I was 8yrs old when my mom and her friend took me too as I remember Mandy as Che sang very nice and mellow but when he yells sings in anger I was scarred of him, LOL, I always thought patti lupone was an angel playing Eva Perrone a sweet sweet voice. But when Che sings i had to close my eyes,lol but i love his voice singing very mellow. Hehehe!
This song has moved me since the first time I first heard it because it seems like whenever something big happens in my life or I'm worried about what will happen to me I always say "So what happens now? Where am I going to?"
ppl always compare this song to other renditions, stage and the movie, but they forget one big difference, none of the others had Mandy Patinkin's Che, which was the best. I saw them on Broadway in 1978 and nobody's come close to this perfection. Not to mention the fabulous Patti LuPone as Eva, so this one is tops for me.
For one entire year, I would pass the playhouse hosting this production on Broadway at 54th Street, I was a bartender at STUDIO 54. Because of my high-profile at StUDIO, the producers of EVITA with Patty Lupone would have given me front row seats any time I would have asked for, Not once, not one single time did I ever just walk into this theater and sit down and watch history in the making. I could kick myself in the butt, however, in my defense, at 54, I saw much history in the making. I still grieve my ignorance.
From what I understand one of Madonna's conditions for doing this role was that she sing this song.And while she is perfect for the Role the song is better off in the hands of a younger less confident character then Eva was when putting the moves on Peron.That said they could have written in an earlier scene of a young Eva being kicked out of a powerful mans home earlier in the story.Then had a reprise done later by a mistress she is kicking out.Showing Eva as having come full circle from victim to predator.
That's not true. The screenplay (co-written by Alan Parker and Oliver Stone) was already finished by the time Madonna was cast. The mistress on stage is practically a cameo, and Parker felt that having Peron's mistress -- someone whom you only meet or see just once -- singing a key scene just didn't work for him and likened it to having a nondescript character in a non-musical drama reciting very important monolog. I think it works perfectly in the movie, because the film is not about Peron's mistress; it's about Eva Peron, so most of the film should revolve around her, not some character that only has 5 minutes of screen time. Furthermore, it gives Eva some sympathy and sheds some light on her early struggle to succeed. Young Eva actually pounded the pavements looking for acting gigs and sometimes went days without any work or food/nourishment. In the play her plight was implied, but in the movie they needed to flesh it out. Also, the song does have a partial reprise when Eva kicks the mistress out and she sings plaintively "So what happens now? Where am I going to?" It makes the scene even more poignant and ironic, since it calls back the earlier scene when Magaldi gave Eva the boot, except now Eva is the aggressor and seems oblivious to the mistress' sorrow. That's not to say the song didn't work as it is on the stage. In the play, the mistress (thought she existed in real life) is really just there for contrast; she's the other side of the coin. She represents everything Eva never was and could never be. Whereas Eva is determined, the mistress is passive. Had Eva been like the mistress, we would never have heard of her. Plus, it gives the actress playing Eva a breather, since she's practically on stage 90 % of the time. BTW: Another myth I want to debunk is that "You Must Love Me" was written because Madonna demanded that ALW & Rice write her a new song. Not so. The powers that be wanted to also try for a Best Original Song nomination, since songs not written specifically for the movie are ineligible. It paid off because the song won the Oscar. But Madonna had nothing to do with it. In fact, one of Parker's conditions upon hiring Madonna was that she didn't have a say in the script.
Christian Camlin Perfectly said. IMO this was one of the biggest mistakes the Madonna version made and this solution would have added depth to the film instead of detracting from the character.
Depth in the film? THis is soo late for a response. But how in the world a cameo in the film sing such a key song be adding so much depth. Even ALW agreed with the switch because overall, the song itself made such a great impact, the singer is vaguely even remembered since was just a cameo. This being given to eva added MUCH more depth in the movie especially when fleshing out her younger self.
Actually the song fit well on both Evita and the mistress. Eva was once on the mistress' side and her treatment was no different when she was hoping from one man to another. Webber made the smart call to give the song to Eva in the movie to flesh out her struggle as the original mistress solo on stage felt out of place on film being a brief character.
