I'm posting the review I wrote on my myspace blog. Read it here, or if ya want, you can check it out on my blog by going to blog.myspace.com/lovemesomedali.
And now for our feature presentation...
HOW DO YOU MEASURE, MEASURE A FILM?
Being the good homosexual theater student that I am, I patiently waited for five-hundred twenty-five-thousand six-hundred minutes for the film version of Rent. Of course my expectations were high since almost the entire Broadway cast reunited for the film, and the film soundtrack (in my opinion) is much more enjoyable than the Original Broadway Cast recording. Sadly though, the film version of Rent made me more disappointed than seeing a horribly miscast and untalented thirty-something play the title role in last year’s film adaptation of The Phantom of the Opera.
So what turned this Pulitzer Prize and Tony Award winning piece of theater into the worst film adaptation of a musical since A Chorus Line? I’d start by blaming virtually unknown screenwriter Steve Chbosky and director Chris Columbus as both obviously do not understand what the original stage version is all about.
The stage version of Rent is a story of life, love, loss, friendship, and—most of all—community as told by a group of eight friends living in a modern day New York plagued by homelessness, drug addiction, and AIDS. One of the things that makes Rent such an entertaining piece is how the large chorus is used to breathe life into New York and to show that most people face the same kinds of problems as the eight principle characters. In short, the chorus is a pivotal ninth character that helps illuminate many of the play’s themes, especially the theme of community.
One of the grave mistakes of Chbosky and Columbus was the elimination of the chorus. By doing so, they fail to establish an environment that their main characters live in. Though the main players may bicker about the world they live in, they now appear totally detached from it, and thus the idea of community is now non-existent in the film.
Chobsky and Columbus also have trouble establishing the relationships between their main characters. It seems like their main characters have been friends forever yet we as an audience never see how they become friends or why they’re friends or even how important they are to one another. This doesn’t seem to be a problem in the stage version, though, as the entire first act establishes how these people met and why they have such a close bond.
And then there are the more amateurish problems in the film. Many of the crucial plot points and songs seem to come out of nowhere. For example, when Collins, an African-American professor at MIT, and his transvestite boyfriend, Angel, finally declare their love for each other in the song “I’ll Cover You,” nothing instigates it besides--as far as I can tell--a short ride on the subway. If a subway ride is all one needs to feel love, then why are New Yorkers so cynical? When another character goes missing for a month, we don’t even find out she’s missing until a few minutes before she comes back. And some scenes just seem to have the wrong tone. When Roger, the HIV positive recovering drug addict sings a love song to his dying girlfriend, Mimi, the lighting and camera angles make him look more diabolical than loving. I would have expected him to slit her throat more than I would expect him to kiss her.
But I’d say most of Rent's problems lie in the editing. Two songs which give us crucial pieces of information about certain characters—such as the insinuation that Roger’s roommate Mark is a closeted homosexual or that Roger's drug addict girlfriend, Mimi, needs to check herself into rehab or she’ll die—are cut from the film yet were obviously shot as the songs appear on the soundtrack. These cuts and others like it make it very difficult to follow the plot or understand who the characters are. And while these crucial points are cut, we somehow need to sit through a second rendition of “Seasons of Love” and a reprise of “La Vie Boheme,” both of which come out of nowhere and don’t serve the story at all. If things needed to be cut for time, those moments should have gone long before scenes that help us understand the characters or their problems.
Still, Rent is somewhat redeemed by its brilliant cast. “Law and Order” alum Jessie L. Martin gives a charming performance as Collins. His rendition of the heart-wrenching reprise to “I’ll Cover You” is enough to win him a Golden Globe nomination. Other stand-outs are Tony Winner Idina Menzel’s energetic and hilarious performance as the trashy, constantly horny bisexual Maureen. Her rendition of the monologue/song/performance art piece “Over the Moon” is both nonsensical and laugh-out-loud funny all at once. And Tracie Thoms as Maureen’s sophisticated, Ivy-League lesbian lover Joanne gives a brilliantly understated and demure performance. Their fierce duet, “Take Me or Leave Me” is easily one of the most enjoyable moments of the film, as is Thoms’s duet with Antony Rapp’s Mark in the “Tango: Maureen.” But the biggest surprise of the bunch is Rosario Dawson as the optimistic yet HIV positive junkie, Mimi. Who knew that she could sing or dance? At any rate, she is a joy to watch, and her striptease number “Out Tonight” is a high point of the film.
Despite the enjoyable performances by the cast, Rent is plagued by bad writing, directing, and editing. As I watched this train wreck I could picture the producers of the upcoming adaptations of Dreamgirls and Hairspray cowering in a corner. My advice when it comes to Rent: save your money for The Producers, which will hopefully follow in the footsteps of better recent musicals like Moulin Rouge and Chicago. And if you must see Rent, well consider that renting that seat in the movie theater costs a lot more than renting the DVD will.
Read my review on my myspace blog!
/ 
.jpg?format=auto&width=365)
