#26
Posted: 11/6/04 at 8:12pm
Why does it matter if EW knows crap about theater or not? Isn't it a MOVIE that is the subject at hand here????
Entertainment Weekly (the RENT movie) — Page 2
#27
Posted: 11/6/04 at 8:18pm
Like I said, they're not exactly the source I go to for my movie expertise, either. But people who don't know crap about the actors they're referring to really shouldn't make condescending implications about stage acting.
If EW had an ounce of common sense they'd realize that tons of the best movie actors are great stage actors as well- from Marlon Brando to Ian McKellen.
If EW had an ounce of common sense they'd realize that tons of the best movie actors are great stage actors as well- from Marlon Brando to Ian McKellen.
#28
Posted: 11/6/04 at 9:00pm
I used to love EW, but I've grown disinterested in these past few months. I don't know if it's the fact that I'm now more focused on theater than film/tv, or if it's because the quality of the writing has gone down, but I'm definitely not as passionate about it as I once was. Premiere is a much better source of information. The only reason I continue to read EW is for Dalton Ross (Ah, Dalton). 
#29
Posted: 11/6/04 at 9:02pm
I don't bother much with any source that isn't available online. And EW is unusually protective of its stuff, so I pretty much said, "screw them" a while ago. What I have read of them isn't that compelling.
#30
Posted: 11/6/04 at 9:30pm
FosseBoi... I'm interested in knowing why you believe the OBC are the right people for this movie?
"I'm not a catcher! I'm a piano player!" -- Schroeder from "Peanuts" ----- http://www.facebook.com/p/Brandon_Bartlett/500719306
#31
Posted: 11/6/04 at 9:38pm
If it's any consolation, a critic in Entertainment Weekly dismissed Rob Marshall's "Chicago" as a pale imitation of what one could see on stage... but alas, that blurb about the Rent film concerns a sign of doom that not only EW is mentioning. Over the next few months, you won't find yourself just criticizing EW for expressing concern about the ages of the would-be stars. I guarantee you that once casting is officially announced and it includes several people in their mid to late 30s, several sources besides EW will be predicting failure for the Rent film. Whether you want to believe them or not is obviously your choice.
#32
Posted: 11/6/04 at 10:40pm
All of the OBC mentioned to be in the movie are in their early to mid thirties, not late thirties. The oldest is Jesse Martin, and he is 35.
I don't know why you're so sure the media are going to jump all over the age issue, but I don't think it would be such a bad thing for the movie to get a little anti-hype. An audience that is pleasantly surprised is always better than one that is disappointed after hearing a lot of over-the-top hype.
I don't know why you're so sure the media are going to jump all over the age issue, but I don't think it would be such a bad thing for the movie to get a little anti-hype. An audience that is pleasantly surprised is always better than one that is disappointed after hearing a lot of over-the-top hype.
#33
Posted: 11/6/04 at 11:15pm
EW is the worst source to look at for movies theatre popular culture, its just eye candy trash. Pay no mind to them
#34
Posted: 11/6/04 at 11:26pm
Im sorry Evelyn but I have to disagree with you about the age thing, I think the people on these threads are making way too much of a hype about it, the critics will start talking once production has started and the rumours of wether the film is working out or not comes out. But the age think i don't see as a problem at all, I've seen Adam, Anthony & Jesse recently and they really have not aged that much, PEOPLE have faith in Art Direction, Costumes and of course the narrative which is the most important - if you get sucked into the narrative you won't give a rats ass about there ages. I think everyone needs to calm down about this age think and let the pros deal with it. I mean would you rather have Justin Timberlake instead of Anthony cos he supposedly age appropriate. C'mon now.
#35
Posted: 11/6/04 at 11:31pm
I don't think Evelyn's disagreeing with you. She's just saying more media outlets will be making a big deal out of it than just EW.
I'll also wager a bet that the media will be dogging having "stage actors" instead of "movie stars" in this movie. God forbid we release a musical movie without Beyonce or J.Lo!
I'll also wager a bet that the media will be dogging having "stage actors" instead of "movie stars" in this movie. God forbid we release a musical movie without Beyonce or J.Lo!
"It's not always about you!!!" (But if you think I'm referring to you anyway, then I probably am.)