Nonsense. Madonna coopted the song to give her scheming title character some degree of softness. And she got further synpathy with YOU MUST LOVE ME. Pure ego.
Yea because giving a solo ballad to very minor character would work well with a movie audience. Madonna was rightful for the song as her character went full circle when she met the mistress seeing herself way back when she was on the mistress side. The switched worked!
I always thought it made more sense that Eva sang 'Another suitcase' because A) she's the main character and B) it gives her some emotional weight beyond the power hungry bitch she was portrayed as. It also shows the audience her 'last straw', the moment she decides to not be a victim and take control of her future, by any means necessary.
As great as that sounds, that’s unfortunately not the reality. The mistress singing this song shows another unfortunately casualty of Eva and Perón’s rise to power…one of very many people during that time. I feel like the point of the musical is that it strips away the facade of the celebrity and shows who the human was. As Che put it “She had her moments, she had some style, but she did nothing for years.” They’re all complicated and flawed people caught up in the ruthless and unforgiving stage of politics.
It's a shame they allowed Madonna to alter this to be performed by her as Eva in the movie... It just doesn't hold the same weight as it does coming from this poor, anonymous girl, where this is the sole glimpse we have into her life... This girl could sing circles around Madonna anyhow... Beautiful, heartwrenching song.... I'm sure we've all fel this at one time or another...
At 1:18...she stopped singing? "I like your conversation, you've a catchy turn of phrase" but not "you're obviously going through an adolescent phase..."?
+Luciano Marquez and also kambeasley....Just to clarify, in the movie, the part of Peron's mistress who Evita ( played by Madonna) is addressing is played by Andrea Corr...of the group The Corrs. Jane Ohringer played the role of Peron's mistress in the Broadway production.
Eva should not be singing this song. "Where am I going to?" is rhetorical, not meant to be answered. An answer certainly is not "Marry the President and become the First Lady of Argentina." The song is about innocence taken and kicked to the curb to an uncertain future. The tone of the song is much softer and sung at a higher scale than Eva's brashness. This is the version of the musical I listened to growing up and I just loved the song; one of the top 3 songs in any musical in my opinion. I was looking forward to seeing Madonna in the movie, but came away disappointed because her voice was not strong enough for the role. She could not project the depth and power required, of course not many could compare to Patti Lupone.
well, i actually have to say i like madonna better at this part, for hello and goodbye, i liked the way she sang it. BUT, i like the mistress singing antoher suitcase in another hall better than when madonna sang it, if that makes any sense...
In the movie, the mistress was played by Andrea Corr, who went on to musical success with her sisters and brother as The Corrs. I also wish she would have sung more of the song than she did...I think it would have made an interesting contrast in what she was experiencing, as Eva had done earlier in the story when Migaldi cut her loose and went back to his wife. On a different note - I was pleasantly surprised at the singing of Antonio Banderas as Che...particularly his take on "High Flying Adored".
Isn’t Eva very confident and cocky? Doesn’t that make it confusing for her to be singing this in the movie? This song seems to be about admitting defeat. That is not part of Eva’s character. I guess it was just a pretty song that Madonna just couldn’t bear not being able to sing.
I was 11 when my mom and her boyfriend took me to see Evita (1980..... yeah.... I'm old!) . . . and even at that young age, this song floored me.
I was 8yrs old when my mom and her friend took me too as I remember Mandy as Che sang very nice and mellow but when he yells sings in anger I was scarred of him, LOL, I always thought patti lupone was an angel playing Eva Perrone a sweet sweet voice. But when Che sings i had to close my eyes,lol but i love his voice singing very mellow. Hehehe!
I saw this at 10 years of age. Patti was off, so it was her alternate, but it was still amazing. I used to sing along to the whole soundtrack often.
One of my fav. songs of the show.
This song has moved me since the first time I first heard it because it seems like whenever something big happens in my life or I'm worried about what will happen to me I always say "So what happens now? Where am I going to?"
ppl always compare this song to other renditions, stage and the movie, but they forget one big difference, none of the others had Mandy Patinkin's Che, which was the best. I saw them on Broadway in 1978 and nobody's come close to this perfection. Not to mention the fabulous Patti LuPone as Eva, so this one is tops for me.
