Lindsay Ellis' complete dissection of RENT as a property
Lindsay Ellis' complete dissection of RENT as a property
#1Lindsay Ellis' complete dissection of RENT as a property
Posted: 12/31/16 at 10:43pm
For those fans of her complete take down of the Phantom movie, I present Rent... just all of it...
#2Lindsay Ellis' complete dissection of RENT as a property
Posted: 1/1/17 at 2:38am
I absolutely adore RENT, but no lies were detected in this video essay.
#3Lindsay Ellis' complete dissection of RENT as a property
Posted: 1/1/17 at 3:00am
ever since that Phantom video i've been obsessed with Lindsay, she's terrific
"Contentment, it seems, simply happens. It appears accompanied by no bravos and no tears."
#4Lindsay Ellis' complete dissection of RENT as a property
Posted: 1/1/17 at 3:03am
This is amazing. Thanks!
"This thread reads like a series of White House memos." — Mister Matt
broadwayguy91
Broadway Star Joined: 12/23/15
#6Lindsay Ellis' complete dissection of RENT as a property
Posted: 1/1/17 at 5:31am
She's a treasure. Very well articulated, researched, and edited.
#7Lindsay Ellis' complete dissection of RENT as a property
Posted: 1/1/17 at 6:23am
Love her and love this.
Keeping BroadwayWorld Illustrated
BroadwayConcierge
Broadway Legend Joined: 7/24/15
#8Lindsay Ellis' complete dissection of RENT as a property
Posted: 1/1/17 at 11:30am
This video is fabulous and so well thought-out. It really puts to concise, clear words what's frustrated me so much about Rent over the years. Thanks for sharing!
Alex Kulak2
Broadway Legend Joined: 9/11/16
#9Lindsay Ellis' complete dissection of RENT as a property
Posted: 1/1/17 at 11:35am
RENT will always have a special place in my heart (it was the first community theatre show I ever did, it's where I met my creative partner), but good lord, it is not a perfect show.
theatreguy12
Broadway Star Joined: 4/20/15
#10Lindsay Ellis' complete dissection of RENT as a property
Posted: 1/1/17 at 1:55pm
For me RENT was a musical for its time.
I saw it when it first opened on Broadway, and I've seen numerous productions since. And I've enjoyed it each and every time.
Like all shows of its ilk (and not) it was inevitable that it would be received differently by different people.
And now, it is equally inevitable that it will be analyzed through a different prism now that we're some 20 years out from its original introduction to the theater world.
Back then, I'm sure some in the audience were taken aback by the subject matter (and I'm sure this was especially true when it started touring to subscription houses across middle America).
I'm sure some made a personal connection to it, because even though the characters weren't always sympathetic, you could feel for where they were at at that moment in their life, regardless of how they got there.
Some liked it because it was the flavor of the day (and it was hip and edgy to like it), while others, even then, loathed it because it didn't go far enough (and it was considered too white-washed for their taste).
Could it have been handled through a more Larry Kramer-like lens? Were (and are) there grittier stories out of New York, and Alphabet City? Were there more authentic ways to address the themes of the musical with greater ventures into realism? Sure.
Maybe that wasn't Larson's vision. Maybe it was as gritty as he wanted it to be for his Broadway audiences. Maybe Larry Kramer wasn't what he was looking for.
Nowadays it is absolutely inevitable that it will be looked at through that different lens.
Yes, there were those who felt it missed the mark, even then. That it didn't go as far as it could have.
But there will be even more nowadays who critique it as such. Because we're looking at it from a 20 year old perspective. And nothing is left to the imagination anymore.
Did it have its flaws? Did it have its share of unsympathetic characters? To many, yes.
But it resonated with a lot of people....at whatever level they were at at that point in history. There were those in the audience who had never experienced what these kids were living. There were some who did. And there were some who had undoubtedly endured a hell of a lot more than these kids did, without the safety nets some of these characters had.
Does that mean the creator was out of touch with those of the latter group? No. It just means he didn't take this particular show in that particular direction.
There will be those who were very young, or weren't even born, when the Broadway production came out, who can now grab their bottle of Stoli and critique this and that. And it's all valid. Many good points.
