RENT: Live from Broadway (Film) - Thoughts- Page 3

[colleen_lee]

Posted: 9/26/08 at 7:11am

Tonight was the first time in since maybe '99 or '00 that I really left the theater moved by theshow again.

The cast was near perfect. That has really been my biggest complaint over the years. Everyone they had in this final cast could actually ACT, which hasn't seemed to be a requirement for quite some time.

I read earlier that there was no intermission, but my theater did have a 10-minute intermission. It was the camera pointed at the stage, and a countdown clock on the screen.

[NY_Broadway2]

Posted: 9/26/08 at 8:35am

I just saw the movie last night. I generally liked the entire movie. My biggest complaint was two things: 1) the sound was not very loud in my theatre or it was the movie...I don't know which but it just didn't give me that Rent vibe but that's not that big of an issue. 2) I generally did not enjoy the closeups...I felt they were a little TOO close. I like being able to see actor's faces so I can feel what they are feeling but it was just too close at some points. Case and point when Michael McElroy was singing the "I'll Cover You (Reprise)" the camera was just way too close on him. I mean I know you want to see his emotions and pain from Angel's death but I mean the entire screen was consumed by his face. They needed back away a bit. Plus I would've liked to seen more distance shots where you could see the whole cast acting during the whole ensemble songs then them trying to weave in and out of the characters. But that's just my personal opinion. I thought the actors were all phenomenal. I especially enjoyed Renee's performance of Mimi. I think she acted the role perfectly.

[Broadway_freak]

Posted: 9/26/08 at 9:20am

I absolutely loved it. I feel the same way, i been turned off to RENT for wahile but this film really brought me back. It is the end of an era and I am so glad to see it well put together for everyone to see. The performers are amazing, the only complaint is that I wish the sound was louder in teh theatre I was at.

[uncageg]

Posted: 9/26/08 at 10:19am

Roger, I thought it was just me but I am glad someone noticed that there were shots that were out of focus. I noticed it more in Act I. I just thought my eyes were tired from work.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 9/26/08 at 11:02am

OMG...complain, complain, complain....

That's all RENT fans seem to do.
The filmmakers tried to give RENT you all something that was a fair representation of the show. For some reason...none of you are ever satisfied. Always griping about something.

Sounds like griping to me. People are expressing how they felt about the film. You would prefer they were dishonest or disingenuous? There is not one film or one show that satisfies everyone, Rent fans or not. Why is this a surprise? Most of the comments sound pretty objective. They enjoyed the film, but they expressed their feelings about some annoyances or flaws. Sort of like how people review other films.

Take for instance Christmas Bells...there are at least 4 separate things going on at the same time. When you see it live, you can focus on what you want to. But in movies you can't...unless you want a static shot of the entire stage...which would be boring. So the filmmakers tried to get in everything you were supposed to see...through editing.

And in turn, presented us with a flipbook of images that rarely allowed the audience the opportunity to process what was happening in the scene. Spatial relationships were virtually non-existent, and the various storylines were pretty much ignored. And yes, there are other ways of presenting a scene with multiple stories happening simultaneously than one static shot of the stage. It appeared the editing was rushed to get this out to theatres without much thought or creativity in the process. Christmas Bells was particularly sloppy.

In live theatre, you're in an intimate space, in the same room...but in film, you're not...so the director has to compensate for that.

Right. In moderation. But in filming a live theatre performance, especially one that is unconventionally staged, continuity in perspective and setting is vital. I just felt the video was a little overloaded with closeups and at times, completely forgot that it was telling a story.

Finally...take this film as a gift to us RENT fans.

I think it's just a shame that it wasn't much of a gift to newcomers or those who aren't particularly loyal fans to every member of this specific cast. My friend loved it, but it took a lot of explaining afterwards. She really had trouble piecing together the settings and the action due to the editing. And she had absolutely no clue as to what happened during Christmas Bells other than there was a drug dealer and the I Should Tell You duet.

BE THANKFUL....Jonathon Larson would have wanted you to.

Really? What were his thoughts on the film? Honestly, that was just pretentious. I'm not entirely convinced Jonathan Larson's message is "Just be thankful you got anything, bitch!"

