Latebreaking RENT FILM CASTING NEWS- Page 4

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 10/26/04 at 12:18pm

Good Lord, people. I love RENT with the best of them and whenever this movie comes out, I will go watch it. But, I have to agree with Matt_G in saying that the movie is going to turn out the way Christopher Columbus wants it made. I think it is funny that before every movie musical (Chicago and Phantom and now RENT) people complain and complain saying how it is going to translate horribly on screen. How dare they get a black rapper to play the part of a white Matron? How dare they get an actress by the name of Catherine Zeta Jones to play Velma when it should go to BeBe Neuwirth? How dare they get the director of Phone Booth to direct PHANTOM? How dare they get someone else to play the Phantom instead of Michael Crawford?

I mean, come on guys. You know I luv all of you but I am getting tired of all these assumptions and insults before the movie is even made. When the movie comes out and you still don't like it, then you have every right to lash out at whomever you please. Until, then just let it slide and get it out of your head.

[DesperatelySeekingStranger]

Posted: 10/26/04 at 12:55pm

I have to agree with RobbieJ. I'm not going to get my panties in a bunch over the cast of the Rent movie. Maybe its just me, but I get so engrossed in a story that the last thing I think of is "Gee, he looks to old to be in his 20s!" It never crosses my mind. Not in Rent, not in Grease, not in Beverly Hills 90210. People play younger on stage and in film ALL THE TIME. Hell, in Caroline, or Change, Anika Noni Rose's character was about 15-16 and she's 30 in real life. I think most of the original cast is capable of playing their part though its a wise decision to not have Daphne R-V play Mimi. She is the only one to me that looks ancient. When I saw her in Anna in the Tropics I couldn't get over that she was the same person I saw play Mimi years earlier. Baffling...

[QueenMuppet]

Posted: 10/26/04 at 12:59pm

I know this has been said but I have the urge to just add my opinion on this:

Yes, I might have not seen the 'sides' but it annoys me to read smartarse comments and assumptions about a movie that hasn't even started filming yet. I saw some of the OBC in London and yes, they were very special.

I never ceases to amaze me that some people are so full of hatred for certain performers. I don't like some performers but to CONSTANTLY cry about them gets very pathetic.

I would have been happy for some talented unknowns to be cast but if I have the choice between some Hollywood 'Stars' and the OBC - I know what I'd go for. Yes, I know NOTHING about 'the holy sides' and I don't care.

Matt G, what can I say! Your comments are legendary!

QM

Updated On: 10/26/04 at 12:59 PM

[Alix]

Posted: 10/26/04 at 1:08pm

Just saw this on Playbill and am still in shock. I love all of the actors and would love to see them all together on the big screen but using the OBC in the film probably won't get across the original story about the tragically young Bohemians. Who knows!

Alix

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 10/26/04 at 1:15pm

I also saw Yassmin as Mimi. She was very good, too. One of the oddest things I remember was seeing one member of the original chorus (very small girl who sang Mark's mother) go on for Maureen. She was really good, but it was odd to see a mini-Maureen.

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 10/26/04 at 1:17pm

Matt,
mark's Mom was played by Kristen Lee kelly

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 10/26/04 at 1:22pm

LOL

Thanks broadwayguy! I'm terrible with names.

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 10/26/04 at 1:27pm

no problem! I LOVE Rent and the original broadway cast.. i just have issue with some of them being given WAY to much credit for little talent and I think that the quality of casting has gone WAY down... going from the likes of Simone, Shayna Steele, Michael McElroy, Jim Poulos, Sherie Renee Scott, and others to the current crop of drivel on that stage who get kicks out of playing around and having casual chat with band members during shows...

[TGIF]

Posted: 10/26/04 at 1:35pm

Since everyone is giving there opinions/suggestions, I guess I will add mine.

