BroadwayGirl107 on the RENT film. (With spoilers)- Page 5

[wickedrentq]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 3:56am

Welcome back Anthony!

And well considering things said in private were all made public...I think this whole situation serves as an important reminder about *public* forums. Sometimes on this board, well particularly in the OT board but that's another story, we give ourselves the idea that there is a select/limited group reading what we say--our friends on certain threads, simply fans, but sometimes don't consider the fact that one out of many, many people could be reading it. In fact, the chances are often good when we post about a particular show/movie, whatever, that someone involved in the making of it is reading it. Which is certainly not to say you shouldn't post negative things about something b/c you fear someone involved is making it, just something to think about. If you are going to post on a public forum, it is important to accept that absolutely anyone can read and or/reply to anything you say privately or publicly. In actually clicking the "post" button you are in effect agreeing to the idea that anyone can read or reply to what you wrote, so IMO you should not feel uncomfortable with any response you receive. ((That aside, again just b/c it's all publicly posted from what I've gathered, you were first asked to give your thoughts in private and when those thoughts seemed to be contrasted with what you publicly wrote it was suggested you publicly share those thoughts, not what you made it seem to be in which you were told in a PM randomly why not right more positive things publicly and that being that?)

Anyway, I ramble, as many know. I guess my bottom line is for everyone to remember this is a public forum, and what goes along w/ that. No one should be deterred from posting an opinion, whether you're involved w/ something or whether you fear someone involved in something. That's all.

And once again I am up later than I should...perhaps I shouldn't have said Em was wrong when she said I'm up till at least 3:30 every single night...

[EvelynNesbit1906]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 4:39am

I stand by MJohnson and my belief that the celebrity-consumer divide is beneficial for all. The consumer is able to say what s/he wants about a work without feeling that s/he is directly insulting the celebrity. The celebrity avoids bad press; we all know that reporters read message boards and would get a kick out of a story like this, and it wouldn't be because MJohnson is "lying" as some of you think.

Celebrity-consumer discussions about a film are better left to advanced screenings and random encounters on the street. This doesn't mean that there should be a rule against anyone in a film or show posting here about it; that would be impossible to carry out anyway. Rather, the whole idea that honest discussions about a film can be held on a message board if the star is either PMing people about it (even if the PMs are 100% amicable) or posting about it just doesn't swing. Now my PM box will be overloaded with messages from people commenting on what's happening in this thread but afraid to post for fear of what you all might say.

[Greekmusicalfan]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 5:48am

Well, speaking for me, I am THRILLED and HONORED that Anthony reads our opinions and cares about them enough to respond ! How many celebrities do that ? This is really rare and it shows once again what a truly GREAT artist he is, how much connected to the real world and how much he values the people's opinion. I never thought I could appreciate and love him even more, but I do !!! A BIG THANK YOU Mr. Whiteboy Spice

[zzannahk]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 6:10am

Anthony, now that you're back I would love to hear your take on some of the more specific criticism, like April's lack of suicide, the disappearance of Goodbye Love, Jesse's recent comments about Freddi and Daphne. or what people seem to be saying about the dilution of plot (perhaps to get a pg13 rating)

I'm sure you can spread some light on the decisions that we can't seem to comprehend or that seem have conflicting "stories" as explanations

Updated On: 11/14/05 at 06:10 AM

[bwayfan3]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 6:24am

Wow. I go to bed at 11:30 and wake up at 6 and so much can happen in those few short hours!!!

I have been trying (albeit unsuccessfully) for the past couple of weeks to avoid reading personal reviews of the film until I myself had the opportunity to see it. I wanted to be able to experience it in true tabula rasa style. But realize that it is nearly impossible to do that due to an extreme lack of willpower as well as having been too invested in the making of the film as it went along (blogs, appearances, etc.--access granted to the fans in ways uncharacteristic of any other movie I can think of). I think the people involved in this film have across the board (no pun intended) given us a lot over the last year. I'm disappointed that there are fans who would be reluctant to participate in a creator/consumer conversation when the notion of that is such a rarity in the entertainment industry. Especially now that it has been established that it was not approached in an arm-twisting, "say something nice about me" kind of way.

While my mind is now clouded with a lot of people's thoughts and opinions, I still feel that when my chance to see the film comes (in 9 long....long...long days from now...unless some miracle strikes), I will objecively be able to take it for what it is and realize that even in its possible cinematic imperfections, it's message is still one of the most important we will see in any current film.

And welcome back Anthony.

[Fantabulous428]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 7:34am

Anthony, not the ideal situation to make a comeback in, but welcome back none the less!

[colleen_lee]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 8:47am

Ugh. We all just had to go there didn't we.

Can we not just engage in an adult discussion without always resulting in personal attacks and accusations?

