Susan Boyle is everyone’s feel-good story of the moment. And I don’t begrudge her a little bit of happiness and fame.
But since I’ve never actually watched the British TV show in question, I have to wonder… does this show typically have performers who are terrible, who are put on stage solely to be laughed at by the judges and the crowd?
I know that, in the EARLY stages of “American Idol” (and, presumably, “Pop Idol”), they show many funny clips of talentless (and clueless) auditioners. The audience seems to enjoy watching Simon Cowell tell such people, “You’re bloody awful.” But such people get put on a big stage in front of thousands of people.
Which makes me wonder- if the frumpy Miss Boyle had been a horrible singer, WOULD the producers have been cruel enough to put her on stage? Or did they put her on stage precisely BECAUSE they knew her talent would take the judges and viewers completely by surprise?
Yes. At least, on the one episode I’ve watched, the other day. They had a singing duo consisting of a woman who couldn’t sing and her pet parrot, which got stage fright and remained mute throughout. And a couple of terrible performing dog acts, one of which managed to set fire to the backdrop. Etc.
I’m not sure they would put someone like Susan Boyle up just because they were a bad singer. I imagine they’re looking for stuff that is either pretty good or thigh-slappingly bad. A woman standing there singing off-key would just be dull.
He’s asking about this series in particular, not the reality competition genre in general, so William Hung’s 15 seconds on American Idol is irrelevant.
I can’t speak for “Britain’s Got Talent”, but the US version, “America’s Got Talent” absolutely brings terrible singers – and people who think they have some other kind of talent but really don’t – out to be made fun of. And, especially with the singers, there’s almost always the little conversation with the judges first, in which the performer so earnestly declares that they have a great talent. It’s the sincerity and conviction of the person’s belief in their talent that makes the reality of how crappy they are all the more fun.
When I first watched the Susan Boyle clip, I was completely expecting her to be a terrible singer. The person that emailed me the link called it a great feel-good moment, but I was expecting the feel-good part to be something else, not that she could really sing.
So I have no doubt that if Susan had been a horrible singer, the producers would have had no compunction about sending her on stage. She would have come out, sung badly, been booed by the audience and jeered by the judges and then forgotten.
There’s another thread on this, but I can confirm (having watched these UK shows a lot :o) that the producers in the early programs are looking for:
real talent (especially surprising ones like Susan)
a heart-warming story (kids doing well for single parents etc)
people who are dreadful and don’t know it (or don’t want to admit it)
Every act shown is therefore either:
quality
surprising
eccentric
sympathetic
laughable
really dire
On the TV show you **never **see a normal person walk on and do a straightforward average performance.
Oh, and the last act at every venue is always both sympathetic and good (this is true of American Idol too).