Bottom line is, I want who is best for the parts. If this excludes members of the OBC then thats how it works out. They may have been pefect for there roles, and might not be now. Others still may be the best choices for their roles. I have always said (well from the first time I heard about the new RENT project) that I didn't think Adam was the ideal Roger for the movie.

I do, however, think that Anothy Rapp and Taye Diggs can still pull off their roles, and both have substantial movie acting experience. This would also be depenedent on the age of the other cast members. You cannot have all 24 year olds playing 24 year olds then add a 33 year old in and expect him to not stand out.

I don't know what direction they are taking this movie, I just want them to get cast members who fit that direction, while staying true to the original source (if that is possible). Maybe someone like Britney Murphy would make an excellent Maureen. Or perhaps it would be better to go with an unknown talent. What ever decisions are made, I hope they are made for the right reasons.

[Roses]

Posted: 10/26/04 at 1:56pm

As a non-frequent poster, I feel driven to respond to this thread.
I saw the OBC too many times to count. I was 15 and the show really did change my life. They understand the show better then any of the (very talented) actors that came after then. Who knows if any of them would even be interested in returning to the show and revisiting their pasts but IF they did. I would be honored.

The bigger point is whether or not the show even resonates to today's audience. I do wonder...

[Broadway Matt]

Posted: 10/26/04 at 1:59pm

All of this needs to stop. The whole movie thing needs to stop. It's out of hand and I don't believe I'm the only one who thinks making these films is a very BAD thing for the show and its fans. Chicago was cool, and it's good to see SOME interest among the mainstream in the world of musicals. But now the greed machine is turning its cogs, and the theatre execs who should know better are all too happy to serve up every musical they think can be made profitable on film. There's too much happening too quickly, and that is not the road to take if anyone is hoping to save Broadway theatre.

Broadway has been coming in this direction for years, focusing less on quality and more on making money. This is understandable given how expensive it is to keep a show running, but nevertheless it brought us all these first few steps. It's scary now how willing everyone is to just bend over for Hollywood and worldwide exposure. We all know that Broadway is in a slump right now, but the way to fix that is NOT by marrying it to where the money is. Money isn't going to allow Broadway more freedom to grow creatively, but quite the opposite. The closer Broadway gets to this silly tasteless mainstream, the less freedom any musical will have. It'll all be about hoping to appeal to Hollywood, relegating the entire theatre industry to nothing but an audition showcase for any movie producers that might be in the audience. The closer to the mainstream, the closer Broadway comes to simply dissolving into the monster of pop culture altogether.

There is so much bad that can come from this, and it already has. Look at this vicious fighting over who should play certain characters. It makes me sad seeing everyone playing into the movie phenomenon by arguing so intensely for their opinions to be seen as right, much more than if it were a replacement actor for the stage version. What it's saying is that the movie is the be all and end all and therefore has to be cast PERFECTLY. The PROBLEM with that is we've all become fans of the show through different paths, fallen in love with different ensembles, connected to different portrayals of these characters, so of course we have opinions on who would be best. And since there is ONLY ONE CHANCE to cast the movie, everyone is positive that their perception of the show should be the "definitive" perception shared by all. What happened to respecting personal opinions? Or does that not apply to a film because there is no future cast? Either way, trashing other actors who might not be your personal choice only reflects badly on you.

You all are better than this. Obviously, however they cast the movie, huge amounts of people will be unhappy with it. If you're going to get excited for the movie, get used to dealing with not having things your way.

I won't even get into the issue of how these musicals will be altered to make them more appealing to a wider audience. Regardless of how well done a film might be, I just think it's too damn early and massively unfair to the current casts to create and immortalize on film the single defining performance of it. Might as well start replacing Broadway stages with screens.

[diva007]

Posted: 10/26/04 at 2:08pm

ladies, ladies please. You are all pretty!

Can we all just agree that it will be a different performance all together no matter who is cast.
The OBC is not only older now but they have much more life experience, and less innocence.
New "unknowns" have probably heard the music a thousand times, and already have their own interp on things.
It not be the same, it will never be the same.

