Has RENT film release date changed??? — Page 2

Right - don't have to tell me that. LOL

---

The film will not be post-poned. It can't be! I say that it will always say that 11.11 is when RENT will be in theaters, hands down.

---

If they run behind schedule, I can see a Thanksgiving opening. They won't want to run it at Christmas with THE PRODUCERS.

I agree its a Fall film. NOT Summer. If the delay is true, I would rather a Nov 2006 release than a May 2006 release.

It's also better to be released in the Fall in terms of Oscar buzz.

---

I agree that the film will be lost on a summer release in between all the blockbusters and I also agree that the release of a film sometimes changes. However, I don't remember a film that has specified an EXACT date being delayed. It is different to say "coming soon" or "coming Fall 2005" and then change it, but RENT has a specific date 11.11.05. That means that there are already detailed plans for distribution, marketing, promotion etc. towards the specific date that will not be easy to overturn. Anyawy, I guess we will find out soon, but I sure hope the original date stands.

RENT will hopefully be a wonderful film. But don't hold your breath for it to be a major Oscar bait movie. If it's really great, it could maybe garner an acting nom or two, but the majority of Oscar voters are your grandparents age (60+) which is hardly the target audience of the film. Plus Chris Columbus is a director like Joel Schumacher (PHANTOM) who's work is looked down on by the majority of Hollywood.

And RENT is going to be up agaisnt a lot of bigger, more Oscar friendly, year end fare: THE PRODUCERS, MEMOIRS OF A GEISHA, CINDERELLA MAN, ALL THE KINGS'S MEN etc.

More important then awards is for the film to be a hit. It would help keep the show running on Broadway and would help foster additional film work for the cast and encourage production on other movie musicals. Who could realisticaly ask for more than that?

Because The Producers was already a movie. And Mel Brooks is already successful in Hollywood, while few people there have heard of Jonathan Larson. And Nathan Lane and Matthew Broderick are more well-known in Hollywood than anyone in the Rent movie. And The Producers appeals to a greater generational audience then Rent.

And The Producers is a more recent Broadway phenomenon, so more people are familiar with the Lane-Broderick hype with the show. Remember when both of them came back for a few months? People who usually could care less about Broadway were talking about that. The Rent OBC was a phenomenom 9 years ago, so the majority of average theater-goers won't remember the original hype behind the OBC.

Don't get me wrong, I'm bitter about The Producers' musical movie, because I've loved the original movie for years, and would love for Rent to come out on top. But considering the politics in Hollywood, I have to agree with Michael Bennett.

Although wouldn't it be funny if Nathan Lane and Adam Pascal both received Oscar nominations for Best Actor? Very déjà vu.

---

Updated On: 5/26/05 at 06:58 PM

I certainly think RENT at least deserves some Oscar buzz and I always figured that the market strategy was to release it in time for consideration of the Oscars so I'd be very surprised if the release date was pushed back til May of 2006. I don't know much about marketing but you'd think between the two decisions, the November release would be the obvious one to go with (unless of course there are delays in editing and a push back is unescapable.)

---

Well I say that it deserves the buzz just for all the amazingly hard work being put into it plus I'm a RENThead/obsessive so my opinion is slightly biased. :-P Won't be able to say if I think it deserves an actual oscar or not til I see it though you're right.

---