THEATRE REVIEW: Rent Remixed
- Posted on October 4, 2007 2:56 PM
- 59 comments
Duke Of York Theatre
3rd October
Please note: this review was written during previews.
Rent Remixed is an updated version of Jonathan Larson’s ’96 Pulitzer Prize winner Rent, reworked by William Baker and Steve Anderson - the creative team behind Kylie. With this in mind, you would expect something poppy, bright and sexy, something that is captivating and musically advanced. Sadly, this is not what we got. Musically, Rent Remixed was mediocre – this had a crushing impact considering it is a musical.
The original Rent set is known for being minimalist and remained like this, but with a touch of modernity, brought on with a splash of chrome and some bright, show room type lighting. The sound system definitely contributed to the poor quality of the play as it sounded like it was being pumped through a tape player.
The singing wasn’t bad, in fact, some very strong vocals managed to punch their way to the surface, particularly the vocals coming from Mimi, played by Siobhan Donaghy. Siobhan Donaghy, a former Sugar Babe, was one of the best things about the performance. Her voice is soft and syrupy, it trickled around the theatre and leaked into every dark corner, keeping the audience going. She soaked up all of the audience’s attention with her glossy curtain of auburn hair and stunning figure, often accentuated by stockings, corsets and spiky heels. The downfall was the generic, bland tone that clung to most songs. There were no catchy notes, just a grey blend of dull sounds and irritating songs that went on too long.
Admittedly, the performance picked up in the second half when Denise Van Outen finally strutted on to the stage as the feisty, sexy and manipulative Maureen. She immediately livened things up and threaded various innuendos and some strange humour in to the performance (getting the crowd to moo with her?) Her voice was a lot stronger than the background of the cast members who became shadowy figures in her presence.
Furthermore, the story line was hard to follow and uninteresting. Maybe I was the only one that thought this? Maybe I completely missed the point, who knows? A large majority of the crowd were active throughout the play, whooping and jeering – but I think the audience was crammed with the cast's parents and friends. I felt detached from the plot and apathetic even though the theme of struggling to pay the rent is one I could relate to. The only one song in the play that struck a chord with me had the line ‘How can you generate heat, when you can’t feel your feet?’ This took me back to being a student and being able to see my own breath in my living room. Brrrrrrr. I then found myself entertaining thoughts of University for the rest of the play, as Rent Remixed failed to hold my attention. In fact, at some points, I was deliberately trying block out the songs.
- Zarina Raja
Tags
Comments (59)
Kate Spiegelhalter
Oh dear!...how's Denise going to pull back from this I wonder?
Posted on October 5, 2007 12:35 PM
David Andersun
Rent Remixed was utterly atrocious. It was the toffs version of Rent, with upper class English accents replacing New Yorkers, and the most dire staging you can imagine. The music was appalling, and the audience fell silent after a few of the 'big' numbers - presumably in horror at the slaughtering this once great show was getting.
Sorry guys, wish I hadn't gone. The original show was a masterpiece compared to this trash.
Posted on October 6, 2007 11:17 PM
Jenny Fraser
Rent Remixed was rubbish. Bad acting particularly from Siobhan - she looked as wooden as a plank. Nasty cheap sounding music, tacky staging and campness all over.
Really not worth the money.
Posted on October 6, 2007 11:19 PM
Ric Talbut
Rather disappointing. I'm not sure about this being remixed for the 21st century. While Denise and Francesca have very good voices, the disco music killed "Take Me Or Leave Me".
Probably the biggest disappointment was Siobhan as Mimi. I could see those around me cringe during some of her vocal wobbles. Mimi is a feisty role and Siobhan just didn't have it. She was not believeable as Mimi. When singing with Luke her voice was lost.
The rest of the cast put their heart and sole into it, and that always makes for an enjoyable experience. In some sections they don't yet seem comfortable with the staging and make it seem a bit forced. That should come in time.
I liked "Tango Maureen", a bit of influence from the movie.
The set was a bit high tech and looked like a bit of a fashion runway rather than setting for characters that a supposed to be broke. Just my opinion, not a deal breaker.
I really wanted to love it, as a die hard fan (not quite a renthead), but I just "liked" it.
Posted on October 7, 2007 12:07 AM
Ben Philips
It's a hideous and desperately confused production.
To be fair, it's a very difficult musical to make work - the story is extremely thin (despite being lifted from La Boheme), and was only really carried by the passion of its cast and the resonance that it had with its original audience - the further it is from its historical and geographical origin the more pointless the musical seems.
But even so, William Baker's production is a disaster.
The decision to present the character's world - one of poverty, disease and homelessness - on a glossy white, chrome and flourescent stage was never going to work. It conjours shop interiors, cheap restaurants, and art galleries. Which isn't really the right tone. The cast look as though they've just stepped out of a Gap advert. But homeless people showing off their chests and undies in a snow storm and character's who have 'been living in the park for a month' looking as though they've just been made over by Trinny and Suzanna are the lesser of the shows problems.
The hamfisted direction is the key fault - when a key character dies and ascends to heaven (the spiritual one, not the club), it's clearly a problem when most of the audience are stifling laughter.
William Baker may have directed pop shows, but he can't get acting performances from his cast, nor does he know how to tell a story on stage without resorting to the kind of cheap, tasteless theatrics that even a GCSE drama student would avoid.
On top of all that there's the problem of precisely where and when this is set. Apparently we ARE in New York, but for some reason, most of the characters seem to be English. And Baker has made a vague decision to alter the period of the play - one or two drug references and a couple of lyrics are all he seems to have dared, though. But this rather undercuts the nature of the story - HIV is no longer the death sentence that it was. And the musical is (or was) a response to that death sentence. Without it's historical place, there is no story worth telling.
Worse still is Baker's take on 'sexy'. Black, strappy underwear, under-rehearsed dancing and glittery, American football gear is the verdict there. It is a passionless, sexless and joyless experience.
Posted on October 7, 2007 2:15 AM
Ric Talbut
Rather disappointing. I'm not sure about this being remixed for the 21st century. While Denise and Francesca have very good voices, the disco music killed "Take Me Or Leave Me".
Probably the biggest disappointment was Siobhan as Mimi. I could see those around me cringe during some of her vocal wobbles. Mimi is a feisty role and Siobhan just didn't have it. She was not believeable as Mimi. When singing with Luke her voice was lost.
The rest of the cast put their heart and sole into it, and that always makes for an enjoyable experience. In some sections they don't yet seem comfortable with the staging and make it seem a bit forced. That should come in time.
I liked "Tango Maureen", a bit of influence from the movie.
