|
|
|
|
PLEASE NOTE: The Reality TV World Message Boards are filled with desperate
attention-seekers pretending to be one big happy PG/PG13-rated family. Don't
be fooled. Trying to get everyone to agree with you is like herding cats,
but intolerance for other viewpoints is NOT welcome and respect for other
posters IS required at all times. Jump in and play, and you'll soon find out
how easy it is to fit in, but save your drama for your mama. All members are
encouraged to read the
complete guidelines.
As entertainment critic Roger
Ebert once said, "If you disagree with something I write, tell me so, argue
with me, correct me--but don't tell me to shut up. That's not the American way."
|
|
|
"New Show/New Judges..."
1simplyme 55 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Hollywood Squares Square"
|
04-22-04, 04:17 PM (EST)
 
  |
|
"New Show/New Judges..." |
I don't know about you, but I think it's time for AI to make some changes.New Judges (An acredited Music Producer, A phenominal singer, and one ordinary moe)
New Age requirements (27-40)?
New Voting process. I know someone out there agrees with me.
|
|
|
Top |
| |
goDAWful 34 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Beauty Pageant Celebrity Judge"
|
04-22-04, 04:49 PM (EST)
|
|
1. "RE: New Show/New Judges..." |
Mark me down as someone who isn't a tiny bit interested in having an "ordinary moe" on the judging panel. Ordinary moes' opinions belong on message boards and the phone lines.As for the age requirement going up to 40 -- ich, no. If someone's talent hasn't been noticed by the time they're 30, it's because they have no noticeable talent and thus shouldn't be allowed to clog up our prime time TV with their hideous caterwauling. Let's at least watch young people caterwauling hideously; the fact that they are less able to cope with rejection makes the viewing that much more scintillating. I would be OK with an age range of 18 - 30. New voting process -- why? Any other popular opinion poll is going to be just as fallible as this one and nobody is going to believe any alternative is "fairer" or "less open to abuse" than this one. (Let's face it, we can't even get a president elected and have everyone agree it's "fair," so pulling our hair out about the voting on a pop show is a waste of time.) No matter what voting procedure is used, the general public as a whole unit will always do something other than attain a consensus of opinion, or even a mathematically significant preference for one candidate over another, and the voting will always come down to a relatively small margin between the best winner and the worst loser. There is simply no accounting for taste. This is not something you would ever be able to mend, and nor is it something that needs mending in any event. The fact is, there was a smaller registration of enjoyment of Jennifer's performance than of other performances. Regardless of the reasoning why (in my book it was because the voting bloc that prefers black female belters had its vote split across three candidates), voting in this scenario is a simple mathematical process and Jennifer didn't have the numbers that the others did. Many people do find her annoying, overblown and overhyped, so it should come as no surprise that she's the first head on the three-headed black chick to get the chop. As other posters have pointed out, voting the other way -- for whom you want OFF the show -- isn't an acceptable alternative because that system is also radically open to voting along political lines (picking off the perceived threats, for example) rather than simply "who did worst tonight". Are you voting for the worst singer tonight? Or the worst singer overall? Or the meanest personality? There are no published parameters for the voting, so everyone does whatever their immediate whim dictates in any voting circumstance (and they would anyway, even if there WERE parameters for the public to judge the contestants upon). And understand that the producers don't WANT to limit households to one vote each, or one vote per household member (how are you policing that, anyway?) or one vote per phone or whatever, because that way they won't be able to brag about how many squillions of people demonstrated an interested in their show -- and they want to be able to have those numbers as high as possible as this is what dictates their advertising revenue. Whenever someone doesn't like the outcome of a popular opinion poll like American Idol, they call for a change to the voting procedures. The fact is, there is no infallible voting procedure because the fallibility lies first with the voters, and second with the fiscal interests of the producers, and not with the technical processes themselves.
|
|
|
Top |
| |
 |
greenmonstah 10761 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
|
04-22-04, 05:02 PM (EST)
|
|
2. "RE: New Show/New Judges..." |
 <--- Ordinary Moe, as mentioned above
I am not a blue peep, just an ordinary Moe, but I think there may be a good chance this thred willl get locked. Why? Because there are several threads already discussing this (perhaps not all three at once) and a blue peep, Ayak, went out of the way to bump an old thread for such a discussion. I could be wrong...if I am...that is why I am an ordinary Moe.
