Rent is Terrible — Page 3

"However, this will never happen. I would love to see some fresh blood in those roles, some new talent, but when was the last time that was done?"
GFC, I believe Cameron Macintosh (sp?) did something just like that with Les Miz sometime around the show's 10th anniversary.
Maybe they should do that with Rent.

I have to add my 2 cents here too. The first time I saw Rent, it honest to God changed my life. I had never seen a show like it. On a light note, Rent taught me the “f” word. On a serious one: I was eleven and knew absolutely nothing about the AIDS crisis. The first time I saw Angel's death scene was the first time I ever remember sobbing, literally sobbing during a show.
It showed me a world that I, a spoiled prep school upper-middle-class girl from the Orlando suburbs, had never seen before. I knew nothing about what being gay really meant. In middle school, being “gay” meant being stupid (like what lame used to mean before the PC craze).
It was also the first show I remember seeing with characters with real life problems. Not cats trying to compete for the one spot to Heaven, not Simba out to get revenge for his father’s death, but people dealing with a real-life-on-the-news-disease.
The show showed me a world that was scary not because it was a wild gross fantasy but because it was a reality.
Now, I can completely understand why people who actually lived the life would be disappointed with the show. (Mimi’s revival is corny to me too, especially since the original Mimi in La Boheme did die). But maybe it’s a comfort to now that this show did in some way raise awareness to a serious issue that we are still in battle with today.
Actual reality; act up; fight AIDS.

No one is denying the shows message or impact.

---

Isn't it interesting how DSTSocrates just flames and flees?

newyorkuniq - "I think that people who love Rent need to get out and see more Broadway shows and theatre in general."

I think you need to understand that anyone can love any show for any reason.

I've been visiting NYC and seeing Broadway shows since 1988 and have seen countless tours and regional productions. I saw Rent 3 times with the original cast the summer of 1996 when I spent 2 months studying in NYC simply to hear the music which was not yet released on CD. I knew pretty much nothing about the show other than the La Vie Boheme sequence bradcast on the Tonys. The show had a HUGE emotional impact on me that very few have been able to accomplish (Les Mis, Falsettos and Parade). Maybe it was the original cast, but the characters did grab me from the very beginning. While I admit, I have not yet seen a cast comparable to the original, I still enjoyed seeing the show. I do think the original cast showed a level of committment to the characters and the project as a whole that could probably never be repeated. Watching the show, it was as if they all knew they were part of an historic moment. And they were.

Mimi's awakening at the end seems a bit corny on stage, but at the same time sends to me an entirely different message. We already saw Angel die, so it's not like Larson was being so incredibly unrealistic about the disease. To me, it was a sense of optimism that HIV does not necessarily equal death any more. It seemed to be a message of optimism and hope. A will to live for things that are worth living for (in this case, love). Is it corny? Maybe. Is it unrealistic? Possibly. But, IT'S A MUSICAL! Angel walks back on stage to join singing the finale. How realistic are you trying to get? Why are so many people disappointed that someone does not die of AIDS and achieves a moment of happiness??? One of the things I actually enjoyed about her coming back to life was the unexpectedness of the moment.

MargoChanning - "RENT promised to be "the musical" of my generation of East Village artists, but to most of us stepping over the syringes that filled the streets back then and watching our friends die on a regular basis, it was a very homogenized, almost Disney-fied version of our reality."

No it didn't. Rent promised nothing more than to be the story Larson wished to tell. Larson never promised to tell your reality of the East Village nor anyone else's. Just in the same way West Side Story probably glossed over a bit of the real Caucasian-Puerto Rican conflicts of 1950's New York.

As for tick tick....BOOM, I have listened to the CD several times and it never sparked an interest for me. Had I seen the show, I might have felt something more, but when the tour arrived, I couldn't seem to get inspired to buy a ticket. Maybe like my experience with Rent, I should have seen the show first.

I'm taking Jarico to see Rent in July. It will be his first time to see it (other than a free outdoor concert version in Spain) and I hope the production isn't too tired. Either way, I'm sure we will enjoy it. If not, we'll just enjoy watching the show together. To me, that alone is worth the price of the ticket.

---

"Why were they singing all the dialogue?"

