Jamie Lloyd-helmed EVITA revival to play the London Palladium in 2025- Page 30

[BorisTomashevsky]

Posted: 8/30/25 at 1:14pm

I’m learning more and more than productions that were hot sh!t in London get closer to lukewarm receptions in NYC. 

Maybe ALW is understanding that too, and takes the audience confusion after this Evita seriously. That confusion is the kind of thing that American audiences would complain more loudly about than the Brits have.

[Birdie Boy]

Posted: 8/30/25 at 1:45pm

I was confused during the last revival. Evita is what it is.  The plot is not exactly clear in the writing. Like sunset blvd, things just start happening with no introduction or context. 

[malcs98]

Posted: 8/30/25 at 1:48pm

BorisTomashevsky said: "I’m learning more and more than productions that were hot sh!t in London get closer to lukewarm receptions in NYC.

Maybe ALW is understanding that too, and takes the audience confusion after this Evita seriously. That confusion is the kind of thing that American audiences would complain more loudly about than the Brits have."

So are you saying that more and more London productions should not consider transferring to Broadway?  

 

Updated On: 8/30/25 at 01:48 PM

[Birdie Boy]

Posted: 8/30/25 at 1:49pm

Why would they even want to come here?  It will be a bigger disaster than Cabaret was

[BorisTomashevsky]

Posted: 8/30/25 at 1:51pm

malcs98 said: "BorisTomashevsky said: "I’m learning more and more than productions that were hot sh!t in London get closer to lukewarm receptions in NYC.

Maybe ALW is understanding that too, and takes the audience confusion after this Evita seriously. That confusion is the kind of thing that American audiences would complain more loudly about than the Brits have."

So are you saying thatmore and more London productions should not consider transferring to Broadway?

"

If it doesn’t transfer to Broadway, I wouldn’t be surprised about it. 

[malcs98]

Posted: 8/30/25 at 1:54pm

Birdie Boy said: "Why would they even want to come here? It will be a bigger disaster than Cabaret was"

So you think after Cabaret ended up a bigger disaster, more and more London productions like this should not consider transferring to Broadway?  
 

[Birdie Boy]

Posted: 8/30/25 at 2:01pm

Yes of course.  I think some of the more “edgy” or artsy fartsy shows wouldn’t do as well in New York.  I think more traditional musicals like Benjamin Button or Two Strangers have a chance. 

[chernjam]

Posted: 8/30/25 at 2:05pm

If it doesn't transfer to Broadway (which would be a surprise to me tbh) it would be more about the economics than this supposed lack of confusion about the story of Evita.  Which seems overblown.  The show is what close to 50 years old... the stage production can't add a lot to a sung-through score like this that would dramatically change things.  No offence, but if people don't understand the story, they're not listening and paying attention closely enough.  

[BorisTomashevsky]

Posted: 8/30/25 at 2:16pm

chernjam said: "If it doesn't transfer to Broadway (which would be a surprise to me tbh) it would be more about the economics than this supposed lack of confusion about the story of Evita. Which seems overblown. The show is what close to 50 years old... the stage production can't add a lot to a sung-through score like this that would dramatically change things. No offence, but if people don't understand the story, they're not listening and paying attention closely enough."

I think differentiating costumes can help people track who is who, and thereby what’s happening in the piece. For someone who doesn’t go to the theatre very much, or doesn’t know the show, seeing mostly-young people dressed in similar clothes to each other, on a set that never changes “location”, can make it harder to go “oh that guy again, I remember him”.

And there seem to be enough people saying “it’s hard to follow”, and enough mentions of that in the press, that maybe there is an issue. I can’t remember a previous show that anyone said that about, except for the recent Sunset. 

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 8/30/25 at 2:22pm

If people are confused by the show (and there are people, I’ve heard them, myself) it has nothing to do with who’s-who on stage. The show essentially has three main characters none of whom are dressed the same. 

[malcs98]

Posted: 8/30/25 at 2:23pm

Birdie Boy said: "Yes of course. I think some of the more “edgy” or artsy fartsy shows wouldn’t do as well in NewYork. I think more traditional musicals like Benjamin Button or Two Strangers have a chance."

I am really excited and wishing nothing but the best for Two Strangers on Broadway (it's one of my most anticipated shows of the fall). I haven't heard anything about Benjamin Button transferring though (which I would kind of consider to be an edgy/artsy fartsy show but that's in a good way). But I feel like we need more edgy/artsy-fartsy shows and directors like JL on Broadway and I just wish that we took more risks just like in London

Updated On: 8/30/25 at 02:23 PM

[Seb28]

Posted: 8/30/25 at 7:27pm

binau said: "There is unspoken sexual domination happening. I know that sounds strange but it’s like you really don’t actually understand the choices being made at times."

