, I spent like 10 minutes debating whether to say people, or cats, before deciding on characters.)

[Wraith]

My biggest gripe is that someone keeps giving work to James Cordon. :smallsigh:

In general though; The CGI is a bit wonky, some of the actors have clearly been picked for star power rather than singing ability, and the original story wasn't that good to begin with in order to warrant a full-length feature film... But all of that is generally true of any big blockbuster musical.

I won't go and see it, because I don't like Cats. I expect that if you're already a fan you'll love it though, so more power to you.

[DomaDoma]

I was seriously disappointed by the original, because I came in from the T.S. Eliot book and figured Webber would connect the fairly obvious dots and make it into a tale of a Grand Unified Kitty Underworld. But no, never mind the subtext and cross-references, apparently Andrew Lloyd Webber didn't even catch the part where Macavity is supposed to be "outwardly respectable."

And now Ian McKellen is Gus the Theatre Cat and not even the general deference to Sir Ian is going to make this dream a reality. Sigh.

[Bohandas]

I was seriously disappointed by the original, because I came in from the T.S. Eliot book and figured Webber would connect the fairly obvious dots and make it into a tale of a Grand Unified Kitty Underworld. But no, never mind the subtext and cross-references, apparently Andrew Lloyd Webber didn't even catch the part where Macavity is supposed to be "outwardly respectable."

Plus the play made the whole plot revolve around Grizabella, who isn't even in the book at all.


The choreography of the play precludes them actually looking like cats - it was made for humans in cat suits, so they are going to ultimately look like humans in cat suits.

If it came down to it they could just ditch the human mo-cap actors and associated choreography entirely.

They could use fully CGI cats like the ones in the remake of The Lion King.

Motion capture is like so 10 years ago anyway.

[Darth Tom]

I'm cautiously optimistic. It's Cats, so as long as they do the songs well and throw in some fun choreography, I'll be easily pleased. My first reaction to the trailer was that the way they CG'd it was a bit creepy, but it's the sort of thing I don't notice after a few minutes.

[DomaDoma]

Plus the play made the whole plot revolve around Grizabella, who isn't even in the book at all.


I wouldn't dignify the production with the name of "plot". But Grizabella does get the best song and the big redemption, and as such I would by no means take her out of my Cats As It Should Have Been fantasy. Think about it: if Gus is the main character - and, whether he tries bringing back Growltiger or the one involving the Indian Colonel, that makes him the main character in Grand Unified Kitty Underworld, with his one last bid for fame landing him way over his head in intrigues - then Grizabella is everything Gus fears becoming. Don't tell me you couldn't make her a pivotal figure.

[Darth Credence]

Plus the play made the whole plot revolve around Grizabella, who isn't even in the book at all.
Grizabella was written for the book, but was cut because her story was too sad for a children's book. Eliot's widow passed this on to ALW. I therefore am perfectly fine with her having a big role, and I was also raised on Old Possum's book as my favorite bed time story.



If it came down to it they could just ditch the human mo-cap actors and associated choreography entirely.

They could use fully CGI cats like the ones in the remake of The Lion King.

Motion capture is like so 10 years ago anyway.

If they did that, it wouldn't be Cats. Cats is about the dancing and singing and spectacle - remove the dancing and you have something else. Whether that would be better or worse is up to the individual, but it just wouldn't be Cats.

[Giggling Ghast]

I thought about this, and I’ve decided there are two reasons why people really hate this trailer (including myself). Besides the uncanny valley factor of turning recognizable actors into CGI cat people, I think the decision to make them nude cat people adds an uncomfortable sexual element to the whole thing.

When CATS is performed on stage, the actors are clothed, albeit in costumes. But here, the point-of-view character is an attractive dancer who looks she’s nekkid except for her CGI cat fur and whiskers. I’ve noticed in some reaction videos on YouTube that some people have a visibly disturbed reaction to that scene where she twirls around, displaying her kitty treats.

Plus, if they’re cats, shouldn’t they have, like, multiple nipples? It just raises a whole lot of questions.

[Sholos]

I never really got a sexual vibe at all. And if you've ever seen a cats belly, you'd know you can't see the nipples through the fur.

