Printer Friendly - Madonna's voice in


Madonna's voice in "Evita"?
Posted by LYLS3637 2012-11-26 14:25:11


So BWW Radio just played something from the "Evita" film, and I was just curious if anyone knew what they did to Madonna's voice in the studio. It sounds airy (for lack of a better term) combined with an echo effect. I'm assuming it's an attempt to make her sound better...

Madonna's voice in
Posted by Mildred Plotka 2012-11-26 14:28:44


Clearly it didn't work.

Madonna's voice in
Posted by Wynbish 2012-11-26 14:39:07


What song was it?

Madonna's voice in
Posted by BroomstickBoy 2012-11-26 14:45:09


I still don't hear much of a difference with her voice before and after the "vocal training". It's like Helena Bonham Carter's voice in Sweeney. She took lessons for a year, 2 years, and THAT'S the end result?

I don't get it.

Madonna's voice in
Posted by LYLS3637 2012-11-26 14:51:03


Wynbish-- "A New Argentina"... It was difficult telling the difference between the radio/microphone sections and the more intimate moments with Jonathan Pryce.

Madonna's voice in
Posted by muscle23ftl 2012-11-26 14:59:03


As much as I dislike Madonna's voice, she still sounds much better than Elena Roger.

Madonna's voice in
Posted by sephyr 2012-11-26 15:44:41


She sounded great in the Evita film, but she sounded even better on Ray of Light (the album). It was clear that she worked hard on her vocal control and her clarity/warmth, which her work for Evita enhanced.

Madonna's voice in
Posted by pair-o-dice 2012-11-26 23:19:53


Actually listened to this the other day-

The orchestrations help her a lot, but you have to admit she's singing from her p*ssy. She doesn't have the notes at all but she's giving it 100% of what she has to give. And, even today, she's still the best/most appropriate person for a film version. Can't sing it even close to how thrilling it shoulda, coulda, woulda been but it makes complete sense in every sense of showbusiness. And, she pulled it off pretty damn well if you ask me.

Madonna's voice in
Posted by CurtainPullDowner 2012-11-26 23:33:30


As a long time Madona Hater, I thought she was born to play this role, but her acting was so sucky it made her horrid voice sound OK.
And singing from her kitty,
Why not? She does everything else from it.

Madonna's voice in
Posted by broadway guy 2012-11-26 23:48:09


I thought her acting was good but she ruined all the songs for me.She wasn't bad in all of them but she had no power to her voice.you cant do a sung through musical and have a lead who cant do justice to the score.I was furious when i heard her do A NEW ARGENTINA and RAINBOW HIGH.Those songs are suppose to be spine tingling and chilling,I cant believe madonna accepted the role when she knew full well she would not live up to expectations vocally.I get why she was casted but I think that Movie is a train wreck IMO.Could have been so good...Banderas was great though :)

Madonna's voice in
Posted by Jordan Catalano 2012-11-26 23:50:45


Oh yay. Another Madonna was awful in EVITA thread. There's more of these threads than "What should I see" threads.

Madonna's voice in
Posted by broadway guy 2012-11-27 00:20:32


I said her acting was good....

Madonna's voice in
Posted by My Oh My 2012-11-27 05:07:21


Madge's vocals were at times thin and warbly ("Don't Cry For Me Argentina") and strong, assertive, and confident at other times ("Waltz For Eva and Che"). The lip synching sucked balls with its horrid, constant echo. The orchestrations were all awesome, even the ones that were revised. My only reservation was the slight changing of melody for "Requiem For Evita," which seemed to be lacking something the original had. But that was a minor point. That scene as a whole is one of the most thrilling movie musical moments ever shot. How well it was recreated was chilling. And the scale of it all!

Know what made it suck butt?

The same thing that makes the current revival suck butt: Eva as saint! While some random guy bitches for no apparent reason on the side.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Madonna's voice in
Posted by Jordan Catalano 2012-11-27 07:48:04


Alan Parker needs to direct another musical and put Rob "Singular Vision" Marshall out if business.

Madonna's voice in
Posted by taboo123 2012-11-27 08:50:24


This conversation is soooo 1996.

Madonna's voice in
Posted by GavestonPS 2012-11-27 13:38:39


Know what made it suck butt?

The same thing that makes the current revival suck butt: Eva as saint! While some random guy bitches for no apparent reason on the side.


^^^^^This.

