Variety: How 'Evita' and 'Sunset Blvd.' Made Andrew Lloyd Webber Hot Again

[MezzA101]

Posted: 8/13/25 at 3:01pm

https://variety.com/2025/legit/news/iandrew-lloyd-webbers-comeback-evita-sunset-boulevard-company-name-change-1236487721

[inception]

Posted: 8/13/25 at 3:05pm

Daily Mail: Nicole's hit musical loses producers £4.5million

[bear88]

Posted: 8/14/25 at 1:21am

It’s the Daily Mail, so I am not going to put too much stock in that report, but folks on this board have said that the Sunset Blvd. revival would not recoup so this wouldn’t surprise me. 

When I think about it, the show was a more expensive version of Merrily We Roll Along, with fewer star salaries to pay but a larger budget and an inability to sell out every performance at high prices for its entire run. (That’s a lot to expect for any show.) Sunset opened hot and closed even hotter, but it muddled along for months in between, making a little over a million per week. That was never bad, and I assume it still made money each week even then, but it turned into a limited run because the producers couldn’t find anyone to replace Nicole Scherzinger.

The failure of a buzzy, award-winning show like Sunset Blvd. to recoup is an ominous sign. Without the tax credit, the upcoming Broadway fall season looks awfully slow except for the pair of high-profile revivals.

Am I overreacting to one revival’s somewhat unique issues or is there real reason for concern this time?

[binau]

Posted: 8/14/25 at 2:40am

"Am I overreacting to one revival’s somewhat unique issues or is there real reason for concern this time?"

I would say yes and no - it sucks that a show like Sunset couldn't recoup but I think the grosses were a little soft at times and of course the costs these days are too high so they can't have both at the same time. However, had it been a sell out hit for the entire run and a cultural phenomena it would have probably recouped - so at least it's theoretically possible for it to make money. I would be much more concerned if the show was sold out every day and it still didn't recoup. The way that people such as myself raved about the show, I think we think it should have probably been reflected in stronger box office numbers and it just wasn't. Oh well. 

I think what worries me more is there seems to be shows that we have to be honest with ourselves seem like they will never make money from the start. For example, Gypsy, Cabaret. The economics are so obviously broken that I don't think we can even pretend anymore that some of these shows have a path to recoupment. If the investors understand what is going on and no one pretends otherwise then great, but I suspect that shows need to at least give some hope to investors or they will be less likely to invest. 

The other thing I'll say is though, we have been worrying about the state of Broadway economics for a long time. Despite this, we still continue to see quality work time and time again so I continue to be pleasantly surprised. I still maintain that New York is the highest quality musical theatre in the entire world, including above London. When I stop saying this, when I don't want to waste my money anymore (and at these prices the day could come eventually, then I will be truly disappointed. 

I do find it a little concerning the new musicals next season seem so poor compared to the amazing lineup we just had. But it's only ever possible to look at trends across several seasons because sometimes it just happens this way. 

---

RE: The variety topic at hand, it's funny how ALW finds a way to give Jamie Lloyd shade:

f course, Lloyd Webber, who likens the “Cats” film to a “horror movie,” isn’t shy about voicing his opinions and disagreements. He praises the London production of “Evita” — particularly Zegler’s handling of the famously difficult central role, calling her “extraordinary.” However, he felt the show was initially “too loud,” and he pushed Lloyd to lower the volume. He also has clearly absorbed some of the criticism of that production as favoring style over substance.

“The feedback that I am getting is that the young are absolutely loving it,” Lloyd Webber says, “but they like the overall feel of the evening — they don’t really follow the story.”

If “Evita” transfers to Broadway, does Lloyd Webber want the production to make the story of Perón’s dramatic rise to power clearer? “Jamie Lloyd is Jamie Lloyd,” he answers with a flicker of annoyance.

Lloyd was originally announced as the director of “The Illusionist.” However, Lloyd Webber now says that “it’s much too early” to decide who will direct the show. “With a new work, it needs to be someone I’m comfortable with,” he says.

Their close collaboration seems to have become strained, at least temporarily. Still, Lloyd’s version of “Evita” was such a smash that the original plan was to bring it to Broadway in 2027, and there was also talk of taking “The Illusionist” to New York after it debuts in London. That may no longer be possible, Lloyd Webber says, because of the high cost of mounting Broadway musicals. Audiences, especially tourists, aren’t always open to checking out shows that aren’t based on popular movies. Moreover, news broke recently that a tax credit program that helped Broadway come back from COVID by providing shows with millions of dollars in subsidies is running out of funding. Lloyd Webber now thinks transferring productions to Broadway may be untenable.

---

To this I think:

1. I was sitting in the first preview of Evita and sitting near ALW - he is right he show is LOUD but I thought he would have personally loved it because one of the loudest moments was the orchestra crescendo in "don't cry for me Argentina". I guess I was wrong about that.

2. Up until now I thought wow look at how great ALW is at giving the reigns over to new directors who can showcase his work, but it's clear from this statement that ALW is actually just ALW. I would honestly suggest to him to park his ego and just trust in Jamie Lloyd - he has finally found someone who can make his work 'cool', 'edgy', appeal to a wider audience. He should accept and embrace this - anyone that saw Cinderella can see what happens when ALW is the one really in charge. 