The set was a bit high tech and looked like a bit of a fashion runway rather than setting for characters that a supposed to be broke. Just my opinion, not a deal breaker.
I really wanted to love it, as a die hard fan (not quite a renthead), but I just "liked" it, in homage to a memory that was.
Posted on October 7, 2007 9:41 AM
Andy Churm
DIRE- AVOID
Posted on October 7, 2007 7:32 PM
Louise O'connor
When I heard they were doing this I knew that it wasn't going to work but I was shocked when I heard Denise Van Outen was plating Maureen as she is very respectable in the Theatre industy as for the other cast which are just has beens. I am wondering what will happen to her career after this. They should have brought Rent back but they way it should be. I am looking forward to going to New York next year to see Rent the way it should be.
Posted on October 7, 2007 9:20 PM
Sarah
I was appalled at the show. I am a big fan of the original but went into the show with an open mind. The biggest problems for me were the direction that quite frankly reminded me of poor GCSE standards, and the cast, most of whom I thought were useless. Leon Lopez was the only one who I thought gave a believable and natural performance throughout, although soem of the other cast had good moment, for example Roger in One song glory. Siobhan butchered the character of Mimi. she managed to transform a passionate, intreguing and beautiful character into nothing more than an unemotional figure who wonndered about the stage and failing to do any sort of justice to Larson's great songs. This was worsened by the tacky club sound that had been plastered all over the original songs. Rent is an incredible show and has been given a bad name by this joke of a show. Bring back the original and keep the show how it should be.
Posted on October 8, 2007 3:15 PM
John Webb
Well what can I say that hasnt already been said - I was unlucky enough to see this show on openeing night - or should I say the rescheduled opening night (if only they had cancelled the show I saw).
I'm tryiong to prioritise the things I hated but there are so many:
1. A cast that looked fresh out of youth theatre - this seemed to be emulated by comments in the program, cast members thanking there parents for support and references to there myspace page - this should have been an early indication for me to run as fast as I could to see if I could get tickets for another show. 2. I presumed the show was set in New York, but you wouldnt know this from the accents of some characters, The Mark character sounded like a member of the royal family, thankfully we were only subjected to a few awful lines of dialogue from mimi, the rest was just awful singing. 3. The death of angel - At this point I was just glad we were a cast member down and hoping that remix ment the others would all soon follow him up those stairs with angel wings on (what on earth was the director thinking) I've never seen an audience more desperate to stifle laughter through what should be an emotional scene.
After seeing this pile of rubbish inside the theatre all I longed for was a sign outside the theatre TO LET
Posted on October 8, 2007 7:17 PM
Rachel Atkinson
Did any one else notice what appeared to be Madonna's holiday as the background to the New Year scene! PAINFUL
Posted on October 8, 2007 8:38 PM
Angel babe
I am sorry but I thought it was a really good production. I saw the show twice in New York and I was really worried about the London version but once they started to sing I was very impressed. Their voices were strong and the acting was good. I like the way the character of Mimi was changed from someone being overtly sexual to someone who was smouldering instead.
Although it will never ever top the original cast I still thought it was great. The guy who played Collins was excellent. He would fit right into the broadway version in New York.
Posted on October 10, 2007 11:50 PM
Jim Bucks
Trashy, disgusting and Larson will surely be turning in his grave. They have crapped on his masterpiece!
Posted on October 13, 2007 11:18 PM
Becca
I'm so glad it's not just me and my friend (a die-hard Rent fan)who cringed most of the way through this terrible show. It was worse than a bad pop concert - Siobhan (Mimi) yowled unbearably out of tune and moved like a thunderbird puppet. When Angel dies, the production descends into farce with mounds of feathers (no doubt stolen from Kylie's Showgirl tour)- everybody around me was either wincing or shaking with laughter.
If you're thinking of going, really don't bother! We paid a lot of money for our seats and that was the only reason we stayed until the end. I was so desperate for it to be fantastic, but the cast was pretty terrible and the direction was the worst I have ever seen. HOW WAS THIS TEAM ALLOWED INTO THE WEST END???
Posted on October 13, 2007 11:59 PM
supermanjovi
I love the Broadway version of RENT and was really excited to hear that it was coming back to London so I bought tickets at £45 each for Saturday 13th October.
What can I say that hasn't already been said...
I thought that it was weird.
Roger was amazing, as was Collins and I think that it was due to their characters not being altered by the 'remix'. Angel, Mark amd Mimi's chararcters were changed beyond recogition.
It was hard to work out why some of the cast were engliksh and some american and why they turned Mimi's 'out tonikght' into something out of Moulin Rouge!
RENT is an amazing musical and as much as it was great to see a new take on it, i am afraid that they didn't get it right.
I watched 5 performances of RENT in a row on Broadway in May , it was that good. I wouldn[t do that for this version its nowhere near as good I am sorry to say.
One last thing. What the hell have they done to Angel???? He's turned into Jimmy Somerville and Mimi appears to want to be Nicole Kidman in Moulin Rouge
Posted on October 14, 2007 7:41 PM
Renee
I saw the show Saturday night, I thought it was fantastic! The cast were truly amazing! I cant believe the above comments could be made. Rent on Broadway has been running for over 10 years. Rent remixed is in its first month of previews and hasn't even had its opening night. as for telling people not to bother seeing the show, I would completely disagree. I would see it again and again if I get the chance. Roger is fantastic! possibly one of the best voices I have ever heard. Denise van outen as Maureen is genius! as soon as she started her protest she had the whole audience in hysterics right until the end of the show. The Dancing was great too! I didn't appear to be the only one enjoying the show either. when angel died the audience were in tears. As for the mix of English and American accents, I think it made the show more realistic. Its unlikely now days that a group of friends living in New York are all going to be American as thousands of brits flee to America. And guys . . . . .Its worth going to see the show just to see Denise's bottom! Enjoy!
Posted on October 15, 2007 12:47 PM
Renee
I saw the show Saturday night, I thought it was fantastic! The cast were truly amazing! I cant believe the above comments could be made. Rent on Broadway has been running for over 10 years. Rent remixed is in its first month of previews and hasn't even had its opening night. as for telling people not to bother seeing the show, I would completely disagree. I would see it again and again if I get the chance. Roger is fantastic! possibly one of the best voices I have ever heard. Denise van outen as Maureen is genius! as soon as she started her protest she had the whole audience in hysterics right until the end of the show. The Dancing was great too! I didn't appear to be the only one enjoying the show either. when angel died the audience were in tears. As for the mix of English and American accents, I think it made the show more realistic. Its unlikely now days that a group of friends living in New York are all going to be American as thousands of brits flee to America. And guys . . . . .Its worth going to see the show just to see Denise's bottom! Enjoy!
