IT COULD HAVE SAVED THE FILM!!! (Rent Alternate Ending)- Page 3

[BSoBW3]

Posted: 2/22/06 at 4:11pm

Well, then. I will just have to hold out longer until I really AM the only one on this board that has not seen the movie.

This shouldn't be too hard.

[DramaDork925]

Posted: 2/22/06 at 4:13pm

My feeling is... no matter what the ending was going to be, no matter who was cast, no matter what they did, we weren't going to be happy with this movie. This show is so poignant, moving and haunting that only live theatre could handle it. A movie version, though it satisfied the basic feelings, would never have been able to encompass the emotion that live actors bring it.

[BroadwayGirl107]

Posted: 2/22/06 at 4:16pm

^I wholeheartedly disagree.

[HoshiForever]

Posted: 2/22/06 at 4:19pm

^ Me too.

[luvliza89]

Posted: 2/22/06 at 4:20pm

I think that's taking the easy way out. Live theatre holds somewhat of an edge over movies in being able to translate a certain idea or feeling, if for no other reason then because a living person is there in front of you. But I've seen a handful of movies that are able to translate such emotions and be heartfelt in the act. You can certainly feel the heat in some cases without actually witnessing the events and being able to touch them. It's easy to say it didn't deliver because it wasn't live. Many films have. I do agree that it tried to satisfy the basic feelings. It felt more of a structure of the show, then the show itself. That was my main problem with the film.

[blaxx]

Posted: 2/22/06 at 4:23pm

It is also about timing...right place and right time.
I think they took way too long to make it, but I've said that a zillion times before.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 2/22/06 at 4:24pm

I think that there could've been a movie version that was MORE satisfying to a wider range of people, but I do think that people would've been nitpicky and probably ultimately unhappy for one reason or another no matter what.

I don't really agree that it can ONLY work the way it works on stage, though. It's just different. I've seen the show again a few times in the months since the movie was released, and I've simply come to accept them as two totally different side-by-side entities.

[BSoBW3]

Posted: 2/22/06 at 4:27pm

WTF is your av, Em?

And, like Capn said - it's called an ADAPTATION.

It could be just as good - if not better.

[BroadwayGirl107]

Posted: 2/22/06 at 4:27pm

"I think they took way too long to make it, but I've said that a zillion times before."

Really? You mean they started making it too late, or that they took too long with the process of filming, editing it, putting it together, etc?

[blaxx]

Posted: 2/22/06 at 4:40pm

I mean they started making it too late.
It had a big impact a decade ago, it should've been made around the time.
And even if it is still doing well, and some of its themes are still relevant, its generation has changed much since, and now it seems to be more "memory lane" than "punch". My opinion, of course.

[BroadwayGirl107]

Posted: 2/22/06 at 4:45pm

I agree. Though I do think a well-made film would have been more well-received regardless.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 2/22/06 at 4:45pm

What, BSo? It's Adam.

[Alli579]

Posted: 2/22/06 at 5:21pm

"I just want to know if I'm mistaken about Seasons of Love being out of character? I'd always thought/heard that for that scene, the actors were... well, not themselves, but not their characters in the show, either."

I believe in Anthony's book he says that they were told to come out of character for this song and just be themselves (in the stage production).

I LOVE the alternate ending. I thought it was just beautiful, and reflected the stage production so well. However, I watched it for the first time with my sister, who has never seen the stage show, just the movie. I was in tears, and she didn't react to it at all. I had to explain to her the whole thing about how they leave Angel's space open, and in the end he comes back out etc. It's obvious that this ending would not have satisfied a regular film audience that is not familiar with the show. I feel the ending they used satisfied everyone, and was the right choice.

[BSoBW3]

Posted: 2/22/06 at 5:28pm

I know, Em.

Sadly.

But...whoa!

