<p>
</p>
<p>Why did that scare you?</p>
<p>alwaysamom, you know Jai?! We were admirers of him when he was on “Queer Eye For The Straight Guy.” :)</p>
<p>nmr, yes! He’s an extremely talented young man. I have to admit that a lot of his theatre friends thought it was pretty amusing when he got the Queer Eye gig, but it served him well and he made some $$. He’s done a lot of theatre, both MT and legit, and is still my favorite Angel. 
He is one of the few actors I know who was cast at a very young age (18) with limited training but with an abundance of talent. Not that he didn’t struggle with that, but he survived it and was successful.This is probably the main reason I’m sad that Rent is closing. This show, as I’ve said before, has provided more jobs for young actors in the past 12+ years than probably all other shows combined. There is going to be a real void there, which will make it even more difficult for all these new college grads to book a first job.</p>
<p>alwaysamom, what about Spring Awakening? Do you think it is on its way to becoming the “Rent” for a different “younger generation” of both actors and theater goers?</p>
<p>Michael, I don’t think so, for a few reasons. Firstly, I don’t think that Spring Awakening will have the kind of run that Rent has had. Within a year of opening, Rent had two national tours running and a Canadian tour. It has had at least one tour running ever since. Even with the Broadway production closing in September, next year’s tour may end up being the most profitable ever because of the return of original Broadway castmembers. The show has been produced in Australia, Japan, the Philipines, Spain, Italy, the UK, Denmark, Sweden, Germany, South Africa, Brazil, Mexico, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, New Zeland, China, Taiwan, Iceland, the Netherlands, Finland, Switzerland, Norway, Hungary, some countries more than once. The non-North American amateur rights have been out for a few years now and the school edition is also available. Rent was, and has continued to be, a phenomenon that I don’t think that Spring Awakening can match.</p>
<p>SA is already having attendance issues and I think, in part, that this is because it appeals primarily to a very young demographic. Of course, there are those of us old-timers who enjoy the show but it doesn’t seem to grip adults the way that Rent has always done. While the younger demographic group has always supported Rent, it has not been its main source of ticket sales through the years. Teenagers will not keep a show open buying $20 rush seats. As important a marketing tool as Rentheads and SA fans are, the majority of people seeing a Broadway show on any given night are seeing it for the first and last time, and are adults. SA has not had the same kind of appeal to that majority of ticket-buyers as Rent has.</p>
<p>I think that part of it is the simple fact that the show is not as good a show. Both shows have their flaws but, in my opinion, the themes explored in Rent are more universal whereas the SA storyline is more likely to appeal to teens. The fact that SA started casting replacement individuals who were ‘known’ by that demographic, so early in its run is evidence that it is concerned with ticket sales. First a popstar as Melchior and a tv star as Moritz, then coming in later this summer to is another tv star to replace the popstar. I am not one who thinks that ‘stunt’ casting is always a bad idea, but my point is that they are doing it VERY early in SA’s run, only a little more than a year in. Now, I may be proven wrong and it may last 12+ years on Broadway like Rent has but I’m doubtful. :)</p>
<p>I am interested to see how the tour will do. That will likely be the main indicator of the longevity of the show.</p>
<p>Alwaysamom-
While I have not seen Spring Awakening, I know when my daughter was called back for Wendla she got the sides and we both felt the script was very racy; we were surprised it appealed to ANY demographic - even teens. I agree with you in saying that Rent has more universal appeal; my daughter saw it at 13 and absolutely fell in love with it. It will be interesting to see what happens.</p>
<p>I agree with Alwaysmom. I also think that the difference in ages of the casts is also a consideration. When my d had her callback it was very unexpected. I remember standing in the long line with the 1200 other kids and their parents/friends/family and thinking that my d would be “typed out” as so many others were because she is tall and usually plays older. When she got her callback we thought it was because maybe for the tour they weren’t so specific of the look. Then the strike changed everything and they decided to send what was left of the original cast on tour and recast for NY. When they decided to recast for NY I think they were looking for kids that looked 14 to 16. This is only what I heard from my D since she goes to school with someone who is BF’s with one of the original cast. So regardless of content and what audience it attracts these kids will be leaving the show for the most part still too young to do much else. At least with Rent they were older and could audition for more parts.</p>
