<em>'Cat & Mouse'</em> isn't terrible, but it isn't anywhere near good either. Of course, there wasn't any big expectations that I held coming into it, but B movies can still offer entertainment. This Paul Rotha picture? Not so much, for me anyway. It's all rather dull.
Lee Patterson and Ann Sears play lead, both are alright. Patterson is the better, even if his character is more there for his ... Read more
<em>'Cat & Mouse'</em> isn't terrible, but it isn't anywhere near good either. Of course, there wasn't any big expectations that I held coming into it, but B movies can still offer entertainment. This Paul Rotha picture? Not so much, for me anyway. It's all rather dull.
Lee Patterson and Ann Sears play lead, both are alright. Patterson is the better, even if his character is more there for his style than any substance; looks straight out of <em>'Grease'</em>. Hilton Edwards, despite chewing the heck outta the scenery, is my standout from this.
I did like seeing bits of 1950s London, mind you. I know it's only because I'm looking at it through modern eyes, but there is something about seeing this general era of England on film that I do enjoy. That's the only true positive I have, which probably says it all in regards to how I view this film.Show less
