[inspectordickon]

First of all...its good to be here on the boards, with fellow Bway zealots We are the sane ones.

Okay, so this is premature, but eventually, Rent WILL have a revival I believe. What would you change?

I think changing the era would be a MASSIVE mistake (see "Rent Re-Mixed). These characters are immortal for a reason. However, I could go for a smaller, more intimate staging, or maybe the "Sweeney Todd" revival route and have it be staged by a group of AIDS hospice residents.

Thoughts?

[Brother Marvin Hinten, S.]

I think we need to worry about a revival when it actually happens.

[pish123c]

[Brock07]

I think it should come back in the same form. It's small and intimate enough. Stay away from the Sweeney Todd thing.

But this is way premature. Stick around for 15 years and we'll talk then.

[mastachen]

^That's what people in the Les Mis forum were saying before it was revived 3 years after it closed on Broadway.


I was always under the impression that Rent was a fairly popular show still. Back in December, the line to get into the Nederlander Theater was still ridiculously long, and that's like a 15 mins before showtime.

[Brock07]

I remember being amazed at that as well.

[ConverseSneaker]

[musicaltheatrefan]

A revival could open like Les Mis did, 3 years after the closing, that would be in 2011.

Yeah, I hope they don't make it like Rent Remixed.

But, I am certain that Rent will be revived.

[Brother Marvin Hinten, S.]

I hope they don't make the same mistake they did with Hair, as it appears they are on the track to doing. Hair opened in 1968, and then closed after it was no longer relevant and sales had dipped (sound familiar?). And then, only a few years after its closing, it re-opened, too late to be relevant again and too soon to be a museum piece. It flopped after 43 performances, and I don't want to see Rent go down a parallel track.

[postmodern-mango-salsa]