Casting for RENT- Page 3

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 3:13pm

Add me to the list of people that would be okay with never seeing Rent again after Monday. It was just too perfect and I don't want to ruin that with the lackluster performances I've come to accept as my only choice over the years.

The actors claim they love the show, but if they love the show so much, why do they look so bored onstage?

Updated On: 4/28/06 at 03:13 PM

[BroadwayGirl107]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 3:43pm

"If you're going to compare that performance to a regular one, then you should also be comparing it to a regular one of the OBC..."

I did not see Monday night's performance. The revelation everyone is comign to as a result of Monday night is one I came to years ago with having NOTHING to compare the show to. In fact, it was until I saw a crappy, deteriorating "visual representation" of the OBC that I realized what kind of life this show DOES have when given the treatment in DESERVES. The only reason I saw the show for a second time was because Will Chase, who I knew from experience WAS a passionate, talented actor who'd bring life to the show was cast.

"but you can't compare what those original 15 had, the history with the show, the bonding, the excitement of taking a show which started as a small job with slim possibilities and seeing it move to the huge hit that it was on Broadway, with the experience that ANY cast has had since then"

No, you can't. But good actors and tight direction and musical direction CAN bring it DAMN close.

"They're not doing it because of the history of Rent, they're doing it to earn a living doing what they love to do."
Many actors would argue with that statement and say that the passion for your work should be your number one concern, not so much your paycheck. Acting is storytelling and entertainment, and if the actors are not investing enough into what has been called a "life-changing" piece to make it "life-changing" frankly, as an actor myself, I don't think they're doing their jobs.

"I've suggested this to people before but I think that if you folks are seriously unhappy with the show as it is currently being performed, there's an easy solution. Stay home! Sometimes people see the show TOO often and it loses something when that is the case. Probably 95% or more of the audience on any given night are seeing it for the first time, and the last, and I'd be willing to bet that most of those people enjoy the show. "

That's the problem. "Stay home!" is a rather sad solution. "Stay home" should not be the solution. The solution should be to give the piece the treatment it deserves. And like I mentioned, I've seen the show twice, the first time being almost three years ago exactly, and I hated it. There was ONE good person in that cast (Caren Lyn Manuel). Imagine watching a story in which the storytellers themselves do not want to, do not care to, can not understand how to tell YOU the story. How is one to enjoy that? And no, I didn't walk out thinking they were slackers, rather, it gave off the impression that the show itself was just lacking in all sorts of ways. Now, do I think every teenager who walks out of the show is going to react the way I did? No. But I'll bet ANYTHING the effect on them will not be as deep or profound as it can be and has been for many others UNLESS something is done.

Instead of figuring that the people going in may not have standards, why not aim to go beyond their standards and blow them away? Would Larson have wanted any less? And why would any actor want any less? Why would any fan of the show SETTLE for less?
Updated On: 4/28/06 at 03:43 PM

[notsovirginmary]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 4:12pm

This is hearsay, as I am not a Rent cast member, but it did come directly from the mouth of someone who was.

RE: Maureen playing for laughs;
they have been instructed/directed to do so for some time now. Somewhere along the line an actress did a wacky/funny interpretation of the role, the audience laughed, and someone decided that laughter was more important then the honest/real portrayal of the character.

I spoke with a performer who understudied Maureen, and after her first show she said that most of the notes she was given were things like “funnier during over the moon” “funnier during make up scene.”

It makes me very sad, because if this stuff is coming from the higher ups, there is a good chance that the show will remain this way was no matter who is cast.

Updated On: 4/28/06 at 04:12 PM

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 4:14pm

I think the trouble was that *unless* it was played as more directly comic than the original intent was for it to be, audience weren't "getting" it and weren't laughing -- they didn't think Maureen was funny unless she was playing for laughs, which, to me, is the fault of the actress. You're supposed to laugh at her because she takes herself so seriously.

That bugs me, too.