"Good luck returning my ass!" - Wilhemina Slater
"This is my breakfast, lunch and f***ing dinner right here. I'm not even f***in' joking." - Colin Farrell
"Good luck returning my ass!" - Wilhemina Slater
"This is my breakfast, lunch and f***ing dinner right here. I'm not even f***in' joking." - Colin Farrell
#36
Posted: 11/6/04 at 11:31pm
Now did I say in this thread that I was against the casting based on the ages, or did I say that EW wouldn't be the last media source that criticized the OBC's casting? As much as we all want this movie to be successful, there's no sense in imagining that during any phase of its production or release, this film will receive wholly positive feedback. Ajay, there is no need to be sorry about disagreeing with me or anyone else on this thread.
#37
Posted: 11/6/04 at 11:53pm
Evelyn I was disagreeing with you about critics hyping the age angle. I really don't think they will. Thats what i meant if i was misunderstood. And I also wanted to put across that all this age stuff is simply bs, it won't be a problem I mean did Daphne really look 19 I think not. And i know on the big screen you can't get away with some things but there are alot of things you can get away with very easily, like I said trust the Art Department, and the Makeup and Costume Departments, they are pros and they know how to do there jobs.
#38
Posted: 11/7/04 at 12:29am
Hmmmm well I guess how the media will react to the casting of the OBC is a matter of opinion. But hopefully, knowing that sources besides EW are liable to criticize the casting will stop some of you from cancelling your subscriptions to EW in favor of new subscriptions to publications such as Playbill -- which includes a column by Eric Grode, who has not had positive things to say in response to news about Rent (not that I'm denouncing him for it; I happen to like the guy's columns even when I disagree with them). I also wouldn't bank on the makeup artist going out of his/her way to make the cast look younger. As Whiteboy_Spice (that's his name, right?) wrote on the 'Latebreaking' thread, Rent doesn't specify ages for any of its characters besides Mimi. With that in mind, it's possible that Columbus and co. will just expect people to view this as a story of people in their twenties and thirties struggling with various issues.
#39
Posted: 11/7/04 at 12:53am
Well, I've already stated numerous times that I REALLY don't want for them to do this movie. The reason of why I want the OBC to do it,TVBOY(your cute if thats you in the pic), is because I think they would know what Jonathan would have wanted, better than enyone els besides his parents. I just feel VERY strongly that it should be done the way Jonathan would have wanted it done.
That was just answering the 2 questions I got.
That was just answering the 2 questions I got.
"I've always secretly longed for an actress to get to the top of the cherry picker and projectile vomit all over the guards below."- Wonderwaiter in the "Defy Gravity?" thread.
~~~~~~~~My dream? Sutton Foster as Cassie in A Chorus Line
#40
Posted: 11/7/04 at 1:56am
FosseBoi, thanks for the answer -- and yes, that is me in the pic. Thanks for the compliment as well :)
I work in the media, so I feel I can say this... I can tell you're a theatre lover because you are passionate about carrying out Larson's vision. Unfortunately, when a film producer obtains the rights to a script, they have the authority to change what they want - in a way that best suits their medium. (Broadway does this too. Look at "Wicked." Nothing like the book.) In film, you also have to package the show to cater to more than "theatre lovers," since it will be shown across the country and not just at the Nederlander on 41st. The show already has controversy and sex appeal, now they just need the big names and pretty faces to pack the movie theatres. (After all, it's all about money. Contrary to what they say, they couldn't care less about what Larson wants. They just want to make a profit.) A huge way of making a profit is to give Middle America what it wants -- controversy, sex, big names, and pretty faces. Unfortunately, this is what the media wants as well. Plus, keep in mind, a movie-musical is almost doomed before production even starts.
I was just having a discussion the other day with someone about the movie "Camp." There's a lot of talent in that movie, but Middle America has never heard of anyone in the cast. Unfortunately, most of the time in movies, name recognition wins out over talent.
I agree with you. I would like to see this movie made the right way, as it's performed nightly on stage. Who knows. We could be surprised. Maybe it will be a huge success.
Oh, and the next time you want to read about theatre, don't pick up EW! If they didn't have something to complain about, they wouldn't have a magazine!
I work in the media, so I feel I can say this... I can tell you're a theatre lover because you are passionate about carrying out Larson's vision. Unfortunately, when a film producer obtains the rights to a script, they have the authority to change what they want - in a way that best suits their medium. (Broadway does this too. Look at "Wicked." Nothing like the book.) In film, you also have to package the show to cater to more than "theatre lovers," since it will be shown across the country and not just at the Nederlander on 41st. The show already has controversy and sex appeal, now they just need the big names and pretty faces to pack the movie theatres. (After all, it's all about money. Contrary to what they say, they couldn't care less about what Larson wants. They just want to make a profit.) A huge way of making a profit is to give Middle America what it wants -- controversy, sex, big names, and pretty faces. Unfortunately, this is what the media wants as well. Plus, keep in mind, a movie-musical is almost doomed before production even starts.
