|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2019 18:49:08 GMT
I think that review might even convince @remark to book for this? 😉 Certainly a very passionate review, but a veritable dealbreaker for the following reason... ...Evita is the X factor and TOWIE, she is will-to-power Madonna, she is fake news...Pauly is so X factor... Unless she's getting blown up in a horrific scene of brutal mess I'm out. There is a chance I'd enjoy the overall ride but 'sass' and centennial attitude do nothing for me other than enrage me. I can't think of anything more painful than spending 2 hours forced to watch someone flaunt about with the brass of Little Mix. I'll stay in my cupboard for this one. Or were you being sarcastic? haha. |
|
19,657 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Aug 8, 2019 19:12:11 GMT
I think that review might even convince @remark to book for this? 😉 Certainly a very passionate review, but a veritable dealbreaker for the following reason... ...Evita is the X factor and TOWIE, she is will-to-power Madonna, she is fake news...Pauly is so X factor... Unless she's getting blown up in a horrific scene of brutal mess I'm out. There is a chance I'd enjoy the overall ride but 'sass' and centennial attitude do nothing for me other than enrage me. I can't think of anything more painful than spending 2 hours forced to watch someone flaunt about with the brass of Little Mix. I'll stay in my cupboard for this one. Or were you being sarcastic? haha. No, not at all. |
|
376 posts
|
Post by hitmewithurbethshot on Aug 9, 2019 0:24:28 GMT
When I asked Marsha she only confirmed the extra matinees as her scheduled performances
|
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Aug 9, 2019 9:51:58 GMT
Thank goodness, press embargo over, I can speak... GO!!!!!!!!!!! This is magnificent, stunning, fabulous, unexpected, rule-breaking, passionate, crazy, and very, very Argentinian. Sad that they cut the balloon dress, as I thought that was inspired, but there are so many scenes that made me gasp, "oh, of course that is how to do it." It did take me until half way through the second half to really "read" what they were trying to do, but then "Rainbow Tour" made the whole thing snap instantly into place and made sense of everything in a massive "sugar rush." And the final tableau was utterly, utterly brilliant. Otherwise, I quite liked the show, and there's a bit on my site about it, too. The other press reviews seem positive too. Not quite the glowing reviews Michael Grandage's production got, but very good nonetheless. Excited to judge for myself tomorrow. Incidentally, Time Out's reviewer claims that this production has ditched 'filler number clogging the score'. Is this really true or has this reviewer made that up? The show is short enough as it is without them ditching anything within it, and I can't imagine Really Useful's licensing department allowing that... |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 9, 2019 9:59:23 GMT
Is 'You Must Love Me' included in this production?
Edit. I see you just mentioned it!
|
|
|
|
Post by theatre241 on Aug 9, 2019 10:09:50 GMT
So sad a s I dont think I will be able to see this one. I think its selling pretty well so do you think they will do something similar to JSC after?
|
|
543 posts
|
Post by freckles on Aug 9, 2019 11:34:13 GMT
Sad that they cut the balloon dress, as I thought that was inspired... On a gusty day like today, it may have been a hazard! |
|
607 posts
|
Post by chernjam on Aug 9, 2019 15:22:19 GMT
Its really cool to read how ALW's works are being re-imagined by new creative teams that, as Dom pointed out, he has nothing to do with. I get that with original productions, it's important for them to work together. But for revivals, it's really interesting to see them have freedom to take things in a different direction.
|
|
202 posts
|
Post by harry on Aug 9, 2019 15:25:32 GMT
Classic wuss-question. Lots of mention here and in reviews of pyrotechnics etc. Are they very loud/unexpected? I like a big old firework display as much as the next man where I can sort of tell when the noise is coming, but I hate constantly being on edge that something might go bang without warning at any moment and being made jump. How do you think I'll get on with this production?...
Thanks!