[BroadwayGirl107]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 4:20pm

Yeah. Now you're leading me to fawn over Idina. :P But what she did very well was play a CHARACTER and she nailed it (And I don't mean that there is only one way to play it. I mean that she found an attitude that worked entirely for Maureen's place in the show AND worked for Idina Menzel the person and she committed to it). She really didn't need to have concerns about whether or not people were laughing at whatever lines because since she was doing her job, they were laughing at the absurdity of the character. Not the absurdity of how the actress was playing the character. Or what silly dance moves she could come up with (notice how Idina Menzel has like...one little hand motion she uses. Not a whole load of "physical comedy" tricks up her sleeve that really don't do much anyway...)

If a director has to tell someone to "be funnier in OTM," I'm not sure she's got the acting chops to handle it to begin with.

[Katt]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 4:27pm

This bugs me in a lot of scenes. I don't think any of it should be played for laughs, it should come naturally without the actors forcing it. Over The Moon should be funny because Maureen takes herself so seriously, but in truth is really horrible. The bag lady part shouldn't be funny, and that whole spitting thing or whatever that Frenchie does is just obnoxious. Matt bugged me in Tango Maureen because he was trying to hard to get the audience to laugh, and it's not necessary. And also, my personal opinion is that when Maureen is talking about Angel being "So much more original then any of us" at his funeral should never be funny, yet it is always laughed at.

Updated On: 4/28/06 at 04:27 PM

[notsovirginmary]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 4:42pm

But this actress DID play Maureen straight, her Over The Moon was very intense and you really got the impression that it was the most important thing in the world to her.
It was funny, but in my opinion not hoot and holler funny.

The next time I saw her she was doing the same shtick that every Maureen does (the silly hand gestures, weird dance moves, etc. ) And according to her the actresses are not given the room to interpret the role any other way.

Katt: I always laugh at Maureen’s eulogy; I think that was written to be amusing in a bittersweet way. It’s funny because it’s true.

[Katt]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 4:45pm

Well, like I said, it's just my personal opinion. I can see why you find it funny, but, it was always just sad to me.

[ElphabaRose]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 4:46pm

I'm now a little scared to go back to Rent. I went last March (and thought that Caplan was phoning in then), but the show means so much to me that I like to go about once a year. I was planning to go in May. Does anyone have a definite date for Caplan's departure? Because if I can, I'd rather go after he leaves in June.

[erinrebecca]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 5:55pm

Broadwaygirl, I'm glad you enjoyed Will. I did, too. I also enjoyed him when he was originally with the show, and in his other shows, all of which I've seen. I respect your opinion, as I do everyone's, but I have to say that of all the performances of the show that I've seen, I can think of probably less than five which I didn't actually enjoy. Maybe I've been lucky, but I think it's more than that. I, too, am an actor, just finishing my junior year at Tisch, so I'm often looking at a show from a different perspective than others may be. I try not to let this influence my viewing of a show too much, though. I think it's a mistake to go into a show, any show, and analyze every small detail.

I tend to do this more often with shows I see once or twice than I do with shows I see more often, funnily enough. As I said in one of my previous posts, I'm not disputing the possibility that there could be some better cast choices out there right now. I think many of us who have loved the show for ten years have favorites who we would love to return, or other actors in the Broadway community who we would love to see onstage at the Neder.

For longrunning shows like this, it's not all that common to inject the cast with a majority of brand new talent. When it's been done at Rent, it has met with mixed results, and I think that this is often the reason why there is so much 'recycling' in the show. That, and the fact that there are literally hundreds of former castmembers floating around. With a talent pool like that, one which doesn't require a huge amount of rehearsal time, people whose work ethic and performance standards you know, it's not unusual or unreasonable that they're brought back.

I think that there's the possibility that a new Mark will bring about a big change in the show for those who are tired of Matt. The role is pivotal in terms of the effect it has on the rest of the cast and also on the audience's perception of the show. I'm anxious to hear what they finally decide, and hopeful that they'll make the decision which I hope they will!

I didn't mean to imply that passion didn't exist in current castmembers. It certainly does, and the people I know in the cast feel blessed with the opportunity to play their roles. They ARE earning a living, however, and that was my point. They're thankful to be in the show but they're not in the show because of the history, or story, or their love for it, they're in it because it pays them well, in doing what they love to do. That doesn't mean that they aren't passionate about their craft.