::shakes head::

Well, welcome back anyway Anthony, though the circumstances are less than pretty.

[LariTheLoud]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 8:55am

Evelyn, I think that's pompous and self-important of you to think that.

And I really don't think it was ever said that MJohnson was lying. Ever. You're again taking this to the extreme.

Updated On: 11/14/05 at 08:55 AM

[Marquise]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 10:00am

two words:

DRAMA. QUEEN.

[katygrace84]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 10:11am

Just catching up on all of the goings on around here. I miss a lot on the weekends, don't I? It seems we have gotten into a bit of discourse about audience/artist interaction and whether or not it's beneficial. As a writer, I can only say that I don't know what I would do without those friends and critics who are willing to be honest and say, "This is what works and this is what you need to work on." As an artist who takes her craft very seriously, it's much more important to me to continue to improve and to continue to put out work that is relevant than to create strictly to please others. I can only imagine that it is probably very similar for artists in other mediums.

Welcome back, Anthony. As you can see, we have all missed you and we're glad you're back. It'll be nice to have your thoughtful and well-written posts on the boards again.

[amasis]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 10:12am

Rather, the whole idea that honest discussions about a film can be held on a message board if the star is either PMing people about it (even if the PMs are 100% amicable) or posting about it just doesn't swing.

I haven't said, and won't say, anything about the movie because I won't be able to see it until (can I just say that one more time?) April 2006 -- although I did enjoy both Emcee's and BroadwayGirl's review as they were both well-written and both gave interesting perspectives.

But it's a misguided generalization of all the posters here to say that just because someone involved in the movie is posting here, then an honest discussion about the movie is impossible.

That MJ felt uncomfortable being engaged in a discussion is perhaps a matter of how comfortable he was with his own opinion. There was no need for him to edit anything, and there wasn't even a need for him to engage in a PM discussion with anyone if he felt he wasn't ready or wasn't up for discussion at that particular time. Yes, he was asked to, but he could have politely declined. Or (less politely) ignored the request.

In any case, this was a far, far cry from what you had said earlier, which had been: "...what we're discussing here is someone privately trying to control a public forum." Evidently, that wasn't the case.
Updated On: 11/14/05 at 10:12 AM

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 10:22am

Well, direct contact with a celebrity involved with the project makes it very difficult to not feel swayed in your opinion.

And Hollywood knows it. For years, the oldest PR strategy behind winning Oscar voters is the celebrity "screening" in which members are invited to watch the film and be treated to a Q&A with the cast (or star) afterwards. The added thrill of seeing said celebrities in person goes a long way towards charming and winning votes.

Even if you hated MARY REILLY, it would be hard to be so vitriolic towards it once Julia Roberts had shaken your hand.

[katygrace84]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 10:29am

I'm surprised that more people don't see Anthony's presence as an opportunity to learn more about the film and possibly why certain decisions were made. Amasis, I agree with you that it it silly to say that this cannot be an honest discussion. In fact, I tihnk that it could, and should be, the most honest discussion here for the simple fact that we have an insider sharing their point of view.

[Whiteboy Spice]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 10:35am

Thanks for taking my post in the spirit in which it was intended.

Here's a crack at answering these questions:

"I would love to hear your take on some of the more specific criticism, like April's lack of suicide,"

I have not talked to Chris directly about this, but I do believe the specific circumstances of April's death are not as important as the fact that she died. As far as I am concerned, Roger would feel as much guilt, remorse, pain, etc if he'd lived through a protracted illness as he would if he discovered April in the bathtub. I asked a friend of mine who had never seen the show before if he thought there was a difference either way, and he said not at all. That's one person's opinion, but I thought it was telling, considering he was previously unaware of the material. He also loved the film -- as a film. He laughed throughout, was very moved by it, thought the cinematography was gorgeous, was never confused, etc. And believe me he's a critical mofo.

"the disappearance of Goodbye Love,"

I wrote an extensive response to this issue on forget regret, so at the risk of repeating myself, go to www.forget-regret.net for more on that subject.

"Jesse's recent comments about Freddi and Daphne."

I'm not sure what the controversy is about this. Daphne gave birth to her son in December, when we were rehearsing. I suppose in some alternate universe she *may* have been able to recover from her pregnancy and deal with a newborn and do this film, but it certainly seemed impossible. Understandably, Daphne was very saddened by the confluence of circumstances. She was also very happy for us. But it is certainly a bittersweet moment for her, as should be understandable. As for Fredi, maybe Jesse had a different conversation with her than I did, but my impression was that she was at peace with the whole thing.

"or what people seem to be saying about the dilution of plot (perhaps to get a pg13 rating)"

Not sure what people are saying about that....

