Rent: Live

These TV musicals are always a little sketchy. I'm not a "Renthead" so I don't have much to go on. I saw the Broadway traveling company a few years ago and was quite captivated. Here, I felt the pacing was a bit slow. It is performed on an enormous stage, with the audience sitting in rectangular cells. This is a really touching story of the AIDS epidemic. It is about a sort of artists colony in a rental building. Many of the people there are HIV positive at a time when most would die from it. Others are drug users. Some are gay. They are all trying to survive. It is mixture of the angst that such a society would deal with, watching their young friends die off or lose their dreams. There is a nice moment at the end.

'Rent' may not be one of my all-time favourite musicals, speaking as a fan of musicals, but it has great songs and a lot of emotional power with sensitive and powerful themes. There is much worthy of admiration. The 2005 film is definitely worth a look, a solid adaptation (though not as good as on stage) and although imperfect it also is a worthy film on its own. Between that and this, there is no doubt really which is the better 'Rent' of the two.

Considering that one, as indicated already, is actually good. Whereas, apart from some great things and moments, this "live" production doesn't really cut it and generally does not gel. It had all the ingredients to gel and be a harrowing, moving experience but it never properly gets there, by all means it's not terrible or irredeemable but it is very easy to see why people were disappointed. Have seen a fair share of these live musical productions made for television and haven't really been a fan of any of them, especially 'Peter Pan' namely because of the usually great Christopher Walken.

Will start with what was good. Brennin Hunt, giving the performance of the night (his vocals makes the jaw drop and the raw grit does wrench the gut), and Jordan Fisher are powerhouses in their roles. If the production did something well it was how it accommodated Hunt's injury. Brandon Victor Dixon is touching as Tom. The most unexpected good surprise was Vanessa Hudgeons, didn't have as big an opinion of her before but she is a revelation here, her voice has grown so much and she acts with a lot of feeling. The same can be said for Kiersey Clemons.

There are a few highlight numbers. "Over the Moon" is one of the few times where the production properly came to life. "I'll Cover You" reprise was the one that brought the lump to my throat the most and "Take Me or Leave Me" is the production's show-stopper in my mind. The costumes and sets are evocatively rendered and the orchestra sound great and perform 'Rent's' fine score and songs with plenty of spirit. The ending is very powerful.

A lot unfortunately doesn't work and don't really have much to add to what has already been said. The camera work is far too frenetic, as an epileptic some of it left me nauseous, and is often focused somewhere else (all the times irrelevant) other than where it should be. The sound quality is badly unbalanced, with the orchestra too loud frequently and some of the vocals sounded underpowered (i.e. Tinashe). Have also not come across a more irritating audience for anything in a long time, actually manages to be even worse than the audiences on the television talent show competitions. Too loud and at inappropriate times.

Have said that there were good renditions here, but the production would have been better if the pace calmed down and the choreography wasn't so erratic (with a mix of just right, too busy and under-energised). A few powerful and moving moments aside, there are some unnecessary and downright strange changes that kill the momentum of the drama and stops it from having enough emotional impact, 'Rent' shouldn't leave one cold but by tampering or toning down what was so resonant and daring about it the production felt bland and too safe. The nadir though, other than the irritating audience, is the walking disaster that is Valentina's Angel. Won't go into detail as to why because everything about the performance was wrong other than managing to look the part, will say though that the all over the place singing was especially painful.

Concluding, a very mixed bag. 5/10

My apologies to all my musical, thespian friends but I was not impressed. I'm trying to puzzle out whether it was RENT or RENT LIVE that fell flat for me. So, after giving it some thought I've concluded that RENT LIVE was a fish out of water and died in a frantic gasp when removed from the societal climate of the original. The original RENT would have been groundbreaking, centered around broke artists, straight and LBGTQ, in the midst of an AIDS epidemic, talking about L-O-O-O-V-E. RENT LIVE exists in a culture where creative rebellion is the new norm, AIDS is no longer a death sentence and being LBGTQ is no longer a novelty. I found the music of LIVE to be cacophonous and the vocal renderings to be shabby with the exception of Vanessa Hudgens and a few of the supporting cast. (Kudos to Hudgens for playing against type). This dissonance was underlined when the original cast performed as a curtain-call treat. Their tones and harmonies were just the opposite of what we had been hearing for 3 hours. They were clear, beautifully blended and spectacular (Idina Menzel and Jesse L. Martin were superb). I think the experience of being in the audience of this show in-the-round might have been more stirring than sitting on front of a TV. The rare moments, that did work for me, were the more intimate moments (like Light My Candle) but I felt they were soon flattened by the speeding freight train of chaos around them. Just a note about it's origin, the musical pulls from Puccini's La Bohème and Jonathan Larson's own life in Soho at the beginning of his writing career. Regretfully, I give RENT LIVE a 5 (a bit of a mess) out of 10. {Musical Theatre for TV}

What do you get when you take Rent and put it on TV during prime time? All the actors had their volumes cut. Many of them seemed to be out of their range. Where Rent thrived on grit, this performance strove for pocket lint. The last three minutes with the original cast was not enough to save this. I'm sad, now.

I've seen Rent on stage numerous times. I've had grace to see Rent on Broadway, off Broadway, in many small and large theaters, with both small and large budgets. I've watched the film version & prior TV presentation. Rent is, obviously, a favorite of mine. This 'Live' presentation has a cast with much proven talent. Some of the crew are familiar for their ace work. I had high hopes. This was such a disappointment & waste of amazing material & many fine efforts. It was hard to follow the staging, seemingly due to combination of jerky flow of sets to lack of cohesive direction of camera work. The quality of the choreography varied from professional to grammar school rehearsal. The greatest issue were the absurd cuts for commercial. That may be the root cause of why so much else, the staging, camera work, choreography, was choppy. Would seem possible Fox placed focus on commercials. Yes, with commercial TV one does expect breaks, but some rational scheduling of them should have been done. As it was, the flow of the music, dance and vocals was repeatedly lost. The powerful human emotion inherent in Rent kept on being broken time and again. A shame. For the performers and crew who did their all, I'd give a 8/10. For how Fox chose to mismanage and cheapen those efforts and, truly, disrespect Jonathan Larson's Rent, I'd give 2/10. A shame.