My Oh My, they lost me when Eva started singing the Mistress' song. I didn't know whether they were pandering to the audience or the star, and I couldn't decide which was worse. (Well, truth to tell, they lost me the first time Madonna gave an interview explaining that Eva Peron was a misunderstood feminist.)

Are there no history books left to point out that the Perons were fascists? Or have show queens gathered up those books and made a bonfire?

(To be clear, I thought the original score, text and production were rather fair to history. I don't need Eva portrayed as pure villain either. With the OBC, LuPone was thrilling, but it was also clear that flinging cash at adoring crowds isn't a sound monetary policy.)

P.S. Sorry, taboo, but I wasn't here for earlier discussions.

Madonna's voice in
Posted by My Oh My 2012-11-27 23:12:34


The Eva as Saint angle loses all conflict, and in reality, there has rarely been an issue or person more divisive than Eva Peron. To fix the movie version and the current revival so that it heavily leans toward one opinion, is as airheaded as one can get.

I agree, I'd hate to see Eva portrayed as a total villain also, and I admit I probably give the impression that's what I want based on the things I say. In actuality, pure bitch would ruin it just as much, because she wasn't totally evil and I personally believe a lot of what she did that is considered wrong felt very right to her, considering her circumstances and the appalling snubbing she endured even after rising to the top. It doesn't justify her and Peron's making people's lives hell, causing them to leave the country, or their shutting down of publications that dare speak unfavorably of them. Peron banned TIME magazine from Argentina for months just because they had mentioned Eva was illegitimate. There's no question that she and her husband's wild spending caused the country's economy ruin, and there's no question they dabbled in unethical practices.

But Eva did tons of undeniably noble deeds, as well. Particularly for the poor. I sympathize with her rage against the upper classes, which was very real. I've heard speeches of the real Eva in Spanish, in which she very openly and unabashedly denounces the rich, saying the poor will be favored by God and that we must defeat them, regardless of what or who is lost in the process. That in itself, as well intentioned as that may have been to her descamisados, can be said to have been evil. You just can't generalize like that and look down on a whole group, assuming the worst of them. But she did. And she did all this while hugging the sick and dishing out homes and money to the poor.

Definitely a complicated woman and a very difficult story, which is why I resent the oversimplification of it in the film and the current revival. The original presented a balanced portrait. A lot of people say Lupone's Eva was a bitch, even Lupone says that she would often be assumed to be the character she was playing: a bitch. But that's just people looking on the surface of things, Lupone portrayed her as strong and feisty but she had her vulnerable moments too. Above all, like Brantley said in his review of the revival, Lupone also infused the character with a fun sense, with a wink, with a sense of irony. This current portrayal is like Madonna's; all too serious, pious, and just bland.

Madonna's voice in
Posted by GavestonPS 2012-11-28 19:32:41


My Oh My, as often as not I am responding to my own logic in a post, i.e., thinking out loud. I didn't think YOU said Eva should be made a villain; I thought my own post might be read that way and I wanted to clarify.

I don't know if you are old enough to remember the protests outside the theater on Broadway when the show first opened. People complained the show made Eva look "too attractive". And I thought, "Well, that's the point isn't it? Fascism *IS* attractive, even if only superficially. That's why it attracts followers, at least at first."

Yes, we were all Peronistas during "New Argentina", but, fortunately, the show has a second act.

Madonna's voice in
Posted by CJ N2N 2012-11-28 19:55:51


I'm taking a wild guess here, but maybe the decision to show Eva as a saint was made to make the film appeal to the Argentinean population. Remember, they still view her as a saint today.

Madonna's voice in
Posted by GavestonPS 2012-11-28 20:54:25


^^^^I'm sure that was part of it. There's also an appeal in making her a feminist icon. Even if American and British audiences don't care about Argentina (and most of us don't), we do like our strong women, even if their endings are tragic.

The "saintly" Evita fits that mold.

But the creepy thing is that such an approach is really no different from presenting "Springtime for Hitler" as a serious number.

As I wrote above, I have no problem with a complex Evita or even a well-meaning Evita, but the suppression of basic freedoms and the deaths of the desaparecidos continued through the 1980s. Of course Eva Peron was dead and didn't personally order all those atrocities, but she and Juan certainly helped pave the wave for them.

