In This Section
TV Guide Spotlight
Also on TVGuide.com
|
« The Great American Idol Blog
Idol Exec Defends Decision to "De-group" Hollywood
If American Idol's Hollywood round last week seemed rather whirlwind and free of soapy "You stayed up late macking on that emo boy and as a result didn't memorize the words to our song!" drama, it was by design. Explaining the decision to do away with the group performances and all the cattiness that came with them, exec producer Nigel Lythgoe told reporters in a conference call, "We realized that people were being cut [during the group performances] because they couldn't remember the lyrics, and that is really not the reason to get rid of people, as far as I'm concerned."
Lythgoe appreciates that the group element gave the otherwise talent-driven competition some fun conflict — "It was always done for the contentious side of it, to get the [in-fighting]... to see how they coped under pressure," he notes — yet stands by the decision to focus on individuals. "This year, we just wanted to base it on talent." — Matt Mitovich
More Idol chatter:
• American "iDol" Songs, Videos Land on iTunes
• American Idol's Top 24: Our Take!
|
TVGuide Links:
|
|
|
|
Feb 18, 2008 9:26 AM
|
Good. The reason I like AI and DWTS and not the other 200+ reality crapfests is the focus on the talent, not the backstage drama (ok, DWTS will get a bit melodramatic sometimes, but overall it's supposed to be a feel-good show).
If I could make any changes to AI it would be to have the singers on stage with the band, not have the band stuck away somewhere. Let's see what the singers would be like in a real concert setting. And how about some originals?
To me forgetting lyrics is less important than how you sound/perform. It shows how you deal with pressure (Jessica and Ashlee Simpson, anyone?). If you get so flustered that you can't sing and maintain your composure, yeah, you probably shouldn't be pursuing a career in live performance and Simon, et al, should send you packing. But I saw Amy Winehouse in concert and it was SO obvious she was reading the lyrics off a sheet on her monitor in front of her. She didn't miss a beat, so not being able to remember your lyrics (or being sober, for that matter) apparently doesn't keep you from selling millions of records or winning a grammy.
|
|
Feb 18, 2008 10:26 AM
|
I'm enjoying it this time 'round - but maybe that's because it's the first time I've seen it all the way from the beginning with some way awful auditions.
Disappointed in some of the people that were sent packing and don't know who some of the others were since it seems TPTB didn't think their auditions were good enough to show us them (strange that they were chosen if that's the case)but in the main I like lots of the ones left so should be one of the best. I have a question maybe someone can help me with - on Dance Wars, how come the winners get recording contracts since the key here was DANCING???? Maybe you can't give a dance contract, and both elements were important and they chose good singers that "could" improve their dancing rather than dancers that couldn't sing but still I'm wondering about that!! Anyone else? Though I'm in the wrong blog for that.
|
|
Feb 18, 2008 10:36 AM
|
I was rather relived that they got rid of the group performances. They always seemed like an inaccurate way of picking who should go on to the top 24. They're never again asked to sing with anyone (competition wise - I'm not forgetting about the dreaded group songs during results shows!), so I never understood the point.
I'm glad they instead gave all the 'no's a second chance - some of them really did well their second time around.
|
|
Feb 18, 2008 11:12 AM
|
|
Dorjean - it's the same reason why people like Britney Spears, J. Lo and Paula Abdul get recording contracts - in the age of MTV there's more emphasis on the dancing and not the singing.
|
|
Feb 18, 2008 11:26 AM
|
|
I haven't started watching yet. I am going to wait until the top 12. I just think showcasing the bad contestants got old and is not funny anymore. Just insults intelligence. At least that is how I see it.What was cute and funny is just plain stupid now, not to mention insulting to my intelligence. I will tune in to top 12 when my vote counts.So I guess I could say I think the change is good from what I read.
|
|
Feb 18, 2008 12:16 PM
|
I've said it before, and will keep saying it--if the focus is talent (and I'd rather see that than the histrionics and fighting), then why the insistence on equal numbers of guys and girls? Imagine if, in season 2, the only slot left was for a girl? Clay Aiken would probably still be a special ed. teacher. (I know that there are those out there who say that that would be a good thing.)