I can tell but it doesn't make any sense. The whole essence of that scene (A New Argentina) is that she presents herself much more modest and decent to the public than she really is. We all know there is sexual tension and domination, that is already very clear from the scenes before, I'll be surprisingly good for you, etc, where she is basically sexually dominating him all the time. It's written in the lyrics, it was shown in the scenes, it is what her whole plan is about. But at this point in the show the story has moved on from that. The reason this scene (A New Argentina) exists is because Eva demands that she comes across as modest and demure now. Her new plan, which is essential for the character arc. To show the people the actual opposite of what she has shown in all the previous scenes. To fight the prejudices of the people and to win them over. She has a political agenda now. Cunningly convincing the people to vote for him. It's like a psychological thriller. This is where we basically see her cosplaying a decent person. Because she has a goal. And we as the audience are witnessing this change, her new act.

By displaying her sexual dominance in this scene too the director shows he does not understand the material at all. This is not a creative choice, this is incompetence.

Updated On: 8/30/25 at 07:27 PM

[binau]

Posted: 8/31/25 at 2:43am

It’s not her sexual dominance in that scene I was talking about it’s his - Peron’s. The sexual dynamics between the 3 leads ebs and flows throughout the show depending on the dramatic purpose and moment. They use Peron’s sexual dominance via his very large stature to make it clear he is a leader and not just the ‘naked boy’ you describe. 

Diego’s Che also clearly has moments of sexual power but when tested against Peron he loses, which is the point because he is the poor shirtless one and he is the powerful leader. 

 

Updated On: 8/31/25 at 02:43 AM

[Birdie Boy]

Posted: 8/31/25 at 3:41am

I just feel like Lloyd Webber musicals are already abstract and need a director to bring clarity.  Jamie Lloyd bringing his own creativity just adds to the confusion.  Like when Hal Prince directed Merrily

[binau]

Posted: 8/31/25 at 3:43am

Jordan did you review Bella? 

[Seb28]

Posted: 8/31/25 at 4:43am

binau said: "It’s not her sexual dominance in that scene I was talking about it’s his- Peron’s.

They use Peron’s sexual dominance via his very large stature to make it clear he is a leader and not just the ‘naked boy’ you describe.

Diego’s Che also clearly has moments of sexual power but when tested against Peron he loses, which is the point because he is the poor shirtless one and he is the powerful leader."

Then why make Peron the poor shirtless one. Needing that shows weakness, not dominance. But the point here is that whatever you do, you can not make Evita the dominant one in this scene, which is what he did. This scene is about her acting submissive, so the public sees her that way. This scene is her turning point. 

[binau]

Posted: 8/31/25 at 4:52am

But this is what I’m saying. Peron is clearly dominant in that scene it’s obvious from the way he looks and the way he is standing. He is towering over every one else on that stage and is clearly the so called alpha male. So I find it very strange that your take on it is that he is the ‘poor shirtless one’. The ‘vibes’ between Diego che and the Peron are completely and intentionally different, almost diametrically opposite versions of masculinity and sexuality defined by their class structures.

 

[Seb28]

Posted: 8/31/25 at 5:14am

All class is taken away from Peron. Height is not enough. The energy this scene gives me is that he is a little, insecure, unstable boy who feels the need to take off his shirt, who is then being comforted by his dominant golddigger temptress, the sm dominatrix Eva. 

While at this point in the story, Eva has different plans. The most important thing in this scene is that Eva does not confirm the prejudices the people have about her. Eva acting politically submissive for the first time is what this scene needs. Here she should pretend to play demure and submissive versus the "hooker in charge" she played in all scenes before (Good night and thank you, I'll be surprisingly good for you, etc). That is the reason why this scene exists.

Of course the audience is not going to understand the meaning of this scene, their relationship, her character arc and growth and the psychological and political purposes. It's like it's being directed by a 12-year old.

Updated On: 8/31/25 at 05:14 AM

[gladly-cheesecake45]

Posted: 8/31/25 at 10:05am

Seb28 said: "All class is taken away from Peron. Height is not enough. The energy this scene gives me is that he is a little, insecure, unstable boy who feels the need to take off his shirt,who is then being comforted by his dominant mother, the sm dominatrix Eva.

While at this point in the story, Eva has different plans. Eva acting politically submissive for the first time is what this scene needs. Here she should pretendtoplaydemure and submissive versus the "hooker in charge" she played in all scenes before (Good night and thank you, I'll be surprisingly good for you, etc). That is the reason why this scene exists.

Of course the audience is not going to understand the meaning of this scene, their relationship, her character arc and growthand the psychological and political purposes. It's like it's being directed by a 12-year old."

