Has RENT film release date changed???- Page 2

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 5/26/05 at 2:47pm

Im not going to bat for the validity of the article. I'm sure its a typo. All I'm saying is that it wouldn't be out of the question for the film's release date to be moved - a week, a month, a year. Studios do all kinds of things. Release dates are never ever carved in stone.

[CapnHook]

Posted: 5/26/05 at 3:15pm

Right - don't have to tell me that. LOL

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 5/26/05 at 4:04pm

I wasn't talking about you, Michael Bennett, but the people spazzing because they can't wait another few months is a little much. We've been waiting 9 years for the movie, another 6 months would be disappointing, but tolerable.

I know that movie release dates are always changing, but I just don't think that this movie has the right tone for a summer release. Summer movies tend to be either action-packed, or light-hearted comedies. Not to mention that a good portion of Rent takes place in the winter; no one wants to see a movie with Christmas themes and heavy winter clothes in the middle of June.

Updated On: 5/26/05 at 04:04 PM

[One Song Glory]

Posted: 5/26/05 at 4:21pm

The film will not be post-poned. It can't be! I say that it will always say that 11.11 is when RENT will be in theaters, hands down.

[kangaroo]

Posted: 5/26/05 at 4:23pm

it better be coming out 11.11.05!

[CapnHook]

Posted: 5/26/05 at 4:27pm

If they run behind schedule, I can see a Thanksgiving opening. They won't want to run it at Christmas with THE PRODUCERS.

I agree its a Fall film. NOT Summer. If the delay is true, I would rather a Nov 2006 release than a May 2006 release.

It's also better to be released in the Fall in terms of Oscar buzz.

[loudasthehelliwant]

Posted: 5/26/05 at 4:43pm

I would be fine if they pushed back the date a *little* bit. Like a Thanksgiving release. (I think that the local paper just made a mistake, though.)

However, I would say they definately should NOT release in summer. It does not seem like a summer movie.

And then there's the Oscar buzz issue. This film looks to me like it deserves buzz at the very least... but isn't the EARLY November a little soon for that? I mean... aren't Oscar buzz movies released a little later? (Would love for someone who actually knows about that stuff to answer this!) I've always taken November 11TH as a bad sign. I mean, trashy movies are usually coming out around that time, aren't they?

I would be happy if they pushed it back.... to Thanksgiving. :P

[Greekmusicalfan]

Posted: 5/26/05 at 4:44pm

I agree that the film will be lost on a summer release in between all the blockbusters and I also agree that the release of a film sometimes changes. However, I don't remember a film that has specified an EXACT date being delayed. It is different to say "coming soon" or "coming Fall 2005" and then change it, but RENT has a specific date 11.11.05. That means that there are already detailed plans for distribution, marketing, promotion etc. towards the specific date that will not be easy to overturn. Anyawy, I guess we will find out soon, but I sure hope the original date stands.

[CapnHook]

Posted: 5/26/05 at 5:03pm

loudasthehelliwant,

I know what I'm talking about. I have friends in the Academy and in the business.

Buzz is prime at christmas, so THE PRODUCERS has that value. However, another prime release is Thanksgiving.

Anything from Halloween on is in good shape for the Oscars. Everything released previously won't generate anything until the media does their "Oscar Predictions" and "Year in Review for Movies."

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 5/26/05 at 5:52pm

RENT will hopefully be a wonderful film. But don't hold your breath for it to be a major Oscar bait movie. If it's really great, it could maybe garner an acting nom or two, but the majority of Oscar voters are your grandparents age (60+) which is hardly the target audience of the film. Plus Chris Columbus is a director like Joel Schumacher (PHANTOM) who's work is looked down on by the majority of Hollywood.

And RENT is going to be up agaisnt a lot of bigger, more Oscar friendly, year end fare: THE PRODUCERS, MEMOIRS OF A GEISHA, CINDERELLA MAN, ALL THE KINGS'S MEN etc.

More important then awards is for the film to be a hit. It would help keep the show running on Broadway and would help foster additional film work for the cast and encourage production on other movie musicals. Who could realisticaly ask for more than that?

[Greekmusicalfan]

Posted: 5/26/05 at 6:29pm

I think that The Producers will be a wonderful film, but why is it more Oscar friendly than RENT ? The Producers is a musical comedy and usually comedies are snubbed by the Academy voters. I am not saying that RENT will be showered with nominations, but I'd love to hear thoughts on that.

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 5/26/05 at 6:58pm

Because The Producers was already a movie. And Mel Brooks is already successful in Hollywood, while few people there have heard of Jonathan Larson. And Nathan Lane and Matthew Broderick are more well-known in Hollywood than anyone in the Rent movie. And The Producers appeals to a greater generational audience then Rent.

And The Producers is a more recent Broadway phenomenon, so more people are familiar with the Lane-Broderick hype with the show. Remember when both of them came back for a few months? People who usually could care less about Broadway were talking about that. The Rent OBC was a phenomenom 9 years ago, so the majority of average theater-goers won't remember the original hype behind the OBC.

Don't get me wrong, I'm bitter about The Producers' musical movie, because I've loved the original movie for years, and would love for Rent to come out on top. But considering the politics in Hollywood, I have to agree with Michael Bennett.

Although wouldn't it be funny if Nathan Lane and Adam Pascal both received Oscar nominations for Best Actor? Very déjà vu.

Updated On: 5/26/05 at 06:58 PM

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 5/26/05 at 7:00pm

THE PRODUCERS has more buzz right now in Hollywood (which is where I am, at the moment, ironically). It's being produced by Unviersal who is one of the biggest and best studios at waging Oscar campaigns. RENT is being produced by Revolution studios -- the people who gave us GIGLI and LITTLE BLACK BOOK. Perhaps because its a newer property and bigger in scope, THE PRODUCERS feels more like an "event" at least to Hollywood insiders.
It's no guarantee that its going to be an Oscar bait movie either, but on paper its apparently a better bet.

[Dreamcatcher]

Posted: 5/26/05 at 8:01pm

I certainly think RENT at least deserves some Oscar buzz and I always figured that the market strategy was to release it in time for consideration of the Oscars so I'd be very surprised if the release date was pushed back til May of 2006. I don't know much about marketing but you'd think between the two decisions, the November release would be the obvious one to go with (unless of course there are delays in editing and a push back is unescapable.)

[CapnHook]

Posted: 5/26/05 at 8:05pm

Can't really say it DESERVES buzz until you see the movie...

[Dreamcatcher]

Posted: 5/26/05 at 8:12pm

Well I say that it deserves the buzz just for all the amazingly hard work being put into it plus I'm a RENThead/obsessive so my opinion is slightly biased. :-P Won't be able to say if I think it deserves an actual oscar or not til I see it though you're right.

[Fan2]

Posted: 5/26/05 at 8:17pm

>>the film of PROOF was long finished when Miramax pulled it.<<<

Speaking of PROOF, according to http://www.boxofficemojo.com/schedule/?view=changes&p=.htm, which give release dates and changes, PROOF has now been given a release date of September 16, 2005. No mention of RENT.