'Are we not cats' is a low-budget feature. It's so low-budget that one could well assume that a fair deal of the budget went toward securing the admittedly excellent soundtrack, and not into aspects like sound design. The entire mix is so hushed - dialogue in particular - that one has to max out their volume to hear, well, pretty much anything; it doesn't help, either, that the cast's delivery is characterized by a lot of mumbling. It's the sort of low-budget feature that goes nowhere fast, and almost entirely declines any meaningful eventfulness - that character trait indicated in the premise doesn't even come into play in any way until the feature is already more than half over.
It's not just the overall narrative: character writing, dialogue, and scene writing feel so bereft as to be almost nonexistent. I suppose Michael Patrick Nicholson and Chelsea Lopez are to be commended for nuanced performances that realize their characters with more substance than the screenplay itself provides. At the same time, it's hard to assess acting in a movie this nonplussed about itself.
But there's one more thing: 'Are we not cats' has been described as fitting into the horror genre, and more specifically, playing with body horror. This is, actually, correct. However, the feature waits until we're within about 20 minutes of its conclusion before that element manifests. True, I think that scene is executed well, with all due cringe-worthiness. Does that alone justify the horror label?
As extremely understated and low-key as the picture is, I think I understand what writer-director Xander Robin intended here. And I appreciate that very underhanded, self-restrained approach. Why, to their credit, that one scene of horror is all it actually takes to tie the movie together - solidifying the narrative and conjuring the previously hidden value, like a reagent allowing invisible ink to appear. It's a neat trick, honestly, and in that regard, I'd be lying if I said I'm not impressed.
Still, I remain uncertain of the overall worth. I'll say this: 'Are we not cats' is not for a general audience. It's not for the average horror fan, nor even for the average connoisseur of body horror. This is for only the most open-minded and patient viewer who enjoys body horror, and who is receptive to the most emphatically quiet, subdued, modest, and minimalist of features. Even then, it's a stretch. But if everything I've written hasn't dissuaded you - well then, maybe this is the right picture for you, after all. I don't think it's bad - I actually kind of like it - but 'Are we not cats' is most assuredly a profoundly odd feature that cries for reevaluation of what "horror" can mean.
3 out of 3 found this helpful.
Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