<p>alwaysamom, I posed the question to my daughter and she agreed with your conclusions but perhaps for somewhat different (as well as some similar) reasons. She opined that at the time Rent opened, it provided a forum for many issues that had not been the subject of broad public discussion and introspection and which had relevance across generational boundaries. It also presented the issues in a fresh format and context very different in many respects from the style of prior Broadway musicals.</p>
<p>In contrast, Spring Awakening deals with issues of teen sexuality and victims of sexual abuse which have been in the public spotlight and afforded a variety of forums for public discourse for many years at this juncture. As a result, the issues are not grabbing the public’s attention the way rent did with the issues it reflected. Moreover, Spring Awakening is far more graphic in the depiction of its sexual content than was Rent, thereby perhaps limiting the scope of the public for whom the performance would be appealing or appropriate. Finally, there is no longer anything new or fresh about a Broadway musical in a rock/pop music genre.</p>
<p>For all of these reasons, my daughter concluded that Spring Awakening will not have nearly the scope of impact that Rent had nor be as enduring.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>kimoki, none of the original cast is going to be on the tour. In a few weeks, all of the original castmembers will be gone from the show, but none will be leaving to be in the tour cast. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>rossji, I wouldn’t necessarily describe it as very racy. There are a few moments which could conceivably make some people uncomfortable. There is a very small amount of nudity in the hayloft sex scene and, of course, the simulated masturbation scene. Personally, I found the beating scene more difficult to watch, but people tend to get crazy with anything nudity/sex-related. I can assure you that there is a huge appeal to teens, a very devoted (fanatic) fandom who, while they may not be as crazy as the Wicked kids, have their own brand of ‘crazy’. :)</p>
<p>Michael, your D is right. Rent explored issues in ‘96 which were not at the forefront of most peoples’ minds, homelessness, homosexuality and AIDS. Combining those social issues with the subjects of friends, family, artistic dreams, made for a show which appealed to a lot of people. It was, and has continued to be, a show which has been an important part of the lives of many gay young men and women. Its themes of love, acceptance, and hope are important in EVERYone’s lives, not just teens! </p>
<p>Regarding Rent’s casting: it was a show(maybe one of the first) that was cast largely with actors who were not experienced in MT. Many were musicians, some were actors, and some had little stage experience. This trend has continued in the intervening years. Although many young kids have been hired for the non-Equity tours since 2001(and many of them have gone on to join the Broadway cast), straight out of college theatre programs, there are many, probably the majority, who have been in the show in the past 12 years who do not have theatre degrees, and many who haven’t gone to college at all. It has been a wonderful mix of talents, and many alumni from the show have gone on to get work after Rent - in shows - AIDA, In the Heights, South Pacific, Jersey Boys, Hedwig and the Angry Inch, The Hunchback of Notre Dame, Wicked, Fiddler on the Roof, Legally Blonde, Hair, The Color Purple, Ain’t Misbehavin’, Mamma Mia, Hairspray, The Lion King, Zanna Don’t, Bare, Passing Strange, tick…tick…Boom, Smokey Joe’s Cafe, Falsettos, Take Me Out, Elegies: A Song Cycle, Working, Brooklyn, High Fidelity, and those are just the ones I can think of offhand.</p>
<p>I want to say that I don’t want to give the impression that I don’t think the SA kids are talented. They certainly are! I think that is what I’ve enjoyed most about the show the times I’ve seen it. The abundance of young talent and the wonderful performances on that stage are a joy to watch.</p>
<p>Oh well that’s what I heard but it was along time and ago things could have changed or maybe it was misinformation but I guess the point was that these kids will be for the most part younger than the Rent actors and most of the shows you listed above wouldn’t have roles appropriate for them. So I am guessing it will be back to school for most of them. I was referring back to post #63. SA will not fill the void since the ages are different. I also agree with Michael and his D about the issues being a reason for the difference in success and the show reaching a wider audience.</p>
<p>P.S. I just remembered why we were told that… I think the reason behind using what was left of the original cast was because they had lost money due to the strike and they thought it would bring in more money on tour. Like I said though maybe that was just something that was being tossed around and never happened for various reasons.</p>
