Could a woman play Sweeney Todd?

This does sound like a very interesting idea and I proababky would want to see it . I see you are probably coming from the ideas of the new production of Compnay and while I do think a gender bent Sweeney Todd would be interesting it may seem a bit uneeded as with Company they are making the story more relivent and contemporary by gender switching but I don't know if that would work with Sweeney as I think you would need a valid reason for gender switching and an aim of what you are trying to achieve with iy  as it may seem a bit like a stunt. 

The rather obvious issue with gender swapping Sweeny Todd would be the hole it would create in the backstory.
Todd is banished away from London by a crooked Lawyer in pursuit of Todd's wife. It is whilst banished from London that Todd meets Anthony at sea and from there the story continues on.

Is it plausible to say in 1700s London that women could work as Judge's and therefore expel a 'Mrs S Todd' from London in order to pursue her husband, thereby going out to sea, working on ships meeting another woman (Antonia)?
Its quite a hole to navigate and would not only require some re-orchestration of music by lyric and story.

I remember watching that when it first aired. It is cringe-inducingly bad.

I say leave things as they are and just write new things to tell different stories. Otherwise things could just get in a right pickle. We'll have Elphaba and Glinda being played by men, Jean Valjean and Javert played by women, Simba and Nala played by horses and Grizabella and Skimbleshanks played by golden retrievers!

I don't think ST lends itself well to a gender swap but I do appreciate creative changes that could make things a bit more inspired.
A female narrator in Joseph and a Leading Player in Pippin works better than a man.

I was watching the Company concert a few days ago and it would have to be significantly rewritten for it to click now. Just changing Bobby's spelling wouldn't really quite cut it. The way the character connects and associates is very male, and I would imagine they would have to address these things. Having said that, I do like the concept, and I do like the fact that it's getting a time update since it was annoyingly dated.

I have edited my posting from 'your agenda' to 'an agenda' - I wasn't accusing the OP of having an agenda - but there is certainly a group of people in the arts who do seem to have an agenda about regendering characters in existing pieces. For good or ill, it is a growing trend and one that does not always work for every given piece.

My track record with regards to theatre-making has always been as inclusive as possible, with significant numbers of gender changes in my Shakespeare productions (including creating new characters - with agency - using lines taken from different characters, not just reassigning whole roles)

But everything I have done has been in response to the text and the productions I have created have been in response to the narratives and themes in the text. I never impose a change that cannot work within the framework of what was already there.

I believe strongly in widening participation in theatre and am actively taking steps within my local community to achieve that.

But I will not always support regendering a role because it is possible. Nor will I always oppose it. It has to be done for positive reasons not just because it can be done.

Bobby becoming Bobbi does raise different questions but I deny the assertion that they are automatically and inherently more relevant. How a man deals with relationships in the modern world can be just as relevant as how a woman deals with relationships. They are different perspectives, raising different issues and different challenges.

The fact that there are fewer scores and scripts that examine the role of women is undeniable and that is something that is changing and will continue to change. I welcome that. But it doesn't mean that the female perspective is automatically and inherently more relevant than the male.

Relevance is different to lack of visibility or opportunity.

Yes, there need to be more roles for all under-represented people. I have never denied or argued against that - nor will I. I want an open theatre that gives voice to every part of our communities.

I want to see new shows that do reflect on contemporary concerns. I want to see new stories told in exciting and innovative ways.

I just don't believe that changing the gender of a central character is always going to be the right move. Just because it can be done does not mean it should be done. There has to be a better artistic reason for doing it.

Claire Sweeney Todd.

Having a woman play the role needn't necessarily involve giving the character a gender swap, of course. I'm sure a Takarazuka Sweeney Todd would be fabulous.