Anthony has done his best to distance himself from his family. He even moved out of the U.S. and opened a restaurant on another continent. Business wound up kind of sucking and when his best friend finds him and gives him the idea to start a detective agency he folds. Their first case, though, takes them further into danger than they ever expected.
I hate the word "derivative." In fact, the only time you'll ever see it used in one of my reviews is when I'm making fun of it. Why? Well, when a critic uses the word to describe a movie, they're basically just saying that the film was imitating another one. In a lot of cases, I find that it's less imitation and more inspiration. I mean, directors grow up watching movies and honed their styles in the memory of their favorites, right? So almost every one of them has been inspired by something someone else made. If a critic simply means the movie is cookie cutter or unimaginative – then they should just say that. I feel like it's just a word those people use to sound more elitist.
Cat Run was not well liked by critics. I think the lot of them were watching the wrong movie or something, because I thought the film was hilarious.
There's a lot of sex and nudity, but considering the main plot it makes sense for there to be a lot of sexuality. There was also the buddy- detective aspect because of the two main characters. Most of Cat Run actually seemed like an episode of Psyche with different actors. It did have some relatively original parts, though, and I thought the characters came alive through the actors.
There were some plot holes. The only one that I can mention without adding a spoiler alert, however, is that it's never explained why Anthony has such superior observation skills (his skills are revealed roughly 10 minutes into the movie). I would have liked to know the story behind it.
I hate the word "derivative." In fact, the only time you'll ever see it used in one of my reviews is when I'm making fun of it. Why? Well, when a critic uses the word to describe a movie, they're basically just saying that the film was imitating another one. In a lot of cases, I find that it's less imitation and more inspiration. I mean, directors grow up watching movies and honed their styles in the memory of their favorites, right? So almost every one of them has been inspired by something someone else made. If a critic simply means the movie is cookie cutter or unimaginative – then they should just say that. I feel like it's just a word those people use to sound more elitist.
Cat Run was not well liked by critics. I think the lot of them were watching the wrong movie or something, because I thought the film was hilarious.
There's a lot of sex and nudity, but considering the main plot it makes sense for there to be a lot of sexuality. There was also the buddy- detective aspect because of the two main characters. Most of Cat Run actually seemed like an episode of Psyche with different actors. It did have some relatively original parts, though, and I thought the characters came alive through the actors.
There were some plot holes. The only one that I can mention without adding a spoiler alert, however, is that it's never explained why Anthony has such superior observation skills (his skills are revealed roughly 10 minutes into the movie). I would have liked to know the story behind it.