Waste of time

This movie is the proof that the world is becoming a sick and dumb place

It's an amazing and heartbreaking story.

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

As a long-time animation fan, I sincerely believed I had never seen this film before recently obtaining a video, then a "flashback" much like a recovered, repressed memory hit during the song "Bubbles"..... So, I saw the movie somewhere in my childhood, but have no fond memories or nostalgia about it.Part of me sincerely wants to like this film. There's something in it for young and old, the music is superbly rendered, and the plot will appeal to younger children without being insulting to their intellect, though it may be a bit much for, say, those under eight or ten. And the characters have Chuck Jones' DNA all over them--anyone familiar with his later work with Warner Brothers, "How the Grinch Stole Christmas," etc., will see all the signature expressions, facial builds, movement flow, etc.That being said, however, the picture has several problems. Don't let Warner Brothers logos fool you; this is a UPA animation project, and it entails all the grainy, "low-budget" feel UPA was famous for (think Mr. Magoo or early Japanese anime). It works in its own novel way in this film, but anyone who has grown up in the CGI era that has brought us The Simpsons, Wall-E, Lilo and Stitch, Cars, Up, Tangled, Wallace & Gromit, Beauty & The Beast, etc. is likely to look at this and scream "Are they kidding?" Furthermore, although the musical talent was excellent in this picture (even on low-tech videotape, the songs come off superbly rendered, among the best animation has ever offered), the pacing of the movie and its music hearkens right back to the movies of the Fifties, Forties, and earlier where the movies were musicals that served more as vehicles for the musical soundtrack, not the other way around. If you go into this expecting the big musical where they continually interrupt the story to sing another song, you'll do fine, but many contemporary children may get fidgety and think "get on with it already!" All told, I don't want to discourage this film. But I suggest that any viewer, over fifty years after it was made, consider the cinematic perspective of the time in which it was released, just as one should with any other decades-old film, animated or not.

I love this movie because the cats are so cute. To me this movie feels like a Golden Era Hollywood musical that got turned into a cartoon with music. Judy Garland's singing is superb. She hit all of her notes and the other voice over actors are good too. The artwork is very French and I liked the clip where Mewsette was being shown in multiple paintings. Major French artists got to have their works represented to children. There is not much violence so kids can easily watch this movie. I don't think this movie could ever be remade because the talent was there behind the scenes and on camera. It's not easy to make a film about singing cats and keep my attention. But they were able.

Judy Garland, Robert Goulet, and Red Buttons lent their voices to this animated movie about a cat, Mewsette, that dreams about leaving the French countryside to see the bright lights of Paris. When she gets a chance to hop on to the back of the car of her owner going there, she takes it. When Jaune-Tom (another cat obviously), voiced by Goulet, finds out she's gone, he must go after her. He may never see her again! That's okay with his buddy, voiced by Red Buttons. She was always in the way of him wanting to hang out and have fun with Tom. Tom did seem interested in Mewsette, but showed it only by bringing dead rats to her and she was unimpressed by such tactics, while probably secretly liking him but not his uncouth, un-Paris-like ways. Such are the temperaments in this tale of love and excitement in a cat's world in France. Then there's adventures abound for Mewsette in Paris and for Jaune-Tom and buddy looking for her on the way to Paris. I thought I remembered liking this years ago, but seeing it recently, I felt it to be an odd mixture of art-like animation and simple juvenile-type humor. But is this geared towards adults or children? Children are the ones who will tire of this first, as this doesn't really grab you in the beginning. Instead it relies too much on the charm and talent of its stars, but that will be lost on children, particularly young children, who won't like the singing slowing down the picture. Adults, who love the singing style of its stars, Garland and Goulet, may like its romanticism and feeling somewhat chic, and at the same time moody, but may be feel something's lacking. Also, its silly resolution doesn't really fit in or mix well with the supposed mystique of Paris and L'Amour, L'Amour. Paul Frees gives a particularly good performance as the film's villain; one could say his hammy, over-the-top performance steals the show. Parents, who aren't Garland fans, who see this for their children may be minimally pleased. Children may like its quaintness, but won't be overjoyed by it. Judy Garland fans, who try to find everything she ever did, will probably be more impressed with it than most everybody else. Its major flaws are its ending and the lack of three-dimensional characters. But, maybe if you can find this little film, you can find more than meets the eye in Gay Purr-ee.

This movie is marvelous. The story is "girl-rejects-boy; girl-gets-into-trouble; boy-rescues-girl; all-live-happily-after." Very romantically satisfying. Paul Frees' voice is perfect for Meowrice, as is Robert Goulet's for Jeune-Tom. Judy Garland's voice is in fine fettle as Mewsette. The impressionist drawing and background style is unique. I've never seen another like it.This is one of those movies parents can allow their children to enjoy without fear of their being exposed to too much sex and violence. On the other hand, adults can enjoy it, also, on a different level.We still watch it regularly 3 or 4 times a year.