The Public Vs Andrew Lloyd Webber
May 8th, 2008 by NathanHas anyone else noticed that there seems to be somewhat of a gulf opening up between what the judges say on I’d Do Anything and who the public vote for? Let’s look at the evidence:
Exhibit A: First of all, old ‘Lordy’ chops got into a bit of a funk the other week over having to chose between Niamh and Keisha. Then…
Exhibit B: Despite Rachel being the darling of a good portion of the panel, she found herself with the fewest votes on Saturday. As Graham quite rightly pointed out, if it had been down to the public alone, she would have been booted out of the competition there and then.
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, does this mean that the public have a different idea of what makes a good leading lady to the experts? And, if so, is it more or less valid?
In the past it has to be said that the public have chosen their West End stars with considerable adeptness. The perennially popular Connie Fisher was chosen by the wider collective to lead in The Sound of Music and Lee Mead is still packing them in at The Adelphi after his victory on Any Dream Will Do (which is to say nothing of the countless awards, nominations and trinkets that they have amassed along the way).
However, looking at talent shows in general, Joe Public and his contemporaries have a far less commendable record. One only has to whisper the words ‘Michelle McManus’ or ‘Alex Parks’ and people start to feel altogether rather faint.
So, jury members, you’ve heard the evidence, whose cause do you think we should get behind? On one side we have the cool hand of democracy; let the people, by the people, choose the people, for the people, to be in a show performed by the people, unto the people, by the people etc. On the other we have stone cold experience; Andrew Lloyd Webber is one of the most successful theatrical composers in existence: ipso facto he knows what he’s talking about.
There we have it ladies and gentlemen, if you would like to retire to discuss your verdict now we would love to hear what you think on the matter. Court adjourned!
Related Posts:
Sneaky Lloyd Webber
I’d Do Anything on the 15th March
Bye bye Chris B
May 8th, 2008 at 8:21 pm
I’m mainly with the judges who have a much better idea of what the role demands. They are certainly better at judging the stamina, consistency and other technical things. Whether they are always right about who has charisma is another matter but they probably are because however well someone sings or acts, if they are uninteresting they will not do well. On the whole apart from the BBC ALW shows I don’t think the uninformed public are very good at judging.
May 14th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
I agree with V stone, the judges are looking for something different to what the public look for. Often the public will be looking for the underdog, or the one with the ’story’ or the good looking one.
Hopefully the talent will shine through and the correct one will be chosen!