A RENT rant (of sorts)- Page 2

[EverythingIsRENT]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 8:29pm

Mimi couldn't die because the show is about LIVING with disease. Mimi didn't have any of her **** together and had lots of crap to figure out, whereas Angel had none of Mimis hangups and was able to move on to the "next" level. I would not be as in love with the show if Mimi had died. It would totally make the "no day but today" statement worthless.

Not to mention, can you inmagine what her death would do to Roger after just losing his last girlfriend? Poor guy!

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 8:29pm

I just don't get the complaint that it's "not perfect." Of course it's not perfect, no show is perfect. I have issues with many other shows I've seen, but I just accept them at face value and move on instead of dwelling on them.

Kringas, I had a long post about my issues with art2 and how he doesn't provoke debate, only manufactured drama, but it got deleted. Basically, I'll just say that there is justification to just calling him stupid (and this was even before the anti-gay shredder came out).

[Kringas]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 8:30pm

It's odd, though (and this is sort of a threadjack), how quickly these kids go from being positive to having full-blown AIDS. Even with Mimi's drug use probably hastening it, she's still only nineteen. How long are we to assume she's been positive.

Same with Angel. Angel is supposed to be young (as they all are, if I remembering the casting call notices from NYC days). I always wondered how long these character had been positive, considering Angel went from jumping all around like a banshee on Christmas Eve to death from full-blown AIDS ten months later.

[Magdalene]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 8:32pm

I always wondered how long these character had been positive, considering Angel went from jumping all around like a banshee on Christmas Eve to death from full-blown AIDS ten months later.

Eazy E was diagnosed with AIDS, and was dead a week later (though I find it hard to believe that he never knew he was HIV positive...)

[Magdalene]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 8:32pm

Foo, a double post---mea culpa!

Updated On: 11/7/05 at 08:32 PM

[colleen_lee]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 8:35pm

But at the same time Kringas, at least in Mimi's respect, it's pretty unlikely that while she was strung out and living on the street that she was on her prescription drug regime.

Keep in mind that AIDS kills by destroying immunity and making it that much more difficult to fight off disease. When you're malnourished and living on the street and not on a steady treatment you're basically accelerating the AIDS effect. Just living on the street in the middle of winter can kill in itself (especially when heavily using drugs) without having to deal with the immunosuppression caused by AIDS too.

Updated On: 11/7/05 at 08:35 PM

[Becky]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 8:37pm

Even with Mimi's drug use probably hastening it, she's still only nineteen. How long are we to assume she's been positive.

It's a good question. We have to keep in mind that this was in the late 80s/early 90s, and life expectancy of someone with AIDS wasn't near what it is today. Suppose Mimi has been doing drugs from a very young age, she could have been infected for 5 or 6 years (and her health probably wasn't great to begin with due to drug use.) That would be reasonable to think she could die at 19. Look at all the "real life" people who lost their battle with AIDS that age and younger.

[Kringas]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 8:38pm

But who knows how long he'd been positive (or how long he had full blown AIDS, for that matter)? I do see your point, though, and I'm no doctor, so my knowledge of such matters is spotty at best.

[broadwaystar2b]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 8:38pm

Angel also had AIDS the moment we are introduced to him:

"Yes this body provides a comfortable home for the Aquired Immune Defiency Syndrome"

[Kringas]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 8:41pm

Well, God bless him for being that energetic with full-blown AIDS.

[broadwaystar2b]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 8:42pm

Mimi in her magic blue pants too

[colleen_lee]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 8:43pm

AIDS doesn't always have a huge drawn out wasting effect. I mean, it's possible for someone to be relatively healthy and within a month be battling a difficult case of pneumonia that their immune system just can't lick.

Keep in mind that no one actually dies FROM AIDS but from complications as a result of AIDS (most frequently, pneumonia).

[broadwaystar2b]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 8:47pm

I have to admit, I really don't know much about AIDS as a diease other than it breaks down a person's immune system
I suppose it's possible that as long as a person was having a "healthy" spell, they could be totally physically active
But I also know that for most of these issues, one has to look at Rent from a dramatic standpoint rather than a totally realistic standpoint

[BroadwayGirl107]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 8:47pm

You'd think that because Angel is alos living on the street thatif he actually did have full blown AIDS he would've been long gone, or at least not nearly as healthy as he was when we met him.

[Kringas]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 8:51pm

That's what I was getting at, too, BroadwayGirl. And that Mimi - for being a (mostly) still active drug user - not only almost dies, but survives is ... odd.

All things considered, it still seems like these kids go from diagnosis to death (or the verge of death), pretty quickly. Mimi's only 19, and Angel seems to be ... what? 22 or so? Angel is taking AZT and ain't shooting up. How did he die so quickly?