I humbly propose we not forget that, no matter how well an actress sings High Es.

evita
Posted by TracyLord 2012-11-28 21:30:19


It's funny, I feel like everyone has seen a different production as I read discussions about the current revival of Evita.

This production is the closest I have seen to portraying Eva's complexities, both good and bad. I thought Elena Roger was absolutely unflinching in her portrayal. Her Eva is both sinner and saint, and by the end of the show, I was as confused as Che.

Now if only the show had some kind of dramatic struggle. We have a narrator and a protagonist that we are told everything about.

evita
Posted by Bettyboy72 2012-11-28 22:59:19


The problem with the revival is Che. Martin has sanitized him to the point that he is no longer showing the audience the other side of Eva.

"I get why she was casted"

She was cast and I thought she was incredible.

evita
Posted by AlanAntonio 2012-11-29 00:08:10


She did not "accept" the role, she practically begged to get it. I'm not kidding. Look it up if you do not believe me. She got that role because of her stature as a pop icon. She did not have adequate talent to essay the role justly. She did her best though, given her limitations.

evita
Posted by drewmangroup 2012-11-29 21:37:14


I don't know that Argentines view her as a saint. You would think you would see her image all over Buenos Aires, but it is not. Either she is still very divisive or the military arm of the government still holds such power (and a grudge) that it makes the public seem divided.

evita
Posted by GavestonPS 2012-11-29 21:43:04


This production is the closest I have seen to portraying Eva's complexities, both good and bad. I thought Elena Roger was absolutely unflinching in her portrayal. Her Eva is both sinner and saint, and by the end of the show, I was as confused as Che.

Tracy, that is the opposite of what I've read here, but I should be honest and admit I haven't seen the current revival. I was talking about the film, to which many others have compared the Roger/Martin revival.

evita
Posted by CarlosAlberto 2012-11-29 22:29:35


drewmangroup, you have no idea what you are talking about. The woman has monuments and statues constructed in her honor as well as a huge government funded sculpture that spans the entire width and length of a building in Buenos Aires.



evita
Posted by CarlosAlberto 2012-11-29 22:36:45


It doesn't take up the entire length but pretty much the width...and it lights up at night. There is another image of her that's on the other side of the building.

evita
Posted by CarlosAlberto 2012-11-29 22:38:41


Here's the other side..

evita
Posted by CarlosAlberto 2012-11-29 22:48:25


Here's another:



And Another:



And yet another..

evita
Posted by NoName3 2012-11-29 23:22:19


Thanks, Carlos. All those static, inanimate, voiceless monuments are the perfect tribute to Madonna's performance.

evita
Posted by GavestonPS 2012-11-30 03:38:35


Very funny, but all kidding aside, I appreciate the images, Carlos. I really had no idea!

evita
Posted by My Oh My 2012-11-30 05:19:07


"drewmangroup, you have no idea what you are talking about. The woman has monuments and statues constructed in her honor as well as a huge government funded sculpture that spans the entire width and length of a building in Buenos Aires."

Yep. There is a reason why Argentina is one of the only countries left that has never presented the ALW stage version. In fact, they've taken it upon themselves to write their own musical about Eva, as well as film their own movie version. It was non-musical, but it is well known that it was done as an answer to the Madonna film.

What's interesting to me is that most everything Argentina produces as "an answer" to the supposed lies and myths about Eva Peron, only help confirm the bulk of those things they claim are untrue. It's strange. For example, many people--in and out of Argentina--like to categorize Patti Lupone's performance as "bitchy" and "over-the-top." Yet, their "answer" to the film version starring Madonna, entitled, "Eva Peron: The True Story," only helps elevate Lupones Tony Award-winning performance.

The film was meant to debunk myths and assumptions about Eva mostly popularized by Lupone's turn as Evita, but the actress playing the role in the Argentine version might as well have done the role as a tribute to Lupone, because it's nearly identical, except she doesn't sing. Case in point:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wPpNXANKxY

That's captivating actress Esther Goris and her take on Eva is flawless. So much so, it's eerie--the inflection, even the slightly weathered, smoker's voice, and that passion. So Ms. Goris confirms Eva WAS a VERY strong, feisty, harsh, even abrasive woman. The filmmakers--who set out to tell the absolute truth--also confirm this by way of not objecting to the portrayal. Look at those mannerisms, they are exactly like Lupone's, but Lupone is often said to have been over-the-top...and evil.