Posted on October 15, 2007 12:47 PM
Lew
I really wanted to enjoy this show, and i went in with an open mind. As a fan of the original i know how good it can be, but tried to see it as a show in its own right. However, the fact that som eof the songs had been 'remixed' wasn't by far the worst part (although dont get me started on out tonight - awful idea to change the original, although the new Mimi definately couldnt carry the origianl). The direction is some of the worst i have EVER seen in any show. There's not enough room to make examples here as there are so many. How could anyone watch that and think 'oh yeah, thats good and makes sinse'?. The fact of the range of accents, from some quite good New York accents, to cockney, to Mark who sounds like Prince William? Bad move. I felt nothing for any of the characters, Mimi was a big dissapointment, no sex appeal, she is supposed to be a fiesty desperate teenager, this Mimi is not at all fiesty, and seems quite together - considering. As for Angel (who had changed from an endearing drag queen to ... I don't know what??) I cared very little for him and therefore didnt care when he died - which had massive repercussions to the rest of the show. Mark - I dont know where to begin. If you are trying to make me believe that this guy who has a pretty amazing (gym - ie not cheap) body, perfect white teeth, lovely brown styled hard and wearing A&F clothes can't afford to pay rent?? Perhaps he should stop shopping and getting veneers? Felt nothing for him. Blah blah, i could go on. They somehoe really missed the point in this. Good points - Roger - amazing voice, Joanne - fantastic...love her, and Denise is a relief when she comes on as there's finally some personality and charisma. I need to go to Broadway to get this awful version out of my mind and remember how good it can be! I know it's a remix, but even as a show in its own right, it is not good...at all. I just hope they learn from these comments and make changes for when it opens!
Posted on October 15, 2007 3:44 PM
Janine, Battersea
Ghastly awful show. Rubbish, unconvincing, grotesque and directed as boringly as anyone could ever attempt.
See it if you like, but there's nothing but frustration and wasted money on offer here.
Posted on October 15, 2007 7:42 PM
naughtylucy
So irritated I wasted my money on this show. Loved the originial, and really wanted to enjoy this. But, after seeing it, I realised I had only gone to hopefully see the original again - which could not have been done better. Anything they were going to change would have been bad, but this was DIRE from start to finish. I WISH I HAD NOT GONE. If you like Rent, DO NOT SEE THIS.... you will be severely disappointed and upset.
Posted on October 15, 2007 7:45 PM
Alf Cadogan
Shit show guys. Bad job all round.
Posted on October 15, 2007 7:47 PM
John John
A complete disaster. From the second Mark walked on stage in an Abercrombie & Fitch top I knew we were in trouble. We are being told they have to burn posters just to keep warm and yet there he is decked in designer gear (PS If Mimi is also a broke stripper junkie then she must be getting paid in clothes - how many costume changes??). Then his accent! God knows what he was trying to do but it fluctuated from British aristocracy to cockney with a flutter at 'American' - disastrous.
The piece has lost its timeline - its design is very 2007, but then when the cast sing you are living in America at the start of the Millenium you realise that the director simply pays no attention to detail whatsoever.
The cast try their best - they give their all to their performances. Denise Van Outen is a true professional, God knows why she took this job. Leon Lopez is a star (incidentally he did Soapstar Superstar and he certainly didn't show on that that he could sing as well as he did on stage!). The voicemails were a joke - in the original they connected things, developed plot, and at times provided the humour, now its just a case of spot the celeb - yes we know you work with Kylie get over it).
Worst bits - Angel remixed - yep he ticked every gay cliche from an Old Compton St point of view - however we are in New York - anyone that behaved like that would be laughed out of town. They 'murdered' his death scene. And Mimi - oh dear. A pop star who has been to the 'hands' school of acting - stumble around stage with palms open hoping to be believed. A lifeless, boring performance. Mimi is passion and movement, a girl who struggles with her situation and yet puts on a show to hide her pain - Sadly our Sugababe has not moved on from the Overload video where she just sat down looking bored - Out tonight was a travesty. I would sack her today and get Ruth Aguilera from the ensemble into the role immediately. Don't waste your money.
Posted on October 16, 2007 10:18 AM
Krystian Martin
Recommendation for anyone thinking of seeing Rent Remixed - Don't, save your money.
You're better off buying the DVD of the 2005 movie featuring many of the original Broadway cast members - http://www.sonypictures.com/homevideo/rent/index.html - highly recommended!
Posted on October 16, 2007 3:49 PM
corfield
i was wondering if anyone has has invested in this rent remixed, if so let me know, and let me know what you thought of it.
Cheers
Posted on October 16, 2007 6:14 PM
Hugo
RENT remixed should NEVER have been allowed to happen! Jonathan Larson must be spinning in his grave, it is truly atrocious. The acting was terrible, the set stupid, the costumes a joke. And as for the singing.... well anyone can sound great on a click track!! You can even hear it clicking in! And numerous times throughout the show, performances are stilted as they wait for the track to click in! This version of RENT is to be avoided at all costs and should close immediately!
Posted on October 16, 2007 8:57 PM
Helen and Nura
As hard core Rent fans, Rent Remixed left a lot to be desired. But then, maybe we missed something- sitting underneath the Mezzanine we could only see the feet of characters on the upper levels of the set.
All in all, this was an overblown, butchery of Larson's salute to America's forgotten youth.
Rent shoud be out-of-control emotional, of course. The whole notion of a musical about AIDS is going to have some sad bits. But there's a line between heart-felt and heavy-handed. This production hasn't just crossed the line, they've hung themselves with it.
Case in point: if were confused by what it meant for Angel to ascend towards a white light after lying in a hospital bed "from heaven," there was a handy flat line beep across the stage's LCD tickertape screen, to really hammer it home. We were also unsettled by the insunation created by the "B & D, metaphorical AIDS dancers" attacking Angel in his final moments, i.e: that all alternative sexual practises are dripping with the virus.
The one time the screen may have been effective was during La Vie Boheme. But rather than seeing all those sensational lyrics (which would have helped us enjoy their subtly "to no absolutes, to Absolut") we got "Anarchy, Anarchy, Anarchy" flashing out of time to the music.
But we would have forgiven the heaviest of hands if the performances had been up to scratch. The only thing we believed about Siobhan Donaghy's performance was that she was weak, extremely hungry and potentially near death. Born to be bad? No, she was born to do the Robot and call it a strip-tease. All we wanted, was ONE moment where she would open her mouth and wibble a note that carried some emotion. Even in "Goodbye Love" she managed to come off as blase.
