Adam Pascal and Anthony Rapp back to RENT starting 7/30 — Page 3

Wow this is crazy. Completely 100% excited by the news, however just picturing Adam in the plaid pants once again is just...odd.

I truly wonder how this even came to happen. Did they approach the show? Did the show approach them? If the show did approach them, I wonder if it was individually at first or if it was presented as a package deal to the both of them. Were any other OBC members asked to come back or just Adam and Anthony?

Ah so many questions.

*Edited to note that I just broke down and purchased an advance ticket which I NEVER do. I just needed to assure myself that I would indeed get to see these two without having to rely on lotto-ing day after day after day.

---

Updated On: 5/3/07 at 10:49 AM

GREAT NEWS! This is awesome!

---

I love RENT as much as the next guy but come on, close already.

---

I am so excited!! I've been dying to see those 2 live...now i finally have my chance =)

They're so much older now.

Keep in mind that there are several people in the Broadway company now that were doing the show just about at the same time as Anthony and Adam back in '97/'98 (at least three I can think of). They still handle the roles fine, and I think Adam and Anthony will be fine as well. It's certainly getting my rear end back to the Nederlander.....

I see your point, Smartful Dodger, but I think it's a much bigger problem when thirty-year-old try to play teenagers than when adults are playing slightly younger adults. The difference in how you look is much bigger.

I think with these two, it's an issue because we know their ages, not because they look that old. You're conscious of it, so you're going to harp on it even if you do so... well, subsconsciously. There are people who are their ages and old older than them in the current cast, but people don't complain because their names aren't like, associated with a number. I think people are more hung up on how old they are than how old they look. Some of you make it sound like they've both gone totally grey.

Not trying to convince anyone to think some other way, just sayin'.

---

Updated On: 5/3/07 at 11:35 AM

If Jonathan Groff, Lea Michelle, and John Gallagher are invited to reprise their roles in SPRING AWAKENING in 2018, wouldn't the whole conceit of the show be lost?

Spring Awakening's central point is much more intertwined with the ages of the characters than Rent's. Rent is not a show about a certain period in one's life (in Spring Awakening's case, adolescence) in itself.

Additionally, as others have pointed out countless times, there have been many Rent cast members (even those playing the leading roles) who were around the ages of (or even older than) Adam and Anthony. The current Roger and Mimi are older than Adam and Anthony. I'm not saying this situation is ideal, but I'm not sure why Anthony and Adam's ages are such an issue for so many (other than us being fully aware of their ages) while no one seems to care that Tim Howar and Karmine Alers are older than both of them.

I think that the characters are vaguely age-specific, though. If a person in his/her early to mid-20s is going around trying to be an artist and not wanting to sell out to the establishment, then that's acceptable to most people, I think. However, if we have someone in his/her mid-30s not wanting to do that, it comes as self-indulgent and adolescent. We all have to work and not all of us like our jobs, you know, but we get over it and we do things beyond our jobs that are satisfying.

But all of this is more about my opinion of RENT than of Mssrs. Pascal and Rapp.

---

Updated On: 5/3/07 at 11:44 AM

If you (or anyone, for that matter) are inherently opposed to casting Mark and Roger in their mid-30s, that's certainly understandable. I personally don't have a problem with it as long as the actors in question can play younger than they are. However, I hope that you had the same complaints when Will Chase, Tim Howar, Christopher Hanke (who is in his 30s despite his given age), and various other mid-30s actors were hired.

If a person in his/her early to mid-20s is going around trying to be an artist and not wanting to sell out to the establishment, then that's acceptable to most people, I think. However, if we have someone in his/her mid-30s not wanting to do that, it comes as self-indulgent and adolescent.

So would you call Jonathan Larson self-indulgent and adolescent?? He was 35 and doing just what you described. Mark and Roger could certainly be close to or in their 30s and still make the story believable.

Becky, let me explain myself better. My problem with the characters in RENT (and I'm only going from the movie) was not just that they were self-indulgent, adolescent, or anything else along that line. It's that they had a strong sense of entitlement because they, as artists, were doing something above and beyond the rest of society. I looked at them and saw a bunch of brats (no matter how old they were) who didn't want to pay for what they wanted.

I realize that I'm going to get hell for saying all of this because heaven forbid anyone should criticize RENT. I don't care for the show. A lot of people do and I can respect that just as I would hope a lot of other people would respect that I don't like it.

---

Oh I am so lotto-ing for this. Or standing room, if I get desperate. As long as Adam doesn't have the hideous hair from the movie or his Aida man-boobs, I'm all good.