Evita - Page 9

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 3/27/12 at 4:05am

Phreak,
No, it does not play out that way at all. The show curtain rises about 10 feet and travels open to reveal the screen as the ensemble, dressed in mourning clothes and clutching candles step forward from the darkness and fog. Che removes a hat and cloak to reveal himself and the footage plays on the screen above them. that is the entirety of "Oh, What a Circus" until the ensemble exits and the screen / scrim fly back down to deck level for the "Eva reveal".
No sobbing woman at a door or niche with candles. As I said, the settings are kept VERY specific until the "Buenos Aires" reveal.

Thank you, Betty. It was driving me beyond bonkers. If you didn't know the libretto / have prior knowledge of the specific plot, you would have zero clue when the locale had changes, when a passage of time had occurred at a point without Che narrating it as such... The lighting for "Don't Cry For Me Argentina" was stunning (a shame it wasn't matched by the performance..), the lit windows were beautiful, but the lighting really served in no way to define time or space, and if you choose a unit setting, your lighting has to pick up the slack to define things. Here, it didn't.

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 3/27/12 at 7:38am

I've got no time for details, but I also saw Saturday's matinee and was left pretty baffled by this production. Christina DeCicco sings the role well, but has not created a specifically defined charcter and lacks spark/fire, save for a small handful of moments. Ricky Martin's got all the charm of an orphanage burning down. Yes, he went up on a verse; whoops. It happens. (It happened to Nikki Jones in BoM on Sunday; I felt terrible for her.) The longer-term problem is that he has zero business acting in a show, let alone on Broadway. Max Von Essen did nothing for me. Like Ms. DeCicco, he sings the role well, but the production and especially the direction swallow him up. Michael Cerveris comes out cleanest by being his usual, very solid self, but almost every other aspect of the show feels so community theater that you wonder what he could have brought to a better production.

This past weekend I saw this, BoM, DEATH OF A SALESMAN, TRIBES, and went to SLEEP NO MORE again. EVITA was a glaringly bad spot in an otherwise exceptional weekend of theatergoing. My companion at one point -- half-jokingly -- suggested ROCK OF AGES instead of EVITA. I wish we had.

[Gypsy9]

Posted: 3/27/12 at 8:42am

I am seeing EVITA for the first time in a few weeks and feel somewhat depressed by all the extreme negativity that so many posters express toward this production. Can it really be that bad? I will go with an open mind and hope that my introduction to this fabled show will pay off with an appreciation of the somewhat different interpretation that seems to bother so many. Elena Roger won accolades in London. I am looking forward to seeing her. EVITA is the only show that I will be going to on my semi-annual trip to my former place of residence, when I saw countless shows and enjoyed most of them. This Board can be a downer at times.

[Bettyboy72]

Posted: 3/27/12 at 9:26am

I take forgranted that people know what's going on in the musical because I know it so well. However the row behind me were a little confused and were asking me questions.

[Sauja]

Posted: 3/27/12 at 9:38am

Just saw this last night. I actually avoided the message boards about it until I saw it, but I find that my opinions are fairly in line with most of the posters here, at least with regard to Roger. I was in the rear mezz, so her acting choices might not have registered as clearly back there, so I was left with her vocals. I'm a fan of an unusual voice. I still think I'm the only person who loved Daphne Rubin-Vega in Les Miz. But I found Roger's upper register difficult to listen to. And, like some others, had trouble making out lyrics in parts--really just when others were singing as well. When hers was the only voice, I could get everything. I just walked away thinking that Roger was a great dancer. That's when she really came alive and connected. Which doesn't seem like it makes her the best fit in this role. At least, not to my eye (and ear).

I liked Ricky Martin more than others, though. He doesn't bring a lot of fire to the role, but he sounded crisp and clean last night. He doesn't do much to create a character, but then...he doesn't really have a character to play. Basically, I thought he was a totally affable narrator.

All of that said, I still enjoyed myself. The show's pace is dynamic, the choreography is pretty thrilling, and I thought the design was beautiful (particularly the lighting). So yeah, Roger left me cold, but I wouldn't say it's a bad night at the theater.

[AngelorPhantom1359]

Posted: 3/27/12 at 10:08am

This is exactly why the investors of Funny Girl dropped out, they knew people wouldn't accept anyone other than Barbra Streisand in the role. It's the same here, people only want to see Patti LuPone in Hal Prince's production. Now I understand why it took almost 35 years for the show to be revived! Its really depressing to me that this show is being crucified because people won't go in with an open mind. Yes Hal Prince's production was brilliant, but that doesn't mean that the material should never be reinvented. I saw this last week and I thought that it was a good production.