Meanwhile remembering that we've seen Taye Diggs play Benny, it was hard to swallow a weedy, talentless Ludacris look-a-like who was a little off key.
Other bits we hate include:
- Mark hamming up one of the only straight roles in the cast. We were embarassed for him throughout "La Vie Boheme"'s intro.
- 'Over the Moon?" Hardly. Denise's pitiful panto broke the fourth wall and had us cringing in our seats.
- The emo ballad mockery of "Living in America".
- The 'subtle' references to explain why half the cast couldn't nail an American accent
- Overuse of the word 'Fuck' in an attempt to make the show more edgy.
- Mark's digital handy-cam.
- Little 'updates' to the script which ruined the rhythm and rhyme. The original referred to "prozac." Xanax doesn't rhyme with "Or you'll pack"
- Angel felt like he was more suited to kicking someone's head in at a football match than to be the symbol for kindness and truth. His ability to put his leg behind his neck did little to make up for it.
- With two stong vocalists "Take me or Leave Me" could have been sensational. Instead Denise van Outen and her lesbian love struggled to keep up with the bubble gum synth house beats. Glo-Sticks anyone?
Apart from an fairly strong Joanne, the only diamond in this very rough production was Luke Evans as Roger. His performance was better than any we have seen before - and we've seen a few. He resurrected the previously dreary "Without You" and even managed to breath truth into the cheese of "you were the song all along". He made love to every note and saved the duets with Donaghy.
The ensemble was also fanastic. "Christmas Bells" was an excellent ending to the first act and "Will I lose my dignity" actually brought tears (and for once not of laughter).
Good bits aside, we didn't buy Baker's rehash of our favourite 90s musical. We wouldn't even rent it.
Posted on October 18, 2007 2:45 PM
JIMI
O my god, how trendy is it to get AIDS and look fab and not suffer, look buff and wear Abercrombie, I must get it today...........NOT..... The production stank, as a hardcore RENT fan you really dissappointed me. Firstly it takes place in the East Village in New York not the Village Bar in Soho, where was the reality? I saw no Black women in the production, do they not exist in the East Village? As for the interview William gave in Attitude Magazine, if this is the production for the my space generation then I suggest you stay at home and surf, he also made comments on other Actors who have appeared in the real RENT productions, in particular Adam Ricketts, what was the matter did he turn you down William? As for the Actors in the present Pretentious production, hang on what's that I smell, oh yes it's Eau de Amateur with phoney accents. On the whole this production lacks reality, grit, earthy quality but excels in clean lines, neat & tidy set & a glamorous approach to life, if only living with AIDS was as perfect is this production leads you to believe it is.
Posted on October 19, 2007 10:33 PM
Mike
I dont intend to ramble on about how bad the production was because i'm assuming if you've got this far down then you alrady know the production was shocking. I merely want to question why once again the West End has chosen a "celebrity" over talent in casting the monstosity of a performer in Siobhan Donaghy. its frustrating as a performer to know how hard it is to get work and when you see talentless "celebs" taking up the lead roles its soo disheartening. If the future of the West End lies in the hands of talentless has beens then all us thesps should really re-think our careers. Denis Van Outen wasn't actually to bad and the guy who played roger was great. But they were two good performers in a terrible production. As for the rest of the cast who frankly seemed heartless, empty and lack luster the spirit of RENT and what it stands for have been hacked down by page52 of the GAP catalogue and what seemed to be an ikea showroom. The inexperience of the director and some of the cast is evident and i totally agreee with the GCSE standards on offer in the home of what is apparently the best Enlgish Theatre has to offer, the West End. If the creators, directors and prducers read this, here is my advice. Pack up your bags and make way for a show worthy of the West End.
Posted on October 20, 2007 4:09 PM
Tony
Saw the show on Saturday night during its first week and when a show can't fill a theatre in its first week then its downhill I'm afraid. Lets start with the positives, Denise Van Outen, surprised me and actually enjoyed her performance, even though I thought she was mis-cast. Luke Evans as Roger, a very strong performance. Unfortunately that's all the positives I have, the negatives I'm afraid I can write a whole novel on. I would have to agree with many of the reviews already posted. So many aspects in this production didn't work ranging from the stage direction of certain numbers to the 'remix' of certain numbers that took the grittiness of some of the songs and turned them into fluff. Siobhan Donaghy, not a highlight at all. The whole production was dissapointing. I loved the original and have seen Rent many times and was really looking forward to seeing the show but some numbers were appalling. I didn't know whether to laugh or just cringe. Overall, save your money and save two hours of your night, you're not missing much!
Posted on October 20, 2007 11:26 PM
Lou
I hate to say it but this production fell apart mainly because of Siobhan Donaghy. She's out of her depth here, not up to it vocally or dramatically. It was as if she was performing in a high school musical. As a result, a lot of the emotional thrust of the show was gone.
Other than that, the rest of the cast were pretty good - the Roger was amazing. Turning a rock opera's tunes into a pop/clubbing style was a mistake, as was updating it into cotemporary times (where AIDS no longer kills so swiftly and the part of New York where Rent is set is quite trendy and expensive). The context of the story was lost. But it might have just been pulled off, though, with the right Mimi.
Posted on October 23, 2007 2:58 PM
Duncan
Are all these reviews written by the same person? Its hard to think that so many people who call themselves Rent fans could so utterly fail to get the point. I have seen the 'original' Rent three times - in New York, in London and produced by a little theatre company in New Zealand. I was interested to see how a 'remixed' version would work. Well it does! It really does! I dont personally think that the original music needed to be 'updated' at all and I think that the sound could have been a little less compressed. Mimi's mike should have been louder at times. But overall a really great performance from this cast. None of the people around me were parents or friends of the performers but the response from them all was enthusiastic and positive. Mark and Roger are superb. Angel and Tom equally so. The person who asked what mooing was all about should do their research and not try to write a review on the basis of other people's opinions. At least turn up to the show and be honest. Well done to this cast. I will bring my family from New Zealand to see this show. Dear cast - ignore the passionless drivel from these negative critics. They are wrong. They are blinkered. They probably havent been to see the show yet. And they should. They really should.
