Yesterday, Seth Rogen (I assume on the Cut’s recommendation) spent the evening watching the movie Cats. While we suggested using the Japanese drugstore foot treatment “Baby Foot” during viewing, Rogen decided to take drugs instead:
The results, which he livetweeted while watching, still made for a rather comprehensive and perceptive review of the film. Critics have described Cats, an adaptation of the Andrew Lloyd Webber musical, as everything from “not a catastrophe” to “bad” to “insane,” which was also the tone of the actor’s tweets.
And, while sporadic, Rogen’s observations did hit on some of the same inconsistencies that critical reviews of the film did. For example, he observed that the scale and size of the cats relative to their surroundings was illogical and erratic:
Furthermore, he noted inconsistencies when it came to cat nudity, as well as their disturbing physical characteristics:
Indeed, the appearance of the cats in Cats was a big issue upon its release, with the Wrap describing their appearance as “un-catty valley hybrid of physical and digital,” and the National Post noting that the “unsettling fur-covered quasi-nudity of the cats is a common theme among the professional film reviewer.” And their appearance is indeed unsettling: Some cats were given secondary sex characteristics, such as breasts, but none of the cats were given genitals. That’s not to say the film wasn’t overtly sexual. The Guardian, in fact, described the film as “an orgy of throbbing tales.”
Furthermore, it was revealed that a version of Cats in which the animals had buttholes once existed, but someone was allegedly hired for the express purpose of removing them:
In a final note to his review, Rogan called for the release of “the Butthole Cut of Cats!!” which led to the hashtag “#ReleaseTheButtholeCut” trending on Twitter.