Jonathan Larson wouldn't want RENT as it is today... — Page 4

Especially when its regarding a show that's been open 10 years, for chrissake. No one expects a show to be open anywhere NEAR that long.

---

I'm kinda in the same boat as you, Capnhook...

I have seen the movie multiple times, and I didn't think the story was really told either. But I did like the feeling of the music being live, and I loved Christopher (he was Mark when I saw it). Angel and Mimi were good also, but everyone else was just... not. I didn't think Collins was all that great, and Roger was- ok. Everyone kept telling me ITS ABSOLUTELY WONDERFUL!

Everyone also says the movie is crap. I don't think so. It's the closest I can get to seeing the original cast performing.

Even though Christopher is awesome.

---

ljay dear, when I mentioned Kander and Ebb, I was- to quote jimnysf- being snarky. Did you not notice the previous sentence where I mentioned Abba's feeling's on Mamma Mia? Or do you just block out any statements not pertaining to Chicago? I brought it up because I think it's ridiculous that people drag Jonathan Larson into their arguments, but never with other shows or other composers. I'm sure Verdi would have had a heart attack when he saw Destiny's Child Member #3 onstage too, but that's irrelevant in someone's personal reaction to the performance.

I mention something in passing and you blow it completely out of proportion. CapnHook was the one that first brought up the Chicago comparison in this thread, not me.

Currently, I'm just curious about these reviews which apparently praised Melanie Griffith to the high heavens. I've only seen the dozens of negative ones. And, no, "She can't sing or dance, but she's a star!" is not a positive review.

---

I definitely do agree that the show can often lack in direction, or choreography for that matter. The latest touring production is brilliantly directed and does feel like the kind of production always intended for Rent ... the pacing and choreography was perfect, as was the singing and acting. The guy who plays Roger (his name escapes me; it's in my program at home, but I'm currently at school) is definitely one of their greatest actors.

When I saw Rent in NY, the pacing was extremely rushed (almost dizzying), actual good choreography was absent, and some of the "acting" was stiff as a board.

---

Brantley on Melanie Griffith in CHICAGO:

"Ms. Griffith is a sensational Roxie, possibly the most convincing I have seen. This doesn't mean that she gives the most electric or crowd-stirring interpretation ever of the aging jazz baby turned killer. How could that be, when her predecessors include Gwen Verdon (who created the role in 1975), Ann Reinking (the original Roxie of this revival) and Renée Zellweger (who deserved to win the Oscar for her portrayal in this year's film version)?

What Ms. Griffith offers is a powerful and instinctive empathy for the part, which she walks into as if it were a longtime lover's embrace. Since she swam into celebrity as a vixenish teenager in the 1975 film 'Night Moves,' Ms. Griffith has exhaled a scary, seductive aura of corrupted innocence. Or is it innocent corruption? In any case, in movies like 'Something Wild' and 'Body Double,' she discovered dark roots in the classic dumb blonde that redefined the prototype for the late 20th century.

Showbiz history is filled with examples of screen stars whose flame shrank and guttered onstage. Ms. Griffith, however, projects big, while doing what seems like very little. She is certainly the least kinetic of Roxies, wrapped in a languorous, protective mantle of self-absorption. She becomes the ultimate vague narcissist, unable to register anything that doesn't feed her ego or threaten her existence.

This gives Roxie newly organic depths of humor and pathos. When Ms. Griffith steps to the edge of the stage to confide, with a mix of bewilderment and resignation, 'I am older than I ever wanted to be,' it resonates as never before.
___________________________________________________________

Her Roxie is one of the few fortunate examples of the penchant of this show's producers, Barry and Fran Weissler, for revolving-door replacement casting of famous people. (Only Reba McEntire in 'Annie, Get Your Gun' has offered comparable satisfaction.)

The vultures who were expecting to see Ms. Griffith stumble, in other words, will have to look elsewhere for their fix of schadenfreude. 'You're a phony celebrity, kid,' Roxie's lawyer tells her. Ms. Griffith, on the other hand, is definitely the real thing, with a persona that translates into a heartfelt presence onstage.

As the evening progressed, I even forgot to think of her as Ms. Griffith, she was so simply and completely Roxie.

---

"ljay dear, when I mentioned Kander and Ebb, I was- to quote jimnysf- being snarky. Did you not notice the previous sentence where I mentioned Abba's feeling's on Mamma Mia? Or do you just block out any statements not pertaining to Chicago?"

Your snarkiness just won me over a little bit, orange.

The tour I saw sucked.
I'm not sure what you saw.

"I seem to remember in a documentary on the show (I think it was part of the movie's special features) that Mr. Larson's family goes in regularly to make sure the show stays fresh. Are they in fact doing this?"

Even if they are, they okayed the Rent film, which I think suffers from the same lack of passion and care as the stage show. It says a lot about their standards...

Besides, and with all due respect, they shouldn't have much of a say about how a show is kept "fresh"... I wouldn't send my family to take over my job just because we are related, that's silly.

---

I agree - family members? Since when does that make them skilled and experienced enough to oversee a Broadway production?

They want it to keep running so his legacy is kept fresh, and their bank accounts are kept healthy. That doesn't mean they have any idea of how to do it correctly.

---

I don't think the Larsons are exactly going in and telling everyone what's wrong with the production like a director would--I get the feeling they just visit the new casts and sit down with them and try to make them understand what Jonathan was about. I can't imagine they go in presuming that they can do a director's job--I think it's probably up to the actors themselves to bring energy to the piece. I'd lay the blame on Michael Greif if the show is not being kept fresh, not the Larsons.

---

Updated On: 10/9/06 at 08:26 PM

The Larsons live on the West Coast. If anything, they're probably more likely to just see the new tour cast when it rolls through. Many people here have said that the tour is in better shape than the Broadway production. So that would kind of make sense.

Not to mention the fact that Michael Greif last worked with the touring cast only a few weeks ago when the new cast members came in. I wonder when the last time he worked one on one with the Broadway cast was- instead of just leaving his notes with the stage manager.

---

Updated On: 10/9/06 at 08:37 PM

Fiction Writer - What I saw was the 1st National Tour in Denver. And though it was bit loud, it was everything I had expected the show to be and more. I can remeber the reprise of I'll Cover You had the entire theatre in tears.

BroadwayGirl - I do agree with you about the movie. I so wish Spike Lee had directed it.

As far as the Larsons checking in on the show, I just threw that out there because it hadn't been mentioned.

---