[robbiej]

Posted: 10/26/04 at 2:09pm

Again...

You all care this much?? REALLY????

[b-way buff]

Posted: 10/26/04 at 2:20pm

i spoke with adam this morning and he told me they are suposed to know something this week about weather or not he will be cast in the film version. he said he should know something by thursday and would let me know.

for those of you who doubt the integrity of my post, I really dont wanna hear about it.

and for those of you who dont think i should post info adam tells me, you will be happy to know he could care less!!

[Becky]

Posted: 10/26/04 at 2:34pm

I don't think this is a terrible idea. If the movie is well done, I don't think any of the above mentioned people are so old that the roles can't be pulled off. Heck, if Stockard Channing can play a senior in high school at 34 in Grease and the movie didn't crumble, I think Rent will be fine.

Hopefully people won't be so focussed on age that they are sitting there in the theater thinking, "Huh, does she really look 24?" I just don't see the age jump from your twenties to thirties to be drastic enough to cause this big of a discussion. I guess maybe I'm cutting them a little slack since they are original cast members - and I would actually love to see them do the film.

I think being able to market the movie with some people that are fairly known *and* being members of the original cast might not be that bad of an idea. It's a heck of a lot better than ending up with a cast of flavor-of-the-week pop stars.....

Plus, Larson was a struggling artist in his thirties, so I don't think the sentiment is lost because they aren't actually 20 somethings.....
Updated On: 10/26/04 at 02:34 PM

[Matt_G]

Posted: 10/26/04 at 2:36pm

*SOME* people here just like to bitch and moan and pretend they are in the know to seem important, which they are not. Show of hands who here is in their 30's or 40's and is a struggling artist.

To think that only 20 somethings can play those parts is ridiculous.

[Becky]

Posted: 10/26/04 at 2:52pm

Exactly Matt.

The roles may have been intended for a young twenty-something age group - but the problems, situations, and issues in the show are not age specific enough where actors who are a little older would detract from the story and what is trying to be accomplished. At least, it wouldn't bother *me* I should say......

[Matt_G]

Posted: 10/26/04 at 3:03pm

Oh, and another FYI. Unless they change songs/cut dialogue this film will be rated R for language which is NEVER a good sign for a musical aimed at the youngins.

[insomniak]

Posted: 10/26/04 at 3:06pm

...

I've beat myself to death on this. Should we get the originals back? Will they bring that spark to this doomed movie? (and it is doomed, because, as Mimichica said, someone will always whine about something) Or should we go for fresh faces?

I don't know anything except that there is no 'we'. There is only 'them' and we can't change what they do for whatever reason.

No matter what happens, I will be seeing this and I will be setting aside my biases toward it for two hours and I will try to see it as seeing Rent for the first time. There's absoulutely no reason to measure it against this cast or that nonstop. Would I like to see the OBC? Yes, because they are the originals and no matter who you think did better, I can't help but wonder what they were like. At the same time, I would also like to see new people who can bring it the energy and honesty it needs. I don't know what I'm going to get, but I'm giving it a chance either way.

Who knows? If we all stop worrying and criticizing long enough to watch the movie, maybe it might not be so bad. Updated On: 10/26/04 at 03:06 PM

[DesperatelySeekingStranger]

Posted: 10/26/04 at 3:08pm

Broadway has always been about making money, this isn't anything new. And Rent surely isn't the first show to be made into a film, they've been doing it for years so I wouldn't say Broadway is heading in a bad direction. And for the record, with the exception of Chicago and arguably Moulin Rouge, how many recent movie musicals have been profitable?

[Matt_G]

Posted: 10/26/04 at 3:10pm

Stranger, it's coming to a point where a movie doesn't have to do great box office to turn a profit. It's ALL about DVD sales now. That's where the films are going to make their money from now on.

