joevitus said: "shocktheatre said: "Re: lLiza as Evita in a Ken Russell film version
What I've always heard is that she agreed to a screen test for Russell, and he was blown away. When Stigwood (and possibly Weber) would not budge on her casting (for some reason they were hell bent on Elaine Paige, who had never headlined a major film), Russell walked away from the project.
A true lost opportunity. Nothing against the Madonna/Alan Parker film, but its too bad this didn't work out for Liza, much like the aborted Minnelli/Goldie Hawn/Frank Sinatra film version of Chicago, which was discussed for a very long time.
I've been asking for YEARS if anyone has that screen test footage. I've never seen it resurface. Kind of strange, esp. nowadays when there is so much rare stuff on YouTube."
The Madonna Evita is one of the worst movie adaptations ever.
To me, it makes perfect sense Stigwood and Rice wanted Elaine Paige, and she might have been amazing. This is a major star in Britain recreating her biggest role. That she'd never had a movie lead really doesn't mean much.
But I will say Ken Russell was an amazing director at his peak, and his vision of Evita might have been really something. I can't see Liza in the role, but that doesn't mean she couldn't do it. Her voice seems wrong for the part, to me, though, and like Madonna, Liza isn't a dancer, and this is a role for which one should be able to dance."
I do agree with you that the Alan Parker/Madonna film of "Evita" was not a good film - but I feel it was because Madonna was out of her depth in the role.
I just can't see Liza as "Evita" either as her voice is completely wrong for the role and I am betting that is exactly the reason why Webber and Rice vetoed her casting.
You completely lost me with: "and like Madonna, Liza isn't a dancer, and this is a role for which one should be able to dance."
I wouldn't know where to begin in trying to explain to you just how many, many, many things are so wrong in that one statement.
Updated On: 8/18/22 at 06:57 PM