|
|
7,052 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jon on Aug 9, 2019 16:21:21 GMT
Its really cool to read how ALW's works are being re-imagined by new creative teams that, as Dom pointed out, he has nothing to do with. I get that with original productions, it's important for them to work together. But for revivals, it's really interesting to see them have freedom to take things in a different direction. I think that apply to most revivals, I don't mind creatives having a say but I do think some creatives and their estates are adamant that any revival have to retain elements from the original production like West Side Story and A Chorus Line which IMO hinders a show rather than helps it. |
|
202 posts
|
Post by harry on Aug 10, 2019 5:53:13 GMT
Are they very loud/unexpected Yes, both. You will figure out a few times - one point where there are a couple of women very obviously poised to release confetti cannons. Other times, they will be unexpected. You could contact the theatre's access helpline openairtheatre.com/accessibility and get advice there. Thanks. I’m sure I’ll cope. I might try the accessibility line if I’m feeling nervous next week and see what they say - I find I’m much calmer when forewarned. On which note any info you can remember and would share in spoiler tags (like if you remember some moments/songs and the sort of loud effect such as confetti cannon/explosion/pyro flash etc. to be ready for) I’d appreciate it. But no worries if not. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2019 8:59:32 GMT
Thank goodness, press embargo over, I can speak... GO!!!!!!!!!!! This is magnificent, stunning, fabulous, unexpected, rule-breaking, passionate, crazy, and very, very Argentinian. Sad that they cut the balloon dress, as I thought that was inspired, but there are so many scenes that made me gasp, "oh, of course that is how to do it." It did take me until half way through the second half to really "read" what they were trying to do, but then "Rainbow Tour" made the whole thing snap instantly into place and made sense of everything in a massive "sugar rush." And the final tableau was utterly, utterly brilliant. Otherwise, I quite liked the show, and there's a bit on my site about it, too. Hurrah! So glad has got the official monkey seal of approval! Agree the first time i went it took me a while to 'get' it. But by that final scene - indeed, was utterly brilliant. |
|
637 posts
|
Post by AddisonMizner on Aug 10, 2019 17:51:23 GMT
Really upset that I’m not going to get chance to see this now, and wish I’d booked when it was first announced. I’m always reluctant with Regent’s Park because of the weather, and having to travel to London from Nottingham, I didn’t want to risk the performance being cancelled.
What do we think the chances are of it being revived, or doing something similar to JCS (which I am seeing next week, and really excited for)?
|
|
19,657 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Aug 10, 2019 18:18:26 GMT
Rain forecast for when I’m there next week 😟
|
|
2,242 posts
|
Post by richey on Aug 10, 2019 19:08:03 GMT
Rain forecast for when I’m there next week 😟 thunderstorms for Wednesday when I'm there |
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Aug 10, 2019 20:53:38 GMT
I really wanted to like this production, having thrilled to Regent Park’s Jesus Christ Superstar, which I thought was as close to a definitive production of that show as we’re ever likely to get. But I don’t think this production works. Jamie Lloyd has some interesting ideas, but they do not cohere as whole. The worst thing about this production, for me, is that it exposes flaws of the piece (which I have a huge affection for; it’s one of my all-time favourites) that I hadn’t appreciated were there, because Hal Prince and Michael Grandage had so cleverly concealed them. In fact, it’s taken this production to make me realise that both the directors of those previous superb productions had to do a lot of work not only to ‘join the dots’ of this show, as it were, that might have otherwise been filled by the absent book, but also to create drama out of material that, if not served well, comes across only as an episodic and disconnected. Putting my main thoughts as 'Spoilers' just in case... {Spoiler - click to view}
The idea of turning Evita into a ‘Make Argentina Great Again’ rally to reflect our times is definitely an avenue worth exploring, but the execution (the constant pyrotechnics, showers of confetti, balloons, poms poms and strobe lighting effects, all of which quickly become tiresome through overuse) isn’t successful. I’m not sure we needed Jamie Lloyd to make so explicit what were always obvious parallels anyway. The main problem with the concept is that it robs the piece of its time-and-place historical specificity; after all, this is a show about a particular historical figure in a particular country during a particular time, not just a show about populism in general. If you were a first-timer to Evita, you wouldn’t have a clue what was going on or where and when any scene was set. I felt this was playing to a ‘knowing’ audience already familiar with the story and the material; the appearance of the famous white dress at the end, after Eva’s death, seemed to confirm this sense of ‘nod-nod’/’wink-wink’.
We are left with no understanding of why the Peróns were able to seduce a nation. All the characters, including Eva, come across as thoroughly unlikeable. The original Broadway production was fairly ‘anti’-Evita, but Patti LuPone astutely realised that the need to make audience like or at least respect Eva (it often works well if the audience gets suckered by the propaganda itself); otherwise, the audience is baffled as to how this person became the myth she did. Here, though, Samantha Pauly’s Eva is never really more than a cold, sneering, self-entitled, petulant brat (even before she gets to Buenos Aires). We come close to getting something more than this when we near her death in the second act, but by then it is too late, because she’s dead five minutes later. Elaine Paige and Elena Roger both communicated what drove their respective Evitas and why they made the choices they made. But we never understand what drives this Eva and never feel any sympathy towards her. On Eva being sympathetic, this production has made a clear choice to revert back to the ‘mito negro’: Eva is a social climbing whore – end of story; and Perón is a fascist despot – end of story. These cardboard stock myths don’t really work any more in 2019, when we know more about Argentina and should be able to handle its ambivalent icons with more nuance.