[RogerFilmmaker]

Posted: 9/26/08 at 11:16am

I just got horrible news of just how correct my earlier notes on the poor videography and editing may just destroy this valuable play. When I saw the show last night I had brought about 14 people with me. All of them RENT newbies wanting to see it because I'm such a fan and got them excited. Today a few of them confessed they really didn't "get it" because they couldn't tell what was going on half the time and where people on the stage were. They liked the singing and thought the performances were great. But they said it jumped from place to place so often and was so close they couldn't tell where the characters were coming or going. It's hard to get emotionally involved when you are always in their faces. One person just said he so busy from all the motion he wanted to walk out. For people who have never seen RENT before they don't really know the set up of the stage. They don't know there is a guard rail on a second level at the back of the stage where Mimi can "Come out tonight" the film cuts straight to a close-up so no-one knew where she came from and where she was. No-one knew there was a second level on stage right for the Life Support meeting. It just curt to close-ups. eventually it was shown but not until closer to the end of the song. I can understand those on the sight who love the movie, love the play. But they have most likely seen the play and know how the stage is and how the staging is set-up. Plus its easy to look past somethings flaws when you love its core. In the film we rarely get a sense of what the stage actually looks like, where they are on it, and how they interact with each other upon it.

Is this the legacy we leave behind for RENT? Please, please, please re-edit this play/film. We need establishing shots to set-up where people are on the stage. Medium shots to see how they interact with each other. It's far more efective to see Mimi and Rogers look into each others eyes as they hold hands in a medium then to shoot to a close-up then follow their bodies down and hold hands. We get it, they are holding hands. but the real power of the scene is in their look. At the end the song is "When I look into your eyes" not "When I hold your hand" The power of more medium shots and far less snappy edits should not be underestimated. Even though the show is full of action the spoon feeding of cutting to each person as they sing in close-up makes for a very disjointed experience.

I love the play RENT. That is why I'm being critical of this filming of it because I want the best captured version of it to remain in the archives forever. I know they have the footage to re-cut and re-edit to. Please to all of you I plead we must have them re-edit this show if it goes to dvd. We are all very close to it and as I said earlier its easy to look past its flaws when you love the play and have seen it quintuple times. But its a confusing mess for the uninitiated. The least they can do is stop cutting to the out of focus shots. But we must say something to the filmmakers or it won't change.

It is at this moment I ask all of you to stand up and Moo. Even you people who loved it to begin with, what if it could be even better and you just didn't notice. I have worked in the film industry for 18 years producing, directing and editing everything from music videos and live events (So I know about the MTV style of motion cameras and movement, MTV never cuts to an out of focus camera and never cuts to a camera still finding its shot zooming in, just about, just about, tweak, tweak, there, and then we immediately cut to another camera in close-up) Plus I have filmed dramas and tv commercials. So I know my stuff. We need to make this better. At least for the performers sake as they did an amazing job. Mimi's real tears will haunt me in my sleep. Very powerful performances. Just hurt by mistakes in a poor edit.

So as I run on... Let's call this the "Live RENT rough cut" I can understand the filmmakers had time pressures to get this out in a short time. But we the fans must stand up and implore them to re-edit it for the DVD. If we don't now then we leave a poor example of the amazement that RENT is for our grandkids. I would just say that's an insult.

[RogerFilmmaker]

Posted: 9/26/08 at 11:22am

Thank you Mister Matt, While I wrote my long note you expressed far more eloquently my thoughts. What the hell I told you I'm a filmmaker not a writer...

