Evita

Well I have seen both and I'm sticking to my opinion.

Isn't that a bit too much of a generalization as to who sees which shows? I'm 32. I've seen Guys & Dolls and The Girls. I haven't & won't see Kinky Boots, Dreamgirls, Book of Mormon or Hamilton. You can be (fairly) young & prefer more classic shows.

I agree that the audience for "classic" shows tends to skew older. I guess it just bugs me that it is assumed that younger people prefer "contempory" shows when I don't. Ditto opera. The number of articles I've read saying how opera houses need to do all sorts of innovative productions to attract a younger audience. I've been opera going since I was 18 & I much prefer traditional productions & hate most regietheater.

I'm not so sure about that. I think the argument that older people tend to splurge more and have more to splurge is out of touch with what people do and how much income they generate. Young(er) people could and do earn a lot of money and have substantial disposable income, and are likely to spend it on entertainment. When I say younger, I mean people in their mid-20s to late 40s. 

Interesting discussion. I think the "blockbuster period" mid 80s-mid 90s seemed to attract more young fans and more new people taking an interest in the genre itself, whereas later trends like the jukebox musicals seemed more geared towards middle-aged/older people (who recalled the songs from their own youth). Personally I have been open towards all sorts of musicals, classics as well as modern musicals, but I guess what Ali means (maybe) is that there are a few "modern" musicals (if we use this divider) that attract a huge fan following of younger people who otherwise have no interest in the genre. Rent in the 90s, followed by Wicked, currently Hamilton and the gloriously overhyped Evan Hansen.

And these shows are important to bring fresh blood in. The current "old dears" still grew up with accessible theatre everywhere, but for many younger generations theatre is something that hardly exists. Their entertainment consists of concerts, festivals, movies or just staying in with computer games and Netflix. If you don't manage to pique their interest in theatre-going, there will be fewer and fewer theatre-goers. Yes, many of those who went to see Les Mis and Phantom 100 times in the 90s turned away from the genre some time, but I'm sure there were others like me who matured from seeing Starlight Express 40 times to seeing musicals of all sorts, straight plays, opera and ballet. So yea, I agree that London needs a few fresher shows to attract young people, stuff like Rent, Hamilton or Evan Hansen but perhaps with a more British slant. (God, you Brits do all these fantastic TV shows aimed at young people, like Misfits and Skins, surely you could do something similar on stage?)

I also think that London audiences are way more sceptic than Broadway audiences. There's moaning here that many of the recent new shows weren't great quality-wise. But I find Evan Hansen mediocre and clumsily written yet it sells like hot cakes on B'way. I thought Come From Away is a lovely little show with the heart in the right place, but it's a few people in street clothes on a single set with a few props, I'd never pay Broadway prices for this.

To finally bring this back to Evita: I can see both sides of the argument. I'd rather see something new, fresh and GOOD, but I don't mind these shows coming back either for brief runs. Rather them than stuff like Stomp and Thriller Live clogging up theatres.

Thanks for that   

And yea, I guess the audiences have now aged somewhat here too, with fewer young people discovering musicals as something new to be a fan of...  but then I'm an oldbie now and don't really frequent the places where young people today convene like Twitter and FB Groups.

Yep me to, much preferred kenwrights version to the lazy and dull Grandage revival

Although i find the movie the best version ive seen so far. It just flows better from a story point of view than the stage version

Now I do love the movie...

I don't hate the Kenwright production by any means. I reviewed it several times professionally on a previous theatre website and really enjoyed it. But when I saw it in London with Marti Pellow last time around the circuit, I loathed it. The cast was crap, it looked tired and falling to bits. As a stage manager by trade, I can tell a show which sorely needs a kick up the arse, a good tightening of the screw. It looked terrible and it had Pellow in it.

When I compare *that* to Grandage's slick, tight production it's on a different level.

I saw every cast in the tour and largely hated the casting. Mark Powell was the understudy in the Grandage, and they were selling off all the unsold Grandage 2006 production's merchandise. Before him, a talent show runner up who was way out of his depth. The brochures had embarrassing photoshop work. I didn't enjoy Louise Dearman or Rachael Wooding. Mark Heenahan was Quast's town understudy. The whole thing just felt quite literally second rate in comparison. Earl did it for a bit and he was good.

But I LOVED Abi Jaye as Eva, the best I have ever seen in any production and gives Covington a run as my absolute favourite.

Now Abi Jaye in the Grandage would be a dream.

They haven't changed it... They've just lowered it for Emma

I hadn't noticed that they'd lowered it, but in any case lowering it is changing it. I would imagine that Kenwright would've had to seek permission from RUG before making any changes. I don't think it's massively uncommon for scores to be lowered when the lead can't sing them as written - I think Sister Act adjusted the keys for Alexandra Burke?