And for everyone saying how they shouldn't have done Evita like this, Patti LuPone said how she was happy that it was a new production and not Hal Prince's because she said that the show needed a new perspective. If they had just revived the original, everyone would have said that it was just a carbon copy and that it wasn't inspired in any way. Give the show a chance!

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 3/27/12 at 10:41am

lolwut? Careful with generalizing.

Speaking for myself, I'm not attached to anything. I didn't see the original production and am more inclined to listen to the movie soundtrack than the OBC. My mind was pretty durned open.

What I saw Saturday was a boring, flat show, with moments of life, but not enough to prevent the 130-minute run time from feeling overlong and tedious.

I've got no problem with a re-conceptualizing of the show, though I take serious objection to that term in describing this production. Is it because I didn't see the original production that I'm having a hard time seeing this as anything but a gross overstatement? This production may be scaled back, may be quieter, gentler, but there's no radical re-envisioning of the material here.

I'd have welcomed that, honestly.
At least some risks may have been taken.

It's very possible people are just not caring much for what they're getting here, comparisons to the OBC or not. Okay, so, it doesn't stand up to the original production. I'm in no position to agree or disagree with that. But whether it does or it doesn't, taken on its own merits, it's still a bland production of a decent musical with a lot of potential.

[DottieD'Luscia]

Posted: 3/27/12 at 11:00am

I saw the Hal Prince staging of the Evita tour that passed through DC several years ago and didn't like it one bit. I thought it was very sloppy and that Sarah Litzsinger was just not a convincing Eva. I also saw the original production in December 1980 and thought at the time the staging really stood out. It's what has most stood out to me. I remember coming home that night and talking to my mom about the show (and the staging and how cinematic it felt).

I do want to see this revival, but will wait until I have the opportunity to see Christina DeCecco. I heard all I needed to from the London cast recording, that I didn't want to sit through a performance listening to Elena Roger.

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 3/27/12 at 1:18pm

I have to agree as well. I did not go in wanting or expecting a LuPone or a Prince staging. In fact, LupOne's rendition of "Don't Cry For Me Argentina" is NOT one of my favorites. Other women has done it better.

Sauja,
I completely agree with every point. I would only be more specific, as I was in previous posts, in saying that the scenic and lighting designs were beautiful, but inappropriate.

[Bettyboy72]

Posted: 3/27/12 at 1:42pm

I need to join the chorus of "I wasn't looking for Patti". I was looking forward to EVITA with every fiber of my being. I adore the music. Me not liking the revival does not mean I am overly attached to the LuPone version (I never saw that.)

Also, I wasn't crucifying anything. I was just being critical. I also praised most of the performances.

I will say that LuPone's belt is thrilling and some of what made the songs iconic. It's like taking Elphaba's money note out of Defying Gravity. I would have cast Eva with a big belter.

The way the role is being sung now, I don't see the need for an alternate for Eva. In hindsight, after reading Patti's book, it seems like she needed an alternate because she hadn't learned to sing properly.

If Elphaba or Diana don't need an alternate, I don't think Eva does.

[givesmevoice]

Posted: 3/27/12 at 1:58pm

The way the role is being sung now, I don't see the need for an alternate for Eva. In hindsight, after reading Patti's book, it seems like she needed an alternate because she hadn't learned to sing properly.

Elaine Paige lost her voice early enough in the London run and required an alternate. An alternate was cast for the American premiere to avoid that happening to the Eva here. It had nothing to do with Patti specifically.


If Elphaba or Diana don't need an alternate, I don't think Eva does.

I think both of those roles might have the need for an alternate.

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 3/27/12 at 2:30pm

Every singer I know agrees that, on a regular 8-shows-a-week schedule, Diana absolutely needs an alternate over an extended period of time. The same would have been true of Caroline, had the show run.

[AngelorPhantom1359]

Posted: 3/27/12 at 4:04pm

I would like to clarify that people who gave objective reasons as to why they didn't like the show were not who I was referring to. What I was referring to were the people who arbitrarily disliked the show for no reason other than the fact that it didn't have Patti. To the people who have objective reviews, I wasn't talking to you guys. I'm referring to those who couldn't give any constructive criticism about the show.

[751guy]

Posted: 3/27/12 at 11:49pm

Like Sauja, I saw the show Monday evening from the sixth row of the mezzanine and I'll be honest, EVITA's one of my favorite pieces, holding lots of special memories, ever since I saw it back in '79 at the Broadway, made a few trips, then saw it many times on tour at the Shubert Boston in the early 80s. I love history, politics, theatre and EVITA has all of it, even if Rice's view of Eva is somewhat heavy-handed and merciless. Nevertheless, I was looking forward to being reacquainted with an old friend last night and I wasn't disappointed. She's a fine old gal with lots of fire still in her. And as much as I loved the original Hal Prince staging, I was looking forward to seeing a new interpretation.