I definitely understand this perspective, but I’m not sure if I’ve ever read this number as requiring Eva to be demure or submissive (maybe due in part to how intense her parts of the score are). Her lyrics exalt Perón and present herself as humble, of course, but with the purpose of whipping up a frenzy and promising a remade world, which requires her to take center stage with her charm offensive on full display under the guise of a greater purpose (a precursor to the false humility in DCFMA). They represent the imposition of fascism in different ways, with Perón ordering physical violence and deception while Eva promotes the seductive, cultlike mindset of a leader (her husband) as an infallible savior. I think both of these are essential to making the number work, and it’s one of the reasons I like this staging so much — the couple seem so driven and unprincipled behind-the-scenes (Perón’s willingness to give up especially stood out to me here — while Eva commits herself wholly to the platform because it’s the most likely to secure them power, he would surrender his care for the people if presented with an easy way out), but you have the queasy dread about what’s to come literally drowned out by nationalist confetti. I’d probably find it more confusing if Eva took a backseat in the blocking, but like many Jamie Lloyd choices, I can also easily acknowledge that the aspects of his direction that made this musical click for me in a way it hadn’t before are the exact things that make it unenjoyable for others. 

Updated On: 8/31/25 at 10:05 AM

[Birdie Boy]

Posted: 8/31/25 at 10:27am

Given the political climate in the country, the last thing people want is Evita.  Just like Tammy Faye, we do t want this. 

[Seb28]

Posted: 8/31/25 at 11:00am

gladly-cheesecake45 said: "I definitely understand this perspective, but I’m not sure if I’ve ever read this number as requiring Eva to be demure or submissive (maybe due in part to how intense her parts of the score are). Her lyrics exalt Perón and present herself as humble, of course...

..charm offensive on full display under the guise of a greater purpose..

..I can also easily acknowledge that the aspects of his direction that made this musical click for me in a way it hadn’t before are the exact things that make it unenjoyable for others."

Thanks for your reply! You explain it even better than I did. The demure, submissive, supporting, humble part is indeed an insincere act of hers, for the greater purpose. Especially because of the criticism Eva received, people called her a low class, golddigger, h**ker basically, which is also in the lyrics of the show.

The purpose is indeed to exalt Peron and to make herself look like the supporting and humble partner. Not to make the role sincerely feel like that, but to make the role feel like a cunning woman who presents herself like that in that moment because she has a plan. She doesn't just want the people to vote for Peron, she also wants them to change their minds about her.

They carefully carry out this plan together. They are actually very principled and driven about their plan. The last thing they would want is to confirm the prejudice the people have about her.

Which is what the new version does.

It doesn't make any sense. She is not trying to be the savior here. The point is to exalt Peron and call herself a saved victim.

Which is in the lyrics. This is essential to make the number work. This is the moment where she can not play seduction or domination.

Updated On: 8/31/25 at 11:00 AM

[SteveSanders]

Posted: 8/31/25 at 11:19am

Birdie Boy said: "Given the political climate in the country, the last thing people want is Evita. Just like Tammy Faye, we do t want this."

Of the 340+ million people living in America, I imagine a fair percentage of them visiting NYC will be just fine with Evita on Broadway as will visitors from abroad, even if they are a declining n umber at the moment.

 

Updated On: 8/31/25 at 11:19 AM

[binau]

Posted: 8/31/25 at 11:30am

Birdie Boy said: "Yes of course. I think some of the more “edgy” or artsy fartsy shows wouldn’t do as well in NewYork. I think more traditional musicals like Benjamin Button or Two Strangers have a chance."

You think Two Strangers and Benjamin Button, both west end flops, would do better in NYC than the known property of Evita with the current hottest theatre director in both NYC and London, a star turn by Rachel Z, proven box office receipts at the palladium? Ok. 
 

[ggersten]

Posted: 8/31/25 at 1:51pm

Seb28 said: "Matt Rogers said: "If people are leaving the theatre with no comprehension of what they saw, that just proves how many absolute morons are currently roaming the face of the earth. This show is not rocket science."

I think JL is the reason why people don't understand it anymore. For example, in "A New Argentina" Eva is a business woman, politically steering the people, convincing them why to vote for Peron, explaining the political benefits, while cunningly playing him, which is brilliantly written, like a psychological thriller. Having her strut around in nothing but a leather Bra and boots with some stomping and dazed street dancers trying to be sexy and cool is not it. Also, Peron doesn't look or behave like a leader at all in that scene. What is the audience supposed to think when they see a submissive half naked boy and a k-pop imitation?

"

How does LuPone wearing a bathrobe communicate Eva's "business woman" and cunning ability better?  

[Seb28]

Posted: 8/31/25 at 6:39pm

ggersten said: "How does LuPone wearing a bathrobe communicate Eva's "business woman" and cunning ability better?"

Good point, this scene is about her act of trying to look simple, basic, one of the people to make them believe she is just like them. In earlier versions they showed it in this way, in later versions they included a more business like costume, the act became more like presenting herself as a modest, hardworking commoner.

The purpose of this scene is that Eva does not confirm the prejudices the people have about her. 

Instead, to exalt Peron and call herself a saved victim. To win over the people.

In the new version she just confirms it which takes away all the tension and flushes the whole plot down the drain.

Updated On: 8/31/25 at 06:39 PM