I've seen most of that film and it left me scratching my head because there was nothing so incredibly revealing that would change anyone's perception of Eva that they might've gathered from the ALW musical. Goris portrays her as incredibly foul-mouthed and it's obvious she came from "the sticks." It's almost as if people just like to complain and have this odd persecution complex when it comes to Eva Peron, so they ignore the intended purpose of a piece, like the musical, and extract the more juicy aspects of the real Eva Peron.

Without doubt, that chick IS NOW a myth.





evita
Posted by StageManager2 2012-12-26 20:55:37


drewmangroup, you have no idea what you are talking about. The woman has monuments and statues constructed in her honor as well as a huge government funded sculpture that spans the entire width and length of a building in Buenos Aires.

Not to mention that this past summer Eva Perón became the first woman to appear on any Argentine banknote, replacing former president Julio Argentino Roca on the 100-peso note.



evita
Posted by CarlosAlberto 2012-12-26 21:25:44


Stand back, Buenos Aires!...indeed!!

evita
Posted by StageManager2 2012-12-26 21:29:47


Yet, their "answer" to the film version starring Madonna, entitled, "Eva Peron: The True Story," only helps elevate Lupones Tony Award-winning performance.

So true. I was hesitant to watch that film 'cause I thought they would sanitize her life story and gloss over the politics. But, in fact, the film confirms that the Peróns were despots who silenced opponents, usurped the media industry (i.e. newspapers, radio, films), and sometimes employed torture on political prisoners.


Goris portrays her as incredibly foul-mouthed and it's obvious she came from "the sticks."

Having read all the biographies and watched the documentaries, Goris' portrayal is the best interpretation of Eva Perón, IMO. She was, after all, a girl from the wrong side of the tracks who only had a 6th grade education. The biographies mention how the oligarchy would entertain themselves by listening to her radio programs and later her balcony speeches (which were broadcast), because Eva was not genteel in her speech. For example, she would say "poetries" instead of "poems." You know how some illiterate Americans say "ax" instead of "ask"? She often made grammatical errors like that, which the aristocracy found amusing and used it to deride her.



evita
Posted by StageManager2 2012-12-26 21:59:43


So Ms. Goris confirms Eva WAS a VERY strong, feisty, harsh, even abrasive woman.

Here's a scene from the movie that best illustrates that. Eva confronts the railway workers after they threaten a nationwide strike. At this point (1950), after Eva and Perón's excessive spending and mismanagement, the Argentine economy was tanking and inflation had wiped out all the gains the workers had made. Eva met with the railway workers and warned them not to strike or there would be dire consequences. They ended up striking anyway and many were imprisoned and tortured. Some didn't get released until after Perón was deposed in 1955.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZRK0f5GJRc



evita
Posted by Gothampc 2012-12-26 22:01:28


Does anyone think Madonna's performance would have been different if she weren't pregnant during the filming?

evita
Posted by My Oh My 2012-12-26 22:24:40


And here she tells the president of The Ladies of Beneficence to basically f*ck off and then cuts off their government funding because they snubbed her.

http://youtu.be/iM8ZxnwD1fc?t=5m

I don't know what they were on about with their beef with the Madonna film. Madonna sanitized her terribly. That's why I can't believe people think she was GREAT in the role. Goris should have won an Oscar for her accurate, Lupone-like performance. Look at that walk after she tells off the old lady, it's eerily similar to Lupone's Eva Bitch Walk! XD

http://youtu.be/iM8ZxnwD1fc?t=8m7s

evita
Posted by StageManager2 2012-12-26 23:31:05


I don't know what they were on about with their beef with the Madonna film.

No pun intended, right? You know, 'cause Argentina's biggest export is/was beef. (Never mind.)


Goris should have won an Oscar for her accurate, Lupone-like performance3

I remember in one of my Entertainment Weekly issues at the time (Jan. 1997), there was a short article about how the Eva Perón movie was Argentina's official selection for that year's Best Foreign Language Film Oscar, and that Goris was also being put forward as a candidate for Best Actress. The EW article ridiculed the notion, pretty much saying there was no way in hell she would get close to a nomination. I guess they were pushing for Madonna. After all, they did feature her on the cover for their annual Oscar race issue.