My comment that some fans should "stay home" was directed at those who don't want to risk ruining their fond memories of Monday night with a lesser performance by the current cast. Too often fans of the show go to see it FAR too often. I know many who are posting reviews on a weekly basis, and sometimes more than that! When you see any show that often, it's going to lose its magic, regardless of the performances onstage. Too much of ANYthing isn't good. I also never suggested that the majority of people in the seats at the Neder had lesser expectations, simply that they are seeing it in a fresh and new light and don't view the show with the critical eye that frequent fans do.

[Dramatic_Irony]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 6:08pm

I too saw the OBC anniversary on Monday, and feel that it would be unfair of me to see *any* other performance of Rent in the near future, because I would be making unfair comparisons. Nothing can compare to the unique bond that the OBC has with each other, brought on by all the experiences they've shared.

However, long before Monday, I almost dreaded seeing some parts of the current cast's performance, simply because I knew it was *not* going to be done correctly. And by coreectly I don't mean "the way the original cast did it" but playing unnecessarily for laughs, not *getting* the meaning of the words that are coming out of their mouths.

I would like to say that things would get better when Matt Caplan leaves, I really would, but he's not the only problem. Instead, I fear that with him leaving, the other actors will lose all semblance of direction. He's been there a very long time, after all, and unfortunately many of the other cast members take their lead from him.

Updated On: 4/28/06 at 06:08 PM

[wickedrentq]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 6:12pm

I don't think it's ALWAYS true that seeing shows over and over gets tiring, and you tend to think the cast is getting worse. It may be for most people, but there are a few who that is simply not the case. The one show I've seen "over and over" seems to be getting better with each viewing.

[Dramatic_Irony]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 6:19pm

Sweeney Todd has all the vivacity for many, many viewings- I don't think that show gets tiring seeing it "over and over". (Sorry for the slight threadjack, but I don't think seeing a show too many times necessarily means that it gets tiring.)

[To The Stage!]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 6:38pm

I think rent needs a fresh new cast and bring some new life to the show.

I didn't even cry the last time I saw rent..that makes me sad.

[Jimbo2]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 6:46pm

I'm going to see RENT next Saturday for the first time since Anthony left the show. After being at the benefit and seeing the Original cast hundres of times I'm sure it won't be half as good but I'm going to try and go with an open mind, not comparing the current cast and remembering all the fun times I had back in '96. Jimbo

[CrAzIaBoUtReNt]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 6:50pm

Here are my thoughts:

-Matt WAS a good Mark...but now his time has come.
-Never saw Tim, but Will Chase rocked my world
-Antonique is extremely talented, but I believe her talents should be used somewhere other than Rent...
-Justin. Just, wow. Best Angel I have ever seen. I'll be extremely sad when he leaves. If there was anyone I could keep fomr this cast, it would no doubt be Justin.
-Destan's really annoying voice makes me want to leave the theatre. He has a good voice, but when he holds a note for a while and it starts to "wobble", it really gets annoying. And he seems emotionless. He can leave, let me hold the door.
-Ava, again, has talent, but shouldn't be using it in Rent. I want her to go. I won't be sad at all.
-Kenna rocks. Amazing voice. I wouldn't be sad if she left, but I will be happy that I got to see her.
-D'Monroe, please leave. Never liked his Benny. And the last time we had a new Benny was....please get us a new Benny.

Well, thats all I have to say besides that this makes me sad and that I hope that the cast changes soon. They need a cast who can reach out and bring the audience into the show, which is defenetly not what the current cast has been up to lately.

EDIT: Oh yeah. The band is lacking energy too. I've heard bands from the 90's and its ROCKING OUT, but now its not even half as exciting.
Updated On: 4/28/06 at 06:50 PM

[citrustwist]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 7:18pm

I admit, I'm kind of surprised by how different my opinion is from almost everyone else who has posted on this thread (aside from erinrebecca)!