And the suits look like exactly what I'd expect walking into a ballet. I imagine people disgusted have just never seen a dancer in a unitard or leotard before. Or are overly sensitive about that sort of thing.

[Clertar]

If they did that, it wouldn't be Cats. Cats is about the dancing and singing and spectacle - remove the dancing and you have something else. Whether that would be better or worse is up to the individual, but it just wouldn't be Cats.

But they could do it in a much more artistic and interesting way. Something great about the Lion King musical is the way animal masks and props are built, with a very sub-saharan African aesthetics, taking inspiration from African masks, totems and dance clothing. Was there really no non-CGI good way to represent the cats in Cats as people? How cats would see each other the way we see each other as humans. Which is most likely not like tiny furry corny humans.

[Giggling Ghast]

And if you've ever seen a cats belly, you'd know you can't see the nipples through the fur.

A two-second Google image search informs me otherwise.

[Sholos]

A two-second Google image search informs me otherwise.

Maybe when they're actively lactating? But I've never seen nipples on a non-lactating cat's belly with pushing the fur aside, and that includes shorthairs.

[DeadMech]

I think the decision to make them nude cat people adds an uncomfortable sexual element to the whole thing.

When CATS is performed on stage, the actors are clothed, albeit in costumes. But here, the point-of-view character is an attractive dancer who looks she’s nekkid except for her CGI cat fur and whiskers.

That's not much different than the stage show. Victoria's actress wears a tight dancers leotard and early in the performance performs a solo ballet that shows off her body. And later on in the performance she shares centerstage with one of the male cats to perform a provocative dance. I've read that her character is a young cat going through puberty so you know... Potentially uncomfortable sexual undertones there as well.

[False God]

That's not much different than the stage show. Victoria's actress wears a tight dancers leotard and early in the performance performs a solo ballet that shows off her body. And later on in the performance she shares centerstage with one of the male cats to perform a provocative dance. I've read that her character is a young cat going through puberty so you know... Potentially uncomfortable sexual undertones there as well.

When you get down to it, a lot of ballet and theater is done in skin-tight leo/unitards. Honestly this isn't any more uncomfortable than watching Swan Lake.

As for the underage undertones...I mean, thats like 90% of media involving women these days. Not saying it's OK, just saying we can't jump all over Cats for it any more than anyone else.

[DeadMech]

Not saying it's OK, just saying we can't jump all over Cats for it any more than anyone else.

not my intention to judge on those grounds. The characters are animals afterall, not people. And as far as I know the actors and actresses all all adults and professionals.

[Braininthejar2]

Ian Mc Kelled as Gus is beautiful and very sad.

Judie Dench as Old Deuteronomy is... wtf... she's a great actress, but... wtf?

[False God]

Ian Mc Kelled as Gus is beautiful and very sad.

Judie Dench as Old Deuteronomy is... wtf... she's a great actress, but... wtf?

I wonder if the pitch to these actors was "Hey, wanna see what you look like CGIed as a cat?"

[Giggling Ghast]

When you get down to it, a lot of ballet and theater is done in skin-tight leo/unitards. Honestly this isn't any more uncomfortable than watching Swan Lake.

Yeah, but those are still people wearing costumes. This is more like Pokemon erotica — it's the inexplicable intersection between two paths that never should have crossed.

But I don't want to keep hammering on this point, so I'll leave you folks to enjoy your sexy catfolk. Just be careful not to let them awaken anything inside you. :smalltongue:

[Bohandas]

If they did that, it wouldn't be Cats. Cats is about the dancing and singing and spectacle - remove the dancing and you have something else. Whether that would be better or worse is up to the individual, but it just wouldn't be Cats.

Humanoid shape and dance is an idiosyncrasy of the Broadway format, not an essential piece of the story. In fact, it seems relatively clear from the story and even clearer in the book that they are meant to be actual cats and not merely generic zoomorphic humanoids of the sort seen in many cartoons.

[Vinyadan]

The thing that makes me wary is how the director is the same of the movie rendition of Les Misérables, which was very hammy and featured some imho bad or unsuitable singing (Crowe in particular, Jackman too). Also enormous backgrounds that didn't really go anywhere.

