Ariel has been anxious for about the last year to see the film of “Rent,” so I took her to a showing right after school. What fascinated me about many of the reviews I read was complaints over how it didn’t work as well as the show.
Well, I didn’t see the show on Broadway, and I liked the film just fine. I think it suffers from the same problem that many modern musicals have: Exactly one memorable tune. Makes you long for the old days when any one show would have at least half a dozen tunes you could leave the theater humming. Other than that, though, I applaud the decision to import most of the original cast members. I particularly regret missing her in “Wicked” after seeing Idina Menzel here, who is easily the show-stopper of the group (although Rosario Dawson and the guy who played Angel are close seconds.)
I’ll tell you something, though: During one establishing shot, there was the Twin Towers, big as life. What kind of commentary on our life is it that a few people worrying about dying from an overshadowing disease as AIDS seems somehow small–even, God help us, quaint–in a world where all people are worrying about dying from anthrax or carbombs?
PAD
• 
Um…shouldn’t that second paragraph begin, “Well, I didn’t see the SHOW…”? 🙂
Paul
This cheers me, because I find the entire album extremely memorable – some colleagues and I have been going around to our classes all week singing the songs, in preparation for the film.
Yay! Thank god we’re into good movie season, finally…
While I understand what you’re saying about this being a personal story compared to the larger issues we face today, I also think it reflects the way that focusing on the “current” issue often avoids the bigger issue and the real danger. The current estimate is that 3.1 million people will die in 2005 of AIDS. That means that more people are dying each day of this disease than died of the attacks on September 11th, or that have died from all the car bomb attacks of the past decade, or that have died from weaponized anthrax ever.
When I saw the show on Bdwy with the original cast early in the run, I felt that it had a lot of potential and would have benefitted from an out of town tryout to allow a few months for the composer and creative staff to rewrite parts of it. However, when the composer tragically died, it was frozen and no tweaking would be allowed.
Too bad since I thought the composer had real talent. I just thought his potential was not fully realized in Rent.
Call me a curdmudgeon, but I don’t think I’ll see “Rent” unless I get very bored. I generally like musicals, but I don’t think there’s anything in this one I want to see. A bunch of self-absorbed people involved with deadly sex and pity? Sounds like the sort of stuff I can regularly get on just about any Internet forum. Add to that the deceptive TV ads (which they’re running a lot of) which all suggest this is as uplifting as watching “Oklahoma” and getting a massage afterwards.
I’ll wait for the remake of “The Producers,” thank you, although from the released sequences it doesn’t sound like Mel Brooks rewrote a lot of the lines. At least there are some new fun songs. And as for “Rent,” I think I saw the essential parts of it when I watched “Team America World Police,” with the actor singing “Everyone’s Got AIDS” in the musical “Lease.”
I don’t know, Thomas – I found Rent to be incredibly uplifting, when I saw the play.
…then again, I’m often accused of being goth, so take it as you will.
My two cents: Rent the stage show is a masterpiece. Rent the movie is a piece of crap. The stage show is abstract and artistic, but the movie took it and made it bluntly literal and inane. I suppose it was doomed from the start with Columbus directing it. His directing style seems to be to point the camera at the actors and say, “Okay, now sing and move around!”
I saw the trailer for The Producers today, and I have to say it doesn’t interest me at all. It looks exactly like the original movie, but with musical numbers and less talented actors, so I don’t really see the point. Gene Wilder was hilarious, but I don’t care to see Matthew Broderick trying to act like Gene Wilder.
Um…shouldn’t that second paragraph begin, “Well, I didn’t see the SHOW…”? 🙂
Many refer to musicals in movie format as still seeing the show. Movie listings in newspapers do use the words “Show Times”.
Though its equally possible PAD has seen the stage show….just the Touring Cast in some other city. And he was making it clear he hadn’t seen it on Broadway, with the Broadway Cast.
I’m lost. Maybe it’s because I just woke up, but this conversation between Paul and John isn’t making any sense to me.
Well, apparently Rent was not only based of of La Boheme, but it was also apparently plagerized:
http://www.slate.com/id/2131017/?nav=ais
The discussion is confused because the original post has been changed; Peter accidentally said that he hadn’t seen the “film” (or “movie”, I forget which word he used. Probably wasn’t “talkie” or “flicker”, though) when he pretty clearly meant that he hadn’t seen the stage production upon which the flicker is based. So this confusion is of a type that is actually common in the amendable medium.
“I think it suffers from the same problem that many modern musicals have: Exactly one memorable tune.”
I had to go home and re-watch TEAM AMERICA after seeing RENT.
I saw Rent when it went on tour several years ago and saw the movie last week. The movie was well made, even if many of the original actors (Jesse L. Martin) are starting to look a little long in the tooth to be playing 20-somethings now.
I thought it was really good, but it struck me at how dated the plot has already become. “Gays are people too,” isn’t really all that shocking an idea in the era of “Will and Grace” and the idea of living 10-20 years or longer with HIV isn’t all that alien either.