Posted on October 27, 2007 9:29 AM
JOHN LAURIE
first off this visit to RENT REMIXED would have been my 7th time seeing RENT 4 in NYC and 3 in London with the orig cast so think I know the show well...RENT REMIXED...you have to cringe at the tital alone ...hasa lot going for AND against it..more against to be honest...first the bad...the set awfull,white trendy BORING!...the costumes..Abercrombie et all lazy lazy lazy...Mimi looked shocking through out..the three girls in fishnets looked like some throwback rip off of ROCKY HORROR from years ago,oh and Willliam the silly little box hat looked crap on Kylie a few years ago and it still does here!...cheap and tacky at times Not all the times I give you...the cast...oh dear!!!...William were you having coffee and cake on Compton Street the day they cast Mark!?..or was he the only one to turn up,now dont get me wrong Oliver Thornton can sing but he should be in the SOUND OF MUSIC not RENT miss casting gone soo bad its astonishing!...Siobhan ok at times but was the descision to REMIX Out Tonight done because she sooo had no chance of performing the original version?..the night I went no Denise she was ill this turned into a blessing get rid of her!,you dont need her C J Johnson was great as Maureen!!...now for the other possitives!!....Luke Evans GREAT as Roger looked right great voice and can act,,,same goes for Leon Lopez as Collins plus Jay Webb as Angel loved his dance the only thing that had been improved from the original,,the death dance though was bit naff sub MADONNA dance routine,he looks great and thought it works well making him English,only crit and its not his fault hes a bit fit to look like hes on his deathbed with AIDS!...all three ,producers could be lifted and trasported over to NYC and would fit right at home on Broadway...all in all its ok nothing great oh and SEASONS should be put back where it belongs...the supporting cast were good also!..if you have to go check Denise is ill!!!
Posted on October 31, 2007 12:53 PM
Kyle
The fact of the matter is this show wasn't RENT. It was a lame, high school-style production that totally missed the bar. I was utterly disappointed, being a huge rent fan from the early days when RENT originally opened. I didn't really understand the need to change the songs, "Out Tonight" was absolutly the worst thing I've ever seen on a profesional stage. One of my biggest problems with the show was the fact that the lovable character Angel was neither lovable, or in drag!! Plus the cast was hardley multi-cultural, which I always thought was one of the major points of the show. It was just god awful..
Posted on November 5, 2007 4:19 PM
Will
Ok to all the people leaving these comments slating the show, I'd just like to say this:
No, it wasn't RENT. It was RENT Remixed. Now, I haven't seen the show in New York, and quite frankly, I don't care if it's "better", or more realistic. The fact is this show was SUPOSSED to be different, and it worked.
After listening to the soundtrack of the orignal, in my opinion many of the tracks have been vastly improved, especially Out Tonight, Tango: Maureen, and What you Own. I loved the new versions. It wasn't a direct copy of the orignial, the music was made to be different (hence Remixed), so people should appreciate that when they go to see it.
And come on, do any of you really think you could do a better performance than any of those actors? All of the cast have put so much effort into the show, and i think they deserve credit for a really good performance. I loved it guys.
I don't go into a show pretending to be a professional theatre critic, I go to enjoy it. And I did enjoy the show. Everyone's entitled to their opinion, and if you didn't like the show then that's fine, but that doesn't give you the right to toally trash other people's hard work. So instead of telling everybody how awful it was, and not to waste their money, why don't you let them decide for themselves?
My opinion: I really enjoyed the show. I think that's enough.
Posted on November 6, 2007 12:15 AM
Renee
Saw the show again on Monday!
Fantastic, it was a understudies showcase! with CJ Johnston as Maureen, Craig Stein as Angel, Jamie Sampson as Benny and Ruth Augilera as Mimi. I Loved the show the first time but loved it even more the 2nd! CJ as Maureen was AMAZING! especially in take me or leave me, her harmonies was FANTASTIC! her and Fran who plays Joanne had great chemistry! Craig as Angel was OUTSTANDING from the moment he stepped on stage with his big hair, I enjoyed Jay webbs performance as angel too first time round and couldnt say who was better as they both were Great! but different. Ruth as Mimi . . . . where do i start, Her and Rogers harmonies made the hairs on my arms stand up and sent shivers down my spine.The emotion in her eyes whilst she sang without you, she brought every member in the crowds to floods of tears.
She was perfect as MIMI!
La ve boheime is my favorite song in the show! So much energy and so much fun to watch! Ohhhhhhhh I love this show! Get your butts down there and see the show people!!!!and one more thing. The people slating this show seriously have watched a diffrent show than i watched. so comments like "pile of rubbish,Trashy, disgusting" are insulting! and absolute b*llox! I LOVED IT! and so has everyone else i know who's seen it! Chow Peeps
Posted on November 8, 2007 3:00 PM
ashley
Pile of ..... (you fill in the rest)
oh and this Renee (above) is clearly either delusional or a good friend of the cast trying hard to fight the denile of what truely is an awful awful AWFUL show!
The issue of AIDS was completely glammed up, and i completely missed the whole story (baring in mind i know it very well).
The re-writers were so concerened with changing the music to 'update' it and signing kylie minogue to record voice clips, that they forgot to tell us some of the key bits! or if they did they just threw it away before starting another completely electronically enhanced recorded vocal track!
At least its comforting to know that its getting easier to get a lead role on the west end! Not long and we'll (You know who you are) be along to wipe them all out with real talent!
Roger was AMAZING and held this show together, maybe they should re-remix it as a concert version staring only him! Im sure he could portray a sexy club dancer as the role of mimi, instead of the trailer park trash without a voice we saw from siobhans under study.
END...
Posted on November 9, 2007 12:07 PM
Stibs
The production team have given a much needed kick up the arse to the original production of Rent. Tired and dated, the original is a snapshot of time from the early 90's and is so of that moment, watching it is like entering a time warp. This production on the otherhand tells the story in a much more accessible way, with staging and performances that put the original to shame. Maybe Rent could be the stage version of Battleship Potemkin, reviving itself every few years and keeping it fresh; just don't mess with Seasons of Love.
Posted on November 9, 2007 8:33 PM
Ruth
Ashley that really wasn't a nice comment to make.. Why are you so fiesty? Fair enough criticise the performance etc etc but don't start throwing names about when u don't even know the individual, it's not fair and it really isn't nice to see. For your information the cast have all been working really really hard and whether people are enjoying this production or not it's the one that is on and the cast and band are trying their best to have people enjoy it.
I've been a fan of RENT since I was 15 so can understand peoples frustration with it 'not being the same' n'all that but the story remains the same and the songs are the same lyrics just arranged differently and yeah it is a bit popped up but get over it. Remixes happen to songs.. ya know? The cast are busting their asses off and verbal abuse from the likes of Ashley isn't nice.. It really isn't. Especially for people who've never taken part in a West End show so it's a pretty scary and daunting thing to be a part of!! I'm not having a go I'm just simply saying please consider that the cast are human and are not all nasty diva bitches that people seem to think.. they are just normal people like you.
