Dear Editor:

When friends and I were deciding what movie to see over the Thanksgiving Weekend, I voted for Copote but was out voted by my friends who wanted to see RENT on Opening Day. I had seen RENT, the play, almost 10 years ago and had been captivated then by its courage to depict the struggles and hopes of those suffering with AIDS at a time when American leaders had their heads buried in the sand. I wasn’t sure how the stage version could be adapted to the big screen and keep the essence of the stage while relaying its overall theme of struggle and hope.

To my surprise, the film succeeded on both fronts. In fact, the screen version allows RENT’s original theme of depicting the struggles of people Living and Dieing of AIDS to be more focused and understandable than could be gleaned from the stage production. The music was as almost as mesmerizing as the stage production while the visual effects of the big screen helped me refocus on, and clarify RENTS’s original message of struggle and hope. I found myself much more focused on the story line and more emotional toward the overall impact of AIDS and its devastating ripple effects on those whose lives it touches. I was blown away by the films ability to stay true to the stage production while crystallizing the horror of the AIDS epidemic and the courage and strength of those who must fight it.

On Saturday, I read the review of the movie in the GLT by Scott Marks. I was taken back that Mr. Marks seemed to be missing an opportunity to enlighten his readers on the positive results the movie version of RENT would have on its viewers compared to the stage version. Instead, he seemed obsessed with trying to sound authoritative on film making and going out of his way to use ridiculous language to make parallels to his self serving grandiose ness. The only time he mentions AIDS in the entire review was to mock that it: “… it plays like a special, AIDS-themed edition of American Idol”. He was more focused on making the argument of how the characters can drink, smoke and dress flashy - but NOT pay the rent versus focusing on how the movie version might add to the original intent of the play - To Open America’s Eyes to the AIDS Epidemic.

For those who haven’t seen RENT - the play RENT or the movie - I would recommend that you see one or both. Any medium that helps our community understand the impact of HIV/AIDS is worth the price of admission. RENT shines a spotlight on one of the biggest issues affecting our Gay Community and should be embraced - not used as a tool for self serving reviewers. If Mr. Marks can’t see the forest for the trees then maybe the GLT should consider finding a new reviewer.

Brian Lacklen

Dear Editor:

I want to acknowledge the GLT for its issue 933 on 11/05 on gay conservatives. I my self along with most Americans are leaning to a more conservative view on politics and the gay community is not left out. One of the fastest growing political movements today is the gay conservative vote. Here in San Diego we even have a gay conservative talk show host Steve Yuhas on KOGO 600. Since becoming a Rep two years ago I have found many of my friends in there 30s and up vote conservative. Many of us are not out to promote, defend or protect the “progressive” views of the gay community. We vote for our country, state and local issues before any gay agenda that many think we all want or need! Like gay marriage not all of us are for it, many prefer domestic partnership. But with the non stop emotional push of the gay left, any desire for marriage in most states is now banned all together! So now there is a new voice in the horizon and we are here to make a difference.

Paul Benson

Dear Editor:

(RE: Scott Marks’ recent vitriol in the 11/23/05 A&E Section). I was shocked with Marks’ personal take on the three films he reviewed: Rent, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire and Walk the Line.

I saw Rent and certainly not based upon his recommendation. Marks rated the infectious Rent: “barely sticks to the screen.” His distaste for talk-sing musicals comes across loud and clear as vainglorious reportage. Rent is an excellent movie-musical, captured with a fine eye by director Columbus. It played well with great dissolves, frame cuts, and allowed for the darker flavor of the era that underscored a historical ‘La Boheme’ landscape. We thank Marks for his intelligent observation that it has little to do with opera. It does, however, have everything to do with music, but he failed to point out the energy, the voices of angels, and the sincere, honest portrayals of the actors, breathing constant life into the author’s words. Choreography was imaginative and provocative, whether in a stripper joint or on a subway. The emotional connection of the ‘family’ portrayed in Rent was palpable with the audience’s response: applause. If this movie didn’t move Reviewer Marks then he’s in need of oxygen. I can say the same about Walk the Line, a definite thumbs up (Haven’t see Harry Potter as yet). I would only allow you to compare the responses of ‘reputable’ reviewers who argue his further ineptness. Scott, you get a solid “thumbs down.” Perhaps it’s time for you to rethink your writing career: [think obituary column].

Jorge Gutierrez