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
|
|
1simplyme 55 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Hollywood Squares Square"
|
04-23-04, 09:15 AM (EST)
|
|
3. "RE: New Show/New Judges..." |
Geez, I apologize. It has nothing to do with Jennifer, frankly I couldn't care less about her situation. I've been tired of Simon, Paula, and Randy for quite some time now. They're boreing already, and have been since the beginning of AI3, and as far as I'm concerned they're not talented enough to be the only judges. I was thinking of maybe different judges to rotate each week, along with a different ordinary moe each week would be refreshing. The voting process? I was thinking maybe they could set it up that fans could e-mail their votes once per e-mail address and call in their votes unlimited for two hours. No major changes, just some refreshment. As far as ages, I don't know, that was just a random number. But really, I didn't mean to upset anyone. My bad!
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
|
|
1simplyme 55 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Hollywood Squares Square"
|
04-23-04, 11:00 AM (EST)
|
|
9. "RE: New Show/New Judges..." |
Thanks "Monstah", no prob... 
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
1simplyme 55 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Hollywood Squares Square"
|
04-23-04, 10:05 AM (EST)
|
|
7. "RE: New Show/New Judges..." |
LOL my point exactly "hunter" She's being paid for judging, so give some unknown moe a chance to gain some publicity and a few dollars. Hahahahaha I love it!!!
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
goDAWful 34 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Beauty Pageant Celebrity Judge"
|
04-24-04, 00:34 AM (EST)
|
|
18. "RE: to: godawful" |
>So I
>guess it's fair to say
>that there are alot
>and I mean a lot
>of people who love Jennifer,
>her facial expressions and her
>voice, who feel that she
>was wronged.Yes, I would agree that that is fair to say. >No matter how
>you slice it, her hometown
>was not able to vote,
>and that makes a big
>difference. Unfortunately, we will never know the actual voting percentages (unless we can find someone around here who has stronger ties to Fox than I do). It is always possible that either Fantasia or LaToya could have gone instead, if Jennifer's home town had been able to vote, given that we know how small a margin there is between each candidate regardless of the quality of their most recent performance. >I wonder what would've
>happened if John Steven's highschool
>wasn't able to vote. I don't. John wouldn't have been going home regardless. The members of a high school are simply a statistically insignificant portion of the votership and it's extremely unlikely that their contribution to his score made the difference between last place (Jennifer) and (at worst) three places above that. You're underestimating how large a number 24 million votes is and overestimating how large a dent in that number a high school could make, even if they all voted 24 hours a day. Don't get me wrong -- I don't think John is better than Jennifer. In fact, I think he's absolute rubbish and Jennifer, while not to my taste, can actually sing. I'm simply saying that the reason she got the boot was not because the voting was rigged, or because her home town couldn't vote, or any of that other stuff. The reason she's gone is because she, Fantasia and LaToya have simply shared the votes available from viewers who like a black chick singer, and of the three of them, Jennifer's performance registered the least audience approval (for whatever reason). This doesn't make the voting system wrong. It makes Jennifer wrong for being foolhardy enough to allow herself to become "one of the three black chick singers". I expect LaToya and Fantasia will be wary of this issue as the competition moves forward, though I still expect them to continue to share one voting bloc between them until only one of them remains, which means both of them are in relative danger all the time.
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
goDAWful 34 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Beauty Pageant Celebrity Judge"
|
04-24-04, 01:22 AM (EST)
|
|
21. "RE: to: godawful" |
For what it's worth, shedevil, I think Jennifer stands a reasonable chance of getting work. She has what appears to be a modicum of humility, which would make her an amenable performer to work with, and she can undoubtedly sing (whether any given individual likes her vibe or not).The main thing in her favour, though, is a massive one; one that is basically immeasurably valuable. You identified it yourself. It's the free publicity. Jennifer has just been a headline on every news wire in America and will have attracted the notice of not only everyone in the industry (Billboard magazine reported on this today) but also of all kinds of people across the country who don't even watch the show. They'll have clicked on the Yahoo news story because everyone in America loves a story that suggests "voting impropriety" when it relates to a major news corporation. Jennifer is more well known to the average American than the winner of this competition will eventually be, because the only people who will read the Yahoo news link about the winner of AI3 are the people who were already interested in the show. And being well known to people as someone who didn't deserve to be voted out of a talent show amounts to more commercial opportunities for Jennifer than money can buy. It is true what they say. There is no such thing as bad publicity. No matter what line of entertainment work you're in, with the possible exception of child molestation charges there is no such thing as it being a bad thing to be in the news. Every performer benefits in some way (whether it is via more record sales, or more personal appearance money, or more massage for tense egos) from even the worst headlines.
