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

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.

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

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

---

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

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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

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.

---

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.

---