that someone who wasn't moved to see RENT on stage wouldn't like the film. After all, neither are sure to be everyone's cup of tea. But it's certain that those who enjoyed the stage version will find something to love about the film version, and that's good news for them. I know it's impossible to divorce the fate of Jonathan Larson from his work, but his untimely death does infuse RENT with a meaning (for those who feel it) that embodies the transcendent power of art. I, for one, am glad his voice is still out there to be heard...

Stephanie Zachareck did not miss anything by not seeing the stage production - it provoked in me exactly the same response as the film version has just done in her. Christopher Columbus has probably been too faithful to the original. The stage version for me was full of incredibly talented people provided with moderately OK material and a truly dreadful wasn't-she-supposed-to-die cop out ending. I saw it in London, maybe it lost something in crossing the Atlantic?

I had the CD of the show for, oh, 2 or 3 years, and I can't recall a single tune or a memorable line from it. Such a lovely idea, a Downtown version of La Boheme, such a sad end for its writer, such sentimentality from the Pulitzer folks. I want to be on their side, all these brave kids, but I just can't - is there anything more painful than false daring? It's like a senior class project on Fame.

i did see the stage version of this tasteless, overcooked turkey when it ran in san francisco several years ago. what an annoying, preachy plot and tuneless set of songs.

this production reaches abysmal depths when performing the number "today 4 u", which struck me as a shameless theft of rollerskate skinny's "man under glass".

and dear gawd, yes, someone (or somebodies) with cash to piss away had to copy and paste it onto the silver screen, when freight train loads of far worthier projects remain unfinanced.

I'm not sure how much credence I'm going to give this review if the reviewer can't bother to get the lyrics right. Mark and Roger aren't singing "you are what you are," which would indeed be banal. They're actually singing "you're what you own" after Mark sells out. In fact, the name of the song is "What you own," so these are difficult lyrics to miss.

If you're going to disparage the lyrics, you should at least get them right. Larson wrote, "When you're living in America at the end of the millenium, you are what you own." You still may not love it, but it certainly has more meaning than your misquoted "you are what you are."

I utterly adored "Rent" when I was in high school, but I fear that, were I to revisit it, it would only remind me of how annoying I was back then. This might be a story that only a 16-year-old's earnestness could love.

It's a relief I'm not the only one who noticed the Rent emperor isn't wearing any clothes. I was unlucky enough to be subjected to at least half a dozen ear splitting selections from Rent, sung by members of the San Francisco cast, about 5 years ago at an open mike bar. It had all the whiney, nasal whitebread charm of most contemporary Christian music, only with a stagy twist.

The reference to Up With People nails it. Rock had R&B as an inspiration. The music from Rent is so soulless it makes Amy Grant sound like Aretha Franklin.

It Seems to me that most of the folks who don't "get" Rent - Don't want to "get" Rent. Yes, it's young, awkward, overly earnest, hopelessly optimistic and still feels like a work in progress. That, however, is the point. Young life IS YOUNG, awkard, often overly earnest, hopelessly optimistic and, unless cut short, is a work in progress, not polished or finished or settled.

Yeah - I've never really liked the end - I would have preferred a singing "ghost" Mimi to drive home the point of wasted time. Although that would have been more faithful to the source material (la boheme), one would have expect Nate Fisher to magically appear as well (NARM! - The Musical!). Still, this was before protease inhibitors and the finale does seem to have an eerie preminition of the "Lazarus syndrome" that was to follow in the 90's for so many HIV Positive persons (That's a subject I want to see dealt with on film, by the way).

My main point, however, is that I've detected a common thread of condescension running through so many of the negative things written so far. Something along the lines of - "who'd want to watch THOSE people?" Please - if that's how you feel, don't bother.

No Day But Today

I saw Rent in London, with the original NY cast, and couldn't get out of the theatre fast enough. Rent and Cats are the reason I tell people I hate musicals, just in case they are about to invite me to one. It isn't true, of course. I love some musicals on stage, hate almost all at the cinema.

Unfortunately, it sounds like Hughes is faithful to the play. I have seen the play myself and just don't get the hype. I truly believe if Larsen had not died at the time he had, the play would not have had the run it has had. Even with the corrected lyrics, the songs are banal. I truly have been poor, and trust me, I sure would have answered the phone if my parents, hell anyone parents, were to call and offer help.

I hope it leaves theaters soon.

Yes, another useless musical adaptation of a useless musical.

Stephanie Z's opening line says it all: "Oh, the plight of the struggling artist in New York, circa 1989". The rest of the world no longer gives a hoot about what happens in NYC's provincial bohemia, and I pity those who see Rent, Fame, A Chorus Line, etc, then head into NYC and sacrifice chunks of their lives to try to "make it".

The idea of NYC as the red hot center of the world died decades ago with the Algonquin Round Table. I wish people would stop trying to bring it back.