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

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.

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

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.

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 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.

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

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

Jordan did you review Bella?

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 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

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

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 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