As for nekkid kittens, I can't say that I care. They're essentially just wearing suits and a lot of makeup. Breasts are invisible, you may catch a muffled line of their upper butts, but that's not too different from watching volleyball, and it's covered by the tails. Pity for choosing someone that beautiful and covering up her face, though; but then, a musical is about the whole body, not the face, and focus on the face is a general failure on the side of cinema when adapting musicals.

It worries me that Taylor Swift is in the cast, because, as far as I have seen, she cannot act. But then, maybe she can sing.

Also, this rendition of Memory: just scream through it, notes don't matter. The heck?

[Darth Credence]

Humanoid shape and dance is an idiosyncrasy of the Broadway format, not an essential piece of the story. In fact, it seems relatively clear from the story and even clearer in the book that they are meant to be actual cats and not merely generic zoomorphic humanoids of the sort seen in many cartoons.

The book is not the play. The play is about the singing and dancing, and the dancing requires them to have human bodies. This absolutely, positively, is essential - the play is not about a story, it's about the spectacle. Making them into actual cats would not allow for the same choreography, which would make it not the same play.
If you want to watch a movie about real cats singing and dancing, watch The Lion King. If you want to watch Cats, then they have to be humanoid.

[LaZodiac]

It worries me that Taylor Swift is in the cast, because, as far as I have seen, she cannot act. But then, maybe she can sing.


Deadass laughing my ass off at this comment in particular.

Taylor swift is a famous musician and you're like "maybe she can sing?"

[Bohandas]

The book is not the play.

And by the same token the play is not the movie


Deadass laughing my ass off at this comment in particular.

Taylor swift is a famous musician and you're like "maybe she can sing?"

Isn't she a pop musician though?

[Darth Credence]

And by the same token the play is not the movie

They are adapting the play to film. They are not adapting the book.

[LaZodiac]

Isn't she a pop musician though?

That is what makes it funnier.

I'll leave it to you whether it's a positive or a negative addition, but the end result is that it's funnier inherently.

[Psyren]

I wouldn't dignify the production with the name of "plot".

This. For those interested, here's a brief summary of Cats:

https://i.imgur.com/d55XiYK.jpg

And here's a background on the production:

https://i.imgur.com/v0ASNu7.jpg

[Giggling Ghast]

Also, one of the cats is a master criminal and another is a wizard, Harry.

[Psyren]

Also, one of the cats is a master criminal and another is a wizard, Harry.

Got 'em both in there.

[LaZodiac]

The cat that is a criminal is implied to be on the run from the actual human Scotland Yard, and says he's murdered people.

In another universe there's a show about Scotland Yard where their main antagonist is just a regular ass cat and no one bats an eye at this.

[Dragonus45]

Humanoid shape and dance is an idiosyncrasy of the Broadway format, not an essential piece of the story. In fact, it seems relatively clear from the story and even clearer in the book that they are meant to be actual cats and not merely generic zoomorphic humanoids of the sort seen in many cartoons.

And the stupendous ballet choreography is absolutely as essential part of CATS, you change that and you are just making something totally different. The show is much more an experience then it is a plot.

[Bohandas]

The show is much more an experience then it is a plot.

I know a couple of people have commented here about the film looking risque, but this description more than anything else makes it sound like porn.

[False God]

I know a couple of people have commented here about the film looking risque, but this description more than anything else makes it sound like porn.

How....do you figure that, like at all?

[Dragonus45]

I know a couple of people have commented here about the film looking risque, but this description more than anything else makes it sound like porn.

Yea, you could say its song and dance porn the same way you could call some movies gun porn.

[Bohandas]

How....do you figure that, like at all?

Because in both the plot is just a flimsy excuse to watch what the audience really came to see.

EDIT:
Note to self: Idea for play- routine pizza delivery somehow turns into a dance competition

[False God]

Because in both the plot is just a flimsy excuse to watch what the audience really came to see.

When your argument could apply to everything your argument applies to nothing.

It sounds more like you want to dump on this movie and call it porn because you want to call it porn and for no other reason.

[Durkoala]

To be fair, Neil Gaiman has also put forward* the view that pornos and musicals have similar plots that mostly exist to get you from one sex scene/song to the next.

