Reidel: "RENT" to be revived off-B'way next June

[uncageg]

Posted: 11/5/10 at 12:49am

http://www.nypost.com/p/entertainment/theater/way_new_lease_on_rent_bCCgNnEdlBnG3I5OuWtdPN

[maxximumvolume]

Posted: 11/5/10 at 12:55am

I'll believe it when I see it. Still, this all just seems a little bit too soon.

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 11/5/10 at 12:56am

Oh joy.

Just the shot of adrenaline this season needed.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 11/5/10 at 1:01am

I'm guessing they'll want the big Ave Q theater, no?

[Taryn]

Posted: 11/5/10 at 1:08am

What is the point of a new set and a new cast if they don't get a new director?

[dramamama611]

Posted: 11/5/10 at 4:02am

Sounds like a money grubbing venture to me.

[CarlosAlberto]

Posted: 11/5/10 at 6:39am

Wow! $2,500 for a studio on Avenue C?!!! I lived near Avenue C when no one dared even walk let alone live there.

[Play Esq.]

Posted: 11/5/10 at 9:31am

^ A bit of a hyperbole. I had 2 bedroom apartment there for less than that a couple years ago and know friends who have a similar 2 bedroom for less than that now.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 11/5/10 at 9:56am

I don't understand the need for this revival at this time, other than the fact that someone needs a source of income. Are they trying to capitalize on the success of the Hair revival?

I saw the original and I understand that some of the themes are relevant for this time period, but the show needs to be given a rest. The most it should be attempting now is a one night only star-driven concert version benefitting some worthy charity.

We've discussed before how the show exists in a bit of a time warp. It reflected an East Village that was more aligned with the 1980s, even though it was set in the mid-1990s.

And yes, it needs a new director. It needed a new director before it moved to Broadway.

I think the only thing that would bring me back to it is if it was done in an environmental production, performed in an empty lot or an abandoned building.

But I blame Lea Michele. That girl will stop at nothing to steal other actresses material. She'll show up on Glee singing some of Maureen's material. Mark my words.

Updated On: 11/5/10 at 09:56 AM

[Katurian2]

Posted: 11/5/10 at 9:57am

Ditto. I just moved out of a 2 bedroom there that was $1,600/month. Someone needs to read his real estate pages better.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 11/5/10 at 10:00am

Of course the real solution is to expland New World Stages so that RENT, GYPSY and GREASE call all continuously play in New York for the rest of all time!

[madbrian]

Posted: 11/5/10 at 10:02am

"...and cast of fresh-faced unknowns."

Yeah, right. What's the over/under on when Anthony and Adam join the cast?

[Gothampc]

Posted: 11/5/10 at 10:14am

I'm surprised at how poorly written this article is.

"It'll be nice to have those cute bohemians back in New York, bringing a tear to the eye with "Seasons of Love."

Romanticizing the material takes away its grittiness. They weren't a bunch of Muppets. AIDS, druge use, homelessness were all what made the musical interesting. There would be no redemptive message without those elements.

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 11/5/10 at 10:25am

^6 months

I first heard about this a month ago and didn't want to believe it then. I still don't. It's clearly a money-grubbing venture, as someone mentioned in another thread, and at the same time, I don't know who they think their audience will be. A bunch of tweens who weren't old enough for the first go-round? Japanese tourists? People who show up to TKTS at 7pm to get tickets for any show left? And don't me started on hauling Grief back. Stupid, stupid idea.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 11/5/10 at 10:34am

"Japanese tourists?"

They kept Oh! Calcutta! running.

[rorschach37]

Posted: 11/5/10 at 10:43am

I'm actually very excited about this. RENT is my favorite musical and having never gotten the chance to see it live, I am thrilled it's being brought back with it's original director. However, I do understand the point of view of those who have seen it before. It had a very long run.

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 11/5/10 at 10:55am

rorschach, where do you live, may I ask? There will be regional productions in 34 different states in the next year. If you truly want to see it that badly, you don't have to wait for it to be off-Broadway again.