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
|
|
1simplyme 55 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Hollywood Squares Square"
|
04-26-04, 01:55 PM (EST)
|
|
31. "RE: to: godawful" |
>That's the point I was trying
>to make, if Jennifer's hometown
>could've voted, Fantasia may have
>been the one saying goodbye.I
>think I may have said
>it was rigged in some
>post somewhere, if I did,
>it was my sadness for
>Jennifer talking. I really don't
>feel it is, but I
>do think it shouldn't have
>ended this way. The one
>thing I'm happy about in
>all this is it's giving
>Jenn tons of publicity and
>I think that is going
>to increase her chances at
>being a star. Everyone loves
>the underdog right?
>
>
>
>
you don't have to feel badly about thinking the votes were rigged, or fixed, or perhaps there was a mistake made in the voting process. You're absolutely right! Jennifer was robbed, and most people know it!
Simply put,
Simply Me
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
|
|
pinki3 9 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "American Cancer Society Spokesperson"
|
04-24-04, 12:49 PM (EST)
|
|
25. "RE: New Show/New Judges..." |
Thank you, thank you, thank you Karennz! It is very sad for someone to think that 30 is the cut off to realizing your dreams! As someone who is over 30, I can tell you that is not true at all! And by the way, the 30's happen to be the most fun, exciting, wonderful time!
Limited thinking is so very wrong no matter what your age. Thank you for allowing me my 2 cents. I've been reading this board all season and finally decided to take the plunge. . . . Of course Jennifer is a talented singer and I don't think she should've left before some of the others, but I'm sure she'll be just fine--probably has a record deal or Broadway offer as we speak! And the voting process will probably not change, because just as someone pointed out already, it's all about the buzz AI is getting and the advertising dollars rolling in. Hope I did everything right as a first time contributor to this board. Love to all! Pink
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
Handola 54 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Hollywood Squares Square"
|
04-25-04, 12:30 PM (EST)
|
|
26. "RE: New Show/New Judges..." |
Hi, Karennz-I totally agree with you on this and I mentioned it in an earlier post (to which, the poster replied). Check out the post, because the person who wrote it is in the music industry, which surprises me, but clearly I was wrong when I assumed otherwise. I know many musicians, and as katysax alluded earlier, most genres of music are not going to be acknowledged as much as pop music (thus it being called "pop" music.) Luck and timing is ABSOLUTELY key-though talent definitely need be present. The right person has to see you at the right time, or you have to spend all your time working on getting auditions, demos done, etc. Many very talented artists in jazz, folk, rock, etc. have to work full time jobs to support their artistic careers. My fiance is a jazz musician and he's received much local acclaim on the East Coast and in the Midwest, but hasn't gone national yet (if ever) mostly because the audience for jazz isn't as large as the audience for pop. And, he's turning 30 this year. I may be biased, but I know good musicianship when I hear it, and this man is fantastic. That said, I agree with goDAWful (music industry poster) about not wanting to see 40 year olds on AI. I also agree that 18-30 is a fine alternative to the now 16-25. I still think that someone could be fabulous at 40 on a national scale, though. Anything is possible. In fact, THAT might even be refreshing. But AI is and should be for younger people and truly, the age limit should remain as it is.
Fame and fortune, however it is measured, can come at any age. Period. 'Nuff said. Kudos to your friend who has been touring.
