I truly am sorry, but... — Page 2

Well, I certainly think the prospect of Rent having ended up for eternity as a TV miniseries would've been awful.

Not to say that people who had done the roles on stage AFTER the OBC couldn't have been just as good -- before I realized that the OBC members truly weren't too old to pull it off, I was pulling for lesser-known actors who had at least played the roles on stage at one point or another. They could've given great performances, too, but there's a bond that you can't deny they'd be lacking.

I think Justin has talent. I don't enjoy his work and I think he's waaay overrated, but he has talent. If he ever goes anywhere near Roger, though, I will not be happy. His voice is all wrong, and he has the acting skills of a hard-boiled egg.

I thought Christina was up for Maureen, but whatever; it's moot.

My "Raúl as Angel" campaign is usually accompanied by "if he were a few years younger and a few pounds skinner," but I didn't want to be mean.

---

DMB: You're being SLIGHTLY ridiculous. Eminem doesn't even sing. You could also argue that someone like Madonna is talented. It's widely agreed that she is. But does that mean that she should be in the RENT movie - or COULD be in the movie? No, absolutely not - so your Eminem analogy is pointless.

You don't think casting Rosario Dawson is any more or less a sell-out than casting Timberlake? Furthermore, you don't think that making a major motion picture of RENT is a sell-out? Of course, yes, it kind of is. Just because RENT features themes about not selling out, etc., doesn't mean that the entire show/story should always be marketed according to the beliefs of the characters put forth in the show - that's just ABSURD.

---

Well, Rosario was a smart choice for the part. I don't think if Justin had done it, people would be saying the same. And her name is *definitely* not as powerful.

---

DMB: You're being SLIGHTLY ridiculous. Eminem doesn't even sing. You could also argue that someone like Madonna is talented. It's widely agreed that she is. But does that mean that she should be in the RENT movie - or COULD be in the movie? No, absolutely not - so your Eminem analogy is pointless.

You don't think casting Rosario Dawson is any more or less a sell-out than casting Timberlake? Furthermore, you don't think that making a major motion picture of RENT is a sell-out? Of course, yes, it kind of is. Just because RENT features themes about not selling out, etc., doesn't mean that the entire show/story should always be marketed according to the beliefs of the characters put forth in the show - that's just ABSURD.

A) I was being completely sarcastic about Eminem. However, in the film the drug dealer really didn't have that many lines...they COULD have plopped someone like Eminem in that role, but thank god up above they didn't.
B) I was going to mention it in my other post...when I first heard that Rosario was going to be in it, I thought "Well I guess they had to get some well known actress in there" and really wasn't too happy about the idea of it, I didn't think she could pull it off -- but then I realized....wait, Rosario really has not been in that much, and she's not really an A-list celebrity, regardless of the films she's been in. She's up and coming. So in the end, I didn't mind, and I think she did really well with Mimi.
C) I totally agree with you that Rent even going "Hollywood" has sold it out to some degree. That's WHY it is so important that the OBC got to stay in there, to balance it out. I mean...look what they did with the Chicago film. (Granted, I really enjoyed that film a lot!) -- I'm just thanking our lucky stars they didn't cast A-list movie stars to hype up the film. It really does have that indie feel to it, which I had just read in a review a few minutes ago, and really like about the film. It's Hollywood, but yet...it's not.

---

What magic? Please someone explain to me the "magic" of the original cast. I saw the OBC I saw the LA show. I saw the Boston show. I don't understand what this "magic" is. All of these casts had the magic you speak of. They are ACTORS playing roles. If you cast the right people in a good piece of material the "magic" I think you speak of will exist. If its a good piece of work, which we can all agree Rent is, then cast the best people for the roles and the work will shine through. Some actors are better at what they do than others. I saw many many people play these roles who were far better than the original cast. I also believe that some of the original cast were incredible. They should have cast the movie with the best people for the roles. The best talent, the appropriate ages, and the best actors and singers who could put people in the seats of the theatre so people could experience the message that Jonathon Larson was trying to convey. Its not about the OBC its about Jonathon and his work, and the best way to convey his message was to cast the appropriate people in 2005 with the most talent.