[uncageg]

Posted: 2/22/06 at 5:30pm

This may already have been said here, but in an interview, Chris Columbus said something to the effect that he did the opening the way he did so the audience could get used to the fact that the movie was a musical. I really didn't understand his reasoning as most people already knew they were seeing a musical. And that statement made me wish even more that Spike Lee had directed this film. Not the worst film, I will probably buy it at some point, but for me it wasn't what I had hoped for.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 2/22/06 at 5:33pm

I don't exactly think he meant it literally. Like, I don't think he did it to be like "okay, everybody, this is a musical. Just wanted to make sure you knew!!" but to ease you into having a story told through song.

[neomystyk29]

Posted: 2/22/06 at 5:43pm

While I do wish they put the alternate ending in the movie as the real ending I sincerely doubt it could have saved the film.

[uncageg]

Posted: 2/22/06 at 5:44pm

That's the way I took it. Sorry if I didn't express it that way in my post. But still, I feel %99 percent of the people seeing it knew it was a musical. Even if they hadn't seen the show or heard the music.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 2/22/06 at 5:51pm

Huh? I'm saying it *wasn't* about making sure they KNEW, per se. It's about getting used to something you're not accustomed to, which is people singing in a movie.

Updated On: 2/22/06 at 05:51 PM

[blaxx]

Posted: 2/22/06 at 5:54pm

Still didn't work. His setting was to realist to justify spontaneous singing.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 2/22/06 at 5:56pm

Okay, but to play devil's advocate, is that really his fault, or just part of the trouble with the movie musical? Would Rent work if they didn't try to make it feel real? Is there a way to make something feel as real as possible but still have people singing in the streets?

And no, I'm not looking for an answer that's like "if Columbus didn't direct, that would've fixed all the problems."

Updated On: 2/22/06 at 05:56 PM

[downtowndiva84]

Posted: 2/22/06 at 7:10pm

I actually think a lot of the trouble rests with modern audiences and not modern movie musicals. There is only so realistic that a musical can be after all, and that's why I'm really glad that Spike Lee didn't direct. I love Spike but I don't think he was the person for this film. I think it would have ended up TOO gritty and from what I've heard he wanted to cut a lot of songs that he didn't feel were "important", etc.

I think modern audiences have become really jaded. And I don't know if there's a way to fix that.

In regards to the fact that "Rent" was made too late...I don't know. It certainly captured New York in the early 90's for me in several places, so maybe that was "going down memory lane". But do people really think our generation has changed so much? The themes of the show really resonate with me to this day. More so even, now that I'm not a teenage Renthead (nothing but love to those who are)

A bunch of people told me that the whole threat of HIV/AIDS seemed really outdated to them. Those people scare me.

[Harpo]

Posted: 2/22/06 at 7:15pm

BSo - I'm the other person who hasn't seen it! Living in the sticks meant that I blinked and the movie was off the big screen. Think you are gonna win this race though, I ordered the DVD so I'll see it this weekend.

I've only seen it on stage one time, but now would like to see it again.

[BSoBW3]

Posted: 2/22/06 at 7:21pm

Ha, Harpo!

I've seen the show a few times. But not the movie.

And I won't be seeing it this weekend!

Hmmm....
YES!

[starletta8]

Posted: 2/22/06 at 7:23pm

I watched the alternate ending (and other scenes) last night.

IMHO, I think that Columbus got this one right. The alternate ending is quite beautiful and echoes the stage production, but it would've changed the emotional impact of the film.

It's been said a million times already, but film and theater are two different mediums and what works well in one doesn't always translate perfectly into the other. That's something that we all need to keep in mind.

For all of those who wanted to see Rent, exactly as it is on stage at the Nederlander, on the big screen- you're likely the only ones who would've liked it. Continually reminding the audience that these are just actors is distracting in the film medium. In the theater, the 4th wall exists. You see the actors, on stage telling a story. Watching a movie, you can suspend belief that these are actors in a different manner. (It's hard to explain what I mean, but while I enjoy theater I always know it's a show. I can really get sucked into a movie in a different way.)