|
|
|
Top |
| |
geekboy 1788 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"
|
04-23-04, 09:22 AM (EST)
|
|
4. "RE: New Show/New Judges..." |
As much as people ##### and moan, i think AI has everything right. Along these lines, i totally disagree with you re: revamping the judging, age requirements, and voting process.Randy is an acredited music producer, and an extremely successful one. Paula knows the business inside and out, and her critiques and assessments - although a bit touchy feeling - are right on the money. Simon also is extremely successful and knows the business and is a "no-BS" guy. Simon _IS_ American Idol. The voting process is perfect, in my opinion. America chooses, what more can you say? They got it right w/ Kelley, they crowned two champs in season two, and i think they'll get it right this season in the end. Age changes? I don't think that would be wise since they are going for the 'amateur' pool of contestants, and once the age range is increased, the amateur factor is lost. I think everything is just fine w/ AI. geekboy
|
|
|
Top |
| |
managerr 1959 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"
|
04-23-04, 12:05 PM (EST)
|
|
12. "RE: New Show/New Judges..." |
Not yet. The ratings for the show are still soaring high and show no chance of dropoff. The formula is working. They probably need to keep adding little "twists" here and there like Survivor does to keep fresh though. (And I'm not talking about non-relevant twists silly Bottom 3 Group thing, Producers)
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
Handola 54 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Hollywood Squares Square"
|
04-23-04, 02:00 PM (EST)
|
|
15. "RE: New Show/New Judges..." |
I don't necessarily think it would be a bad idea to have one or two new judges for next season, but I do think that the same three people should be judging for the whole season. The judges see the contestants at every stage of the competition and can see how well they improve, or don't improve. Just like America, really. For example, George had a bad night this week, but he's still around because people who watch him week to week have seen that he can shine over and over again. If he does badly again, well, then that shows he's not consistent and then he could be voted off. Consistency is key in this competition, as is having a blow-out stellar night.I don't always care for Paula's remarks because I know that she is only the "half full" version of Simon's "half empty" mentality, but at least she offers a different perspective than the others. She does need to stop being so darn nice all the time, though. I wished that the age range was changed to 18-30 yr. olds last year because I wanted to try and audition (I'm a singer) but that might open things up for more "ringers" and not give the kids the opportunities. Well, maybe 30 wouldn't be too old, and by the way, someone said before that if a singer hasn't been discovered by the time they are 30, then they aren't talented?!?! I'm not saying I'm great or anything, but the person who wrote that obviously hasn't had any experience in show business or the talent industry. Plus, some people are very talented, but they don't decide to pursue it until later on in life (after kids, grad school, or whatever). Sheryl Crow (though I'm not a fan at all) didn't have any hit singles until she was in her 30's. Not everyone is Britney Spears (thank God!)
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
goDAWful 34 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Beauty Pageant Celebrity Judge"
|
04-24-04, 00:01 AM (EST)
|
|
16. "RE: New Show/New Judges..." |
the person who wrote that obviously hasn't had any experience in show business or the talent industryIt was me. In brief, my resume addresses the following: I work in the music industry for one of the world's largest independent multimedia entertainment corporations, where I started in business affairs (being a lawyer by training, if not by vocation) and where subsequently I transitioned into artist management and eventually into my current position in producer management. The artists whose names appear on my resume (and on whose records my name appears) are some of the industry's largest selling and most long standing acts. My career in the entertainment industry over the last fifteen years has taken me from London, to residence in Los Angeles, then New York, and finally back to Los Angeles where I opened the company's West Coast operation which now employs 50 people (of the company's 750 worldwide total). Our client list includes many of the artists who populate the top end of the record sales charts on any day of the week, and ranges from rock to pop to country to urban to R&B to rap to metal and all the way back around again. In the course of my daily business, I listen to probably 10 demo tapes from would-be professional singers, songwriters, and performers. We are one of the few companies in the industry that even accepts unsolicited demos and I could listen to a lot more per day if I wanted to make more of a dent in the pile. However, approximately 1 in every 1000 unsolicited demo tapes shows any workable promise whatsoever and therefore it can cause one to lose the will to live if one exceeds the benchmark of around 10 per day. The vast majority of unsolicited demos are complete dross that nobody in the business could do anything with. While I'm sure the reality of the situation is unpalatable to you, what I have described is the reality of the situation as regards undiscovered "talent". In other words, it is not impossible that you have undiscovered talent, but in simple statistical terms it is highly unlikely. This applies whether you're 13 or 97. My preferred age limit of 30 for American Idol has less to do with where lies the cut-off point for undiscovered talent in regards to age, and much more to do with the fact that seeing desperate thirty-something wannabes cavorting on national TV with blithe disregard for ordinary adult dignity would be utterly abhorrent. By all means, if you find my comments about talent unpalatable, assuage your feelings by maintaining your position that the comments were made by someone who has no real understanding of the industry. It's not like we're going to be working together any time soon. ;)
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
katysax 11 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Got Milk? Spokesperson"
|
04-24-04, 11:54 AM (EST)
|
|
23. "Undiscovered Talent" |
I live in LA, and I am an amateur jazz musician. I play and have played in a handful of semi-professional groups. Some of my friends are among the top session musicians. As regards ordinary garden variety pop of the sort you find on American Idol I think you are pretty much right about "undiscovered talent". I'm not sure that even much of the discovered "talent" is all that talented. On the other hand, there are certainly dozens of people on the fringes of the industry who are amazingly talented who will never have a big hit or be well known. In some genres like jazz they might not even be trying to find a place in the music industry because they know there is no commercial market for them. The problem is not that the music industry hasn't "discovered" them. On the contrary some of them are pretty well-known within the industry. It's that the industry has determined that there is no market for their creative production - which sadly is far more original but unfortunately for its commercial value - also far more challenging to appreciate than pop music. Let's face it - pop is to real music as (borrowing from another thread) Velveeta is to cheese. I find almost every note of "music" produced on American Idol to be unmitigated garbage. But I still find the show oddly fun to watch. For me it's kind of like "musical survivor". Totally frivolous but enjoyable nonetheless. I have heard some people occassionally on the show who do show some sparks of real talent but I don't think the show is so much about finding talent as it is about entertainment and a cheap way to help market new processed pop. We are about to enter an age in which the music "industry" will become irrelevant - the internet is creating the disaggregation of content production and distribution. It will be interesting to see over time how that affects popular music. By the way there is a long history in American music of talent being discovered in talent contests. Both Ella Fitzgerald and Tina Turner were "discovered" that way. However, both were all very young when that occurred.