Like I said, Raul could go either way.

As for the OBC, it's quite simple. Maybe there are better actors out there. But this material is a huge part of their lives. And no, that's not to say that it's not just as important to subsequent actors, etc, etc, but they all have a bond that you can't re-create from having been through losing Jonathan together, and from having been integral in the *creation* of these characters. No matter acting or singing talent, that's something real and person that you can't recreate. They know what Jonathan would've wanted.

---

There isn't going to be a war trust me. But I do get it. Trust me. But to say that the OBC are the best people to play these roles right now just because they knew Jonathon personally, is to say that the only way that this musical works at its best is when these people play the roles. I happen to think its so good that it works with good actors. And if you are going to make a film about it, then you should put the best actors in it. If these people are the only people who can play these roles that is sad to me, because then I guess it will die with them. Its a piece of art, there isn't one way to perform or interpret this piece. Original casts are great, but sometimes revivals are better because new people who are coming to it fresh have an opportunity to bring to the fore what may have been missing originally. I think it was a missed opportunity to shine a new light on a great work.

Think about this, though. The people playing the parts on Broadway right now are all very talented, individually. But they lack a connection to each other; there are no sparks. Sometimes talent isn't all you need. Certainly a group of young, talented actors could've been found and hopefully would've bonded and connected, but I think Columbus made the right choice -- he saw the sparks the OBC had that have never been recreated in the same way. The show is good and can play itself when given talent, but it's not the best it can be if they don't connect; and the strongest connection is had by the OBC, because of what they experienced together.

Exactly.

These new cast members on stage...they ARE great! But...they're all coming in and out and there's new people here and there ....the OBC started all together....they gave life to this story, the ARE the mom's and dad's, right along with Jonathan. You (rican) have a point...it is of course valid to say they should be using the best actors, the right age group, etc etc ....but I think it's a really important thing, respectful to Jonathan, that they kept the OBC. It's like a rebirth, almost. It's the way it should be. If anyone was going to try and give Rent a life on film, it SHOULD be those who gave it life in the first place. Don't you think?

But I'm biased. If I knew nothing about Rent...would I feel the same way? Probably not. I dunno.

---

No, that clearly *isn't* what he thinks.

The last time I saw Rent on stage, it felt phoned-in, lifeless and tired, regardless of how individually talented the actors were. It's on autopilot; just going through the motions. That's not how Rent should be.

ETA -- like two years.

---

Updated On: 11/29/05 at 01:13 PM

Chris Columbus didn't see anything. You think he brought them in together and saw the "magic"? He saw an easy way to make a movie. You don't think that a new group of people could have bonded in a similar manner? PLEASE. They would have had a similar amount of time to bond. And would have bonded about different things for different reasons. They are actors for God sake. I think I have a little more faith in Rent than most of you do. I'm sorry.

Columbus saw the orignal cast on *stage*. That's how he knew anything about how they worked together. He didn't just up and call them to hang out with him as an easy way out. He says over and over again that he same them on Broadway.

The bond isn't about TIME. It's about experience. Haven't you ever had a meanginful friendship? It doesn't just up and form because you spent a zillion hours together. It's about what you go THROUGH together. To say that had some random people spent a bunch of time together would've result in the same thing is absolutely ABSURD.

Argue with my points on the *issue* all you want, but I take offense to the fact that now you're calling me/us out on our "faith in Rent." Don't you dare put that into this mix. It's really low.

---

Rawr. This is absurd. I'm sitting here reading Anthony Rapp's book; so, with his words in hand, *I* am "sorry," but you can't tell me with hopes of getting me to see the "light" that the connection and committment would be present in *the same way* with some other combination.

---

Updated On: 11/29/05 at 01:30 PM

I'm sitting here reading Anthony Rapp's book; so, with his words in hand

Oh, I wanted to ask you...how long is it? # of chapters, # of pages?

---