Ummmmm......because it is a sung-through musical. That is how it was written. Like Falsettos, Les Miserables, Evita, Jesus Christ Superstar, and numerous other shows. The technique has been around for around thirty years, more or less.

---

Well, the reason they were singing all the dialogue was because it is a ROCK OPERA. Hence, dialoge is sung.

Mister Matt, thank you for your post. You put a lot of solid thoughts eloquently into words.

It frustrates me, and perhaps it's because this IS my favorite show, that people who enjoy this show have to continuously defend themselves. I'm sure if can be said that we don't, and that we choose to, but honestly, this is the only show running right now that is so consistently under scrutiny. It gets old after awhile.

As does the statement that "Jonathan wouldn't want this" and statements of the like. I really don't see how the message is getting lost. The message is IN the show. So long as the show is running, and people are seeing it, people are seeing the message. It's not WHO brings the message to them, or how much money is brought to the producers when the message is set forth, it's that it's there. It is still there. Maybe put forth by people who aren't performing it as well as others have, and that is an issue, but it's not THE issue. The message will not be lost until the show closes and all of the cast recordings disappear off the face of the earth.

I understand that's just my take on it, but it amazes me what some people come up with in order to put down this show.

Updated On: 5/11/04 at 08:05 PM

"I will admit i went to see it on the heels of AIDA which is polished and full of power voices (except dude from the monkees...lol)"

Oh, lord, wasn't he AWFUL? He and Cheyenne Jackson playing father and son was hysterical...how did this big, beautiful guy with this incredible voice come from THIS man? The worst was at the stagedoor...exactly ONE girl was waiting for autographs (she was getting everyone's...leads, ensemble, etc...it's not like she was there just for Mickey!) Mickey signed her playbill and didn't even smile and make eye contact with the ONE person waiting. Sheesh.

Okay, don't yell at me for this because I can feel its going to come... I know that I read places that Larson was very much into Sondheim's work and was heavily influenced by him. But, when I watched Rent and heard the song which I think is called Contact, it just felt to me that he was copying Sondheim's song Bang. Whether he was or he wasn't it irks me whenever I see a show and I feel like the person is copying someone else's style instead of fleshing out his or her own.

---

My sentiments exactly. I never saw what the big deal was about this show. I did like it better than Urinetown. These two were my least favorite shows.

---

OMG I think you said that stuff on purpose, and you knew you would get a rise out of people. Personally, I think you wanted to be crucified.

---

Well 3 people walked out in my section...and I wanted to die.

I was familiar with the rock opera concept.... but as I said the actors lacked chemisty. So It didn't work. It is clear that it worked in the past...it just doesn't now...in my opinion.

I flame and leave yes... I am busy...sorry...didn't have enough time to tend to this today. My bad. The rentphiles...have spoken....but Socrates is still standing. No beef...just let the topic fade.

Oh yeah, I meant Puccini. Duh. :)

And to think all of my years of musical theory and history have come down to this. LOL *sigh*

---

although I respect everyone's opinion on the matter, I'm am personally a major Renthead (hence the name:)). Unfortunately, I've yet to see the show !! I'm madly in love with the recording, and I can't wait to see it.....I live many states away from NY, but I always planned on going to see it before it closed and not settling for a tour, but am I wrong? Is the overall agreement that the tour is just as good if not better? All input welcome!

Secondly, saying that you liked La Boheme better than Rent is like saying you liked Romeo and Juliet better than West Side Story....apples and oranges....you can certainly prefer one to the other but you cannot compare them like they are the same thing just because one is based on the other.

On that note, Mimi's return was one of the biggest changes Larson made from La Boheme, and I feel with good reason. I understand everyone's differing opinions on this matter, but while we're giving out 2 cents, here's mine. Larson was more focused on the idea of LOVE, HOPE, and living each day to the fullest than he was on realism. Like someone previously stated, Angel's death showed realism and Mimi's life was very unexpected. For an unknowing audience member especially, that return is very powerful, and, although unrealistic, carries much weight pertaining to the themes mentioned above. It's not so much trying to say "Oh, look! A miracle!" as it is trying to say...well...No Day But Today. Whether you ARE dying or just starting to live, TODAY could be your last and it should be appreciated and taken advantage of. I think Mimi just decided she'd stay alive just long enough to tell us that :).