RENT tonight — Page 2

Aw, this was really a good thing to see when browsing the boards. I'm glad you liked [mostly] everything, and especially Kelly. She's a RENThead herself, and I know she reads reviews here and elsewhere, so that's wonderful.

---

Yeah, his brother sent a mailing list around apologizing for the mixup. Though I'm not sure I would consider it "leaving". He's just done covering for Drew for the time being.

"Matt's actually leaving on Saturday" So who will be going on, on saturday?

Emcee, great review as usual! I agree with mostly everything you say. The only thing sis that I am not a huge fan of Jeremy's Roger. I was thinking about it, and i realized during the show I like his performance ALOT, yet when looking back and analyzing his performance there are alot of things I do not like about it. In a sense he is the human form of WICKED for me. I go to the show and have no complaints watching it, yet on reflection I see alot of problems.

---

Tiff, thanks for the info, unfortunately I'm not in Manhattan till Weds...sad times

---

At least I wasnt the only one who noticed the excellent chemistry between Matt Caplan and Jeremy Kushnier on stage....

I must've seen Matt on a good night...bc I thought he was fabulous in compared to who Ive seen play Mark in the past....lol

aww that review made me wanna hop a plan and get to the Neder :::sniff::: It's funny, because even though Matt Caplan has done this show for so long, i've only seen him as Mark ONCE and that was back in 1999. I saw him as Roger in 2002 and then in March, Seb was on instead =)

I'm still tired of people talking about this "spark" or whatever the show is losing. Whatever, I won't waste my time arguing =) The show still kicks ass and that's all that matters! woohoo!!!

I think the show still kicks ass too! *high five*!

Wow... Matt played ROGER? I can't even picture that...

And yes, Matt and Jeremy had a great connection. I really liked finally being able to SEE the friendship between Mark and Roger.

Princess,
I'm still tired of people talking about this "spark" or whatever the show is losing. Whatever, I won't waste my time arguing =) The show still kicks ass and that's all that matters! woohoo!!!

It's not really a topic that people are trying to "argue" over. First of all, the entire point of a lot of my post was that even though certain parts of the show are clearly suffering, it indeed still does "kick ass," simply by virtue of WHAT it is. No matter what, it's still going to be a show that changed American musical theatre. It's still going to be a show that breaks your heart, and has a lot to say. Underneath, the material itself is never going to change, and that's why I was saying that there were certain points in the show where all of the problems just instantly became forgivable because the show itself is still so beautiful and so powerful. That said, I do think it's a bit naive not to realize (especially if you've seen the show in a relatively recent time frame) that the show is dying. I think I described it as a sort of "autopilot." The show seems tired and like it's just running for the sake of still running. This has NOTHING to do with the material; I think that's all still perfectly relevant. This has to do with the logistics of the particular performances. It just seems to lack the energy and sense of community that I know it used to have, and that it should still have. Hopefully that clarified things a little bit.

---

Updated On: 10/15/04 at 08:59 PM

certain parts of the show are clearly suffering

I don't think it's "clear" to everybody - for I didn't think anything major was wrong with the production when I saw it recently. I honestly think it's impossible to recapture that magnetic spark we all felt the first time or two we saw that show. Just consider the possibility that it's us - the audience - that creates that unmeasurable level of energy that first time - and then it's impossible for *them* to live up to that level of excitement on repeat visits. People go expecting to feel as excited and charged the next time they go and expect to feel a certain way about what they are seeing - and they just don't. I just noticed that people seeing it for the first time or so comes away thinking the show is amazing and perfect right now. It's the repeat visitors that claim that the energy, chemistry, or "spark" (or whatever you call it) isn't quite there. Could be that we know what it has been like in the past because we have seen it before and it really is lacking - or it could be that we had a different reaction to it in the beginning that we aren't experiencing anymore (and we blame them.) Something to at least think about.......

BTW luvemcee, thanks for the review. You gave a really detailed account and I enjoyed reading it.

Just have to add that after 8 years of seeing the show, Matt Caplan is the first Mark I've truly connected with since Anthony. He makes the character seem very real, and after a few conversations with him over the how he plays the role - I've learned he makes VERY conscious choices regarding what he's doing onstage. A lot of thought is going into his characterization.... and pay attention to him when he isn't the focus of the scene. Some of his reactions and behaviors really add to the moment. I agree with whoever brought up his chemistry with Jeremy. They play off each other so well it's scary. You feel like they walk off the stage each night and go back to their East Village loft on the corner of 11th Street and Ave B.

Nope. That's not it at all. I saw the Original Broadway Cast right after opening, saw the first tour five times when it was in Boston. It was just as exciting at time number six as it was at the Nederlander. HOWEVER, each subsequent generation has been like a copy of a copy of a copy, losing clarity and yes -- spark -- with each iteration. By the time I saw the Benny Tour in its last gasp in San Francisco I thought everybody on stage, but most especially the conductor, should have been hanging their heads in shame.

It wasn't me, it was them.

---

Updated On: 10/15/04 at 09:38 PM

Nope. That's not it at all.

So you don't think it could be it, even a little? I too saw the original cast - and many of the U.S. tour/Broadway combinations since (as well as the Benny closing and I didn't find it to be the disaster you are describing.) That's what I mean - two people have experienced similar things re: the show and have two different views on the level of quality. Of course, I admit there have been some moments along the way where I wanted to storm Telsey's offices and track down Greif to remind him he is still a director, but a lot of times I'm puzzled by some of the criticism.

You were also describing loving the show back many years ago when it was all still new to you. You don't think that has any affect on how you view it today now that a lot of time has passed? Just honestly asking.

Of course I don't think everything is perfect, and there are changes that have been made over the years that I wish hadn't (Maureen's performance piece for example), but I still don't think the quality is as low as some claim.....