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
Handola 54 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Hollywood Squares Square"
|
04-25-04, 12:44 PM (EST)
|
|
27. "RE: Undiscovered Talent" |
>I live in LA, and I
>am an amateur jazz musician.
> I play and have
>played in a handful of
>semi-professional groups. Some of
>my friends are among the
>top session musicians. I am also an amateur jazz/rock/r&b vocalist who has played in a few semi-professional groups. I know many extremely talented, experienced musicians. Many are over 30.
>
>As regards ordinary garden variety pop
>of the sort you find
>on American Idol I think
>you are pretty much right
>about "undiscovered talent". I'm
>not sure that even much
>of the discovered "talent" is
>all that talented. So true! I do think that there are some star quality contestants on this talent show, but many are young people who can sing well, but need more guidance/experience/dertermination.
>
>
> In some genres like
>jazz they might not even
>be trying to find a
>place in the music industry
>because they know there is
>no commercial market for them. It used to be different. Long ago, jazz was pop music. It would be cool and kind of retro to have that be the case again. >
>I find almost every note of
>"music" produced on American Idol
>to be unmitigated garbage.
>But I still find the
>show oddly fun to watch.
> For me it's kind
>of like "musical survivor".
>Totally frivolous but enjoyable nonetheless. Do I know you? ; ) Seriously, I sometimes have to defend myself to my musician cohorts when they discover that I watch this bubble gum show. I enjoy watching the kids have an opportunity that they otherwise may not have had because it's impossible for producers to hear everything out there. Their personalities-good or bad-keep it interesting even if I'm not down with the songs they're singing all the time. >We are about to enter an
>age in which the music
>"industry" will become irrelevant -
>the internet is creating the
>disaggregation of content production and
>distribution. It will be
>interesting to see over time
>how that affects popular music. Hopefully, popular music will become a genre that cannot be identified by one particular icon like Madonna or Britney Spears. It will become a multi-genre, multi-ethnic kind of music for the masses.
>
>
>By the way there is a
>long history in American music
>of talent being discovered in
>talent contests. Both Ella
>Fitzgerald and Tina Turner were
>"discovered" that way. However,
>both were all very young
>when that occurred. Didn't know that about Ella, that's cool. It can certainly happen. The question is, will ANY of the American Idols have the same staying power as people like Ella and Tina? Only time will tell. Peace
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
Handola 54 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Hollywood Squares Square"
|
04-25-04, 01:27 PM (EST)
|
|
28. "Sorry, long post" |
>the person who wrote that obviously
>hasn't had any experience in
>show business or the talent
>industry
>
>It was me.
>Clearly, I was wrong about your experience. Had I noticed that you in particular had posted several times on this thread, I would've at least deduced that you are educated- academically and within the contexts of the music industry. I stand corrected! I actually agreed with some of what you had to say, and now I know why it was so well versed. I still disagree with your statement about talent and age restrictions, though. I must say, however, that it is interesting to find someone with your experience on boards like this one. It's proof that the internet really brings all kinds of people together. I am a performing artist. Unfortunately, tis I who am at the bottom of the ladder because there are more of me-or more people who strive/want to be performing artists- than there are of you. Sounds like the artistic community at large could use more of people like you so that incredibly talented musicians aren't being overlooked. It's true, one person can hear only so much drivel before one goes absolutely mad. >
>
>While I'm sure the reality of
>the situation is unpalatable to
>you, what I have described
>is the reality of the
>situation as regards undiscovered "talent".