.


evita
Posted by Broadwaywest 2012-12-26 23:59:59


Then there was faye...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyDCWNgi6E0

evita
Posted by The Scorpion 2012-12-27 08:08:51


I disagree with some of the allegations here that Michael Grandage's production portrays Eva as a saint. It is true that it has been softened for Broadway and Elena's portrayal in London was much more ambiguous (I assume the change might be to avoid offending the many Latinos attending the Broadway production thanks to Ricky Martin). But nonetheless I still don't come away with the impression of Eva as a saint from the Grandage production. It's still the stage show script so the verses removed in the movie that were controversial are restored. Of course, Grandage's production (which I think is beautiful) It is also significantly softer than the Hal Prince Broadway production (which I also adore), which itself was far more aggressive and one-sided than its 1978 London premiere as a result of the critics' allegations the London production glorified fascism. And I stand by what the London critics said and my overall belief that Elena Roger's Eva Perón is a magnificent performance and outshines Madonna completely. Not that I think Madonna did a terrible job, although the way the keys were all lowered for her is, of course, extremely regrettable. I blame the santisation of Eva's character though on Alan Parker, who I suppose had a choice between either that or not getting to film on location.

I do, however, echo people's comments about Esther Goris's fantastic performance as Eva in the film from Argentina. It's absolutely riveting.

As for Faye...yeah, her performance made me laugh and not for the right reasons.

evita
Posted by Auggie27 2012-12-27 09:21:06


The real problem with much of it was Parker's decision to accentuate the "reality," to pretend it's not really a musical. Early on I was seriously let down by this documentary-like approach. The editing and staging turn "Buenos Aires" into one of the dullest musical sequences ever put on film, and it's a number we expected Madonna to deliver with smokin' heat. (And think of how often we might see the song excerpted, had it been any good; it's never seen out of context, because it's dark, tedious, and makes the leading lady look like a frump taking tango lessons.) The number is built around the damned train, not this woman igniting when she arrives in the city. A key moment in the music is illustrated by -- a train pulling into a station. Ooooh, how counter-intuitive for a musical! Daring! Not really. And then it peters out as she dances, dully, in a club. No sexuality, no choreography worth noting, but plenty of (yawn) period detail. It ends with her boogieing out into the street, without a scintilla of Madonna's natural dancing skill spotlighted. Were they so afraid to exploit what she does well? Instead we get Madonna not allowed to be ... Madonna.

evita
Posted by Gothampc 2012-12-27 09:38:06


Auggie27, Madonna was pregnant during the filming. I think some of the choreography was altered/simplified because they didn't want her to have a miscarriage.

evita
Posted by Auggie27 2012-12-27 10:03:39


It has nothing to do with the complexity of the steps. Madonna herself spoke about the intricacy of the tango she had to learn in her Vanity Fair diaries. In a way, what's seen is actually trickier. I'm speaking of the style, that the numbers were staged as "reality," only performed as if Eva Peron might've danced, not in any way stylized. This may have served the documentary tone, but it emptied "Buenos Aires" of its theatricality. Sexuality. Excitement. If anyone who posts here wants to make a persuasive case for "Buenos Aires" in the film, I'm all ears. I watched it again this past fall and couldn't believe how pale the number is compared to either of the Broadway productions.

evita
Posted by CarlosAlberto 2012-12-27 10:08:41


Auggie27 I have to agree wholeheartedly with you. BUENOS AIRES is a show stopper. In the film it's a "wet firecracker". There is no pop, no sizzle, no excitement. It's dull and plodding.

Ugh. I hate this movie.

evita
Posted by Gothampc 2012-12-27 10:12:23


I think the whole movie was a let down. I think I counted three times when they use the same footage of Madonna on the train waving goodbye and heading to Buenos Aires. That tells me they ran out of ideas/images. I can understand using it in the original sequence, and then maybe in the funeral flashback. But the third time was really too much.

evita
Posted by PopAria 2012-12-27 11:54:04


"As much as I dislike Madonna's voice, she still sounds much better than Elena Roger."

I like Madonna's version the best.

evita
Posted by My Oh My 2012-12-28 02:45:36


Thought the YouTube comments below the last part of the Argentine film were interesting. I've translated them below.

The original Spanish quotes can be accessed here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQwROi_p1uE

--------------------------------------------------

"Very good movie. Portrays Eva Peron like the leader of a country who gave much support to its workers. The Madonna film covered mostly the frivolous aspects of Eva."

"The Madonna film was nothing more than an excuse to film the opera's script as a musical, without any historical accuracy. Like, for example, the supposed link between Eva and Che (Che was barely a teenager when Eva died, and they never met).

