Munk's RENT film review — Page 3

Carl, I think that's how a lot of fans will be responding to the Rent film. There will be some who think it's perfect because it IS Rent, but like munk said, he enjoyed the film, but looking at it critically it's a mess. But how can we not enjoy it anyway?

Well said Emcee! Well Said! And besides what do the Oscars even mean anymore? It's all political. The only right thing that they have done in recent history is give Adrian Brody the oscar for Pianist and Denzel the oscar for Training Day. If the Oscars truly celebrated the best work in film Peter O'toole would have a room just for his Oscars and Johnny Depp would have won at the very least 3 (In my opinion). The Oscars and most other movie award ceremonies are antiquated and irrelevant. Shouldn't a performance stand on it's own merits and not need a full page add reminding you to vote for it. If RENT wins Oscars Great! But remember, if it doesn't it wasn't robbed as a little tiny statue does not make it a good or bad film.

---

luvthemcee, has your benadryll worn off already? You need your rest for a big night out! Especially since we are counting on details, details, details!

Have a Blast!

"It might seem like an entirely ridiculous idea because there has never been a film that did that before. But I can't help but wonder how a sung-through film might've come out..."

I have to respectfully disagree. Jesus Christ Superstar and Evita were sung through and they worked fine in my opinion !

---

Updated On: 11/13/05 at 10:41 AM

No problem baby

Munk, ya know I love ya and I respect your opinion but I think I will see the movie before taking your review at face value. Some things you pointed out were nit-pickey things that was changed from the musical that I think I could get past. But, like I said I still love ya so don't take this negative or anything. **Hugs Munk**

---

emcee, you do know that I am counting the hours for your review, don't you ?

I think we are looking to a new "emcee thread response" record tonight, hehehe

Agreed Bway. If I was a huge RENT fan I would feel let down if the film was butchered not just happy BECAUSE it exsists. And I think Spider's post brings up an excellent point. Munk has written an excellent review based on his opinion and knowledge. We all need to make our own decisions about the movie based on seeing it. That is the problem with most reviews, it deters or encourages people who have not seen the thing being reviewed. We should all make our own decisions based on seeing the thing and not let a review keep us from seeing something. I personally try to read reviews after the fact to compare and contrast. Cause lets be honest how can you make a decision whether you liked something or not based on someone else.

---

I had been in denial about all the bad reviews I had been seeing on this board but this one really makes me sad because it is very believeable that I will feel the same way. I am ESPECIALLY dissapointed about Goodbye Love being cut. What were they thinking?

Does anyone think there is anyway that it will be put back into the film? I mean someone from the movie MUST know about all the negative reviews it is getting because of it.

Munk-do you think it would have been better if Goodbye Love and Halloween were back in?

I'm waiting until the 23rd to see the film in full. No way in hell I'm going to pay a Broadway partial seating price to see it in advance.

"Sure, when we get the DVD in a few months' time, THEN it'll all make sense... but that'll be months too late for the film's reputation as a whole."

EDIT: The point of Munk's review - or at least this is what I'm reading - is that with or without Goodbye Love, the film would still be a disaster.

Updated On: 11/11/05 at 11:01 AM

Now he's turned around and not only wimped out on two parts of the film because they were "too much," but he's removed the suicide issue from it. That's a cop-out and break of his promise if you ask me.

Eh. I'm still holding to the notion that overall, it's got the themes. I'm not saying that that's the only thing that'd be important -- I mean, if he REALLY, TRULY butchered it, but kept it about love and friendship and whatever, that wouldn't be okay. But you've got to, once you've even seen it, maybe be willing to understand that the minor things can be messed with. This refusal to read only the very surface of what Columbus says baffles me. This taking his phrase "too much," and because it's conveniently useful to saying that he's taking the easy way out, ONLY taking it at the very barest face-value is really closed-minded to me -- thought too dense to try to see what he means by it. I just don't get why, other than that people *want* to blame the guy, they can't see beyond "too much" as what they've decided is him wimping out and going "I can't handle it, it has to go!" Use some common sense, people -- think, and stop clamoring for just one second.

ETA -- there are drugs. There are needles. There's police bruality. There are VISIBLE signs of AIDS. If he was wimping out, would that be there? He didn't not entirely "keep his promise."

---

Updated On: 11/11/05 at 11:15 AM