987 replies to this topic

[jaqs]

Cant believed they are that worried about Diva behaviour, they cast CHRIS MOYLES.

[pastaeater]

cat123, on 24 July 2012 - 05:57 AM, said:

When will people realise that shows like this can and do put their contestants across any way they want? I've met a number of performers who hav been on shows like this both before an after their apearences and even those that have come across well are scathing about how contestants are portrayed. If ALW wanted Nathan off the show, it would be so easy to plant negative press out there to change public opinion. With regards to him being 'young', 23 isn't young but he's young in the industry. Maybe he does need to adjust his approach to the way he handles criticism but I dot for one moment believe the diva stories.

I don't know Nathan personally but I have met him, and people I respect who work in the industry have only good things to say about him. That's good enough for me.

I couldn't agree more.  Surely there aren't still people on here who believe what is presented to us on the programme is genuinely portraying exactly what is going on? We see a "tweaked" version of what the producers and ALW want us to see - there is absolutely blatant manipulation of the voting so that we end up with ALWs preferred candidate, and there always has been.  The difference in the past was that with IDA - after a run of these shows on the BBC - people began to be wise to it and ignored the preferred candidate (Jessie) and voted for Jodie Prenger. Have you all forgotten ALW and Cam Mac sweating with panic on the panel and making some quite unpleasant attacks on her, which seemed to only spur people on to vote for her?

What is more interesting, I think, is why didn't ALW want Nathan? He certainly has the voice for the part, and I'll ignore the "23yr old man is rather immature" news flash (duh!)  Maybe they had genuine concerns about his acting ability? Having furiously voted for Jodie Prenger, I have to admit that when I saw her live I was disappointed with her performance - she really isn't very strong vocally, and perhaps they were right.

All these comments about Nathan being incredibly arrogant - have we really seen any real signs of that? The judges keep mentioning it, but as one of the Joseph contestants told me years ago, the judges comments are pretty much scripted for them.  Jonathan Williams, who has worked with Nathan as one of the Rock Tenors - tweeted furiously that the comments were totally unfair and amounted to "character assassination". (Incidentally Jonathan would have been an incredible Jesus - shame he went so early, but probably looked a bit old for what they wanted).

As for the person who said "you can't portray things on these programmes if they aren't there to start with"............. ummmm, yes you can. You can get people to record little VTs and then edit them however you want, and you can get panels of judges to say the same things about people over and over again until it seeps into the public consciousness.

I am not a massive fan of Nathan in spite of his voice - it just irritates me to see people thinking exactly what they are expected to think.

[Danube]

That is a very good point about Chris Moyles being arrogant.  He's not at bad as he used to be, but he's still fairly dreadful and makes Andrew himself seem humble.  And Mel C has always been fairly mouthy, and not shy of promoting herself, getting into arguments when anyone suggested girl groups like Sugababes or Girls Aloud might be better than "The Spice Girls" were.

I would say it is impossible for editors to make you say certain things, but it is very easy for them to get you to say something that can then be used out of context.  A long conversation can be reduced into something much shorter, so a reaction may appear to be over the top without the dialogue that took place inbetween.  It's definitely very easy to show "reaction shots" out of context.   I'm sure I read about one of the audience members from the often replayed Susan Boyle audition saying that she was shown laughing, but it was from another part of the day altogether, but now many millions of people think she was laughing at an odd looking Subo.

[DarkViking]

ALW shows his true colours. He'd already made it plainly obvious that Rory and Roger were his favourites, having shamelessly saved both. There's nothing to stop both making it through to the final - David and Ben are all but out.

What ALW has forgotten is that this is a ROCK opera - and it's being presented in large venues. The lead MUST have a great voice AND have presence. Neither Rory nor Roger have that. Roger hasn't the 'rockstar' voice and Rory may have a decent pop voice but he's as dull as dishwater - no emotion in any of his performances.

The one true rockstar who would command our attention has been booted out by his lordship. I switched off in disgust after Dawn's shameful comment. Apparently I missed a tirade from ALW directed at poor Nathan. As I've read in another thread, this was a carefully orchestrated dismissal of someone ALW didn't want.

ALW would like to think that the public will have chosen the winner. Not true. He's had full control and has exerted it. He's made the choices so far and will ensure that his preferred people make it through to the final.

I've paid for my ticket to the O2 in September. With the shameful way in which this 'talent show' has been conducted I've no desire to waste the £77.76 I've spent so far seeing second-rate performers in a large arena. 78 quid, near enough, - that's only the cost of the ticket. The hotel and train to London will add considerably to that.

I'm going to get a refund. I'm disappointed and angry!

[MS1995]

DarkViking, on 24 July 2012 - 11:59 AM, said:

ALW shows his true colours. He'd already made it plainly obvious that Rory and Roger were his favourites, having shamelessly saved both. There's nothing to stop both making it through to the final - David and Ben are all but out.

Have you realised that he also saved david earlier in the competition?

and there is a way of stopping them getting to the final... people not voting for them so they don't get into the final.

and as for the comment about it being all in ALWs control so you want a refund... well you probably should have realised it would be like that as all the previous shows have been.

and lets face it in the end it is down to the public, as if someone gets enough votes then ALW wont be able to kick them out and they will win the final!

[Helenkagooner]

Jonathan Ansell was badly edited and wrong information given out
Jonathan was given permission to go for the part of JC
he was rehearsing for A tale of 2 Cities being put on at Charring cross theatre for few weeks
It was on website that he would not be doing every show
If you had booked tickts well in advance and found that Jon was not going to be i that performance you seeing it could be changed for another time or money back
Showed him to be rude and not caring ever so wrong Jonathan is brillant and very caring
They did not mention about others who were in west end shows
This is performance not to be missed

[DarkViking]

Perhaps I'm just being a bit naive thinking that ALW wouldn't have favourites. The only other similar talent show I watched in the past was Any Dream Will Do. I haven't been aware of how much control ALW held onto.

As I say, Rory and Roger are odds-on favourites to make it to the final. Neither of them are worth my while making the trip to London for.

[Titan]

Why did you book tickets before the role was cast?

[Flunkyfoo]

Both Jonathan and Nathan weren't badly edited. They're both nice guys but have a tendency to be difficult. At the island Jonathan didn't accept the advice of the mentors and in the live shows Nathan has rubbed people up the wrong way with his demands and hissy fits all of which have been witnessed by people who have a big say. And if they hadn't reacted negatively they wouldn't have been cast as villains. No matter how good you are if the management find you difficult and don't feel they could work with you they're not going to employ you. Be it a tv show casting or through the normal process.

[pastaeater]

Flunkyfoo, on 24 July 2012 - 01:23 PM, said:

Both Jonathan and Nathan weren't badly edited. They're both nice guys but have a tendency to be difficult. At the island Jonathan didn't accept the advice of the mentors and in the live shows Nathan has rubbed people up the wrong way with his demands and hissy fits all of which have been witnessed by people who have a big say. And if they hadn't reacted negatively they wouldn't have been cast as villains. No matter how good you are if the management find you difficult and don't feel they could work with you they're not going to employ you. Be it a tv show casting or through the normal process.

Do you have inside information about the demands and hissy fits, or are you just going on what has come over on the programmes?
(I'm not disagreeing with you, just interested).