No, no, no, no, no! Regent’s Park Open Air Theatre, what are you doing?! You are a place for magic, not grunge, grime and grit!
This is yet another production of concrete, scaffolding and microphones - think the recent productions of Our Town, A Tale of Two Cities and Jesus Christ Superstar. In terms of their sets, they are basically the same. There is no imagination, creativity or flair. Designers, you have an incredible space to work with, so use it! In this production, the stage was just filled with rows of concrete steps/levels so that it looked basically like the mirror image of the amphitheatre auditorium, albeit without the seating. It’s stark, cold and, quite frankly, dull. I remember Into The Woods, where Judi Dench was a mechanical giant who came out of the trees - where has the magic gone?!
And what is this current obsession with blinding the audience with lights that shine out from the stage? Between each concrete layer there is basically a row of headlights which, during various numbers, shine out directly into the audience. On stage you are under lights, but you are not looking directly at them. As an audience member who is looking at the stage, when these lights come up and shine directly at you, your choice is to either be blinded by them or look away. Bright lights trigger my migraines, so I have no choice but to look away. And, in one scene, the lights remained up through the fairly lengthy applause, forcing me to put my hands over my eyes, even though I was looking away! I realise that I am in a minority when it comes to my light sensitivity, and I am used to looking away when lighting is bright, but the level and duration in this production was just too much.
Speaking of too much, there is way too much smoke used in this production. The flares for Evita’s death and Peron’s election were effective, but the almost continuous smoke machine added nothing. It only served to obscure what was happening on stage, because outside you cannot control the environment, and suffocate the audience. Unless the level of smoke is reduced, I would be incredibly concerned about audience members with asthma and a warning needs to be provided - I don’t have asthma and the level of smoke made me cough. And, whilst the use of the flairs was effective, I don’t appreciate having to wash my clothes after going to the theatre because they smell of smoke.
Ok, so enough about the set and lighting. What about the performances? The star of this show, for me, was Frances Mayli McCann as The Mistress. She was sensational and had an amazing voice. Her number ‘Another Suitcase In Another Hall’ was, by far, the best thing in this production.
Samantha Pauly’s Eva Peron was a hateful character, her voice doesn’t make the numbers seem completely effortless, and there was absolutely no character development. There was no sense that, at the start of the show, she was a child, suffered hardship and injustice, and then became a woman. She started out as a horrible, bitter, vengeful person and remained that way throughout. And that characterisation is, to my mind, not only completely wrong, but totally at odds with the journey that the show portrays. The sentiment of the songs in the second act seemed so discordant with the characterisation and, in every other production of Evita that I have seen, you are sad when she is dying. Yes, terrible things happened under Peron, but Eva was a child who clawed her way to the top and made awful mistakes as a result of the chip on her shoulder from the way that she had been treated. You have sympathy for her; she had a terrible start in life and that influenced how she acted. I haven’t seen a suggestion that she was a nasty, scheming, Machiavellian mastermind when she was 15 and first went to Buenos Aires! Her death is sad because, for all the terrible things that happened, there was some good too. In this production, however, her death is a relief - the world is now rid of a truly horrible woman. I concede that I probably haven’t read as many biographies and historical texts as the director but, even if Eva Peron truly was a horrible woman, that characterisation seems at odds with the core of the show. ‘Don’t Cry For Me Argentina’ is a heartfelt plea to her people who she has fought for and who she cares for, because she sees herself as one of them despite the journey she has made. In this production, it is completely false and fake, and suggests that Eva Peron cares nothing for her ‘descamisados’ and has just used them as a means to an end. I’m not sure that that was entirely true. I am all for new interpretations, but not when they seem to fly in the face of the substantive elements of the show (or history).
Ektor Rivera’s Peron seemed a little wet and pathetic, and you didn’t quite believe that he was ruthless enough to pay someone to take out his opponents. The lack of age disparity between him and Pauly did not reflect the real life age disparity between Eva and Peron, and no hint or suggestion was even made of it, which then made his political party’s dislike of Eva rather bewildering.
Trent Saunders’ Che was a little reminiscent of Judas from Jesus Christ Superstar, combined with Sean Walsh! Unfortunately his voice wasn’t that great, and there was no real chemistry between him and Pauly’s Eva; only detest, loathing and snarking. Not that they have a great romance or anything like that, but there is usually a spark. I pay him absolute tribute though for laying on stage in his boxers, covered by goo and confetti, for about 20 minutes. It can’t be comfortable, and it would be pretty chilly on cooler evenings. It was, however, reminiscent of the crucifixion in the production of Jesus Christ Superstar here - if I hadn’t looked it up, I would have sworn that the two shows had the same director!
This production may as well have been a concert version for all the characterisation and action that took place - it was more or less one in any event! - and the use of the handheld microphones drove me crazy. They added nothing to sound quality or volume, which could have symbolised one person/their voice being more powerful than others. They were basically just props, and were incredibly reminiscent of Jesus’ bonds in Jesus Christ Superstar. The use of balloons in ‘The Art of the Possible’ to signify the death of opponents was clever, but Eva’s balloon dress in ‘Don’t Cry For Me Argentina’ had more than a few audience members laughing and raising an eyebrow. Not the intended reaction I suspect, and it really didn’t seem to add anything. And I really hope that all the confetti used is biodegradable!
I felt quite angry after seeing this show - I’m getting a lot more particular in my opinions in my old age! - but, on reflection, I think it’s more disappointment. The Open Air Theatre is an incredible space to work with but, recently, productions are just not taking advantage of it. Into The Woods, Seven Brides for Seven Brothers, Crazy For You, J.M. Barrie’s Peter Pan, The Sound of Music, To Kill a Mockingbird, are all past productions that had the wow factor. We’re going back a few years now though. Recent productions I’ve seen just haven’t compared. Maybe I’m seeing the wrong ones!
I said to someone before I saw this show that it was hard to mess up Evita because it is so iconic. I was wrong. The music of Evita is some of the most well known in musical theatre and you can leave a theatre singing it. I know the music extremely well, but it really didn’t shine or make much of an impact in this production: I’m not sure people who are new to this show would think much of it. I’ve been listening to the show today, and the production I see in my mind’s eye when I hear the music is the London production that I saw 13 yeas ago; not this one.
This show is only just into previews, so things could change, but I think it’s the fundamental character and direction of this production that I found so disappointing, and that isn’t something preview tweaks are going to change.
If you love Evita no matter what, you can probably accept and enjoy this production. If you’re new to the show, you can probably accept and enjoy this production - this will be your only experience of the show, but the second act may confuse you given that it contradicts the characterisation of the first. Traditionalists will be disappointed. And for regular theatre goers and theatre lovers like me, I think that this will be marmite. Ironically, I like marmite…