A Street Cat Named Bob

Dir: Roger Spottiswoode

2016

*

A Street Cat Named Bob is Marley & Me all over again. It's a lovely, uplifting story based on a book telling the true story of one man's struggle with homelessness and drug addiction and how a little Ginger Tom helped him overcome his problems. The book did well because it's a wonderful story but where there is a good book, there is a soulless film studio waiting around the corner looking to profit from it without truly respecting the real story. Okay, so Bob and partner James Bowen both agreed to it and also appear but even when I take my cynical hat off, this is nothing but a shameless cash in - done badly. Maybe not as bad as Marley & Me in terms of changing facts and tone to suit a family film but it skips over important issues regarding homelessness and is very lazy in how it deals with drug addiction. Bob the cat, who plays himself, is by far the best actor in the film and gives the best performance.  Luke Treadaway is awful, and Ruta Gedmintas and Joanne Froggatt aren't much better. It's like watching a group of RADA rejects putting on an am dram production of Trainspotting, but with a cat, directed by a dog. That may sound harsh but I'm not sorry, this is a shamelessly lazy adaptation with only money in mind, the sort of film that gets green lit by producers without them actually reading the book first. Roger Spottiswoode was the worst choice of director. i'm guessing he was hired because he was cheap and had some animal experience (Turner & Hooch). His cat's eye view direction was horrible to sit through and the man just doesn't know when to cut a scene. I'm not sure he's ever made a truly great film but he has many years’ experience, he should have been able to come up with something better than this. It's amateurish, not even good enough for very late night TV. The producers made out it was a Christmas film in the run up to its November release when it couldn't be further from a Christmas film. There is a Christmas scene in the film, shot in the sunshine with bright green leaves on trees in the background. Continuity wasn't considered at all. When the dialogue ran out, the camera just followed Bob, who just sat there for much of the film. It's one of the most contrived pieces of nonsense I have ever seen. I've seen James and Bob many times around Covent Garden, I like James's songs, although he was always more popular as a Big Issue seller. You don't see many cats in central London, so Bob was something of a novelty, but I wouldn't say people flocked to see him as suggested in the film. I'm very happy for James, but there is nothing unique about his story, other than most homeless people (and it should be said James didn't sleep on the streets for very long) don't have cats. Many have dogs but aren't seen as novelty. James is now a millionaire, and good for him, but take away the cat and it’s an age old story. There are many homeless people living rough out there who aren't given the opportunity, that don't have cats, and I'm afraid my cynical hat is back on my head. All that aside, the film is badly written and badly made in all ways. I recommend the book but certainly not the film.