Some RENT questions...for the experts. — Page 3

So...I've sat with my disappointment in the RENT film for almost a week now. The more I think about it, the more I realize that some of the best musical sequences (and some of the most important character stuff) has been cut from the film. The St. Marks sequence and the fight after the funeral are particularly regrettable.

I think the treatment of April is perhaps the best example of why I was so disappointed. The death of April would be tragic no matter what. But it's a very different tragedy if Roger and April go through the illness together...from finding out through to her death. In Elizabeth Kubler-Ross terms, Roger theoretically could go through the five stages of death with April. Of course, the depression could continue (particularly since he has AIDS as well).

But in the play, April's death is violent and includes the revelation, heretofore unknown to Roger, that he is infected with the AIDS virus. It's a completely different type of horror. It's like comparing the scene in Longtime Companion in which Bruce Davidson comforts his lover in his last moments to the scene in Stonewall in which Duane Boutte's character witnesses the suicide of his lover. It's totally different.

---

Updated On: 12/1/05 at 03:02 PM

Someone kinda answred / asked this but i still dont get it.

Benny is married to Allison, before that he dated Mimi.

Now he's helping Mimi out in rehab. But i got the impression from the funeral that he's doing more than helping mimi. So is seeing Mimi on the side? Or did he dump Allison? or?

I forgot about that. It's at the end of the show where they wonder about Allison finding out about Mimi...doesn't Roger say something about a little birdie telling him and Collins comes in with 'Or an angel.'

It's been forever since I've listened to my OCR.

---

~ yes.
and this is just another prime example of how that libretto was butchered and how some of those relationships don't make any sense in the film.

So would it be fair to say the instead of improving on the weaknesses of the original material, the film makes it worse? But we are glad the film was made anyway?
Half-assed RENT is better than no RENT?
So it is not really a good film, but it is nice to see the cast and the musical in any form?
I just wonder what Spike Lee or even someone like Tarantino would have done with it.
Oh, well. It is what it is.
Just don't expect any Oscar nominations. And I mean ANY.

---

One of the major problems I have with the cuts (besides losing what I consider the best music in the show) is that so much of the story is lost. I understand the impetus to cut the recicative, but it then falls to the screenplay to fill in the gaps...which it didn't do.

---

I can certainly respect that criticism, robbie. And, I agree that April's death in the musical is better than how it came off in the film.

---

ugh, I loved that script. There were a lot of tiny things that made me go "wtf?" but it was so RAW. It was sort of like the real thing meets a really well-crafted piece of fanfiction.

---

So would it be fair to say the instead of improving on the weaknesses of the original material, the film makes it worse?

~ yes, absolutely. the film did nothing to improve the material.
i wholeheartedly agree with BroadwayGirl107's assessment.
and i don't agree that half-assed RENT is better than no RENT
~ but sadly that's what is up there on the screen: half-assed RENT...

so true jerbs, so true...*lol*

Now, that, I have to say, irritates me. I had always thought that Roger got HIV from April via sex. And, I always liked that as it provided a truth that many people don't wanna admit--heterosexuals get it from sex, too.

---

Updated On: 12/1/05 at 06:04 PM

Well...in truth...if it were just Roger and April shooting up and neither were infected, they would be fine...ok...they'd still be junkies, but you know what I mean.

There'd have to be another person involved or they had to have it before hand.

---