[crc03772]

Posted: 9/26/08 at 12:33pm

So where do I begin? Ok so i've seen this on stage 3 times and of course on film multiple times (and will see the tour again with Adam and Anthony). I'm not going to say this film is perfect, but I can say it's pretty damn close to it. I have seen many musicals on film (i'm talking of the legal kind) and have to say this is very high on the list of those shows that have been filmed. The close-ups were awesome, this cast acted the s--t out of the show, there was not a dull performance what so ever. I loved being able to see the raw emotion on each actors face, upclose and personally, especially Justin Johnston and Renee Elise Goldsberry. When those two were crying, it too brought tears to my eyes. My only complaint was the sound in the theatre, it didn't feel like a 'rock' show because the sound was just so mousey and low, i'm sure if and when it's released on DVD it will be a different experince (let's hope). All I can say is i'm dissapointed that more people didn't come out to enjoy this experience (at the theatre I was at). It's a beautiful film and to be cherised. If you haven't seen it yet, I suggest you do...just two performances left :)

[crushgroove]

Posted: 9/26/08 at 12:46pm

I think the sound is dependent on the theater...some venues aren't up to snuff when it comes to audio or they don't know how to use it to the best of it's abilities. I'm thankful that the Kaufman Studios own the United Artists theater in Astoria...they're sound is always pretty amazing.

PS: They are NOT going to re-edit this film...they are pleased with it...just because you would have made different choices in the editing room.

All I will say is: Instead of picking apart this film for what it isn't...treasure it for what it is...

[Broadwaynerd101]

Posted: 9/26/08 at 4:07pm

Saw this at South Barrington, Illinois (AMC 30 so the seats were extra nice! :)) and I ran into a problem with my memory.

For a week, I forgot all about it. Come Last night 6:47 (Started at 7) and 20 mineutes away, I am on here and I realize that is was Thursday, the night I had my tickets for. I threw my shoes on and ran out the door (Forgot to turn the TV and everything off). My car was in the shop so I had to ride my bike to get to my friends house. He also forgot about it. We left 2 mineutes later and got there during Today 4 U.

I was pissed that I forgot about it. Anyways, I enjoyed the movie alot. I loved Contact and being able to see Mimi crying during Your Eyes. I can't wait for the DVD!

[RogerFilmmaker]

Posted: 9/26/08 at 4:42pm

Crushgroove...
It's not an issue of different editing choices as it's the fact that 25% of the bloody shots are shaky, roaming for a place to aim and out of focus. Those aren't editing choices, they are poor camerawork. If they don't plan on a re-cut on some of those shots then they are darn fools becuse it's an insult to the fabulous and emotional performances those actors left on that stage. I'm not out to complain and I'm not trying to create an issue. But I've worked on many films, and toured with many bands shooting and editing live performances. Film 101 teaches us about the importance of an establishing shot. There are barely 5 in the whole show. Film 101 teaches us that all shots have a beginning and an end, it's that moment just before the camera locks on its target and holds still. In this they cut way early while the camera searched then found frame and they cut away. And bottom line, it's unforgiveable to have one out of focus shot let alone the abundant amount they have. You have to admit as perfect as you feel it was that there were shots out of focus.

[uncageg]

Posted: 9/26/08 at 4:57pm

I agree that people who have never seen the show may have come out confused. I think the film was filmed the way it was for fans of the show. I have seen it onstage, seen the movie and can sing it from note one to the last (Including the Stevie Wonder version of Seasons of Love). So I knew what was going on. Still, I feel that it was filmed poorly. It was just too jumpy, even for me and my friend (Who saw it onstage twice) When I can clearly see the silver filling in the back right of someones mouth, that's a bit close for me!! And, in my opinion, if Mr. Larson were still alive, I don't think he would have wanted it to be filmed that way. Also, now that I know that the bulk of the show was filmed in August, it took away a bit of the excitement. We got August's show with the original cast spliced in for the finale. So we didn't really see the entire final show. And I would assume that the performances for the final show may have been a bit more exciting. I could be wrong but while watching it, I just wasn't getting that "final performance" feeling from the cast. Just my random thoughts.

[TheQuibbler]

Posted: 9/26/08 at 5:23pm

I'm with colleen_lee. I had felt like I was pretty much "over" Rent, but I found my experience in the movie theatre deeply affecting. I thought it looked gorgeous, the colors and the lighting were particularly exciting. The performance, as a whole, were heartfelt and sincere (my only real complaint being Adam Kantor, whom I found to be merely serviceable). For me, there was a real joy in experiencing this Rent; a joy that had been missing for a few years now. As for the camerawork, I thought it was appropriate for the subject matter, shaky and a little gritty. I left the theatre completely satisfied.