The show didn’t exist on Broadway in 1978.
@@giovannirastrelli9821 must been '79 then. thanks.
Always one of my fav's from this musical.
For one entire year, I would pass the playhouse hosting this production on Broadway at 54th Street, I was a bartender at STUDIO 54. Because of my high-profile at StUDIO, the producers of EVITA with Patty Lupone would have given me front row seats any time I would have asked for, Not once, not one single time did I ever just walk into this theater and sit down and watch history in the making. I could kick myself in the butt, however, in my defense, at 54, I saw much history in the making. I still grieve my ignorance.
I feel your pain! EVITA is one of my favorite musicals -- in the top 3 -- and would give anything to have seen the original Broadway cast.
as well you should...but we all make mistakes. It was unforgettable!
so what about the movie .. this is brilliant.
From what I understand one of Madonna's conditions for doing this role was that she sing this song.And while she is perfect for the Role the song is better off in the hands of a younger less confident character then Eva was when putting the moves on Peron.That said they could have written in an earlier scene of a young Eva being kicked out of a powerful mans home earlier in the story.Then had a reprise done later by a mistress she is kicking out.Showing Eva as having come full circle from victim to predator.
That's not true. The screenplay (co-written by Alan Parker and Oliver Stone) was already finished by the time Madonna was cast. The mistress on stage is practically a cameo, and Parker felt that having Peron's mistress -- someone whom you only meet or see just once -- singing a key scene just didn't work for him and likened it to having a nondescript character in a non-musical drama reciting very important monolog.
I think it works perfectly in the movie, because the film is not about Peron's mistress; it's about Eva Peron, so most of the film should revolve around her, not some character that only has 5 minutes of screen time. Furthermore, it gives Eva some sympathy and sheds some light on her early struggle to succeed. Young Eva actually pounded the pavements looking for acting gigs and sometimes went days without any work or food/nourishment. In the play her plight was implied, but in the movie they needed to flesh it out. Also, the song does have a partial reprise when Eva kicks the mistress out and she sings plaintively "So what happens now? Where am I going to?" It makes the scene even more poignant and ironic, since it calls back the earlier scene when Magaldi gave Eva the boot, except now Eva is the aggressor and seems oblivious to the mistress' sorrow.
That's not to say the song didn't work as it is on the stage. In the play, the mistress (thought she existed in real life) is really just there for contrast; she's the other side of the coin. She represents everything Eva never was and could never be. Whereas Eva is determined, the mistress is passive. Had Eva been like the mistress, we would never have heard of her. Plus, it gives the actress playing Eva a breather, since she's practically on stage 90 % of the time.
BTW: Another myth I want to debunk is that "You Must Love Me" was written because Madonna demanded that ALW & Rice write her a new song. Not so. The powers that be wanted to also try for a Best Original Song nomination, since songs not written specifically for the movie are ineligible. It paid off because the song won the Oscar. But Madonna had nothing to do with it. In fact, one of Parker's conditions upon hiring Madonna was that she didn't have a say in the script.
Christian Camlin Perfectly said. IMO this was one of the biggest mistakes the Madonna version made and this solution would have added depth to the film instead of detracting from the character.
Christian Camlin madonna ruined this song lolol and she'll never be a singer like patti lupone
Depth in the film? THis is soo late for a response. But how in the world a cameo in the film sing such a key song be adding so much depth. Even ALW agreed with the switch because overall, the song itself made such a great impact, the singer is vaguely even remembered since was just a cameo. This being given to eva added MUCH more depth in the movie especially when fleshing out her younger self.
Lisa Picanso Yes....she did! She is not a GREAT or WELL-TRAINED singer AT ALL! I LOVE Madonna, but she should not have tried to sing this role...
Actually the song fit well on both Evita and the mistress. Eva was once on the mistress' side and her treatment was no different when she was hoping from one man to another. Webber made the smart call to give the song to Eva in the movie to flesh out her struggle as the original mistress solo on stage felt out of place on film being a brief character.
