Why do movies, when they have anthropomorphic cat people, not go full cat?

There are tons of media that give animals animal features. Look up Blacksad as an example.

Another example that is closer to what you are aiming at is the Garfield movies. They are bad, but all animals have animals faces and animal behavior.

You are just looking at the wrong movies.

So they won’t eat the anthropomorphic mice. That would be too weird.

Look at all the aliens on Star Trek, or science fiction in general. Very few are not thinly disguised humans.

It’s theater. People like to look at people. We would rather suspend belief and concentrate on the story and dialog than puzzle out an unfamiliar creature.

I would think it’s more about animal welfare since so many big cats have been ruthlessly exploited and abused by humans. I can’t stand bad CGI, but the alternative is not acceptable.

Here’s the explanation for the use of CGI in Call of the Wild:

IMDB notes the producers chose a CGI dog “to give him a fuller range of emotion and expression as well as to avoid putting any real dogs at risk of being injured or frightened in this tale of overcoming hardships in a harsh environment.” All noble intentions. By doing so, however, they’ve entered into another harsh environment: the “uncanny valley,” that limbo area where the appearance of a virtual being is just “off” enough from the flesh-and-blood version to give it a cold, cyborg-y eeriness.

https://www.worcestermag.com/entertainmentlife/20200226/call-of-wilds-cgi-pooch-is-wildly-disappointing

Might be part of a context in which to show off lady cat figures too along with faces just sayin’.

@dabbler Great point actually, sex sells.

Cats was enough of a dog without hailing taxi cabs.