There has been some anticipation for the cinematic adaptation of the monster Broadway hit musical “Cats”. Partly it was the anticipation on the part of fans of the show. In another sector, however, was another level of excitement — for an impending disaster.

The film was directed by Tom Hooper, who directed Le Miserables, and initially this was believed to become a potential awards season darling. But then problems arose.

When the initial trailers came out it caused viewers to recoil or mock the ludicrous visuals. Then when the studio mandated that the digital effects be repaired and improved it meant the film would miss the release window to qualify for major awards. Also, there was little in the way of advance screenings, with an embargo on reviews being placed, which was not lifted until last night.

With all these bad signs it was with anticipation that we waited for the reviews — and WOW, have they been scathing. It is remarkable to see an avalanche of common thoughts flooding in at once.

There is just so much coming out at once, and so little of it is impressive. Even the positive reviews seem to be of the same attitude: “Well, it is crazy as hell, but some stuff is…”

Meanwhile, those panning the film have their claws out.

You may need to wade through her subtext there, but I think she panned the film.

And that was from a rave review.

Perhaps the best blurb of all came out of Ireland.

In his review of the film, Matt Singer may have explained it best just in his spoiler alert at the top of his piece.

By some definitions, this article contains some minor SPOILERS for Cats. But seeing as how I could not explain the specifics of the movie if my actual life depended on it, we’re talking seriously minor spoilers. Can you spoil something you do not understand on any level?

This editor even tried to assist him with the summation.

Singer was kind enough to lend some clarity.

And with that, heading over to Fandango right now!