*The Pornography of Genre, or the Genre of Pornography in The View from the Cheap Seats.

While looking up the title, I found that Gaiman got the idea from 'an excellent study of hard-core ponographic movies' Hard Core by Linda Williams, so I'm including that in the name of giving credit to a rightful creator of the idea.

[Psyren]

When your argument could apply to everything your argument applies to nothing.

But it doesn't apply to everything. There are musicals that are narratively-focused, that have a meaningful story to tell. Cats is not such a musical, and that's the parallel he's drawing with other excuse-plot forms of entertainment. Clearly that hasn't hurt its popularity any.

In both cases the main draw are the visuals/aesthetics. That of course doesn't do the remake any favors, since what was stunning on stage in the early 80s is probably not going to be all that visually arresting on screen in the late 2010s - as we saw with the trailer reactions.


To be fair, Neil Gaiman has also put forward* the view that pornos and musicals have similar plots that mostly exist to get you from one sex scene/song to the next.

*The Pornography of Genre, or the Genre of Pornography in The View from the Cheap Seats.

Interesting, I'll have to look that up.

[Bohandas]

what was stunning on stage in the early 80s is probably not going to be all that visually arresting on screen in the late 2010s

That's an understatememt. It's either going to be a complete snoozefest or else keep the audience's attention solely due to how much of a trainwreck it is.

They should have taken the opportunity of the movie format to add character designs that look good and an actual plot.

[The Glyphstone]

That's an understatememt. It's either going to be a complete snoozefest or else keep the audience's attention solely due to how much of a trainwreck it is.

They should have taken the opportunity of the movie format to add character designs that look good and an actual plot.

Wouldn't that just drive away the existing potential fanbase (Cats fans/musical fans) with no guarantee it'll be interesting to the average moviegoer?

[Psyren]

Wouldn't that just drive away the existing potential fanbase (Cats fans/musical fans) with no guarantee it'll be interesting to the average moviegoer?

Sounds like a great reason to just not remake the dang thing at all :smalltongue:
Cats' success more than anything else was driven by the costume design and the stage direction (movement) of the actors, none of which are novel today and certainly wouldn't be novel on film. The songs were bland and barely coherent, the plot and setting nonexistent, and the characters unmemorable besides having funny names.

But this is what happens when brand recognition greenlights movies rather than having a more substantial/artistic rationale.

[Mechalich]

The songs were bland and barely coherent

I'd argue that the songs are catchy and whimsical, as they are intended to be, designed to invoke and draw the audience into the fairy tale atmosphere of the production. Only Memory - which is not based on the TS Eliot poems - is intended to be emotionally evocative. The songs are fine, for what they are intended to do.

I do think Cats is an odd and generally poor choice for an adaptation though, and particularly for an adaptation of this nature. It is possible to make a successful movie musical with barely any plot that just gets a bunch of celebrities together to sing songs, especially when the music in question appeals to an older demographic - they made two Mamma Mia! musicals and both made money and that was built around ABBA. There are also three Pitch Perfect films and any number of animated musicals (Trolls, Sing, etc.). Cats though is just so unusual and lacks and easily explained framing device, and doing it live-action presents the inevitable visual issues that everyone commented on regarding the trailers, that making it to work would require threading a particular needle and it just doesn't look like that's happened.

Also, for some extremely bizarre reason Cats is opening on the same day as The Rise of Skywalker, which is either pure madness or the greatest move in the history of counter-programming. Also, it seems like that this Christmas will feature dueling disasters at the box office.

[Vinyadan]

Only Memory - which is not based on the TS Eliot poems - is intended to be emotionally evocative.

Memory is based on TSE's poems, specifically the Rhapsody on a Windy Night (https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/44215/rhapsody-on-a-windy-night). The book with the cats is something of an outlier in Eliot's production*, however, so it's not strange that you didn't recognise the style.

*Now waiting for someone to drop a 500 pages essay on my head explaining why the book with the cats is actually a typical Elliotian work.

[Mechalich]

Memory is based on TSE's poems, specifically the Rhapsody on a Windy Night (https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/44215/rhapsody-on-a-windy-night). The book with the cats is something of an outlier in Eliot's production*, however, so it's not strange that you didn't recognise the style.