Posted on November 11, 2007 4:32 PM
Gary
I agree, people are ready to shout abuse before they think about who they're going to be hurting in the process. I saw the show on Wednesday evening and I disagree with Ashley's comments but I guess that's his opinion.. You're welcome to your opinion but saying Ruth Augilera had no voice is utter nonsense, her voice was beautiful and I thought she had an absolute understanding for the character 'Mimi' and before you start on me NO I don't know any of the cast.. I just enjoyed the production I saw.
It may not be the original but it was a really enjoyable evening.
Again this is my opinion and everyone's entitled to their own opinions but lets all try and keep it consructive rather than nasty little outbursts because I'm pretty sure being in a show isn't easy work, and especially a show like Rent with such a small cast.
Oh and just to add, if it was THAT terrible then why was there a standing ovation even before the finale???!!!
Posted on November 11, 2007 7:38 PM
Renee
Delusional . . . . Ha! Ashley you are an arse! I have voiced my opinion and how dare you call me delusional. I genuinely believe this is a brilliant show regardless to whether I know the cast or not. I'm still a big Rent fan and think the remixed version is great and I thoroughly enjoyed it. Gary there was a standing ovation when I went too so if its a bad as Gary seems to think it is, clearly the rest of the audience disagree. and to say Mimi's understudy had no voice is the most ridiculous thing ive ever heard . . . No 1. If she didn't have a voice she would not be Mimi's understudy for a start and No 2. I think to be an understudy is very difficult not only have you not had as much rehearsal time as the original but you are put under a lot of pressure and even after that I believe Ruth Augulera's performance was superb. I think we should let people make up there own minds on the show but Ashley I think you are the one who is delusional. Please let me know when you are about to perform in a west end musical so I can come watch you! Chow!
Posted on November 13, 2007 1:04 PM
Joanne
Oh shame Ashley.. That'll teach you to be bitchy like that..
I thought Rent Remixed was great.
I loved the set even though it was very different to what I'd seen before.. Wasn't too sure about the costumes as some of them looked a bit too clean for Rent but then again they work with the new updated theme..?!?!
I do believe it worked well.
The songs are different from the original but I do think they're good, they're fun.. Perhaps Take Me Or Leave Me and Out Tonight are better as the original but the cast were fantastic and pulled off the new versions really well.
I saw CJ Johnson (Understudy) as Maureen and she was hilarious. Her Over The Moon performance was really entertaining and far better than the version I saw from Caprice a few years back. I actually understood what CJ Johnson was going on about. Take Me Or Leave Me was great, CJ Johnson and Francesca Jackson were definitely a great couple in this song. So angry and strong.
Ruth Augilera (Understudy) as Mimi was also fantastic and from reading her biog I understand it's only her second professional job and first West End job so I think she has done really well to get to where she is. You can tell she has worked hard and she must've been really nervous so cut her some slack. I LOVED light my candle she was so flirty and also so frail, she nailed Mimi's character.. I don't like 'Out Tonight' much because I love the original version of the song but I loved the way she sang it and made it her own, I think you can tell she must know Rent because of her understanding of Mimi's character? She sang 'Without You' with such conviction that I found myself blubbering and so were a lot of people around me... It was emotional.. Oh and when she died it was so horrible because her and Luke Evans looked so perfect together on stage. There was a great chemistry between the two of them.
Craig Stein (Understudy) as Angel was out of this world. I loved his dancing and the way he totally glammed and camped up Angels character the way it should be.. I'm not sure what Jay Webb's like but apparently according to my friend (who saw it the other week) he was a little too butch.
Luke Evans as Roger made me nearly wet myself.. Oh wow.. I'm sooooooooooooooo in love with him.. ha ha! He is outstanding and I could talk and write about him all day but I won't. He's amazing!!!! He's stunning and has the most beautiful voice ever.
And Leon Lopez his voice is a dream and his and Angels relationship was so cute I was sobbing when Angel died! Leon sang the 'I'll cover you reprise' so well.. Woe this show is pretty emotional when you think about it.. I cried so much. : )
I thought the story was easier to follow and the cast were brilliant. I wanted to jump up there with them during la vie boheme, ha ha!
Please go and see it for yourself because it'd be a shame to listen to all the harsh critics and not experience this for yourself. I really enjoyed it, I saw Rent in London when Caprice was in it and RENT REMIXED is way better than that version.. As I say there are a couple of songs that will be a bit of a shock to hear because they are arranged differently BUT they're fun and as long as you don't go along with any pre conceived thoughts you will enjoy it, I think..x
Posted on November 13, 2007 2:55 PM
Charlotte
Ok I'd like to pull this review back from a bitching session to say to Stibbs that the whole point of the show being set in 89/90 was that it was a time when AIDS and bohemia were everywhere and things like homosexuality were still fairly taboo, so to update it to a society where there is more accessible medicine for HIV and sexuality isn't an issue takes the heart out of the play.
Posted on November 20, 2007 7:06 PM
Craig
Just got back from the longest 2 and a bit hours of my life, to think I paid good money to watch this tripe. I'm a HUGE fan of Rent, possibly one of the best musicals of the past 25 years if not more, BUT if this was my first experience of anything Rent then this show would have put me off for life. What was the thinking behind the team that produced this (and for that matter how in hell did the Larson family approve this), to read in the program that the show has been brought into the 21st century with this production kept me laughing on the tube all the way home, (something the show failed to do intentionally)
First off, WHATS TO UPDATE?? You don't hear people saying "Hey Les Mis seems a bit dated now, lets set it in the Iraq war and make it more accessable to folks. 19th century France is history worth retelling and the aids epidemic of the early 90s is as equally valid historically, why zap it forward to present day? This ain't a 1950's musical, its a 15 year old rock opera!! With as much resonance with todays audience as it did when it first opened. But this sounded like it was the precursor to the Rent we know and love, in fact it sounded as if stock/aitken and waterman had written it in the mid 80s.
Second, WHAT HAVE THEY DONE TO MARK!! My favourite character by far has been turned into upperclass twit of the year. It was painful to hear this guy murder La Vie Boheme and my personal favourite Halloween.
Third, when did Angel turn from the soft sensitive character we know and love into a brash and obnoxious, this portrayal did nothing for me at all, and by the death scene comes round I was thanking the stars I had the rest of the play without his overacting and constant bum patting.
But there was a slight glimmer for all those who didn't walk out (and trust me, by the time we got to Angel's song Today For You, I saw 2 groups of people exit the theatre)
The guys who played Roger and Collins were sensational, left mainly alone by the remix, One Song Glory still sounds amazing and I'll Cover You reprise in the second half still carries the raw emotional power it should.