[SteveSanders]

Posted: 8/14/25 at 5:49am

I'm not sure I would characterize ALW echoing/voicing audience feedback as "giving shade" unless only banal positive platitudes are expected all the time. 

One could. make the case it is somewhat refreshing for him to not simply spout banal positive platitudes.  Patti LuPone is heralded by many for doing so.

Updated On: 8/14/25 at 05:49 AM

[inception]

Posted: 8/14/25 at 9:42am

I think people with money have been living in a bit of a bubble as they haven't been as affected by the economy as quickly as regular people. So now when there are news stories about things like Las Vegas tourism down 10% the number crunchers are suddenly getting whiplash.  These people don't do their own grocery shopping.  They haven't noticed that at the grocery store a 907g bag of coffee beans has doubled in price.  Here even a tub of Flogers or Maxwell House ground coffee is now over $20CAN.  That's just the one item that stood out to me last weekend.

I don't think average people can afford a lot of extras these days.

Updated On: 8/14/25 at 09:42 AM

[BorisTomashevsky]

Posted: 8/14/25 at 10:05am

It sounds like ALW has come around to see Jamie for the Emperor in New Clothes that he is. 

[Wick3]

Posted: 8/14/25 at 10:08am

bear88 said: "It’s the Daily Mail, so I am not going to put too much stock in that report, but folks on this board have said that theSunset Blvd. revival would not recoup so this wouldn’t surprise me.

When I think about it, the show was a more expensive version ofMerrily We Roll Along, with fewer star salaries to pay but a larger budget and an inability to sell out every performance at high prices for its entire run. (That’s a lot to expect for any show.)Sunsetopened hot and closed even hotter, but it muddled along for months in between, making a little over a million per week. That was never bad, and I assume it still made money each week even then, but it turned into a limited run because the producers couldn’t find anyone to replace Nicole Scherzinger.

The failure of a buzzy, award-winning show likeSunset Blvd. to recoup is an ominous sign. Without the tax credit, the upcoming Broadway fall season looks awfully slow except for the pair of high-profile revivals.

Am I overreacting to one revival’s somewhat unique issues or is there real reason for concern this time?"

That’s a good comparison with Merrily since that production also came from the West End. The St James theater (Sunset Blvd) is almost double the capacity of by the Hudson theater (Merrily) yet Merrily recouped. 
I do think Daniel Radcliffe is a bigger name than Nicole Scherzinger though in terms of tickets.

Either way perhaps Nicole was overpaid? Did sunset Blvd really need to bring Tom Francis, Grace Hodgett Young, and David Thaxton over to NYC from London? Who knows but I’m glad investors got this show to Broadway.

[KrupYou]

Posted: 8/14/25 at 5:13pm

great feature. i am happy for ALW. 

[BJR]

Posted: 8/14/25 at 6:55pm

binau said: "2. Up until now I thought wow look at how great ALW is at giving the reigns over to new directors who can showcase his work, but it's clear from this statement that ALW is actually just ALW. I would honestly suggest to him to park his ego and just trust in Jamie Lloyd - he has finally found someone who can make his work 'cool', 'edgy', appeal to a wider audience. He should accept and embrace this - anyone that saw Cinderella can see what happens when ALW is the one really in charge."

That was my takeaway, too. Someone doesn't suddenly go from being pretty middlebrow in their production tastes to all this overnight. So, it would make sense if he's both happy and uncertain about some of these new takes. And it's been notable he's spoken about JELLICLE the same way: it's the response he finds undeniable.

I was surprised in that article to read the plan to transfer EVITA as only the "original" plan. Bway has been very hard lately, but I wouldve thought that show a more sure commercial bet. And I'm surprised to hear it's a maybe.

[binau]

Posted: 8/15/25 at 2:53am

If Evita does not transfer, in my opinion it would be a shining unfortunate example of what Broadway economics has come to. Pre-COVID this production would 100% transferred without question in my opinion. I still think it will. The numbers in London are too good, and Rachel Z's reception is too good. I think someone can convince someone somewhere to throw money into it. Would be nice if ALW could help with some of the PR if they are courting investors, "Jamie Lloyd being Jamie Lloyd" is not exactly a phrase that inspires a lot of confidence...

[OhHiii]

Posted: 8/15/25 at 5:16am

The fact is, shows lose money like this every single season year in and year out. Prognosticating on the state or broadway finances based on this one production is silly. Revivals are notoriously hard to recoup. And I imagine that Sunset’s expenses beyond what regular shows incur (the walk permitting to close the street, etc) proved to be expensive. Interesting to me that Jamie Lloyd put his own money into it. Rule #1 of lead producing has always been to produce with other people’s money, not your own. 

It’s undeniable the show was a hit culturally, so the original article about making ALW hot again is 100% accurate. Cattily posting a non-recoupment article doesn’t change that.

[inception]

Posted: 8/15/25 at 7:54am

He was hot for 10 minutes. 

Sunset Boulevard? 

That show has closed up shop

The actors washed their feet

And called it Angel Street.

[BJR]

Posted: 8/15/25 at 12:56pm

OhHiii said: "Interesting to me that Jamie Lloyd put his own money into it. Rule #1 of lead producing has always been to produce with other people’s money, not your own."

Are we sure he did? I read that line about $4 million being his share as either putting in his own money (for which $4 million as a theatre director would be a lot), or that was his share as a producer (since his company co-produced with LWHM).