<p>I know I’m going to get a lot of flak from this, but personally I far prefer the score to Spring Awakening than Rent. However, Rent, for all the issues it took on in '96, now seems like a much more mainstream show. By the way, I think In the Heights is going to have a very long run and be very successful on tours. Most of the cast is young in that, too, and the music is a wonderful combination of rap/hip hop and old fashioned musical theatre type songs.</p>
<p>and P.S. You can take anyone of any age to In The Heights. It’s surprisingly clean and the fact that grandmas can take their grandaughters or grandsons will only help its commercial appeal.</p>
<p>Alwaysamom, it scares me that she paid that much attention to a stupid reality show but can’t remember where her ATM card is.</p>
<p>Well, the young women in the reality show are always right there, in the television, whereas a girl’s ATM card is tiny and could be lost anywhere. (Just sticking up for your D!) :)</p>
<p>HSN, no flak from me. I love most of the SA score. I would actually be more likely to listen to the cast recording for SA rather than the one from Rent. Now maybe that’s because of timing and the number of years I’ve been seeing Rent, but I think that the SA score is enjoyable even if you are not familiar with the show. Rent’s score is, in my opinion, much more tied to the storyline of the show and would generally be enjoyed more by people who have actually seen the show. I hope you’re right about ITH, it’s a wonderful show. Although the cast is young-ish, they’re not SA young, and many of them aren’t Rent young (Robin DeJesus and Karen Olivo are both alumni of Rent). That, and the fact that the majority of the cast is Latino, will not naturally make ITH a replacement for Rent as far as young casting opportunities are concerned. That actually is an additional positive about the opportunities that Rent has provided - a very diverse cast. As for a grandma being able to take grandchildren to see ITH but not Rent or SA? Our entire family has seen Rent, on more than one occasion, with grandparents, and one of my Ds has seen SA with her grandma. So, different strokes for different folks, as they say. :)</p>
<p>skwidjymom, gotcha! One of my Ds is like that, too.</p>
<p>Skwidjymom, I lol’d when I read your post about your daughter recognizing someone from a reality show but losing her ATM card. BOY did that hit home! My d can remember every name/face of anyone who ever played on Bway but just the other day lost her cell phone…
Anyway, I was saddened to see Lauren leave on LB tonight! She was one of my favorites!! She DOES look too young to be a law student, but why did they let her go on as long as she did if they thought she was too young looking?</p>
<p>So! Bailey and Autumn for the finale? Anybody?</p>
<p>They can’t keep Rihannon anymore. Not after that asthma attack of a performance</p>
<p>LizMT</p>
<p>You are funny! I love your description “asthma attack of a performance.” I really liked her but found myself breathing for her. I couldn’t believe the judges didn’t make a bigger deal out her lack of vocals. Their response was “we don’t know if you can make it through a performance.” Well, how about the audience. I was hyperventilating by the end of it.</p>
<p>Autumn is really strong but I can’t get beyond her hair. I am so obsessed with figuring out if it really is her hair or a wig? It just seems so fake. Maybe if they used more makeup she wouldn’t look so washed out. She has beautiful expressive eyes, yet my focus keeps going to her hair. </p>
<p>Rossji, I too loved Lauren. My heart broke for her. But I still feel bad for Emma, I thought she was going to win the whole thing! Also, commenting on one of your previous posts - congrats to your daughter for getting a callback for Spring Awakening that’s impressive!</p>
<p>I think that Autumn’s hair is her real hair, only dyed to make her a blonde. I think they could have done a better job and should give her extensions or something, so she has a mane to throw around, Elle-style, like the rest! Having shorter hair puts her at a disadvantage, I think. </p>
<p>I agree that Lauren is very talented but I also agree she is too young to carry a show on her shoulders. I think they let her stay so long because it’s a television show and they thought she made good tv. </p>
<p>Rhiannon seems very sweet and has a lovely, goofy quality, but I was a little surprised to see her stay and Lauren go. Her vocals just are not up to snuff and I was really surprised when, after the audition last night, she stayed. </p>
<p>I feel for all the young women in the show. It’s very tough and stressful.</p>
<p>I think that if I were a young woman auditioning for that tv show, I would have gone blonde from the get go. In my mind, it’s put all of the non-blondes at a disadvantage the whole time. I mean, come on…the show is called Legally BLONDE. I’m sure the producers thought it made for good tv to have a few who weren’t all along for the drama factor of the transformation.</p>
<p>It doesn’t seem like they’ve been giving Bailey the “winner’s edit”…she doesn’t come across as very Elle-like in the house with her attitudes toward the other girs.</p>