We're not gonna pay...
Jun. 5th, 2010 11:09 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jennariaSo a local theater group was putting on RENT, and thesilentpoet wanted to see it, and didn't want to see it alone. I consented to be dragged along. Only one disadvantage: she has the script memorized. I? Well, I saw this one really kick-ass vid to "One Song Glory," does that count?
Yeah. Anyway. Stef played me the soundtrack to the first act (and then we got interrupted), and I took the precaution of spoiling myself for the key bits of the second act. If I knew who died, I figured, I wouldn't cry.
This theory may perhaps need work. You'd think I'd remember what happened when I saw Les Mis, where I spent half the second act in tears despite knowing exactly who was going to die, and when, courtesy a roommate who adored Les Mis and played the soundtrack repeatedly.
So yeah: second act, Mimi's singing this song about how much it sucks being in love with an asshole and how she misses him anyway, and we see Angel and Collins over to one side of the stage with Angel in a hospital gown, and I knew what was coming, and I still started crying. Did not really stop until near the end of Angel's funeral, when for some reason the actor playing Collins decides to go for the glory note at the end of the reprise of "I'll Cover You," and that jarred me right out of the plot, because when you are grieving for the love of your life, you do not go for the glory note. You just don't. Well, maybe if you're an opera singer or something, but Collins isn't.
On the other hand, right at the end when it looks like Mimi dies? All I could hear in my head was the grandfather from THE PRINCESS BRIDE: "Mimi does not die at this time." So I managed to restrain myself. Admittedly, it helped (for certain very dubious definitions of the word) that I hadn't fallen for Mimi or the Mimi/Roger relationship anything near as hard and fast as I'd fallen for Angel and the Angel/Collins relationship.
Most of the blame for that can be laid squarely at the feet of the Roger of this production. According to whatthesilentpoet tells me, Roger is supposed to be broken at the beginning, and he's supposed to have an actual character arc, growing and learning and changing and all those good things. This Roger not only didn't come off as broken in the beginning, there was no feeling he'd changed by the end. He was saying the right words, but there was no emotional depth behind them. He started the play as a cranky asshole, and he pretty much ended it the same way. I have no objection to cranky assholes as characters -- O HAI SANZO - but I need some kind of evidence that they're more than just a cranky asshole. Trying the 'I am a cranky asshole because I have been Hurt in my Past' routine doesn't work unless I actually do feel your pain.
(And on a shallow note: "Pretty-boy frontman"? Yee-ah, not so much. So.)
Mimi did her best, but when half of her characterization is 'I am in love with Roger,' and Roger's just sort of an asshole, she's left as one of those young women with bad taste in...life, really. And Mark -- I was willing to believe Mark's sense of alienation and loneliness, but I had no feeling at the end that he'd finally reached out, maybe because the only person I felt him reaching out to was, well, Roger. Who by the end, the way this production had it, was wrapped up in Mimi, in addition to the whole 'cranky asshole' thing. Sucks to be Mark, apparently.
Joanne and Maureen? Well, they had enough emotional depth that if I knew them as real people I'd probably be advising them to break up already and stay broken up. Which I gather is intentional, so I guess no complaints. Yay for the lesbians?
In other news, have gotten large amounts of hair chopped off! Wound up with more a lion's mane effect than the shaggy pixie cut I was going for - I'm not entirely sure the hairdresser understood which picture I was pointing to for model -- but eh, I can work with this.
thesilentpoet wanted to see it, and didn't want to see it alone. I consented to be dragged along. Only one disadvantage: she has the script memorized. I? Well, I saw this one really kick-ass vid to "One Song Glory," does that count?Yeah. Anyway. Stef played me the soundtrack to the first act (and then we got interrupted), and I took the precaution of spoiling myself for the key bits of the second act. If I knew who died, I figured, I wouldn't cry.
This theory may perhaps need work. You'd think I'd remember what happened when I saw Les Mis, where I spent half the second act in tears despite knowing exactly who was going to die, and when, courtesy a roommate who adored Les Mis and played the soundtrack repeatedly.
So yeah: second act, Mimi's singing this song about how much it sucks being in love with an asshole and how she misses him anyway, and we see Angel and Collins over to one side of the stage with Angel in a hospital gown, and I knew what was coming, and I still started crying. Did not really stop until near the end of Angel's funeral, when for some reason the actor playing Collins decides to go for the glory note at the end of the reprise of "I'll Cover You," and that jarred me right out of the plot, because when you are grieving for the love of your life, you do not go for the glory note. You just don't. Well, maybe if you're an opera singer or something, but Collins isn't.
On the other hand, right at the end when it looks like Mimi dies? All I could hear in my head was the grandfather from THE PRINCESS BRIDE: "Mimi does not die at this time." So I managed to restrain myself. Admittedly, it helped (for certain very dubious definitions of the word) that I hadn't fallen for Mimi or the Mimi/Roger relationship anything near as hard and fast as I'd fallen for Angel and the Angel/Collins relationship.
Most of the blame for that can be laid squarely at the feet of the Roger of this production. According to what
thesilentpoet tells me, Roger is supposed to be broken at the beginning, and he's supposed to have an actual character arc, growing and learning and changing and all those good things. This Roger not only didn't come off as broken in the beginning, there was no feeling he'd changed by the end. He was saying the right words, but there was no emotional depth behind them. He started the play as a cranky asshole, and he pretty much ended it the same way. I have no objection to cranky assholes as characters -- O HAI SANZO - but I need some kind of evidence that they're more than just a cranky asshole. Trying the 'I am a cranky asshole because I have been Hurt in my Past' routine doesn't work unless I actually do feel your pain.(And on a shallow note: "Pretty-boy frontman"? Yee-ah, not so much. So.)
Mimi did her best, but when half of her characterization is 'I am in love with Roger,' and Roger's just sort of an asshole, she's left as one of those young women with bad taste in...life, really. And Mark -- I was willing to believe Mark's sense of alienation and loneliness, but I had no feeling at the end that he'd finally reached out, maybe because the only person I felt him reaching out to was, well, Roger. Who by the end, the way this production had it, was wrapped up in Mimi, in addition to the whole 'cranky asshole' thing. Sucks to be Mark, apparently.
Joanne and Maureen? Well, they had enough emotional depth that if I knew them as real people I'd probably be advising them to break up already and stay broken up. Which I gather is intentional, so I guess no complaints. Yay for the lesbians?
In other news, have gotten large amounts of hair chopped off! Wound up with more a lion's mane effect than the shaggy pixie cut I was going for - I'm not entirely sure the hairdresser understood which picture I was pointing to for model -- but eh, I can work with this.