It’s a small wonder why this movie hasn’t been made up until now. When you come to think of it the story is just too obvious to pass up, staring us right in the face. Well it’s happened and its done rather well both sides of the water, financially anyway, while it isn’t going to be near Shrek’s massive gross its set to gross over $100m in the US and it beat off Rush Hour 2 in the opening weekend. Also while Shrek had the cash and the good reviews Cats and Dogs has had mixed reviews, some calling it the dogs…well you know and others saying its none other than the cats poop tray. You’ll know what I think of it, you’ve seen my rating already, but before I let you in on what’s, well, bad about it, I’ll give the obligatory background info.

It starts with an uninspiring, but mildly amusing chase between a cat and a dog in a typically American neighbourhood (big houses, windows wide open for them to fly through, typically warm pie type thing getting cooked). What makes it slightly different its that by the end the dog is ‘catnapped’ and taken away from his owners, the Brody’s, who think that he has just run off somewhere. Little do they know that this is all part of the master plan devised by Mr. Tinkles the master cat (voiced by Sean Hayes from Will & Grace). Mr. Tinkles is hell bent to get back to the times of Egyptians when cats ruled supreme, not only of dogs but of humans too. He plans to steal the concoction that Professor Brody (Jeff Goldblum) is making, a potion that will make people with allergies to dogs…unallergic to them, when he has that he will reverse the formula and make everyone allergic to dogs.

Mr. Tinkles tries in vain to steal the potion, with attempts from the Siamese and Russian cats to try and break in and cause havoc. It is not until he kidnaps Lou’s family that he can come close to getting the potion and his plan to come ahead. It is then up to Lou and his friends to try and save his family and the rest of dog kind. I won’t spoil the ending, but it doesn’t take much working out who wins does it?

Before I go on I must point out that I am nowhere near the age range it is intended for so obviously a child of 6 will love it more than me. Yet I am out to have a good time as well and, well, you can’t deny me that. So bear that in mind. However I want to pick the first fault of Cats and Dogs. It’s not that good for the adult to watch. Now, yes, I have just said it is for kids but adults will go along too and films these days have plenty of in-jokes for adults to chuckle at. Take Shrek and Toy Story 1&2 for example, while the kids (and adults) were wowed at the CGI they could also both laugh but at different times for different things. This film is made with solely the purpose of kids (although the Butch line ‘son of my mum’ was pretty good). This could make the adults just slightly bored whilst watching the movie.

The acting is also under par. However it’s not the animals you have to worry about but the humans. Although this is a movie about cats and dogs and they should, admittedly, get more screentime, the humans are treated second rate in more ways than one. Goldblum is wasted as the bumbling professor, get an unknown in there and it wouldn’t have made the slightest bit of difference. Then there is the major gripe of mine, the child. A problem with all films is how to present him/her to the audience. Well this time it’s the spoilt, snivelling type of presentation. Scott is needed for the relationship with man and boy, but breaks up a lot of action. He predictably rejects then loves his new found friend, what’s worse is the fact we, the audience, are subjected to a loving bonding session of them in slow motion, this doesn’t bode well for the film because it makes it look like some cheesy commercial about dog food.