Thanks --

Anthony

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 10:36am

Evelyn, if people are PMing you now to claim they can't be honest with Anthony here, what's been stopping them before? Anthony's been reading these boards for the past year, so saying his presence is "censoring" them now is just pathetic. I've posted my disappointments with news of the movie at times and I've never gotten PMs from Anthony asking me to change my opinion. It's interesting how the only people that claim he's manipulating them are the ones that continuously bash the movie on the boards.

Anthony, thanks for answering those questions, and I'm going to check out forget-regret.net right now.

Updated On: 11/14/05 at 10:36 AM

[Fantabulous428]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 10:41am

thanks for answering questions Anthony! I read what you wrote on forget-regret.net. I saw a screening of the film and agree with what you said about the cuts, I was just frustrated about the lack of insight into Mark's character. Halloween is just so telling of who he is and what he's thinking and feeling. I enjoyed the film very much and think you did a fabulous, or fantabulous job!

Looking forward to meeting you this afternoon. Btw...some people were supposedly at Virgin at 11 last night...wow.

Updated On: 11/14/05 at 10:41 AM

[katygrace84]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 10:45am

Perhaps we should attribute the PG-13 rating to the fact that maybe the MPAA has become a little more loose in their guidleines for such a rating? I haven't seen the film yet and won't read a review until I can contribute, but that was the first possible explanation that came to mind.

[amasis]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 10:56am

Even if you hated MARY REILLY, it would be hard to be so vitriolic towards it once Julia Roberts had shaken your hand.

Yes, of course. However, I felt something more than simple PR was implied; there were references to "controlling public forum" and "artist interference" earlier in the thread. I suppose that's what I was reacting to. But now that the discussion is back to points about the movie, I'll step back now.

As a side note, I was just thinking that when I finally see this, I'll be all excited to talk about it, and no one here will care because months will have passed. Sigh.

Well, good night, everyone.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 11:11am

Oh, this is just ridiculous.

I'm sorry, but if I can be perfectly honest with someone who made the film in PERSON, people can and should be able to do it online. Perhaps I'm being naive here, but the whole online "thing" is that this is anonymous, for the most part. Say what you want. The cast members are adults; they can take it. They also have the right to want to discuss their work. I find it really laughable that nobody had a problem with this presence until the response wasn't only to cater to question answering. Hell, be fair. Give something back -- don't change what you believe, but try to be open.

ETA -- I've grown up believing that theatre is like a conversation. Those are real people there in front of you -- artists performing for you? Sure. But they're real people actually GIVING you something. And you respond to them while you're in the theatre. I absolutely believe that that conversation should carry on outside of the theatre, in whatever way it may come to pass. The actor's committment to his work does not end when the curtain comes down, especially not with a piece that is so close to so many peoples' hearts. I find it sad that rather than be open to discussion once someone that's involved and not biased shows his face, people get defensive and want not to be honest anymore.

Updated On: 11/14/05 at 11:11 AM

[BroadwayGirl107]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 11:16am

Um. Wow. I missed an awful lot while I was sleeping, didn't I?

Anthony--

Just because I did post a mostly negative review (in which I probably sounded very bitter, and I was...I felt let down), I want to make it clear that I was speaking from the film-making standpoint of this, not the fact that Rent as a piece, doesn't work. It's a piece very dear to my heart, and perhaps that is the reason I was so harsh on the film version.

So, I think, yes...it's Rent, it's an incredible score, an amazing story, and it's well-performed, so people are going to enjoy it very much. I said earlier in this thread, I would never discourage anyone from seeing this, and I'm sure I'll encourage some people to see it in hopes that they'll like it regardless. But I think that if many of the mentioned problems were fixed (and I do think they realistically could have been), the Ren film would be stronger overall. I think it would make everything as a whole all the more effective and moving...thus my disappointment. I fear that since the film did not capture the piece as well as it could have, you'll have less people being affected so deeply by it, when I honestly think it could have been a very seriously taken, almost all-around raves piece. I mean...at least from critics and those who loved the piece to begin with.

I say so with no disrespect to others who hold a different opinion than I. I'm sure I'll enjoy the film more when I see it again, and I've gotten over some of these flaws. And if someone enjoys it no matter what, good for him or her. But I still believe there are still very fixable flaws that would have made the film stronger.

And as I said before, if my opinion in my initial review sounds vague or backed up insubstantially, call me on it, and I'll discuss it more. I did leave a lot out.

I do hope this film does well, and people like it regardless. I really do. That won't change that I think it's flawed and that it could have been better, but I do want the film to do well.



