<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
     xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
     xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
     xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
     xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
     xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/">
    <channel>
        <title><![CDATA[‘Cats’ visual effects artist says rumored ‘butthole cut’ exists]]></title>
        <atom:link href="https://usagag.com/2020/04/07/cats-visual-effects-artist-says-rumored-butthole-cut-exists/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
        <link>https://usagag.com/2020/04/07/cats-visual-effects-artist-says-rumored-butthole-cut-exists/</link>
        <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2020 20:16:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
        <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
        <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
        <generator>https://usagag.com</generator>
        <media:content url="/uploads/2020/04/cats-visual-effects-artist-says-rumored-butthole-cut-exists.jpg" medium="image">
            <media:title type="html">‘Cats’ visual effects artist says rumored ‘butthole cut’ exists</media:title>
        </media:content>
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The &#8220;Cats&#8221; derrières could still be there.</p><p>A rumored &#8220;butthole cut&#8221; of the 2019 flop movie musical may actually exist, according to a visual effects worker <strong>who confirmed</strong> that kitty butts were first discovered about halfway through production while watching video playbacks.</p><p>“We went to call our supervisor, and we’re like, ‘There’s a f - - king a - - hole in there! There’s buttholes!’&#8221; the unnamed source told the Daily Beast. &#8220;It wasn’t prominent but you saw it . . . And you [were] just like, ‘What the hell is that? . . . There’s a f - - king butthole in there.’ It wasn’t in your face — but at the same time, too, if you’re looking, you’ll see it.”</p><p>The fur started flying about a rump-included version in mid-March. At that time, <strong>a rumor spread</strong> that a visual-effects producer was hired in November solely to remove pussy posteriors galore from director Tom Hooper&#8217;s footage.</p><p>“My new year’s resolution is to get the cowards at @UniversalPics to release the #ButtholeCut of @catsmovie. MAKE IT HAPPEN AMERICA,” <a href="https://twitter.com/jackwaz/status/1240135051288948742" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">tweeted</a> writer Jack Waz, who said the graphic artist was a &#8220;friend of a friend&#8221; and suggested that &#8220;somewhere out there, there exists a butthole cut of Cats.&#8221; His declaration led to a furry flurry of support from tweeters who used the hashtag #ReleaseTheButtholeCut to exert pressure on the studio.</p><p>According to the anonymous whistleblower, the buzzed-about buttholes were the real rear-deal, although not an intentional addition to the movie, which <strong>has been lambasted</strong> for sloppily adding CGI fur to the actors.</p><p>“There was nobody that said, ‘We want buttholes,’ &#8221; the source told the Daily Beast. &#8220;It was one of those things that just happened and slipped through.”</p><p>Universal has only released one statement about the backside debacle, with a spokesperson <strong>telling Vanity Fair</strong>, &#8220;Hopefully that will add to the magic and mythical nature of the cinematic treasure.&#8221;</p><p>The alleged &#8220;butthole cut&#8221; remains as well-hidden as a dollop of cat poop buried under a pile of kitty litter. Who knows whether the tushes take will ever surface? But in the meantime, <strong>there does exist</strong> a cheeky fan version that inserted backside enhancements.</p>]]></content:encoded>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[USAGAG]]></dc:creator>
            </channel>
</rss><!--Time: 0.072314023971558-->