[GatorNY]

Posted: 9/26/08 at 5:44pm

I saw it last night on 84th and Broadway. There were not many people there. I agree with the previous posters who were surprised at how moved they were be the film. I went to see the show 9/6 and was very unimpressed and pretty disappointed. However, last night, in the theater, I was very moved and got all caught up in the emotion, and found myself in tears several times....just like back in the early years of the run. I think that it was great to be able to see the actors subtext and expressions. When I saw this cast live...I really only was impressed with Eden, Tracie, and Justin. However, I loved Adam and his voice seemed to hold up better on film than it did live. I agree with The Quibbler- I certainly found Adam serviceble, but in a much different way. I always thought that Rene-Elise was much to pure and not edgy enough to pull off Mimi...it was almost like watching Audra McDonald playing Mimi. For some reason I also liked Will Chase less as Roger in the film than I did live on stage. I am so glad that I went to see this though, because it gave me the emotional experience that I wanted to get seeing the show live back on 9/6. I certainly will want this if it comes out on DVD.

[crushgroove]

Posted: 9/26/08 at 6:52pm

Rogerfilmmaker...they used 12 cameras...it wasn't poor camerawork...it was an editing choice to have the shaky camera movement...I think they were going for a "cinema verite" type of documentation.
Updated On: 9/26/08 at 06:52 PM

[RogerFilmmaker]

Posted: 9/27/08 at 3:04pm

Hi Crushgroove,
I can see the attempt at adding a verite look but it didn't work thats all. I'm not the one saying there are issues with the shooting/editing in some parts. I'm not on a slam mission here, I only want the best version of the show to exist. You say they used many cameras and I can see that. That is why it is imperitive to use the right shots in their cutaways. I'm not saying the whole show is a mess in fact the opposite. I love Rent and this was an amazing performance. The video was colorful and vibrant and the filmmakers got it 80% right. Not only my opinion but many others accross the web feel that if you read the talkbacks. I just want the show remembered at 100% is all and not let something as silly as a cinema style get in the way of that amazing show.

This is the opportunity to speak up for that best version going to the DVD. Wouldn't you like the best version preserved? I know from working in the industry that it can be changed at this point. Especially since it was shot digitally on HD. Unlike film I know that each camera, you say there were 12 kept rolling so alternative shots exist to replace those that are out of focus and disjointed. I also know that the footage, every single frame resides on a series of harddrives that simply have to be re-attached to the computer and the project folder opened. HD footage unlike film and video is now kept on harddrives instead of tapes. It's cheaper and makes it possible to bring footage back, re-edit, or use it for other shows. So the entire film could be brought back up ready to re-edit in an hour of two. They will also be using an non-linear AVid suite so the redit is simply recutting the spots that don't work as well. Mainly it's re-examining it with a second set of eyes. But I'm telling you it's no a big deal to fix any problems and they could.

Again I'm just out for the best version ever. You may not have noticed these spots where it didn't work but after several viewings in the future they will start to stick out. I also know as a filmmaker that after I finish a film it takes a viewing several weeks later to notice mistakes or bad choices I made in the edit. Then I go back and re-cut those spots. When you are close to a project it's sometimes hard to see it objectively. That's why we have a rough-cut, then re-cut it, watch it, tweak some more, come back and do a final fine-cut. Because of the tight time schedule I think they never had the chance to objectively step back on some decisions before delivery. I just hope they are listening and take the time to adjust a few things. It's not an insult to the director or his talent or vision. He did an amazing job of capturing much of the spirit of the show. He just needs to take one last crack at the edit. Isn't the memory of RENT worth one week in an edit suite to take it to perfection. I believe it is.

[JP2]

Posted: 9/27/08 at 3:21pm

Just got back. Man was it EPIC.

[HeyMrMusic]

Posted: 9/27/08 at 3:43pm

I just came back from seeing it. I felt very nostalgic watching it. I loved it because it made me think of the times I've seen Rent live and I'm glad that this production was filmed. I especially loved the treatment of "Contact" and the finale. "Christmas Bells" worked as well as it could on film and I appreciated that as well. I thought the encore was kind of anti-climactic, but o well, what can you do. I'm glad I got a chance to see it live as many times as I did and I'm grateful that the show was [legally] filmed for future generations to experience it.