Nonsense. Madonna coopted the song to give her scheming title character some degree of softness. And she got further synpathy with YOU MUST LOVE ME. Pure ego.
Yea because giving a solo ballad to very minor character would work well with a movie audience. Madonna was rightful for the song as her character went full circle when she met the mistress seeing herself way back when she was on the mistress side. The switched worked!
@mikeygg3 thew anoymous girl is Peron's Mistress played here by Jane Ohringer
OMG Gorgeous
my friend i nin tis show on b-way.i saw the show and it was so good!!!!!!!!!!!
Love it! ❤️
I always thought it made more sense that Eva sang 'Another suitcase' because A) she's the main character and B) it gives her some emotional weight beyond the power hungry bitch she was portrayed as. It also shows the audience her 'last straw', the moment she decides to not be a victim and take control of her future, by any means necessary.
I disagree. This is one of the young girls the ruthless Eva threw out. Eva was not sweet
@@joybrautigam9529 I double disagree. I think this number is about what she could have become, forever a mistress.
As great as that sounds, that’s unfortunately not the reality. The mistress singing this song shows another unfortunately casualty of Eva and Perón’s rise to power…one of very many people during that time. I feel like the point of the musical is that it strips away the facade of the celebrity and shows who the human was. As Che put it “She had her moments, she had some style, but she did nothing for years.”
They’re all complicated and flawed people caught up in the ruthless and unforgiving stage of politics.
Who's playing the mistress on this track? Beautiful voice!
Jane Ohringer
It's a shame they allowed Madonna to alter this to be performed by her as Eva in the movie... It just doesn't hold the same weight as it does coming from this poor, anonymous girl, where this is the sole glimpse we have into her life...
This girl could sing circles around Madonna anyhow...
Beautiful, heartwrenching song....
I'm sure we've all fel this at one time or another...
exactly
At 1:18...she stopped singing? "I like your conversation, you've a catchy turn of phrase" but not "you're obviously going through an adolescent phase..."?
@mikeygg3 Very true!!!! Way better than Madonna, truly moving.
does anyone know what key this version is in?
B major.
Jane Ohringer
+Luciano Marquez and also kambeasley....Just to clarify, in the movie, the part of Peron's mistress who Evita ( played by Madonna) is addressing is played by Andrea Corr...of the group The Corrs. Jane Ohringer played the role of Peron's mistress in the Broadway production.
Eva should not be singing this song. "Where am I going to?" is rhetorical, not meant to be answered. An answer certainly is not "Marry the President and become the First Lady of Argentina." The song is about innocence taken and kicked to the curb to an uncertain future. The tone of the song is much softer and sung at a higher scale than Eva's brashness. This is the version of the musical I listened to growing up and I just loved the song; one of the top 3 songs in any musical in my opinion. I was looking forward to seeing Madonna in the movie, but came away disappointed because her voice was not strong enough for the role. She could not project the depth and power required, of course not many could compare to Patti Lupone.
My favorite version of this song, but Jane Ohringer never did anything else professionally with music. :(
GodsGadfly 😢
I wonder why. It's so beautiful
So which one is Eva?
Eva is singing the first song "Hello and Goodbye", then at 1:37 Peron's Mistress is singing "Another Suitcase in Another Hall"
well, i actually have to say i like madonna better at this part, for hello and goodbye, i liked the way she sang it. BUT, i like the mistress singing antoher suitcase in another hall better than when madonna sang it, if that makes any sense...
In the movie, the mistress was played by Andrea Corr, who went on to musical success with her sisters and brother as The Corrs. I also wish she would have sung more of the song than she did...I think it would have made an interesting contrast in what she was experiencing, as Eva had done earlier in the story when Migaldi cut her loose and went back to his wife. On a different note - I was pleasantly surprised at the singing of Antonio Banderas as Che...particularly his take on "High Flying Adored".
Still so many bitter that Madonna was given the role of Eva over Patti LuPone. Time to move on.
Isn’t Eva very confident and cocky? Doesn’t that make it confusing for her to be singing this in the movie? This song seems to be about admitting defeat. That is not part of Eva’s character. I guess it was just a pretty song that Madonna just couldn’t bear not being able to sing.