I was just having a discussion the other day with someone about the movie "Camp." There's a lot of talent in that movie, but Middle America has never heard of anyone in the cast. Unfortunately, most of the time in movies, name recognition wins out over talent.
I agree with you. I would like to see this movie made the right way, as it's performed nightly on stage. Who knows. We could be surprised. Maybe it will be a huge success.
Oh, and the next time you want to read about theatre, don't pick up EW! If they didn't have something to complain about, they wouldn't have a magazine!
"I'm not a catcher! I'm a piano player!" -- Schroeder from "Peanuts" ----- http://www.facebook.com/p/Brandon_Bartlett/500719306
Updated On: 11/7/04 at 01:56 AM
#41
Posted: 11/7/04 at 2:06am
Agree that TVBoy is hot as all get up. It must be said. No one ever complained about blushing...
The only other thing I have to add with regard to this movie getting some favorable press around its release - despite the likely absence of big names - is that a great trailer could be a boost. This is part of the reason why I advocated stylized costumes and settings. If the studio doesn't have Catherine Zeta-Jones or Richard Gere (or even Taye Diggs) to appear on the posters, then at least they can draw attention with something colorful.
Speaking of Camp, wasn't Idina Menzel listed as a singer for that film? I have the movie on the floor beside me now, and I can't figure out when she appears (or sings voiceover).
The only other thing I have to add with regard to this movie getting some favorable press around its release - despite the likely absence of big names - is that a great trailer could be a boost. This is part of the reason why I advocated stylized costumes and settings. If the studio doesn't have Catherine Zeta-Jones or Richard Gere (or even Taye Diggs) to appear on the posters, then at least they can draw attention with something colorful.
Speaking of Camp, wasn't Idina Menzel listed as a singer for that film? I have the movie on the floor beside me now, and I can't figure out when she appears (or sings voiceover).
#42
Posted: 11/7/04 at 2:15am
Evelyn -- You're too nice. And I was really blushing on this end
You made a great point and hit the nail on the head. Promotion will be essential to Rent's success. Hopefully they will hire a good promotion team that will make a flashy, edgy movie trailer and TV promos that will sell the show.
You made a great point and hit the nail on the head. Promotion will be essential to Rent's success. Hopefully they will hire a good promotion team that will make a flashy, edgy movie trailer and TV promos that will sell the show.
"I'm not a catcher! I'm a piano player!" -- Schroeder from "Peanuts" ----- http://www.facebook.com/p/Brandon_Bartlett/500719306
#43
Posted: 11/7/04 at 3:19am
Well, knock on wood! From Eric Grode's November 7, 2004 article in Playbill:
"Why am I so annoyed at the news that Revolution Studios, the folks writing the checks for the “Rent” movie, are considering five of the eight stars from the 1996 original cast? It’s not because Adam Pascal and Anthony Rapp, two of the folks being sought after, play the roles that most young actors would most covet. It’s not because the only actor to win a Tony for his Rent work, Wilson Jermain Heredia, is not being considered to sign on. It’s not even because the show’s message of living and dying young would be muted a bit by the fact that some of these guys are pushing 35. (And since they’re all supposed to be playing peers, that means the entire cast would have to be more or less that age.)"
"The real problem isn’t that different from when this crew started leaving for other projects and Rent began recasting. The alchemic chemistry generated by that fantastic original cast had to be replicated as closely and predictably as possible: The producers wanted a black Benny, a Latina Mimi, a white Roger, etc., etc. It undermined the gender- and color-blind world that Jonathan Larson had worked so hard to create, and that same timidity can be seen now. Recapturing the lightning of that original production will be awfully hard to do no matter what, and news like this doesn’t do much to restore my confidence."
"Why am I so annoyed at the news that Revolution Studios, the folks writing the checks for the “Rent” movie, are considering five of the eight stars from the 1996 original cast? It’s not because Adam Pascal and Anthony Rapp, two of the folks being sought after, play the roles that most young actors would most covet. It’s not because the only actor to win a Tony for his Rent work, Wilson Jermain Heredia, is not being considered to sign on. It’s not even because the show’s message of living and dying young would be muted a bit by the fact that some of these guys are pushing 35. (And since they’re all supposed to be playing peers, that means the entire cast would have to be more or less that age.)"
