Is Not Winning Actually The Better Result
Posted 09 May 2010 - 07:43 PM
but on a positive note, part of me cant help thinking that the ones that dont win may have the better result, as they have the exprience of the show and the exposure, but without necessarily of having the stigma of "the winner of x reality show"
cant help but think of:
daniel boys who had a long run in avenue q,
rachel tucker who played meat in we will rock you in the west end and will be playing elphiba in wicked,
niamh perry playing fleck in love never dies
siobhan dillon - lead in two uk tours (cant smile without you and cabaret,) and patty in grease and is now sandy in grease in the west end
aiofa mullholand as brooke in legally blonde
sam barks - lead in the tour of cabaret, and will be joining the west end cast of les miserables playing Eponine (now would love to see her do on my own!)
seamus cullen played che in evita uk tour
and so on.
Posted 09 May 2010 - 08:21 PM
As we know both Lee and Jodie, are away to start runs in there 2nd musicals, with Lee having done a play between Joseph and Wicked.
Will be interesting to see what Connie does after the SOM tour finishes.
I think the runners up in the shows always get so and so from x tv programme in some shows advertising or press releases, so I guess in a way there is no way escaping being part of the TV programme.
But, to any un-trained performers, not being part of the winning production means if they wish and recieve offers and places they can go and study.
Posted 10 May 2010 - 08:24 AM
I think being accepted by the theatrical community is very important and their attitude when rehearsing etc has a lot to do with that. Connie does not somehow seem to have quite gelled with people and hasn't exactly been inundated with offers. Lee Mead seems well liked and poular with both public & pros. Think Jodie is somewhere between the two!
But, I agree that a lot of runners up have done very, very well and potentially become more credible performers. Their programme notes will always include their reality TV history though. But talent is talent & if they have it they will succeed.
I think it is a little different for the Dorothys as they are all so young. If they don't play Dorothy, I think most are too young to do anything major despite their popularity and are more likely to continue their training before embarking on a career. Which is probably no bad thing as roles now would be limited.
Posted 10 May 2010 - 08:54 AM
Posted 10 May 2010 - 09:12 AM
Out of the winner's Lee seems to be doing well, good run as Joseph, straight acting piece in a play and now Wicked- which although isn't as big a role will still raise his profile again and perhaps give him more credit aside from the reality tv winner label. I'm not sure where Connie can go next after the Sound Of Music. Not sure it was the right move to go back into it. She'll get typecast. Jodie remains to be seen, but I agree she seems to be somewhere in between Connie and Lee.
Any of the contestants will have 'from TV's....'
Posted 10 May 2010 - 12:57 PM
I think Lee will have a good steady career in MT. Jodie is a bubbly woman who might succeed on TV & in MT. I'm not so sure about Connie. They're Playing Our Song wasn't a success and she returned to the SOM. She might have done well to do the same as Lee and get a good role in a well-established show. As you say none of the previous winners can sell-out a show on their own. But that may well change in time.
Posted 10 May 2010 - 01:44 PM
I find it odd that there seems to be an 'inverse snobbery' with regards to the winners (and not just in the TV Casting shows, but also in things like X-Factor and BGT). While those who didn't win get (rightly) praised for their achievements, the winners are often derided as somehow being lesser talents, who only achieved their success because they won. The fact is, anyone who enters these competitions is entering with their eyes on the prize. They all want to win.
It's hard to compare the success of various people. For example, Contestant A may have been in two shows and Contestant B, one show, since their forays into the world of TV Casting. However, Contestant A might have been in two 'short runs', while Contestant B's run in their one show may have been a longer one. So it's not a case of saying that Contestant A is more successful than Contestant B.
Also, there are other factors to take into account. After Joseph, Lee decided to take a year out (during which he released his second album and studied acting in New York). Then there are those who have been in touring productions. So, it's difficult to make a straightforward comparison of career success.
Posted 10 May 2010 - 03:23 PM
Posted 10 May 2010 - 03:23 PM
The shows have been going for what, four years? It takes a lot longer than that to build up a reputation in theatre that will sell out shows. In fact I can't think of any theatre-based stars who can do that in the West End. I think your expectations are a little high.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users