Did you see The Evita film in theaters? — Page 3

Patti once summed up the problem with Evita. It's all exposition. It is mostly telling what happened, rather than showing what happened. This is problematic on stage but impossible for a movie.

Evita works as a series of songs, and when you get good singers in there it can be spectacular. But it is a heavily flawed show. Works better as a concept album.

I saw it at the Cineramadome in Hollywood, in 70mm, on opening day.

I went in with low expectations, and Madonna exceeded them. But she still didn't blow me away. I was surprised at how solid her acting was, particularly in the last (death) scenes.

One of the things that has bugged me from the first time I saw it on the big screen, her dark brown contact lenses are atrocious. They give her little, glassed-over, beady eyes, like a doll. She has scary "doll eyes" through the entire movie. You can't really see her pupils is part of it, and they don't reflect light the way human eyes do.

Very scary and off-putting.

Look at the difference between this:

And this:

I think that bad decision with the contacts served to undermine her entire performance, unfortunately. It's still a "career best" for her, though.

I'm actually quite fond of the movie, truly, but I happily hold two thoughts (and more) in my head at once; I agree with everything that has been stated here.

EVITA is a flawed piece of theatre, and the movie both makes up for it with gorgeous cinematography and location shooting, and emphasizes it, mainly by softening Eva's portrayal to a point you wonder what the controversy is and why Che even exists as a character.

For me, Madonna's main weakness as an actor (aside from the spontaneity comment, which DEAD ON) is she was desperate to always be a sympathetic character, to a huge fault. She saw the characters wounds and she wanted you to, as well. So, as others have stated here, she does shockingly beautiful work during the intimate, romantic scenes, and her death scenes. But when she is supposed to be vibrantly sexy (wait, isn't Madonna herself vibrantly sexy?) or power-hungry egomaniac (....ditto), she isn't. That isn't all her, of course. Parker sought to give a more balanced portrayal of Evita, and Madonna tipped it too far in the other direction.

I saw the film at a screening in San Francisco. I thought Madonna was more than adequate in the role and that the musical was good for its time. My biggest issues with the film had to do with the script and how it was edited.

In terms of editing, I hated that they cut away from Eva as she says the words "Don't Cry for Me, Argentina." That was when we needed a close-up. We also did not need flashbacks to her childhood during the song, especially using the same scenes shown just an hour or so before that moment.

As for the script, I thought it was a missed opportunity to open up the story even more. They needed to explain her story more. Her death at 33 was significant (considering how young she was) but that was lost. They should have explained the cancer too. These could have simply been done with newspaper articles but they adhered too closely to the show.

I saw it in a theatre.

I was excited to see the movie.

She exceeded my expectations (which is not to suggest that I thought she was particularly good).

I was five so, no. But I take the movie for what it is. It's one of the only ALW musicals that I can stand, and I love Patti, but sometimes listening to a cast recording and not being able to physically see it sucks. I actually really don't mind the movie, the only thing that really bothers me when I watch it is Antonio Banderas' voice. But other than that, I second what everyone else is saying about the cinematography and Madonnas portrayal of the romantic vs. the aggressive/sexual.

CarlosAlberto, Madonna was pregnant when she filmed Evita that is why there was no crazy dance moves in Buenos Aries.

Interesting topic... being a huge ALW fan, I was very excited about this - even though I couldnt imagine Madonna playing it. Like many have pointed out it succeeded in that it was the first Movie Musical in a long time, visually was beautiful to look at and was moving at times...

In hindsight, I can imagine a lot of different directions they could've taken to make it even better - different actresses - etc. But remember Madonna was considered a bigger draw and was going to add to the mystique of "could she pull it off" - as well as promote the music. And it was great seeing "You Must Love Me" and "Don't Cry For Me Argentina" on the Top singles of the week (wow, now I'm dating myself - especially as I think of the "Cass-ingle" I had of You Must Love Me

I remember being underwhelmed by the film. Madonna exceeded my low expectations, but I found much of the film disappointing. Some nice cinematography, but as with Buenos Aires, Dangerous Jade was also a dud. Compared to the brilliant choreography and staging of the original production, it appeared laughably lazy and amateurish, reminiscent of the 90s TV production of Bye Bye Birdie that aired the previous year. Banderas was the one real saving grace of the film. I actually preferred the new characterization of Che to the previous Guevara-esque figure.

The only productions that had the fire and passion Rainbow High needed to have was the orginal broadway show, The LA show and maybe the original london show. No other productions have gotten it right. Even the recent revival lacked the fire that song needs to have.

I liked her spin on it. Did it get a little too crazed and manic by the end of her run? Sure. But she hated the show and wanted to get the hell out of that theater. Can't say I blame her when she was terrified to go onstage every night.

"...The first thing about Patti LuPone is that she's a big drama queen. If she hated the show, why did she spend two years doing it?... "

you don't say :) hahaha

But you make a great point. Patti loves to re-write history. Now that she hates ALW post-Sunset - everything that he has ever done, ever written she finds a way to crap all over... including Evita which was her breakout role. And for something she hated, she not only starred in it on Broadway for 2 years, she also played it in LA, and I think I remember reading in Australia as well. Quite the masochist that Patti LuPone, isn't she?