But what's interesting is that a lot of those points were being made even then. From how the characters were perceived (including their backgrounds), to the lack of grittiness and realism that could have been utilized instead. The majority accepted it for what it was, and enjoyed it.
Certainly not everything will appeal to everyone, all the time. Some endeavors will resonate with many, and miss the mark for others. And vice versa. The beauty of theater. And what keeps these boards and other forms of social media thriving.
#11Lindsay Ellis' complete dissection of RENT as a property
Posted: 1/1/17 at 5:39pm
As someone who has always lived bed RENT, I still loved this video. What's interesting is that the characters as she describes them are, in a lot of ways that most people (myself included) describe millennials today.
Broadway Legend Joined: 12/31/69
#12Lindsay Ellis' complete dissection of RENT as a property
Posted: 1/2/17 at 8:18pm
i watched the first part of the video and then fast forwarded to the end so let me know if my argument isn't valid, but I couldn't believe to what standards she was holding Rent. Rent is a musical. It's still around because its music is great. Yes, the characters definitely have flaws but she seems to go past that and is judging it for not being something a musical can never be. What exactly is she looking for? Does she really expect a musical to accurately capture the depth of the AIDS epidemic? Wouldn't trying to take such as serious and tragic topic and setting it to song and dance automatically make it kind of absurd? Rent's a musical, not a novel, not even a play, there's only so much depth you can give it.
#13Lindsay Ellis' complete dissection of RENT as a property
Posted: 1/2/17 at 9:02pm
^^^ Grittier realism wouldn't make RENT "absurd", necessarily, but it might make it grand opera.
***
I agree with most of theatreguy13's remarks above, but would add that it was impossible 20 years ago to separate the sentimentality of the show itself and the Romance of the Lost Genius that arose with Larson's death.
I am one who saw it on tour and liked it much better than I expected. (The subject matter is in no way offensive to me.) RENT shows a lot of talent, but a young talent. Moreover it is an incompletely developed work because its creator expired on the eve of a workshop. Nonetheless, there was no way RENT was going to be viewed unsentimentally once Larson died.
Perhaps newcomers to the piece are just now able to view it clearly.
#14Lindsay Ellis' complete dissection of RENT as a property
Posted: 1/2/17 at 9:16pm
I wonder if, in decades to come when Larson's vision isn't so sacrosanct and revered, the show will get a revision in the way Grand Hotel (and to a lesser extent the stage version of Wizard of Oz) did.
#15Lindsay Ellis' complete dissection of RENT as a property
Posted: 1/2/17 at 9:20pm
spidernight, you are entirely wrong in saying that a musical cannot have immense depth. There are few common but incorrect assumptions I hate more.
Keeping BroadwayWorld Illustrated
#16Lindsay Ellis' complete dissection of RENT as a property
Posted: 1/2/17 at 9:51pm
spidernight said: "i watched the first part of the video and then fast forwarded to the end so let me know if my argument isn't valid, but I couldn't believe to what standards she was holding Rent. Rent is a musical. It's still around because its music is great. Yes, the characters definitely have flaws but she seems to go past that and is judging it for not being something a musical can never be. What exactly is she looking for? Does she really expect a musical to accurately capture the depth of the AIDS epidemic? Wouldn't trying to take such as serious and tragic topic and setting it to song and dance automatically make it kind of absurd? Rent's a musical, not a novel, not even a play, there's only so much depth you can give it."
Wow, okay. I don't think her standards are the ones that need adjusting here.
"This thread reads like a series of White House memos." — Mister Matt
#17Lindsay Ellis' complete dissection of RENT as a property
Posted: 1/3/17 at 1:11am
Thanks to TheatreFan4 for posting about Lindsay's video. Between this and the POTO one, I guess I should subscribe to her feed.
Even if you don't agree with everything she says (though I pretty much do), she presents well-thought-out, intelligent & supported arguments for her position. In a world of "I didn't like it coz it sucked" criticism, such intellectual rigor is to be applauded.
spidernight said: "i watched the first part of the video and then fast forwarded to the end so let me know if my argument isn't valid.... What exactly is she looking for? Does she really expect a musical to accurately capture the depth of the AIDS epidemic?"
Yeah, your argument isn't valid. That's not what she is saying about RENT. Maybe you should watch the whole thing and then comment.
