NO DAY BUT A DAY IN 1991: From the ALOTT5MA Questionably Necessary Remakes Desk--less than 3 years after the original Broadway production closed, an off-Broadway revival of Rent opens today, directed by Michael Greif, who directed the original production, with some rethinking (Mark no longer has glasses and a scarf!). Watch the cast do "Seasons Of Love."
Mark needs a monkey tail hipster beard.
ReplyDeleteThrowing this show up off-Broadway makes a lot of sense: it is closer to the original aesthetic of the show, it costs significantly less money to produce than being on Broadway, and it will make money for years off of tourists who come in and think "Rent! I've heard of that!" Avenue Q is basically doing the same thing off-Broadway to a lot of success.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I'm a New Yorker and I have no interest in seeing it.
Yeah, there were two things in this article that I don't quite buy:
ReplyDelete1. That using the same logo is for any reason other than the fact that it will probably make tourists think it's the original production, and
2. That even the most naive audience member didn't figure out Angel was male pretty quickly in the original production, at least by the second act.
Mostly though I'm just shocked that it's really been three whole years. I would have sworn up and down I played the lottery and saw it in its final month last summer. The summer before that at the earliest.
Does it matter whether it's the original production or not? As not a theater person, I didn't know that I was supposed to care whether it was the original production (same characters, same songs, etc.). If the tourists are so easily fooled, then aren't they more likely to be like me and not know that they are supposed to care whether this was the original production or a revival and therefore draw no distinction at all?
ReplyDeleteThat was me.
ReplyDeleteThis is a good strategy for New York theater. Rent and Avenue Q can run indefinitely, with much lower operating costs, and continue to employ actors, designers, directors, and stage crew. And when they go off-Broadway, they open up theater space on Broadway for new shows, which need the prestige of being "Broadway shows" to launch their runs. I'm all for it.
ReplyDeleteI don't have any interest in seeing Rent again now, but I might in a few years, or I might if there's a particularly incandescent performance in the new version.
I can't stand this show... I just feel like it's as dated, over-earnest as any other show that struck a time-and-place chord that has since overstayed its welcome.
ReplyDeleteBut I remember how nuts were were about "Fame" back in the 80s so I can imagine that "Rent" sort of filled that slot in the 90s. Just because I never bought into the Rent hoopla doesn't mean others won't like it.
There's absolutely no judgement here. As far as I'm concerned, the only thing you're "supposed" to do is suit yourself. If by "does it matter" you mean "should it change whether they go," no, I personally don't think so. If you mean the original and revival are the same, or that not knowing and not caring are the same, I disagree. But just because two things are different doesn't mean one is better or worse than the other.
ReplyDeleteI really don't seek to judge others' entertainment choices. I wouldn't have a leg to stand on if I wanted to.
In fact I probably will see this revival at some point. Especially if there are affordable ticket options. I like RENT and I like revivals.