Aside from that, there was nothing that seemed to work, costumes, set, music all fail.
If you have any sense, head over to HMV and buy the DVD of the film for £5 and wait a few years, by then us Brits might have come to our senses and restored this fantastic show to its rightful glory.
Posted on November 22, 2007 11:50 PM
Scot
When I heard that there was an updated version of Rent, I was excited, yet a bit concerned. But as others have said, I went with an open mind and was looking forward to a GREAT show. I mean, Rent is such a classic, how could you mess it up. Boy oh boy did they ever. Sitting in the 2nd row, I wanted to hide my face just in case the actors would actually see the look of down right disturbing. Here are my reasons:
1) The diversity of the case was completely removed. Having Joanne played by a perky blond totally removed one of the major factors of the character. The fact that she was a well to do black woman with a successful family was lost with this change. Angle being a buff blonde (although very hot) did nothing for the role. His signature number, "Today for you..." was so bad, I was in pain. And what was up with his costumes! Jeez! Could they have been any more horrible? Mimi was another disaster and example of removing the diversity of the show. Her signature number "Out Tonight" was like watching Sateen in Moulin Rouge. But at least Nicole Kidman was entertaining! With these three characters I felt that Cameron Diaz, Joey Lawrence, and Nicole were stepping in to play key roles in the production and it did not work. Then to try to make people happy with the changes, they made sure to put really pretty people in. It was just down right disgusting and I am sorry that I lost 2.5 hours of my life that I will never get back. Not to be a total negative poster there were some good spots. Roger was incredible. The changes made to Mark's character were interesting. Maureen was the one major bright spot of the show. Being from the states, I was not familiar with her. She was incredible. The energy she brought to the stage actually turned things around enough to keep me from walking out. I recommend, keeping her and taking the rest back to formula and try again!!! Then they may be able to stop embarrassing themselves.
Posted on November 24, 2007 11:59 PM
Michael
To add to Scot's comments as I was at the show with him. I can respect the changes to the format of the show, however by removing the diversity from the cast and "butching up" a drag queen just ruins the entire concept of the character Angel. When Angel finally appeared in heals in the second act, it was too little to late, how do you butch up and "de-drag" a fem drag queen. Too much was lost in this pipe dream of an interpretation. All in all casting is the issue in this show, arriving with an open mind I was open to most things, but claiming a predominately "anglo" cast is diverse because half of them have british accents isn't very diverse. Remember Rosa parks didn't participate in civil disobediance so the white man with a British Accent could ride in the front of the bus. Another point, since when do homeless people strut around showing bodies so cut it looks like they spend 28 hours a day in 24 hour fitness???
Now for the posititve comments. Mark and Roger were impressive and Collins - not to mention hot, he also carried his notes well enough to rival productions of the original.
Posted on November 25, 2007 12:11 AM
Kate
I would just like to say that myself and 4 other mates have just got back from seeing Rent and we all thought it was absolutely AMAZING, we loved the singing, the dancing was good altho Mimi played by Siobhan Donaghy could have been better. Her dancing was not brilliant and her voice could have been stronger but she played the part well. The cast members gave a great performance, esp the Collins and Roger characters, Roger's voice and the way he put emotion in to each song was outstanding! A definite round of applause to all the cast, Denise Van Outen played the character of Maureen really well and her voice was exceptional. Everyone cheered, clapped and wooed at the end. I would definitely recommend seeing it and to make up your own opinion. With regards to AIDs not being a major issue anymore, it still does cause death and is a disease that exists in third world countries and is something that should still be broadcasted about.
Posted on November 25, 2007 1:47 AM
Lauren
I am actually very surprised at some of the above reviews, I went to see the show yesterday and I think these people must have gone to see something different. I thought the show was fantastic with a very strong cast- Luke Evans as Roger and Leon Lopez as Collins really shone. I also thought Craig Stein as Benny was fantastic. Denise Van Outen also astounded me, she has a fabulous voice and really commanded the stage. Although it is not perhaps your average west end show, I think RENT is definitely worth watching and proved to be thoroughly enjoyable
Posted on December 8, 2007 12:24 PM
Dan
I went to watch this basically because it's Rent. And there were brilliant aspects to it. Luke Evans has an awesome voice, and could walk onto Broadway in the role. And I don't know how people haven't mentioned Leon Lopez's ICY Reprise! It was amazing. I thought Lopez was a bit of a tool, and wondered how he would go from Tanktop to Collins, but he proved me wrong. I was also impressed with Siobhan Irishunpronouncablename. Apart from her uncomfortable dancing in Out Tonight, I thought she did a good job vocally. She'd probably be approximately 7654876th in line for the job if I was casting, but she did a good job. After all, she can't make herself look like someone called Mimi Marquez, can she?!
So the main good points for me were Luke Evans, Leon Lopez and the ensemble, who were great, especially the Rent veteran Earl Perkins (who should have played Benny in my opinion).
Now onto my rant. Firstly Angel. Who the hell thought that playing a 4ft 11 body builder in the role of a AIDs suffering drag queen would be a good idea?! Angel should be sweet, caring and the symbol of what Rent is about. Not an arrogant Englishman with abs you could grate cheese on! His voice was average at the very best, and he was plain dislikeable. Today 4 You was absolutely awful, and when we had 6 or 7 sadomasichists join us in the theatre I didn't know whether to laugh, cry or apologise to the girl I was with, whom I'd promised would find Rent to be an emotional production!
Oh, and thanks for a) patronising us when Jay Webb died. I didn't guess that he was dead, thanks for the flatline and showing him go up to "heaven" and b) adding the word 'fuck' in every 20 seconds. It really added to the production.
But the single worst part of Rent Remixed was Oliver Thornton. I'm fairly sure that Mark was supposed to be a likeable, yet geeky and awkward New Yorker. Not a posh, dislikeable overacting Londoner? This guy's voice is poor and his acting was on a par with a reception-level nativity play. My girlfriend liked him, and yeah, he's a good looking chap, but everytime he came on stage I wanted to run up and smash him over the head with a chair. He was awful to the point that he ruined every scene that he was in. I read on his Myspace that he wants to quit 'acting' and work in London Zoo with monkeys. FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, PLEASE DO IT MAN!
As for the rest, DVO was over the top with Maureen but did a decent job. I saw the understudy for Joanne, and she had a very good voice. Craig Stein was OK as Benny but would probably make a better Angel and did look a little young and gangsta-rap like.
I'll be going to see it again, because it's worth it for the fact that it's Rent and I can't afford to be going to Broadway! Plus the great performances I mentioned warranted another viewing. But I'll be praying that Jay Webb and Oliver Thornton are ill that day. I'd also like to see Ruth Aguilera as Mimi, and Earl Perkins as Benny when I do go and see it again.
