RENT SCREENING review (11/8/05) — Page 2

"I can't help but think that if everyone involved in this project had the best of intentions"

But many of the issues mentioned in the negative reviews (esp. the staging of TMOLM, Another Day and the events for the last quarter of the film) were raised here in response to the screenplay a year ago. Instead of taking the criticisms seriously, people involved with the film got really defensive and insisted on changing nothing. If this film is mediocre or just plain bad, then no one person involved in it should be exclusively to blame.

Yes, Chris Columbus wrote and directed the film, but several of the actors are engaged readers of the message boards (especially IMDB) and should've known from there that putting Mimi outside (with Angel, Collins and Mark, right?) for the end of Another Day was bad staging. I don't know... I may find myself enjoying the film (not likely given that a consensus is developing on what's wrong with it and that I took issue with these same things while reading the screenplay). If I don't enjoy it and reviews [from people who weren't in the film] continue to be negative, then I think a metaphor with the sinking of the Titanic might be apt. This is another accident that could have been avoided if certain parties weren't overconfident in what they were doing. Next time, the studio should spend a little less time marketing their films as genius/life-changing/milestones and a lot more time making sure that the films actually work.

Were there even test screenings for this thing?

Updated On: 11/9/05 at 10:57 AM

"Which just makes it all the more frustrating knowing that it wasn't cut because it didn't work in the film for some reason, but I guess for time reasons."

That person really liked Goodbye Love as it was filmed. Others (including the director and one of the actors in the film) have said that it was filmed "too melodramatically" and "seemed redundant."

I don't think time was the only reason why it was cut.

Yes, they said the argument presented poorly onscreen.

---

Hmm, well, that's good to hear at least. Part of me is like, "It's a musical, it's SUPPOSED to be melodramatic..." but I know that they seem to be striving for realism, so if that's the case then I can understand the cut. I'm sorry to hear that the film isn't as clear without it, though, and I still think that we lose a lot of character development.

That something was filmed "too melodramatically" is bad news as I'm sure the people behind this film would attest. "Too melodramatic" doesn't mean it's true to the spirit of the show (lol). It means that it's funny in a campy bad way.

I don't know whether to think the film would be better or worse off with Goodbye Love *as it was filmed*.

On my five hours of sleep to think on this, I still DO think that April's suicide is instrumental to understanding Roger, and why he doesn't trust love. But I'm right now telling myself that it's because I haven't seen the movie, and that maybe it works without it. I think it's hard, because we think it's "supposed" to be there, but because Roger would feel guilty about her death anyway, maybe it isn't really all that important. It's hard, because I'll know it's missing when I see the movie, but I'll also know that in theory, it probably isn't really that big of a deal. I've told a lot of people that for some time now, I had to learn to take the movie and the show as separate entities. Maybe that's still a valid interpretation -- accepting that they're different media, and things have to be done differently, and accepting that as a movie these changes were made for a reason.

As for these relatively small things hurting assumptions of truth to the fact that the actors say the movie is true to Larson's vision, Larson's vision, to me at least, is not about the details. It's about the politics of his show, and the themes of his story -- not who did what to whom, or anything like that -- but the big picture. And even though I'm nervous about these little things, I know that logically, those things are still there. Things can be different, but the movie can still remain true to Larson's vision. I'll certainly have to keep reminding myself of that, but it seems to make sense to me. I've come this far, and I *am* going to keep the faith I've found in this movie.

heh, the trailer just came on TV.

---

Updated On: 11/9/05 at 11:25 AM

It's sort of unfortunate that, because the argument didn't film well, Roger and Mimi's goodbye and "Goodbye, love... Hello, disease" had to be cut as well for temporal continuity (since it starts off with, "You heard? / Every word.").

[Edit]
Very well said about the important thing being that the movie stays true to Larson's overall message, Emcee. I think that it's important to keep that in mind when getting all flustered about the details of what's been changed.

Updated On: 11/9/05 at 11:26 AM

I think it *may* be an option, BroadwayGirl. I know that after the screening I'm going to, we'll all be asked to fill out some papers about our feelings toward the movie, and I'd assume it's for that reason.

---

It could be done.

I believe Alexander and Elizabethtown are examples of movies with major last minute edits. But did they get rave reviews in the end? No.

I see, Emcee. I suppose that would allow for it to happen...because otherwise, you're right...its a little strange they might ask. But who knows?

Evelyn...It seems as though this film won't be getting raves whether or not "Goodbye Love" is added back in. At this point, who knows if it could save or kill the film either way if it filmed as poorly as we hear.

Updated On: 11/9/05 at 11:52 AM

because otherwise, you're right...its a little strange they might ask. But who knows?

I'm sorry, I didn't follow; who might ask what?

---

Oh. By "they" and "ask" I was referring to the papers you'll be asked to fill out on your thoughts on the movie.

LOL, sorry. I'm so out of it today.