Another problem is that Che has barely anything to do during the whole show. If you have a bad Che or a Che who is not directed, then the show can fall apart. This is what happened in the most recent Broadway revival; either Ricky Martin ignored or was not given any direction, so Elena Roger had nothing to act against, and any drama was removed. By contrast, get an angry, passionate Che like Mandy Patinkin or even Antonio Banderas, and you do get conflict and drama. Unfortunately, Trenton Saunders is never more than a passive observer, with barely any blocking. You often forget he’s there. There were several scenes, such as the ‘Waltz’ number, with just him and Samantha Pauly sitting on the steps of the set singing the songs to the audience, and not doing anything. Similarly, in ‘Surprisingly’, Eva and Perón just look at each other, but without any kind of chemistry or attraction, while a couple of dancers distract the audience during the instrumental section. There basically isn’t enough action. Without this, the show basically becomes a rock concert and nothing more. Why, for instance, were the mourners from the ‘Requiem’ still sitting there in mourning during the scenes in Junín? Why does Eva just stand and watch the Mistress deliver ‘Another suitcase’ when she really ought to have dismissed her and got to work on seducing Perón?
The (often non-existent) visuals often seemed to ignore or contradict the material. What does Magaldi mean here any he says Eva’s act hasn’t changed? She’s not with another man at the time or doing anything else typical of her; she’s just standing there, alone. The absent costumes changes means the audience doesn’t see Eva getting any richer or advancing in her career or through the social ranks during ‘Goodnight and Thank You’ – so what is her end of the transaction she makes with each of those men? Eva doesn’t ‘seem to lose interest’ when in France during the Rainbow Tour; she seems much the same. And she’s certainly not dressed up to the nines (or sixes or sevens) during ‘Don’t Cry for Me’.
It felt like Jamie Lloyd had a million ideas that he wanted to experiment with, but tried shoving them all in and decided to see what would happen. There some nice touches among those ideas. Even if it didn’t beat Hal Prince’s musical chairs, the staging of ‘The Art of the Possible’ was clever and inspired. Eva ‘silencing’ the dissenting Che by snatching away his microphone was powerful. Getting to see Eva’s furious reaction to her own death announcement (I like the fact they used the actual text of the real announcement from 1952) was arresting. But there weren’t enough of these that cohered throughout the show. The scene placement sometimes didn’t help. ‘You Must Love Me’ now immediately follows the second ‘Dice Are Rolling’. This means that straight after Eva asks Perón ‘Where am I going to?’, Eva then repeats her question (the first line of ‘You Must Love Me’ being ‘Where do we go from here?’), even though Perón has just told her with some finality, ‘Don’t ask any more’.
The performers are all exceptional, but I don’t think the casting was quite right. Adam Pearce pulled off his creepy Magaldi, but I don’t think the youthful (and certainly talented) Ektor Rivera came across as a convincing Perón. There’s an 18-piece orchestra but somehow it seemed tinny, particular during ‘Buenos Aires’. It didn’t seem powerful enough during what should be rousing numbers like ‘A New Argentina’. Despite the above, and despite the heavy downpour during ‘A New Argentina’ (which carried on regardless, before an extended interval to wait for the rain to clear), the audience did seem to like it. Mostly baby boomers who seemed familiar with the concept album, some of whom rose from their seats to give a standing ovation, even at a matinée. I’d say if you know Evita, go and see it so you can talk about it. Don’t expect a definitive production that knows what it wants to get across. If you don’t know Evita, it would help a lot to get familiar with the material and the history first. Finally, I just want to add that Michael Coveney’s article in the programme irritated me given that it was riddled with errors – and as a long-time Rice/Lloyd Webber sycophant biographer, he should know better. No, Tim Rice did not catch the end of the Queen of Hearts documentary. He caught the end of a radio show. He saw the Queen of Hearts documentary later on. No, David Cullen did not orchestrate the concept album. I don’t think he was in the ALW universe then. And no, Mary Main’s biography of Eva Perón is not “definitive”. It’s now widely discredited. I doubt any one else cares, but I was surprised at the laziness of the journalism; it’s not as if there isn’t a wealth of material on this show out there. |
|
4,171 posts
|
Post by anthony40 on Aug 10, 2019 21:28:08 GMT
Rain forecast for when I’m there next week 😟 It's one of the reasons that, despite it being relatively close to where I live- I rarely attend this venue. Ant (that's me) don't walk in the rain, let alone pay good money to sit in it and watch actors- regardless how good they are- perform against the elements |
|
|
|
Post by theoracle on Aug 10, 2019 21:45:18 GMT
Got my ticket today for September. Looking forward to this. Row E central stalls. Have there been standing ovations each night so far?
