Neither am I. I find that his work often has too much "noise" and too little focus. And Evita
, specifically, is most unsuccessful because of Parker's choice to ignore the dramatic shaping that Harold Prince gave to the concept recording. The second half of the film is a rhythmic and structural disaster.
I don't think that any of the things that were wrong with Grease 2
had anything to do with Michelle Pfeiffer.
I think the song was also an attempt to find an alternative to the "Montage" (as much as it was an attempt to get a Best Song Oscar nomination). Ultimately, I can't decide which would have worked better on film - but by that time, the movie had completely lost its drive and much of its logic because of the way that they rhythm of the material was destoyed by seemingly random shifts of blocks of action.
I think it gives the audience time to breathe too. I like to think of the song as a kind of caesura, a moment when the audience can take stock of what has happened so far and shift their mindset for the rest of the first act. I also think it's important as the start of a sequence (which continues with "The Art of the Possible") where the audience is able to see the real
consequences of and reactions towards Eva's action of living out her dreams