RENT did what?!

In this podcast (or online audio interviews) original cast members, producers, staff, fans, and family members of the show’s creator, Jonathan Larson, will reminisce about the project’s long and heartbreaking journey from the mind of a creative genius to the force that helped redefine theater.

Which force helped redefine theater?!

---

You know, I'm a huge RENT fan, but I'm sorta of realizing its aftermath. It seems like it might have hurt Broadway because now I feel like every show has to have some sort of screaming or high belting in it. which fits some shows, but def. doesn't fit them all. I dunno, maybe its not that bad. I just feel like too many shows are trying to be the next RENT.

Well, I'm just in awe when I read that it helped redefine anything...unless of course, you put it in matters of hype and screaming.

---

Well, not even, how many pop / rock scores that were obviously RENT inspired do we have?
And most of the themes in RENT, if not all, have been in Broadway musicals before.

---

If you can't see that RENT redefined, or at least helped redefine modern theatre, you must be blind.

I'd say the "screeching high belt" trend goes back to LES MIZ. At least in RENT, the musical style fits the period. In shows like LES MIZ, JECKYLL & HYDE, and LITTLE WOMEN, you have pop/rock vocals in shows set 100 to 200 years ago.

Jon--what does it matter that Les Miz or any of those shows has music that is not period? Opera never cared about matching period to music style. And, Shakespeare wasn't concerned about period either. One communicates in the language of the people regardless of location and time of the work's setting.

---

I'd love to hear how "Floyd Collins" has changed the landscape of musical theatre!

BKLYN was a carbon copy.

I'm not about to say Rent wasn't great or that it didn't interest/inspire a lot of theatregoers.

The foreword to Floyd Collins was written by John Guare, and what he said was that the writers of tomorrow would look back on Floyd Collins as the work that changed the way they looked at musical theatre and what they hoped to contribute to it. That's not the same thing as changing the landscape of theatre, per se, but I do think Floyd has made a contribution to the theatre that is totally separate from Rent's. Having seen them both in '96, I, for one, was moved by Floyd Collins more than by Rent, and it continues to exercise a certain power over my thoughts about musical theatre.

Larson was a big splash and his influence was almost immediate. I think Guettel's contribution will take longer to sink in. I don't think it will be any less important as time goes by, however.

I think that RENT did what Wicked is currently doing, but in a more socially signifant way. Wicked is fun and catchy, it introduces people to an artform they previously had not given much thought to. That can only be a good thing.

As far as RENT goes, when there is a cure for AIDS, perhaps RENT will develop a quaintness that tells of another life and time. I don't pretend to be as theatre savvy as most of you, but I can see that RENT was unique for its time, told a story to song that is still unsavory by some people's standards, and by its success, helped later productions deviate from the accepted norms of theatre.

Perhaps it wasn't the second coming, but it did have an impact, IMO.

thank you for that, ourtime. I knew it was something along those lines.

---

"Hair was huge in its day, but its effect on the artform was brief. Despite numerous attempts to copy it, none of the other rock musicals or events had even a small share of its success."

Hair's effect was quite far from brief. It was the first show with a true rock sound to become a major hit and its success led the way for dozens of rock musicals since (some that were more successful than Hair itself) -- from Jesus Christ Superstar to Godspell to Pippin to Tommy to Dreamgirls to Rent. Hair is one of the most influential shows and scores ever written.


"I don't think you can say a show redefined theatre based solely on attempts to copy it (as some have done in this thread, citing BKLYN)."

But that's what influential means. And no, Mammia Mia isn't a work of art, but it is the most INFLUENTIAL shows of the past decade. Because of its massive worldwide success (over a billion dollars of ticket sales), Broadway producers have been frantically running around pursuing to the rights to the rock/pop/r&b music catalogue of every known and not-so-known artist of the past 50 years. Mamma Mia is directly responsible for DOZENS of shows that have played here or in the West End or are in development (Jersey Boys, Look of Love, Lennon, All Shook Up, Good Vibrations, Hot Feet, Ring of Fire, Our House, We Will Rock You, The Times They Are A-Changin', The Wall etc....). Now, has Mamma Mia's influence been a good thing for theatre? That's another question entirely.

---