I didn't watch it the first two seasons, but I thought this season I'd check it out and see what all the hype is about. The first few weeks when they were doing all the audtions I thought was ok so I thought I'd stick it out and see where it goes.
As the actual competition began...I was like, "This ought to be interesting." And it certainly has become that. I don't know if any of you watch it, but tonight America made a Mockery of American Idol...and I couldn't be happier. One of probably three best singers was voted off tonight; in fact, the three best singers (jmho) were in the bottom three. Jon Stevens is still in it. Believe me, this guy barely beats William Hung. How he has made it this far in the competition is beyond me.
Simon should be proud that his experiment has back-fired and will continue to do so. The American people, for some reason, have decided that this year....the worst Singer will win it. I can't wait to see what happens.
I actually smiled when Ryan "Seacrest out" read of the bottom three vote getters...and Randy, Paula and Simons mouths opened in disbelief.
"If you choose not to decide....you still have made a choice." Rush - Freewill
NickOvTyme wrote:One of probably three best singers was voted off tonight; in fact, the three best singers (jmho) were in the bottom three.
I agree with you here, but I will say the weakest of the three was voted off. It is John Stevens time to go (and I don't doubt that all the "popularity contest" remarks were said with mostly him in mind), although I'd rather see that girl straight out of the Mickey Mouse Club gone first.
Seeing Fantasia so close to getting voted off shocked me, because she's the best one there when you talk about a whole package. I still think she'll win, although she really doesn't have to.
I'm also with you in that this is the first season in which I've really paid attention. At first it was to laugh at all the terrible people, but this top 12 has had some interesting personalities, so I've kept up.
I caught the ass-end of season one, the early-middle of season 2 and have been watching this season all thru, so far.
Only season I enjoyed was last one. It was exciting. Its kinda disapointing how much more I enjoyed the whole 'Clay and Ruben' thing than I enjoy anything they've done post-AI, tho.
And this season is a joke. I'm not really rooting for anyone in particular. That JPL was in past week 1 makes me want to throw up on myself. (JPL = GWB.) Same goes for big Red, but at least the poor guy knows he shoulda gone already. George is kinda sweet, Fantasia is Macy Gray with more range, talent, and attitude (+ dead ringer for Chris Tucker in a miniskirt), LaToya is good but kinda of blah personality wise. Jasmyn's adorable but too young. And Dianna Digarmo = that little girl from the Cosby show (olivia? not rudy..). AHH. okay bye.
I don't really pay too much attention to American Idol except for the last 10 minutes or so I am forced to watch while I wait for the O.C. to come on (because I'll admit it, I love that show. Although Misha drives me crazy). Anyway, from my friends who do watch the show claiming "I hate America!" because of the voting results, I get the impression that the wrong person was voted off last night.
If that chick is really more talented, she should consider herself lucky. She got some free exposure and now she doesn't have to sign her life away to American Idol. If you ever want to produce something creative of your own in your music career, being America's next Idol is not for you.
I just hope when they pick who they want to force feed to the public, they choose the least annoying one of the bunch.
When I first heard about American Idol, I thought it was for bands and stuff too. It's gonna take another Nirvana-level band to make anything like that happen.
Spiffy McBang wrote:When I first heard about American Idol, I thought it was for bands and stuff too. It's gonna take another Nirvana-level band to make anything like that happen.
Why would it require a semi-talented garage band with a mumble-mouth singer to make something like that happen?
The problem lies within today's culture...
"Hip-Hop", "Rap" and other such "music" does not require anyone to play instruments.
The very success of American Idol indicates that if one wants to get into the music industry, one only needs to look half-way good and sing half-way well.
Not since the days of Yes, Genesis, Fleetwood Mac and the like have there been bands that are successful because they are bands. ( There are exceptions of course, but they are very rare. )
Sadly, I think it can all be traced back to when lead singers for bands would start "solo careers".
Kitsune wrote:Not since the days of Yes, Genesis, Fleetwood Mac and the like have there been bands that are successful because they are bands. ( There are exceptions of course, but they are very rare. )
What I'm saying is, how many people know who plays the guitar on Christina Aguilara's (sp?) albums?
How many people even care about the musicians anymore? It's all about the singers. It's about the "me"-centric attitude of the music industry.
The success of Fleetwood Mac far outstrips the success of the "solo" careers of any of it's members... in fact, if it weren't for the success of Fleetwood Mac, they would not have had "solo" careers. That's what I meant about bands being successful because they were bands, and not because they were a singer with some random, nameless musicians behind them.
I don't know about that. A lot of that is due to this growing need the public has to identify with a single person, generally the lead singer of a band, but it doesn't mean that a band's success is only due to that person. To be a nameless background musician has very little to do with talent level and everything to do with where people focus their attention.
I'll grant that you can make the case better with mainstream bands nowadays- there is very little complexity in the instrumental parts of hit songs nowadays. Amy Lee is Evanescence because she's an absurdly phenomenal singer, but also because the band doesn't write their songs with ripping guitar solos or whatever. A huge chunk of bands are now background to the vocalist, regardless of the vocalist's talent. But that's a relatively new phenomenon, not something which stretches back all the way to Fleetwood Mac.
Even in the case of 80's hair bands- Bon Jovi, Motley Crue, Guns N Roses, Poison, etc.- everyone identified with the band. Jon Bon Jovi may have received a lot of attention, but so did Richie Sambora. How about the one-armed drummer in Def Leppard? A special case, sure, but he was noticed. Plus, for the time, the guys could play (especially Slash) and made music designed to show that.
Moving forward, you start to see where the singers started to get more and more attention- a lot of it was in the grunge thing, come to think of it. Kurt Cobain was Nirvana, period. Pearl Jam's musicians did get attention, but Eddie Vedder was where the spotlight shone. But bands like Smashing Pumpkins were bands, Billy Corgan's whiny ass be damned. He may have been a control freak, but he had great people behind him and everyone knew it. What have you heard about him since everyone told him to piss off?
Nowadays, there are still a lot of phenomenal bands around, but they play music that isn't big in the mainstream. The punk/hardcore scene is full of them; AFI is one that seems to have worked its way into a brighter spotlight, although there's a lot less edge to their music now. Pennywise flirted with more fame a few years ago, but as far as I know that was their only single that went anywhere.
That turned into a rant, but the basic point is that what you're saying is true, but in a more limited scope than what you're suggesting. Even now, many, many, many people care about bands and musicians. It's just that that attitude has been pushed below the surface of media attention.