At the end of the day, it is a version of Rent, and it does have some good points. I would recommend seeing it, because if you can get past the utter balls ups they've made, there are some brilliant songs and performances.
Posted on December 8, 2007 6:52 PM
Kelly
From reading these reviews I have drawn some conclusions....
1. Many of the cast members are very talented people, some have just ended up in the wrong roles.
2.It's great that someone enjoyed RENT so much that they thought they'd try to re-work it....I'm just not 100% sure it worked
3. The cast/show are not consistent.
I'm feeling this could be the main issue!!
I saw RENT Remixed yesterday and can really understand the points that others have made regarding cringeworthiness and heavy-handedness; BUT I was also witness to some great moments and would like to see Ruth Aguilera as Mimi and Francesca as Joanne (Francesca and CJ were out yesterday).
It was an uncomfortable experience for me to watch the show, however I hold the Remixers and direction/production team responsible more than the cast.
None of us can help if we are miscast....we take the gigs we're offered don't we?
Posted on December 29, 2007 12:04 PM
Sam Hopkins
im sorry and i dont mean to be rude
but rent remixed was the best musical i have seen in my life, it was truly inspirational and only people with taste in musical theatre can appriciated.
The person who wrote this review does not deserve to be a theatre critique, they obviously have no capacity of understanding a plot and an some inspirational writing, id be more than happy to take their job
so now rent is closing down and on the 26th of janurary people can find me and others outside the theatre protesting about the reviews it has recieved and its closure
your sincerly
sam hopkins
Posted on January 13, 2008 2:05 PM
Milly
Haven't even seen it, but i LOVE the movie version too much to go and see this shizz. i knew it was going to be awful when i first heard about it and these reviews have justified that. there is NO WAY im paying good money to see jesse wallace in a cat suit...sorryyyy
Posted on January 25, 2008 10:04 AM
jack
How nasty can you be milly? Not being funny but for a start jessie doesn't even wear a cat suit and she's way better than Denise! She can actually act for a start rather than portray herself on stage which is what Denise seemed to do. Fair enough read the reviews and take from them what you like but at the end of the day you can't really say it's awful cos u haven't even seen it!
Posted on January 29, 2008 1:21 PM
lou
For all these people who wrote awful reviews.....errrrrrr what were you watching???? how can you say these things!i thought the show was fantastic!i saw jessie wallace in it a couple of weeks ago and was shocked at how great she was!,!All the cast were so strong and the show was really moving.The one that stood out for me was the boy who played Benny (think his name is jamie)his voice was amazing.Dont normally write on things like this but these comments written by sad,prudes just annoyed me!FANTASTIC SHOW!!!!!remember its called Rent REMIXED!!!!!!
Posted on January 31, 2008 8:51 AM
suzanne
i saw rent remixed twice,
in october and the last day. I thought both times were amazing!! although the second time was much better, mainly by the replacing of mimi. Siobhan did not do the role justice, instead of being fierce and sexy she was pathetic and wimpy, made you want to give the charecter a good slapping. Francesca i though had an absalutely stunning voice and all the rest of the charecters. As for the whole it's too different concept, life goes on you cant live in the 80's forever!! i thought it was brilliantly done and gutted to see it leave, hopefully will return one day when the rest of Britain is ready for it.
Posted on February 4, 2008 6:15 PM
tom
I am SOO happy this show has closed. Now maybe something half decent can take its place. I was appalled at the production. Why say it needs updating when it was set in 1989 for a reason? Its obvious that if the original version did not succeed in England, no matter how much you dress it up, the story just wont appeal to anyone other than those in the bohemian world. I feel for Johnathon Larson. I really do.
Posted on February 5, 2008 1:03 AM
chris holmes
saw the show on the last night which received a standing ovation from it's cult followers. Rent remixed was a bold and daring tribute to Jonathan Larson directed by the very brave william baker.
being an avid RENT fan and having read the reviews i must admit i was a little sceptical about watching it. just as equally dissapointed to have received a letter informing me that i couldn't take the seats i booked for late in March and had to reschedule for the 2nd February due to lack of audiences. there were a lot of things i liked about the show and a lot of things i didn't like. the show suits an off-broadway/west end Fringe venue so the audience can become more involved with the action. the tango maureen was excellent and the vocals during ensemble sequences were sound. didn't quite know what to make of 'out tonight' or the cockney accents!? RENT remixed should have been renamed RENT very mixed! i give it my official 3 star rating! my advice go and see the original on broadway where the show is now in it's 11th spectacular year!
Posted on February 5, 2008 1:07 PM
Nicola Millard
I saw the show on 25th January and thought it was great!!! I understand how people may portray it as "rubbish" and my views are that they are comparing it too much to the original show, if they have seen it before. I also think that some may not be looking into the reasons why they did some things, for example Angels death, yes it was very abstract, but to me I felt that it was a good portrayal of the AIDS killing him and showing how awful it is. I think people should look upon it with an open mind and don't compare it with the original show. It was called Rent Remixed for a reason and that is that they wanted to create something different, modern and that we can relate to more. Unlike some musicals it is not given to you on a plate, you have to think somewhat about the reasons things were done the way they were, somewhat in relation to the term "Thinking Man's Theatre". I also think that you have to congratulate them on all the hard work they put in, I don't think many understand that unless they have been in that situation themselves. I know this due to the many performances I was in during GCSE and AS Drama courses, also the 2 West End performances with my previous performing arts group. Thanks for reading.
Posted on February 7, 2008 7:20 PM
Ellie
I went to see it with
Jessie Wallace - Maureen,
Luke Evans - Roger,
Oliver - Mark,
Leon - Collins,
Ruth Agulera - Mimi,
All others the same
it was amazing!
people shouldnt make comparisons with the film as it is different
it is Rent REMIXED
Posted on March 29, 2008 6:42 PM
Abbie
I went to see rent remixed with my school on the 28th of january with jessie wallace as maureen and it was FANTASTIC - one of the best shows i've ever seen!!!!! and everyone who is comparing it to the film.. HELLO?? THIS IS RENT REMIXED! not rent! i've seen the film as well, and yes rent remixed is very different but what some people don't seem to understand is that it's MEANT to be updated and different!
i've never written on one of these comment boards before.. but everyone who's slagging off the show.. i'd like to see you get up on a stage and do better.
i thought rent was absolutely fantastic and i would LOVE to see it agin.
well done rent cast =D
Posted on June 3, 2008 1:53 PM
Post a comment
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.seatwaveblogs.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1363