"The real problem isn’t that different from when this crew started leaving for other projects and Rent began recasting. The alchemic chemistry generated by that fantastic original cast had to be replicated as closely and predictably as possible: The producers wanted a black Benny, a Latina Mimi, a white Roger, etc., etc. It undermined the gender- and color-blind world that Jonathan Larson had worked so hard to create, and that same timidity can be seen now. Recapturing the lightning of that original production will be awfully hard to do no matter what, and news like this doesn’t do much to restore my confidence."
#44
Posted: 11/7/04 at 6:18am
amen TVBoy. VERY well stated. Most people don't "get" how it works.
broadwayguy2 agrees as well... TVBoy is quite the hottie.
broadwayguy2 agrees as well... TVBoy is quite the hottie.
#45
Posted: 11/7/04 at 9:16am
i agree with the article completely. having seen the chbosky script, you need 20-somethings to play the roles.
#46
Posted: 11/7/04 at 9:20am
I'm only 16! I don't know most of those earlier movies. I saw a Beatiful Mind, but I was young and it bored me. Back the I didn't even know who Anthony Rapp was.
Megan Mullally as Karen Walker on Will and Grace: "Tell me more. Tell me more. Like does he have a car?"
#47
Posted: 11/7/04 at 9:24am
what does that have to do with anything? its movie ages, not your own age
#48
Posted: 11/7/04 at 10:18pm
Why does it matter if EW knows crap about theater or not? Isn't it a MOVIE that is the subject at hand here????
Exactly. When I read that the other day, I couldn't help but give that some reasonable thought. While some of them may look good in person or even on TV, being convincing looking on a screen 50 feet high is a whole other animal. We have to consider the MOVIE being true to the spirit of the show, and maybe some sacrifices from the original production do have to be made.
Hey, you at least have to give them credit EW for mentioning the Chris Columbus uncertainty.
"Hey little girls, look at all the men in shiny shirts and no wives!" - Jackie Hoffman, Xanadu, 19 Feb 2008
Exactly. When I read that the other day, I couldn't help but give that some reasonable thought. While some of them may look good in person or even on TV, being convincing looking on a screen 50 feet high is a whole other animal. We have to consider the MOVIE being true to the spirit of the show, and maybe some sacrifices from the original production do have to be made.
Hey, you at least have to give them credit EW for mentioning the Chris Columbus uncertainty.
"Hey little girls, look at all the men in shiny shirts and no wives!" - Jackie Hoffman, Xanadu, 19 Feb 2008
#49
Posted: 11/7/04 at 11:23pm
In that PBS documentary on the Broadway musical, the director of the Lion King made an interesting point that could easily apply to this discussion as well...in both theater productions and movies, people know what they are seeing isn't real. They (usually) know that they are seeing a show or movie. I think the idea is deemed suspension of disbelief or something along those lines. That being said, the movie isn't casting people to be these people; they are casting people to play these roles and I honestly don't think the age questions brought up will really be an issue. Its not like they are casting Chita Rivera as Mimi; people above the age of thirty play twentysomethings all the time. The Playbill guy talks about the irony of older actors playing characters dying young; well to me, dying at 30 is still dying young. If members of the OBC are willing and able to reprise their roles, I say go for it. Honestly, with this particular movie, bringing back members of the OBC will probably attract more Rentheads (who've listened to the OBR but never seen the OBC), than stunt casting would.
Again, just my opinion...sorry its long, I was inspired
Again, just my opinion...sorry its long, I was inspired
"Commit a little mortal sin, its good for the soul"
#50
Posted: 11/8/04 at 5:03pm
I feel that since I started this thread, all the remarks about not to look at EW for theatre stuff, is toward me. I have all ready stated NUMEROUS TIMES that I DONT LOOK AT EW FOR THEATRE STUFF!! I was only looking through it. Evelyn- I have something to say about that article you posted. I do agree with some of that, but I dissagree with Mimi not having to be Hispanic. She does need to be since one of the phone messages has her HISPANIC mother in it.
I would like to know if others agree or dissagree with me on this.
I would like to know if others agree or dissagree with me on this.
"I've always secretly longed for an actress to get to the top of the cherry picker and projectile vomit all over the guards below."- Wonderwaiter in the "Defy Gravity?" thread.
~~~~~~~~My dream? Sutton Foster as Cassie in A Chorus Line
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $95