Look. If that post didn't read as slightly malicious, I wouldn't have reacted the way I did. Even if you weren't *trying* to do that, that's how it read, which is the problem of putting things online. I responded the way I did because of the way your message seemed to be addressed to me. Don't give it if you can't take it. I hate to say it, but you were acting like the "dumb f*ck" you think I was treating you as. I know this is a public board and eveyone has the right to do so and converse, but if you're going to jump into a conversation (especially one between two people where there's clearly some background of which you may be unaware) be careful about being so quick to call someone out - in this case putting me unnecessarily on the defensive. I wasn't snarky or snobbish about anything I was saying until you commented and got on my tail. I posted what I thought was right, just like everyone else on this thread was doing, but suddenly mine is "holier than thou" just because I gave more basis to back it than "oh, I found a scipt online?" Giiiive me break.
So, here comes my "adult" response.
I'm sick of tempers being caused to run so high over a movie and people provoking others over a movie. I'm not trying to *knock* others. People are talking about old scripts, though. I was having a discussion about something that's in the old script versus what might be a mistake now. This board is a place to share opinions, speculations, and theories. That's ALL I was doing. The versions of the script that people were referring to are old, and one of the places that that club is being used as is probably a mistake. That's just common sense. I think TGIF said it, and I don't think she'd be afraid to tell me if I was - I am NOT trying to wave information in people's faces because I had it, but it gets really ridiculous when there's invalid information flying around. Half of the answers to this incorrect stuff can be found by just reading the right things. Anthony Rapp posts on this board. Don't you think *his* information is correct?
Also, I'm not saying that CBGB's isn't appearing in the movie, because I don't know that. I'm saying that I'm pretty sure it's not in its original context, which would've been the opening sequence. The opening of the original screenplay was Roger performing with his band at CBGB's. They were singing Rent. Maureen was wasted, and she threw up on Roger's feet while he was on stage. Mark was in the audience taping, and then he sang the last bit of the song on stage with Roger and the band. In high likelihood, that's not the opening of the film anymore, which was all I was saying. Chances are that there ARE flashbacks to the band at a club like CBGB's, and April HAS been cast in the movie, so she may very well be there. If you read, that's all I was saying. I wasn't saying I knew the club was out because it's probably not the opening; I was saying that it's
probably not the opening and didn't look like it would make sense to stick in there and just tack it on right before the part I saw. ASIDE from my speculation, there is official say that the vast majority of Chbosky's additions and alterations to the show's original form (a drastic example of which would be the CBGB's opening scene) have been removed from the film. And that's NOT me talking. The scene is probably going to end up in one of the flashback scenes. Basic reading comprehension.
Who knows? Maybe all of those reports from the SF papers are correct,and they're using both clubs? Maybe there's more than one club in this really sketchy area in SF - one for CBGB's and one for the Cat Scratch? Can't believe everything you read and hear, and we'll probably never know until we see the film credits in November.
I hope that all makes sense. I wasn't planning on having to spell everything out. *sigh*
For the record, I'm a girl.
A work of art is an invitation to love.
Updated On: 3/30/05 at 09:47 AM
) what Emcee saw, so this is pure speculation from me - is it possible that "Rent" (the song) will be a montage of clips, both flashbacks as well as "present"? It would explain CBGB's presence. I thought it was interesting what someone said about CBGB being part of OSG (or did I imagine that? I'm too tired to scroll back) - I just hate the idea of the song being anything but Roger angsting in the present, because I can see flashbacks coming off cheesy and detracting from the emotional punch the song should have. 