> In other words, it
>is not impossible that you
>have undiscovered talent, but in
>simple statistical terms it is
>highly unlikely. This applies
>whether you're 13 or 97.
> My preferred age limit
>of 30 for American Idol
>has less to do with
>where lies the cut-off point
>for undiscovered talent in regards
>to age, and much more
>to do with the fact
>that seeing desperate thirty-something wannabes
>cavorting on national TV with
>blithe disregard for ordinary adult
>dignity would be utterly abhorrent.
>
If you are referring to 30 somethings being on AI, no I don't think that what you illustrated above is necessary. Whether or not 30 is too old is debatable, and it appears that we actually agree that it may not be too old. When AI came out three years ago, I was 25, which is the cut-off. Technically, I may have been 24 when the auditions happened, but since I hadn't even heard of the show and didn't even watch the first season, that was a moot point. I actually wouldn't audition for the show even if the age limit was increased because I'm not a pop singer (as the definition appears to stand today) and I wouldn't fit in to what the judges seem to be looking for. I also have many other interests in life and I do think that a professional singer should practice every day and be EXTREMELY diligent in his or her efforts to achieve any level of success. Anyway, part of the charm of AI is the age factor. I enjoy seeing younger people get an opportunity that they otherwise may not have. It's interesting to note, though, that all the young people are singing songs that were written and performed by musicians who are over 30 (for the most part).
>
>By all means, if you find
>my comments about talent unpalatable,
>assuage your feelings by maintaining
>your position that the comments
>were made by someone who
>has no real understanding of
>the industry. It's not
>like we're going to be
>working together any time soon.
> ;) Well, that's a true statement if I've ever read one. My point is that I am very shocked anyone would ever make the statement to which I alluded earlier, regardless of his or her affiliation with the music industry. I assumed that because a) I hadn't noticed the continuity of your posts and b) there have been people who have achieved national acclaim after the age of 30 throughout music history-I'd expect someone in the biz to know that. Your point was with respect to AI, and AI only, I hope? If that is true than I agree that there needs to be a 25 or 30 yr. old cut-off. I don't want to see people older than that taking bubble baths together singing "Splish Splash". Not happening. Talent is, as you mentioned, a matter of taste. I know that I am talented. Whether or not you or someone else (an ordinary moe, perhaps, who would actually be buying the records?) thinks that is entirely debatable. It also depends on someone's idea of what talent is. Some people think that Britney Spears is a good singer. I don't. She can carry a tune, she's beautiful, dedicated, great dancer, etc. but she's not -IMHO- a great singer. But, no doubt many many people would disagree. That's cool. That's what makes America what it is. A whole lot of people disagreeing and sharing that with each other. Also, someone is buying William Hung's music. I think the guy is a cutie, a nice guy, and he actually has good pitch, but come on now. And a producer out there is selling his music. Produced music doesn't necessarily imply good taste, but I'm probably preaching to the choir. Overall, talent can be noticed on any scale at any age. That's my opinion, thank you for yours. Peace
|
|
|
Top |
| |
theincrediblehugey 141 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Blistex Spokesperson"
|
04-25-04, 11:52 PM (EST)
|
|
30. "RE: New Show/New Judges..." |
>I don't know about you, but
>I think it's time for
>AI to make some changes. Fat chance. AI is the most successful show on TV. They're not going to mess with it. >New Judges (An acredited Music Producer,
>A phenominal singer, and one
>ordinary moe) Wouldn't an AI gig be something of a step-down (lowering of standards, risk of becoming a social pariah) and a huge time drain for a real music producer and phenominal singer? And who would respect the opinions of an ordinary moe? >New Age requirements (27-40)? I agree with other posters here that the 30-40 age range is a little too mature for this show. 18-30 sounds good to me. >New Voting process.
The current voting process is the reason this show is a winner. >I know someone out there agrees
>with me. Nope. You want a true singing competiton. That would be boring. AI, and all other reality shows, is all about being entertained at the expense of the contestant who is an ordinary moe. To prove my point just look at the TV Guide's "AI 20 Secrets Revealed" It states that:
12) Contestants sign a release form that says "Your apperance, depiction, and/or portrayal in the contest may be disparaging, defamatory, embarrasing, or of an otherwise unfavorable nature which may expose you to public ridicule, humiliation or condemation". As long as ordinary moe's are willing to sign a release permitting themselves to be humiliated in front of millions of viewers, AI will be a hit.
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
|
|
Email this topic to a friend
Printer-friendly version of this topic
Bookmark this topic (Registered users only)
<--- Why I will never be a blue peep!