[BroadwayGirl107]

Posted: 11/7/05 at 8:56pm

I agree with you, Kringas. It doesn't make much sense. Quite a few things don't. However, I don't think it's a matter of Angel's sexual orientation at all. If anything, since we can assume he's had AIDS since before we even meet him in the show, he probably should've been gone already, and it makes perfect sense that he goes before Mimi does.

[MrMidwest]

Posted: 12/1/07 at 3:10pm

One of the things that's always nagged at me about the show is that I feel like there would be more of an emotional impact at the end of the show if we actually saw some (or several) of the characters protesting for more AIDS research or trying to raise some funds themselves. It's not that I think it isn't moving without that, but I think it would be even more poignant if you saw that they were trying to do what they could, and hoping for the best, without knowing for sure what was going to happen.

[Mealz1042]

Posted: 12/1/07 at 3:32pm

Okay, I may be a huge rent fan but i will be the first to admit it has flaws.

My response is a bit long but I really hope you read it and see where I'm coming from.

"It makes me INSANE that they kill off the gay transexual dying of AIDS but let the crack-using hetero love interest come back from the dead ("It shows hope," yell the devoted.) I saw the show in previews and bruised the friend I was with when Mimi miraculously came back from the great white light to the Great White Way to sing a reprise."

See, I think you're missing the point. I do not think that was Jonathan Larson's intention AT ALL. I mean, if it was then he would NOT have written a play about love and equality etc. So the intention is clearly not that. Secondly it had to work out the way it did, at least, from what i've collected, in jonathan's eyes.

As you know Rent is based off of Puccini's La Boheme. in Rent Angel HAS to die becuase it shows that a good person's life can so quickly be taken away and thats why its so important to live like angel did, full of love, living each moment as your last (yeah yeah i know thats mimi's line but angel did it too) As for Mimi, according to Jonathan she had to live because the play is about life, not about death and to him having that note of hopefullness at the end is essential, so really its just following the story line of La Boheme with that change at the end. (Mimi's return might be my least favorite scene in rent though, im just arguing this from another perspective)

I also agree with what a lot of people said, the reason is because Angel was intended to be the most likeable character. Sure Mimi's got a great message but she's still stupid and naive and has a lot of learning and growing up to do.

"I recently saw the show again. It was filled with what looked like red state tourists- and no one groaned at the same sex loving...and maybe, just maybe, it opened some people's eyes by appealing to their ears. And that, I know, is no small occurrence."

Wow, I certainly hope so! It's true when you see it Angel isnt a "gay transvestite" he's a person in love and it'd be wodnerful to see that people who would normally care have realized that. Though when I was at RENT10, the people behind me sia "ewww that was so unneccesary" when Angel and Collins kissed which really put me off, I mean, if you paid over $500 for a show like rent you would think they would have some tolerance or at least respect.
--------
"Hey now,lets not judge so fast..didn't anyone even stop to consider the fact that those are probably MAGIC blue pants..."

considering that she's wearing ratty sweater leggings at the end, nope.
but i like the idea
-----
"Not to split hairs, but I don't think Angel is a transsexual. He's barely a drag queen."

Thank you, another excellent point, a lot of people confuse being a drag queen with being a pre-op transsexual HUGE difference.
--------
"And finally, I don't know that we're led to believe Roger and Mimi will die. The show's biggest misstep, in my opinion, is bringing Angel back on at the end of the finale, before the show is actually over. I've never quite figured out what we're supposed to make of that..."

I think its kind of metaphorical, that he's still with them no matter what, at least spiritually
-------
whered the OP go by the way? I'd like to hear her response to the responses.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 12/1/07 at 3:37pm

This thread is old!

[EveRy]

Posted: 12/1/07 at 3:53pm

Here's my take on Mimi dying.

"It makes me INSANE that they kill off the gay transexual dying of AIDS but let the crack-using hetero love interest come back from the dead ("It shows hope," yell the devoted.)"

The show would be completely off if Mimi had died in the end. I think that the main conflict of the show is Roger accepting love again. After what happened with April, he doesn’t want to commit himself to anybody for fear of losing them (like April). So when Mimi, the HIV-positive drug addict, comes knocking at his door (literally) he doesn't want to let her in. When Mimi is "dying" he admits that he has always loved her. Then she "slips away" and "comes back" and Roger realizes that although she doesn't have much time left, he has to "give in to love" or well, live in fear, even though he can't predict when she will die. I think that's why Mimi has to live in the end. Of course it's unrealistic the way it all happens, but it furthers the entire message.

Anyone agree?
Updated On: 12/1/07 at 03:53 PM

[Mealz1042]

Posted: 12/1/07 at 5:21pm

"This thread is old!"

oh wow i didnt even notice that.