One thing that really struck me was, about halfway through, there was a big opening shot of the Manhatten skyline with the twin towers still intact. I immediately thought back to the opening scene, where Mark (I think) sings (excuse me if I don’t get the line exactly right), “things are sh!t and they can’t get worse.”
Um, well . . .
If you want to see Idina Menze live
she’s now doing a small musical
“See what I wanna see”
in NY Public theater.
First half is a musical version of Roshomon
set in NY City 1951.
Unfortunately it closes December 4.
So, people dying and singing about love, life, and death is quaint now? News to me. And a Broadway musical with an established refrain that is utlized as the basic structure for most of the major musical pieces qualifies as a “suffering” trait?
It is funny when the source of a social commentary, even a movement is later criticized for being behind the times. The movie/show is a snapshot of life in New York for these folks at that particular time. Saying that it is dated is like saying ‘Our Town’ doesn’t have enough references to cell phones and Internet.
Chris Columbus’ hackneyed approach to the movie was, imho, an attempt sanitize what most of America probably would rather not think about; a family friendly package to some political/moral hot topics. I’m not saying he did a good job, quite the opposite in fact; the movie is saved by the performances of the original cast and strength of the source material.
As for that plagiarism charge, that Slate article is crap. If you do a little research (something I realize is not part of Slate’s M.O.) you’d find that Schulman never pursued the matter legally and more importantly, never even realized her own book had been plagiarized, having even seen “Rent” herself, until a friend told her.
The movie may be poorly directed, but not even Columbus’ sloppy “After School Special” tone can diminish Larson’s work.
And really, PAD, quaint? Come on … get your head out of your own biased politics and see the film’s larger, allegorical picture.
I see what you’re saying, Pookey, but I’m with Peter, here. In 1996, the big gay rights issue was still whether they should serve in the military. Now, nearly ten years later, we’re debating whether the government should recognize gay marriages.
Larson took La Boheme and replaced consumption with AIDS because of the stigma associated with AIDS made it more relevent to the time. Now, time has lessened the stigma of AIDS. The story remains a powerful tale about love and life, but the backdrop is dated already. Stories about people living with AIDS were provocative in 1996. Today, not so much.
Den:
Sure, AIDs isn’t as scandalous as it once was, but just because people have been sensitized to homosexuality by heavily stereotypical TV programing doesn’t mean the backdrop of “Rent” is any less small or powerful. It may no longer be topical, but that doesn’t diminish the impact of a good story.
I don’t know, I guess it is just me, but something about PAD commenting that “a few people worrying about” dying of AIDs seeming small in the face of global terrorism is all at once asinine and funny.
Asinine because it totally marginalizes the horror of thousands of sick and dying people just to make a jab at the social climate of terrorist fears created by the administration.
And funny because, having lurked around this site for some time, that is the kind of behavior most of you would ascribe to one of those ‘evil conservatives.’
Pookey:
I agree. It’s still a good story. I just think that it had a much stronger punch when I saw it on stage in the mid-90s then when I saw the movie last week.
I saw the movie over Thanksgiving with my sister and some other people, and I gotta say that this movie confused me. I just wasn’t sure what I was supposed to feel about those characters. Even though most of them were dying, I couldn’t sympathize with them. I think the popular opinion from this particular group was, “GET A JOB!”
I think the writer and director wanted us to admire these characters for being heroic in some way, and I do agree that it takes no small amount of courage to live with those circumstances, but I felt the writing and the music did not do justice to these concepts.
The characters wore a facade of complexity, but never really rose above their simple archetypes… and stereotypes, I suppose.
As heartwarming tales of homosexuality, drugs, death, and AIDS go, this didn’t do much for me. But hopefully it will pave the way for a play or movie that will.
Everyone has AIDS!
The cast of Lease
All: Everyone has AIDS!
AIDS! AIDS! AIDS!
AIDS!AIDS!AIDS!AIDS! AIDS! AIDS!
Everyone has AIDS!
Gary: And so this is the end of our story, and everyone is dead from AIDS. It took from me my best friend. My only true pal. My only bright star.
Woman: He died of A-A-AIDS
Gary: Well I’m gonna march on Washington, lead the fight and charge the brigades. There’s a hero inside of all of us. I’ll make them see everyone has AIDS. [tempo picks up] My father!
Choir: AIDS!
Gary: My sister!
Choir: AIDS!
Gary: My uncle and my cousin and her best friend!
Choir: AIDS! AIDS! AIDS!
Gary: The gays and the straights and the whites and the spades!
Woman: Woop
All: Everyone has AIDS!
Gary: My Grandma and my dog, Old Blue!
Choir: AIDS! AIDS! AIDS!
Gary: The Pope has got it and so do you!
Choir: AIDSAIDSAIDSAIDSAIDS!
Gary: Come on everybody we’ve got quiltin’ to do!
Choir: AIDSAIDSAIDSAIDSAIDS!
Gary: We’re gonna break down these barricades! Everyone has
All: AIDSAIDS! AIDS! AIDS! AIDS! AIDSAIDSAIDSAIDSAIDSAIDS! AIDSAIDS! AIDS! AIDSAIDSAIDSAIDS! AIDS! AIDS!
F YEAH!