And I'm with orangeskittles...I'm not understanding people suddenly deciding they need to censor their opinions because Anthony's posting here. I obviously am giving my honest opinion. Look, we don't even know WHO's lurking these boards at any time whether they have a user name or not, so...why feel pressured if someone shows his or her face? For all I know, Idina Menzel could be reading this, and...if that's so, she knows that I was let down by her "Over the Moon." So be it. (Ehem, if she was, which I'm pretty damn sure she is not, I'd probably also enthusiastically say "Hey, you brilliant artist, you!") I don't think any artists reading these boards would want BS from people on here, whether it be overly negative for the sake of being so or kiss-ass positive. I just think they want honesty.



Updated On: 11/14/05 at 11:16 AM

[katygrace84]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 11:21am

I find it a little odd, too, Em. But I guess some people are content just ot have questions answered and some seek a more critical and in-depth discussion. I think it's just a matter of different preferences.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 11:23am

I think it's a bit harsh, but I'm also not looking at a board of people who are nice to every anonymous, non-famous poster, so I don't think that I should be particularly surprised that this is going on. Perhaps just saddened because of how I've been impacted by all of this.

[katygrace84]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 11:29am

I think I'm the most upset that we seem to have wasted our time with Anthony on these things. He's not here all that often, folks! Let's make the best of it! Here is someone whose work we enjoy and admire and we have the chance to really discuss it with him! Do you know how precious and rare that is??!! GAH! Oh well. There's always next time, I guess.

[Craig]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 11:33am

My only comment to the current goings on is that BroadwayWorld and ANY message board on the net is both infinite and public. I am happy that so many people here are part of our community - but at the same time, everyone must realize that this community is not private - it's open to the entire world. Anyone with a connection to the internet can read your thoughts about RENT, Wicked, what you just bought on ebay and everything else you post about. It's really important to remember this because not only is the forum public, but it also lives forever in cyberspace. That means today and 10 years from now, your thoughts are available for anyone to read. Perhaps a bit daunting or scary - but something to always remember. I honestly believe that many times people forget this because they feel so connected to a "smaller" community on the web.

Now - that being said, this forum is open to everyone. Actors, producers, business people, cooks, teachers, journalists, students, etc, etc. And EVERYONE (within the guidelines of the board) is welcome and encouraged to post.

MJohnson - I am very sorry that Anthony's PMs to you made you uncomfortable. You then came on here and posted publicly about that. Perhaps those private comments made public made Anthony uncomfortable (I won't speak for him at all here - just giving a "what if"). We are all entitled to our opinions - and our feelings.

I don't say this as Senior Editor, but as a participant on this board and as a human being - I don't think a seperation of artist/audience needs or should exist.

How may people cry out that people don't sign at the stage door? Or didn't return a letter or email?

People can't have it both ways. They can't want the interaction when and how they want it. If you post your opinions, reviews, whatever on here - anyone is legitimately entitled to comment on that. If you don't want your review, comments or whatever read, then honestly, don't post them. The second they are made public, you have sent a worldwide invitation to anyone stopping by to read and comment.

I don't think there was anything wrong with MJohnson's comments about the film, nor Anthony's private (and public) response. I can understand why MJohnson might feel intimidated or uncomfortable with getting a reply from one of the actors involved in the film - but as I stated above - if you put your opinion out there - it's open for responses.

I'm not saying MJohnson isn't - but anyone who posts here should feel confident in their opinions and what they write that it shouldn't matter who questions it.

But how fortunate that if you're going to engage in a dialogue about your opinion, you get to do so with one of the creators of the work you're passionate about?

MB - I see your point about being potentially swayed by opinion when face to face with one of the artisans involved. But I don't agree with "Even if you hated MARY REILLY, it would be hard to be so vitriolic towards it once Julia Roberts had shaken your hand."

I believe one wouldn't be vitriolic toward Julia nor state their hatred for the film to her - but I don't think it would sway opinion on the film.

But if one *is* going to open their mouth and say something - positive or negative - they should do it with integrity. Better to shake the hand and say thanks for coming out than to fabricate something to say which is contrary to your opinion.

In this particular scenario, had Anthony PMd me after I posted my opinions, I would have thanked him for his message and that although he might not have liked what I wrote, those were my feelings and that I hope he doesn't take it personally.

I wouldn't feel guilty, embarrased, motivated to change anything I wrote, etc. When I write things whether on here, another message board or even many face to face conversations, I natually assume that what I say can be read (or heard) by anyone.

But that's just me.

[Craig]

Posted: 11/14/05 at 11:39am

p.s.

Wanted to respond to this "I don't think any artists reading these boards would want BS from people on here, whether it be overly negative for the sake of being so or kiss-ass positive. I just think they want honesty. "

Exactly. What people don't like are attacks on people or vitriol for the sake of vitriol. I don't think ANYONE would begrudge a well thought out opinion stated favorably or not about a show, performance, etc. In fact, many would love to know what's working and not working, etc.

But NO one (in the industry or not) wants to read personal and nasty comments about them in public.