I've been seeing Rent for over five years now, and I've seen the show many, many times. I've seen more than 10 actors in every lead role, in some cases upwards of 15. I've seen Matt Caplan more than most people could even fathom seeing the show. I did not go to the show Monday night, I would have liked to, but it upsets me more that I missed the last five minutes than that I missed the whole two hours before it. Why? Because I do not, and have never, thought that OBC was the best cast. Granted, I never saw them live, and I'm sure that if I had, I'd feel at least slightly differently, but it makes little to no sense to compare the current Broadway cast to the original Broadway cast, especially on Monday night. The current cast is not the best cast I've seen. Most of my favorites have come and gone, and I admit, it's kind of a different show when your favorites finally move on. But I was there Tuesday night, and that show still shines bright. I feel sorry for the people who are so wrapped up in convincing people that Matt Caplan is bored or Antonique has too deep a voice that they can't see that the amazing and powerful things about that show that will never disappear, despite whatever shortcomings the current cast may have, which in itself is arguable. I feel sorry for those who feel like they never will be able to see that again. But, I guess that's the point of different opinions, eh?



Updated On: 4/28/06 at 07:18 PM

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 8:03pm

WIll Chase was SO good that he made everyone else look like high school kids up there; he absolutely stole every scene he was in, and gave more passion in his performance alone than everyone else in the cast did combined. He was such a blessing to that show for the month he was there.

[BroadwayGirl107]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 8:37pm

"I think it's a mistake to go into a show, any show, and analyze every small detail."

Frankly, the first time I saw the show when I hated it, I wasn't doing that. I was fourteen. And I still could not help but notice what a mess I was watching.

"I didn't mean to imply that passion didn't exist in current castmembers. It certainly does"

Damn. They could have fooled me. The last time I saw Rent, I think I was viewing one of the least passionate performances I've ever seen of a show. Save for Will Chase and Karmine Alers (who, I think, was by no means great, but she was adequate, and infinitely better than the rest of the cast.)

"When you see any show that often, it's going to lose its magic, regardless of the performances onstage."
Are you SURE about that? I've probably watched that same old deteriorating "visual" of the original cast I mentioned earlier more times than you've seen different performances of the show, and I was absolutely enchanted every time.

"I also never suggested that the majority of people in the seats at the Neder had lesser expectations, simply that they are seeing it in a fresh and new light and don't view the show with the critical eye that frequent fans do."
Is it really a matter of a critical eye, though? Maybe they won't walk out as disappointed as a true Rent fan, but I really would be surprised if ANYONE walked into the show nowadays and was moved as fully as someone who saw the show in the first few years it was around. And JUST because they're not COMPLAINING about it doesn't mean it's not a problem. The problem is people are actually walking out thinking that what is going on at the Nederlander these days is Rent. But it's really not.



Updated On: 4/28/06 at 08:37 PM

[LeaGirl]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 8:49pm

Score on your last sentence there. Just score.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 8:52pm

I agree. Score.

[CrAzIaBoUtReNt]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 8:54pm

"The problem is people are actually walking out thinking that what is going on at the Nederlander these days is Rent. But it's really not. "

Amen.

[citrustwist]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 8:57pm

I'm just curious, but then what exactly IS Rent? Aside from the OBC performing it, what exactly do you demand from the performance for it to qualify as actually being the show? Are you really implying that the cast has to be spot on perfect and as passionate as you think they should be for the show to mean anything at all? What does that say about the show itself, then? And if the show currently going on at the Nederlander isn't Rent, then what IS it? Lastly, should I feel dumb that I really enjoyed and got the message of the show THIS WEEK with that cast, because apparently, I wasn't watching Rent?
Updated On: 4/28/06 at 08:57 PM

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 9:02pm

I figured someone would be facetious. The show you see is *obviously* Rent. For cryin' out loud.

BUT so much of what makes Rent moving and gorgeous and brilliant is the raw, passionate emotion. And I'm sorry, but it's not there like it should be. It's not about perfection; the OBC is not perfect. But they're in tune with the material and they displayed raw, hard emotion when they played those characters. And yes, there are actors who were not in the OBC who can do that.

[LeaGirl]

Posted: 4/28/06 at 9:09pm

I've seen the show more times than I can even count. I even used to usher for tours when I was stuck in North Carolina so I could see them the whole time they were in town.

I've seen casts of Rent that were... very "Rent" - it's just a bit diluted NOW and that needs to change. Don't be facetious, it doesn't have anything to do with the current cast not being the OBC. Like Emcee said.