[Plum]

Posted: 10/26/04 at 3:21pm

Is somebody always going to whine about something? Naturally. But that doesn't "doom" the movie. If Columbus is strong enough and can manage to work without too much studio interference, and is his vision is a good one, people will like the movie.

Back in high school, a few of my friends, comic book lovers, were very, very freaked out about the X-Men movie. They whined about the choice of director, they whined about every casting choice except Patrick Stewart, they whined about the costumes...don't get me started. And then the movie came out, they went to see it, and -surprise!- they loved it. As did enough people to make it a blockbuster.

So...the moral of the story is, feel free to argue with what's happening but don't think you can change it. And don't think that any vision that isn't yours is automatically doomed to fail.

[BroadwayGirl107]

Posted: 10/26/04 at 3:22pm

I think the best news I've heard all the day is the fact that they ARE considering Menzel for Maureen. I am set on the fact that she must have that role. Plus, she's barely aged, if at all.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 10/26/04 at 3:23pm

"But now the greed machine is turning its cogs, and the theatre execs who should know better are all too happy to serve up every musical they think can be made profitable on film."

You mean like the golden age of Hollywood musicals from the 30s to the 50s when musicals were a more common form of entertainment? Gee, what a HORRIBLE thought!

"Broadway has been coming in this direction for years, focusing less on quality and more on making money."

Quality is subjective and it would depend on who you ask. Actually, Broadway musicals are doing exactly what they have done for nearly 100 years - providing entertainment. It has just broadened in diversity as it has evolved.

"The closer Broadway gets to this silly tasteless mainstream, the less freedom any musical will have."

The silly tasteless mainstream is what created Broadway.

"The closer to the mainstream, the closer Broadway comes to simply dissolving into the monster of pop culture altogether."

Every era of Broadway musicals have been a reflection of pop culture including latest trends in music, art, and technological innovation.

"We all know that Broadway is in a slump right now"

No it's not. Chek out the late 80s and early 90s. THAT was a slump. Broadway is doing pretty well right now.

"And since there is ONLY ONE CHANCE to cast the movie, everyone is positive that their perception of the show should be the "definitive" perception shared by all. What happened to respecting personal opinions?"

It's just a discussion like any other with different points of view. I find it fascinating. I, too, hate the actor-bashing, but I love to hear different feelings on the subject as well as other choices for casting. This is not a PROBLEM, it is a CONVERSATION.

"You all are better than this. Obviously, however they cast the movie, huge amounts of people will be unhappy with it. If you're going to get excited for the movie, get used to dealing with not having things your way."

ARE YOU NEW? This is exactly what goes on with every new musical that opens on Broadway. Some people will be disappointed. Some people will not. This is hardly a revelation.

"Regardless of how well done a film might be, I just think it's too damn early and massively unfair to the current casts to create and immortalize on film the single defining performance of it. Might as well start replacing Broadway stages with screens."

Considering the state the Broadway production is currently in, now is the PERFECT time to release it. Perhaps they can show the producers exactly how much it has drifted from what it used to be. I don't think it is unfair at all and given the boost the film version of Chicago gave to the Broadway production, I don't think the casts are complaining. The film is different enough to make seeing the still-running stage version worthwhile, while at the same time, losing none of its intent or artistry as a musical. Chicago has proven that Hollywood can still respectfully honor Broadway within its own medium. I, for one, thank Hollywood for renewing interest in an art form that has, for the last 30-something years, been at odds with and lost when audiences started leaving the theatres for the multiplexes. Now, little by little, those multiplex audiences are starting to head to the theatre to see it live. That is to be commended.

Updated On: 10/26/04 at 03:23 PM

[insomniak]

Posted: 10/26/04 at 3:25pm

Plum, I hope that's true, but it's not how people are acting.

Just calm down a bit and wait. It might be good, it might not, but it definetly will be awful to sit through if you're just waiting to cringe.