~Steven

[log13124]

Posted: 9/27/08 at 3:53pm

I saw it this afternoon and thought it was amazing. The entire time I sat there, jaw agape for a period of it, I was thinking one thought over and over...

Chris Columbus should never be allowed to make another movie ever again. I was a defender of the film, saying that it wasn't perfect or anything (far from it), but it was still enjoyable and showed us the original cast preserved (for the most part). This made me hate the movie.

[lstbutifulgrl2]

Posted: 9/27/08 at 4:09pm

my two cents on the camera work....

i didn't notice it the first night, but when i saw it the second night, the shots that seemed out of focus or overly shaky could be seen as what mark is filming with his camera. it's just a thought, but thinking of it that way made it make more sense to me in the context of the film.

[scaryclowns223]

Posted: 9/27/08 at 4:52pm

Just got back.

Briefly:

I thought that everything worked cinematically...EXCEPT "La Vie Boheme." That song just didn't seem to translate very well.

Adam Kantor had some moments where he was a bit fake, but he did a nice job.
Will Chase was great, but he has a habit of starting delivery of a line in speech and then transitioning into song. That is fine, but not if you do it on every line.
Eden Espinosa was great, actually pretty funny...though some of her bits didn't land.
Tracie Thoms wasn't as good as I thought she might be, but was still serviceable.
I LOVE Renee Elise Goldsberry.
I couldn't help comparing Michael McElroy to Jesse L Martin, but he did a great job.
Justin Johnston was wonderful.
Rodney Hicks was fine, but as an actor some of his deliveries were forced.

[RogerFilmmaker]

Posted: 9/27/08 at 5:37pm

Hi lstbutifulgrl2,
I thought of that idea that they were trying for a gritty documentary feeling through shots from Mark's camera and perspective. The problem is it doesn't make sense because he's no where near to give us that POV (Point of View) shot. Plus the language of film requires that if that is the intention then you must first justify it with a set-up shot ahead showing Mark with camera rolling then cut to the shakey out of focus shots. Nope it's just bad shot choices and some poor footage amongst a lot of great footage. Like I say, style or not it didn't quite work and they should take this opportunity to tweak that stuff that didn't work for the DVD.

[Mattt]

Posted: 9/27/08 at 5:46pm

I saw the film today. It was absolutely amazing and thrilling. Near perfection, I honestly don't have any negative feelings. I just wish the sound was louder but it wasn't bad at all.

Did anyone notice at some points it sounded like their voices were fixed? I heard somewhere that they added riffs and things. Some moments I could tell that the actors voices where altered. Especially in the final voicemail between all the parents. It sounded off to me.

[bwayfan9]

Posted: 9/27/08 at 5:47pm

2 TIMES!!!! that's how good it is!!!!! Skip the Eagle Eye, go see Rent!

[SweetQintheLights]

Posted: 9/27/08 at 5:48pm

Ok- I didn't read this whole thread so much of this may be repeated.


I started bawling at Without You. I've gotten teary eyed when I saw it live but never have gotten to the point of actually crying like I did at this.
Maybe it's just me, but Will Chase didn't seem emotional at all. He didn't seem interested and just seemed....dull (for lack of a better word.)

Eden was wonderful and so was Renee. The emotion that both of them had was fantastic! Their tears were real. There were times that I felt that they wouldn't get through a scene or song because of their emotion. I felt that Collins (forgot who played him) could have showed more sadness when Angel (Justin) died. When I've seen it on Broadway, it was obvious that the person playing Collins was truly upset, it just didn't seem that way in the movie.

I thought the show was taped beautifully and some of the the close ups were fantastic! (Although seeing peoples fillings (cavities) were not as pleasing.)


There were a few things I saw in the movie that I don't remember happening when I saw it live on stage. I can't remember specifics but perhaps they was a little ad-lib here and there since it was the last show.
One thing I have a question about: During "I'll cover you"- Angel says something like "Whoa, my wig is falling off."-- this didn't normally happen, right?

Updated On: 9/29/08 at 05:48 PM