Anyway, while there have been a few good group numbers, for the most part, they're just painful and joyless. I think the change-up is a positive one, especially giving those initially turned down a second chance.
|
|
Feb 18, 2008 3:34 PM
|
|
I don't know why they're having to explain this. I thought it was a great thing and long overdue. I thought the group songs were stupid since the contest is for a solo singer, not a group. I hope they keep this format in the future.
|
|
Feb 18, 2008 4:34 PM
|
|
I'd much rather them explain why there are so many ringers in this obviously spiked group.
|
|
Feb 18, 2008 10:29 PM
|
|
I for one did not miss the group performances and all the drama and BS that went along with it. The show seemed much more professional and serious without it.I hope that the rest of the season follows suit.
|
|
Feb 19, 2008 11:51 AM
|
> If American Idol's Hollywood round last week
> seemed rather whirlwind and free of soapy "You stayed
> up late macking on that emo boy and as a result
> didn't memorize the words to our song!" drama, it was
> by design. Explaining the decision to do away with
> the group performances and all the cattiness that
> came with them, exec producer Nigel Lythgoe told
> reporters in a conference call, "We realized that
> people were being cut [during the group performances]
> because they couldn't remember the lyrics, and that
> is really not the reason to get rid of people, as far
> as I'm concerned."
>
> Lythgoe appreciates that the group element gave the
> otherwise talent-driven competition some fun conflict
> — "It was always done for the contentious side of it,
> to get the [in-fighting]... to see how they coped
> under pressure," he notes — yet stands by the
> decision to focus on individuals. "This year, we just
> wanted to base it on talent." — Matt Mitovich
>
> More Idol chatter:
> • American "iDol" Songs, Videos Land on
> iTunes
> • American Idol's Top 24: Our Take!
I thoroughly agree with the Producer's idea to do away with the group performances and allow contestants a second chance to "get it right." I enjoyed this year's performances more than the last six years I think.
|
|
Feb 19, 2008 12:15 PM
|
If the most shown candidates aren't going to get picked for the final 24, then they shouldn't be shown so much. I wish Joshua would have made it but he did screw up his last audition so he should have to wait another year to try again.
But Kyle Ensley should have made it. He is considerably more talented than Colton Berry and although he looks a little geeky, that could have been worked on. Personally I thought he was cuter than Colton Berry too. Just look at what they did to Clay Aiken and I actually liked his previous look better than his current. When he lost his glasses, he lost part of his personality. That is what happened to John Denver too. He went to contacts and became just another singer with a good voice and no personality.
It's no wonder the viewer count is down. Great singers go home because there has to be 12 and 12 which is dumb because we're looking for the best of the best, not the best guy and the best girl. It's be different if there would be 2 winners at the end - one male and one female. Mediocre singers stay when better singers go because of the male/female count. Male or female should have nothing to do with it. Fat or thin, pretty or plain or geeky should have nothing to do with it. It should be the best voices only.
Personally, I don't think Colton Berry is not that great and I hope he is one of the first to go home. Usually it's Simon who messes up on the best talent. This time Randy and Paula missed the boat. Less time should be spent on the pre-Hollywood shows showing non-talented silly people and more on the people who eventually will make it down to the final 24. It's sad that people would rather watch boring and ridiculous people making fools of themselves instead of talented people trying to do their best. What a waste of time! It's sad that they show some people so many times that the viewers really start to like them and then they aren't in the final group chosen.
Good luck to Kyle Ensley. Maybe he can try out again next year. I would vote for him. When is the music industry going to realize that talent is not based on looks. If it was, we would never have enjoyed the wonderful talent of Mick Jagger, Steve Tyler and Mama Cass among many others.
My choices for this year will be David Archuleta, Michael Johns, Asia'h Epperson, Brooke White or Amanda Overmyer. And my choices are only based on talent. I wish the show could be done with voices only and not even see what the contestants look like until the end. - Debbie Boyer
|
|
Feb 19, 2008 12:25 PM
|
I wish Joshua would have made it but he did screw up his last audition so he should have to wait another year to try again.
I think you mean Josiah.
|
|
Feb 19, 2008 12:33 PM
|
I haven't started watching yet. I am going to wait until the top 12. I just think showcasing the bad contestants got old and is not funny anymore. Just insults intelligence. At least that is how I see it.What was cute and funny is just plain stupid now, not to mention insulting to my intelligence. I will tune in to top 12 when my vote counts.So I guess I could say I think the change is good from what I read.
Since you haven't started watching the show yet, you shouldn't be making comments on how the show has been so far because how would you know? This year they did not focus a lot on the untalented singers, but a lot on the ones with talent. If you wait until the top 12, you will miss some genuine talent because the top 24 are all very talented, even though some have already been inside a recording studio and also have performed on stage. So please do not comment on something you haven't even seen yet.
|
|
Feb 19, 2008 2:18 PM
|
|
|