This Argentine film is historically accurate and even adds an excellent script and great performances, most notably, the phenomenal work of Ester Goris in the leading role."


---------------------------------------

Oh dear.

evita
Posted by StageManager2 2012-12-28 03:18:57


My Oh My, have you seen the fairly recent Argentine film Juan y Eva? It deals with their rise to power, from their meeting at the charity concert through his incarceration and release. Julieta Díaz has got to be one of the worst Evitas. If you thought Madonna was bland, Díaz portrays her rather passively. Even the scene with Perón's mistress, she merely shows up, has a gentle discussion with the girl, then they sit down and eat chocolate together. The mistress even has a line telling Eva that she loves her radio programs. I doubt the encounter was that friendly.

Here's the trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX5VdZ4b6ks

And the entire movie:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OZTW8ROhj8

evita
Posted by muscle23ftl 2012-12-28 04:27:20


I think those pictures of Eva on buildings were a temporary tribute, since I was born and raised in Buenos Aires and I've never seen them, yet, I might not be aware of them existing despite living there for decades since it's a huge city.

The monuments are located in a small suburb outside of Buenos Aires called "Ciudad Evita", which was founded in her honor. In the actual city of Buenos Aires, I don't recall seeing any monuments or statues of hers. I barely heard about her in my entire childhood.

evita
Posted by CarlosAlberto 2012-12-28 07:01:33


They weren't a temporary tribute. They are still there and now she's all over your countries 100 dollar note.

evita
Posted by songanddanceman2 2012-12-28 09:26:49


Wait comments under clips on You Tube thought that an all singing all dancing ALW musical was not historically correct? Im shocked.

evita
Posted by henrikegerman 2012-12-28 10:47:24


"I still don't hear much of a difference with her voice before and after the "vocal training". It's like Helena Bonham Carter's voice in Sweeney. She took lessons for a year, 2 years, and THAT'S the end result?"

Did anyone ever hear Madonna (without studio restructuring) or Bonham Carter before they had vocal training? One needs a frame of reference to judge any possible improvement.

evita
Posted by Luscious 2012-12-29 08:58:07


Madonna was perfect. And it's a better film adaptation of a stage musical than Les Miserables. Period. End of story.

evita
Posted by CarlosAlberto 2012-12-29 11:20:25


IMO, Madonna belongs right up there with Russell Crowe as one of the most miscast leads in a movie musical. Neither did justice to the scores they were singing but at least Crowe CAN act, Madonna has proven time and time again she has no business acting.

evita
Posted by songanddanceman2 2012-12-29 11:26:34


Even as a huge Madonna fan i have to admit that her acting is not the best at all (though i did like her in Susan, Dick Tracey and Dangerous Game) however i thought she did a wonderful job in Evita acting and vocal. Yes some of the songs were adjusted for her range but i personally thought she did a great job. As did the Golden Globes and most of the critics

evita
Posted by AEA AGMA SM 2012-12-30 01:19:12


"Did anyone ever hear Madonna (without studio restructuring) or Bonham Carter before they had vocal training? One needs a frame of reference to judge any possible improvement."

Bonham Carter did sing a bit in The Corpse Bride, which was pre-Sweeney. She's a bit breathy there as well without a whole lot of power, which works quite well for the song and character in that movie. Obviously that one song she sings there is a whole lot simpler than the score to Sweeney, but I don't notice a whole lot of difference between her vocals on the two.

evita
Posted by My Oh My 2012-12-30 02:02:59


Madonna improved dramatically for Evita.

I personally don't take much issue with her singing in that film. It's her dead eyes that translate to bad acting is what I didn't like.

But she improved so much, when I first heard "You'll See," I couldn't believe it was her.

She added a vibrato, a controlled one. Something she lacked before when she sang like Minnie Mouse. Her pitch was also much more in control and not all over the place as heard on her many early pop records. The worst one being "Oh, Father."

"Oh, Madonna, you can't sing in tune. Ballads aren't your strongest point, girl" is what a little boy me thought back in the day.

I think she sounds excellent in "Rainbow High," despite her using head voice at the top notes. She really digs into it. Her best number in Evita is the waltz between Eva and Che. Pure musical theatre. She sings it with the needed bite and vocal grit to make it really shine. She is capable, but her problem is she often simply fails to rise to the occasion.