|
|
1,053 posts
|
Post by David J on Aug 10, 2019 22:07:28 GMT
Okay I was enthralled by the energy of the first act but during the second act i remembered how much of a style-over-substance director Jamie Lloyd is
Scarpia sums up the things that nagged at me. The production kind of lost me when Che was stripped and the montage after Eva’s death. I vaguely remember the ending in the Kenwright tour but still it was moments like these that needed clarity
I think the narrative Lloyd was going for was Eva and Che one-upping each other. They certainly spent a lot of the time onstage giving each other knowing glances. Che trying to show her that she did nothing for Argentina and Eva showing how she had everything and was adored. Eva struts around basking in her brief glory whilst Che cynically looks on
Don’t Cry for me Argentina, for me, felt flat. Nicely sung and when you get to see Eva in her dress and wig at the end the point is made. But the costume did nothing for me and sitting at the front I wished she didn’t have the microphone so I could see her face putting on the image of Argentina’s saint
I did enjoy the performances. Samantha Paula is quite the power house and Mandy Patinkin was superb as Che. And watching the big ensemble numbers was a joy
In a lot of respects a step up from the BK production. It just needed more context and clarity and it could be an awesome production
|
|
1,928 posts
|
Post by LaLuPone on Aug 10, 2019 22:25:52 GMT
and Mandy Patinkin was superb as Che.  |
|
1,053 posts
|
Post by David J on Aug 10, 2019 23:10:22 GMT
Sorry, Trent Saunders. Took the wrong name from Scarpias post
|
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Aug 10, 2019 23:19:39 GMT
Yes, I think 'style over substance' or indeed 'gimmicky' is how I would describe it.
Another example of how the direction doesn't serve the text that I recall is just after DCFMA. 'Just listen to that!', Eva exclaims. 'The voice of Argentina! We are adored, we are loved!'...
...Except there were no cheering/screaming descamisados. Not a single cheer after the song or even the sense that anyone was watching her make that speech in that skimpy costume.
I was happy, though, to have the 'But your despicable class is dead!' line and the harp death theme after 'Surprisingly' restored. Neither appeared in the 2006 revival.
|
|
134 posts
|
Post by Joseph Buquet on Aug 11, 2019 8:29:35 GMT
I couldn’t tell you whether or not the harp death theme has been restored, but this production certainly worked for me. This is Evita for 2019, reimagined. Fresh, modern, exciting, and visually totally different to the Evita we are used to - but with reference to the ‘real’ Evita in the final seconds, which brought everything together beautifully.
Jamie Lloyd has decided on his concept and stuck to it. To say that the piece lacks historical specificity is, I feel, missing the point. If you’re expecting a history lesson of the era, this probably isn’t the production for you. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect a certain level of prior knowledge - especially for such a well-known musical. The Adelphi revival left me fairly cold. I’m sure that was partly because the night I saw it, Elena Roger’s alternate was on - and (although she was excellent) in a production which was selling itself on having an Argentinian Eva, that wasn’t ideal. But also because I found it a very literal production, which - Latin orchestrations aside - did little for me. Though I know many people disagree!
One thing I would say is that whilst her voice was good, I didn’t find Samantha Pauly the strongest singer - a bit lacking in control at times, and with the potential to border on shrill. I did wonder whether Marsha Songcombe will sing the part better. But these slight vocal concerns were a small price to pay for Samantha’s portrayal of a ruthless, self-assured, determined Evita who will do whatever it takes to get where she wants to be.
The production is certainly bold and I can see why it would be polarising - but a definite thumbs up from me.
|
|
|
|
Post by xanady on Aug 11, 2019 8:45:01 GMT
The latest weather forecasts for rest of August in south-east don’t look at all good..oh dear!
Scheduled a visit at very end of month.Think I’ll take me wellie boots lol.
|
|
|
|
Post by d'James on Aug 11, 2019 9:47:12 GMT
I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect a certain level of prior knowledge - especially for such a well-known musical. I think it’s extremely unreasonable. If a piece of theatre relies on your previous knowledge then it isn’t doing its job properly and is excluding people - something which theatre gets accused of a lot anyway. Every piece of theatre should be aimed at the one person who has never seen the show before (be it Shakespeare or Sondheim); not the uber-fans who know every line. If things are not clear, then they haven’t done their job properly. |
|