Updated On: 11/5/10 at 10:55 AM

[KylieS]

Posted: 11/5/10 at 10:57am

Re: who'll see it: Lots of tourists want to see a show but want to be assured beforehand that they'll like the music -- which means picking something they know, which is why this horrible jukebox-musical genre is riding the crest of the popularity wave right now. Likewise, RENT is something a lot of tourists will already know. It's a lazy approach to theatergoing, but who except a serious theater enthusiast cares about that?

I'm betting it'll make money. So who cares, really? Why get annoyed/upset? Just ignore it.

I'm also really interested in this idea, whoever upthread suggested it, that Lea Michele is "stealing other actresses' material". Really? Am I missing some Internet sarcasm here? Apart from the eyebrow-raising concept that Lea Michele is personally hand-picking all her own songs for Glee (and the idea that songs are ever "owned" by a specific performer), which Maureen songs do you think she's going to be singing? "Over the Moon"? "Take Me Or Leave Me," with her new girlfriend Mercedes? I'm so lost.
Updated On: 11/5/10 at 10:57 AM

[Gothampc]

Posted: 11/5/10 at 10:59am

Sometimes it's better to wait. You don't want the experience ruined by a poor production or one that is hastily thrown together.

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 11/5/10 at 11:03am

Heh, you mean like this one will be?

Why get upset/annoyed? Because as a long time fan, the show deserves better than to be tromped out like a Radio City Christmas Spectacular in a lazy attempt to make a buck.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 11/5/10 at 11:10am

As someone who saw RENT in the original production at NYTW, I can attest that there is something very exciting about RENT performed in a small theatre. Even if they were to bring the original production for a limited run at New World Stages, it could be a lot of fun. There really isn't any harm in bringing these productions back, you know. If bringing back these old chestnuts is what it takes to revive our Off Broadway theatre scene, than I'm totally okay with it.

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 11/5/10 at 11:25am

"If bringing back these old chestnuts is what it takes to revive our Off Broadway theatre scene, than I'm totally okay with it."

Ya know...as a part time job to make extra money, I work as an usher in one of the larger (if not largest) off-Broadway houses. It always has trouble finding something to run. One day, the staff were sitting around chatting, and I thought it would be a good idea to do a run of small scale musicals that could use some extra life in NYC. Like do a month or two long run of Tick Tick Boom, followed by Last Five Years, followed by john and jen followed by Closer Than Ever...on and on. It may attract actors who don't want to commit too much time to an off-Broadway project, and the novelty of the the series (as well as the fan base for these shows) should make for a pretty decent sell.

Something, ANYTHING, to revive off-Broadway. If a revival of RENT brings money back into that sector, everyone wins.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 11/5/10 at 11:38am

I'n not really sure those titles you mention Robbie would do much to revive the Off Broadway theatre scene (most weren't successful Off Broadway in a time when Off Broadway was still alive and well) - but I think there is something to using larger scale musicals to help revitalize interest in Off Broadway.

I think one of the issues that really has hindered Off Broadway is that because of rising costs, it is only marginally cheaper to see a show Off Broadway than it is on Broadway (with discounts). And the tourists who are used to seeing one or two shows on their trips would frankly rather have the "Broadway" experience.

But if there are titles of known Broadway properties that will draw audiences to an Off Broadway setting, its a great way to draw people back into theatres outside of 8th Avenue.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 11/5/10 at 11:48am

An off-Broadway run brings up an interesting point. Originally when the show ran at NYTW, they couldn't give tickets away. Even the papering services weren't selling the show out. When Jonathan Larsen died, the publicity machine kicked into full gear and Rent became a blockbuster. It also helped that the producers came up with idea of selling the first two rows of orchestra cheaply, which later morphed into the lottery system.

I'm wondering what the new pricing structure will be.

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 11/5/10 at 11:55am

I think the idea of turning an off-Broadway space basically into a rep house, changing shows every two months, you'd be able to make these show more viable. You'd also might be able to slip some newer stuff and, like you say, larger stuff in. I mean...yes. It'd be a nighmare to program if it were to continue ad infinitum. But I think it could be a worthy and perhaps even profitable venture.