Michael Grandage has created some beautiful staging. Many of the images are luminous and stunning. It's some of the best ensemble work I have ever seen on a Broadway stage. Our first glimpse of Buenos Aires, the determination and speed of its citizens walking past open doors, creates a world we and Eva want to enter. 'Buenos Aires' blew me away. The movement and dance in this piece is breathtaking at times. The military and upper classes are beautifully drawn.

This is the kind of performance that could win Michael Cerveris a Tony. He's polished and professional in every way, but the least manipulative Juan I've ever seen. You feel he truly loves Eva and they're not simply using each other. Elena Roger is not a belter, no, not a powerful singer, but I was drawn to her. She conveyed a tenderness in scenes that's not always apparent in Rice's libretto.

Ricky Martin is the weakest link. Che should always seem capable of commandeering the entire piece. He and Eva should battle for control, but this Che is merely an observer. There's no tension, no dramatic dissonance with Che and Eva... there's never any resolution to their conflict, which represents Eva's battles with the inner demons of her birth and class, because there's no conflict. I'm not sure why Grandage took this approach with Che? Maybe he knew people would simply come to see Martin and not care about Che? He's kind of gutted the piece.

This show will do well with tourists because of Ricky Martin and don't underestimate the well of love people have for this show thanks to Prince's original production. It's unfortunate the Che/Eva conflict has been so thoroughly wiped clean because that's truly where the heart of the show lies, but I'm happy to have the old gal back on the Great White Way where many more can fall for her. Will hopefully be able to return again.

[kyl3fong2]

Posted: 3/28/12 at 12:05am

@751guy---Thanks for this well-written review. :)

[philly03]

Posted: 3/28/12 at 1:33am

"It's the same here, people only want to see Patti LuPone in Hal Prince's production. Now I understand why it took almost 35 years for the show to be revived!"

I wouldn't necessarily say that - Natalie Toro is probably my favorite Eva having seen a few (aside from LuPone or Paige). She got very good reviews, though the recreate of Hal Prince's production did not for the supposed Broadway revival tour. Toro's singing was unbelievable. A shame she's too old now (and hard to believe that was nearly 13 years ago!).

I think some of the new staging works, but the majority does not compare - I caught myself in the "wait, where are we supposed to be now, seems choppy" slate as well. Something like "Goodnight & Thankyou" works more for me in this version than the revolving Hal Prince door. Of course "Don't Cry For Me Argentina" looks much better with the full set as well.

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 3/28/12 at 3:03am

Of course "Don't Cry For Me Argentina" looks much better with the full set as well.

It is almost as if the set was built to highlight this one key scene. I think the whole set is gorgeous, but it just works wonders for that one song. I also find the use of a bare stage for "You Must Love Me" and "She is a Diamond" to be quite jarring, but effective.

[ljay889]

Posted: 3/28/12 at 8:26am

So where are the Elena supporters who kept insisting that her vocals and diction got MUCH better after the cast recording???

[smallworld]

Posted: 3/28/12 at 9:15am

Right here!

If you listen to later recordings of her in London she is absolutely phenomenal. Once she settles into it in NY, I'm sure she'll be even more amazing.

[ljay889]

Posted: 3/28/12 at 8:58pm

Lol, mhmm. We shall see.

[smallworld]

Posted: 3/28/12 at 9:36pm

Lol. What I find absolutely funny is that you (and others on this board) judged Elena's performance even before the show started in New York. Sure, she doesn't sound her best on the London recording but a lot can (and has) changed from then to later dates. God forbid that someone play the role other than Patti, and god forbid anyone put a different spin on the material. If people would just have an open mind about it, I'm sure they'd love Elena and the production.

[ljay889]

Posted: 3/28/12 at 9:40pm

I don't want to hear LuPone. I want to UNDERSTAND the lyrics and hear a powerful voice. Doesn't have to be Patti power.

[smallworld]

Posted: 3/28/12 at 9:43pm

Use your ears, I'm sure you'll hear it

[ljay889]

Posted: 3/28/12 at 9:47pm

LOL, K. Not many people in this thread have heard it!

[smallworld]

Posted: 3/28/12 at 9:48pm

And how many of them have seen the show? I understand having an opinion if you have seen it, but if you're jumping to conclusions based off of the mediocre 2006 Cast Recording it's not very justified...