Well, I meant that it's not based on the poems collected in Old Possum's Book of Practical Cats, which is a fairly self contained thing, and the connection between Memory and Rhapsody on a Windy Night is considerably looser than those of the Old Possum's poems, many of which are practically line-by-line renditions.

[Lvl 2 Expert]

Nice find. I didn't know about this yet either.

My first reaction was "of course they're doing this. In fact, it has taken them quite long, many of the really big musicals get their film adaption much earlier".

Then I watched the trailer, and I think it shows why it took so long. You can't do this as a full on effects movie with actual cats, but you need to differentiate the movie enough from just a recording of the stage play as well. So all you're left with is a middle ground, and it's, well, pretty weird. (One could argue that they could leave out the musical aspect altogether and just adapt the book, but that would be like developing a Pirates of the Caribbean game based on the Disneyland show/ride/thing rather than the super famous movies. People remember the musical, because it was good, so that's what they're adapting.) I don't know if they've found the right middle ground, but the shot of them jumping on the bed for instance looks kind of promising, playful, and yet not something you could quite do as well on a stage.

I am mildly hopeful for them including professional singers and dancers in the cast, I'm super excited for some reason for Idris Elba as what looks like the cool mister villain cat with the jazzy song about him and while it's kind of disorienting to see mr big head honcho cat being played by a woman, Judi Dench is pretty much the perfect candidate for a role like that. If anything there's almost too much of a star studded cast of people who will shine when their moment is there, that could leave other scenes feeling a bit bland if done carelessly.

I suspect there will be some changes to the plot. Or rather, I suspect there will be a plot. I don't really know where to place white ballerina cat in the story as I remember it, but she gets a lot of attention throughout the trailer, so she will probably have some kind of story that guides us through everything else. Maybe she's a stray cat from somewhere else who runs into these guys, needing to have everything explained to her like a proper straight man character, and then playing some role in stopping the villain just in time for the reprise of Memory and the send off scene, with just enough time in between for her to decide that she's not competing for a new life because she already found it?

As for the rendition of Memory, as the trailer song they probably wanted it to stand out from the version people remember. They might play around with it a bit more (or less) in the film itself. I just hope they can refrain from bringing it up every ten minutes and making the whole thing into Memory the musical.

Will I see it? I don't see a lot of stuff in cinema, I'm not really the target audience maybe, so most likely not. But it looks like it might be cool, maybe...

[Darth Credence]

I assume that the white cat is Victoria, the same white cat from the play. That's the biggest dancing role in the play, and I assume will be the biggest dancing role in the movie.

[Lvl 2 Expert]

I assume that the white cat is Victoria, the same white cat from the play. That's the biggest dancing role in the play, and I assume will be the biggest dancing role in the movie.

Ah right, good to hear it's just my memory that's failing. (Well, their Memory too, depending on who you ask...)



Or bad maybe, as I sounded kind of excited about new additions up there...

[Vinyadan]

Ah right, good to hear it's just my memory that's failing. (Well, their Memory too, depending on who you ask...)



Or bad maybe, as I sounded kind of excited about new additions up there...

Maybe they'll have Ian McKellen play an old cat with a brownish coat that travels on a sleigh pulled by rabbits while smoking pot to drive the dogs away, and call him Radagast? :smallbiggrin:

[Lvl 2 Expert]

Maybe they'll have Ian McKellen play an old cat with a brownish coat that travels on a sleigh pulled by rabbits while smoking pot to drive the dogs away, and call him Radagast? :smallbiggrin:

No, Gus I actually remember.


I think it's because I mostly know Cats from a tape we had of it/the songs. Dancing roles just don't come across the same way...

(Also, it's pretty nice that some of these guys have names I can use without looking them up or butchering them bad enough that they're unrecognisable.)

[Bohandas]

The choreography of the play precludes them actually looking like cats - it was made for humans in cat suits, so they are going to ultimately look like humans in cat suits.

They could at least give them cat faces.

[Lethologica]

They could at least give them cat faces.
Once it's established that we're necessarily dealing with anthro cats, there isn't a strong argument to make one way or the other about where exactly on the furry scale they should fall.