'American Idol' changing its tune for 7th season
We can all agree to disagree on "American Idol" and pretty much always have over the past six seasons.
Some editions have been grand, some less so. Which was which? That was strictly a matter of opinion and the maddening and unpredictable hobgoblin known as "taste."
Then, something happened last year. It started quietly enough - maybe a sort of revulsion at the early contestant rounds, which featured a tsunami of false notes and bad hair. Then, there was Sanjaya, who became a national joke. Melinda Doolittle, the finest singer in "Idol" history, was prematurely ejected. Ratings slid slightly, teens abandoned the show by the millions, the summer tours were sparsely attended and potential buyers remain allergic to winner Jordin Sparks' self-named CD.
In other words, there was no disagreement whatsoever on the sixth season: It stunk.
That's why change is afoot at "Idol." Nothing dramatic, mind you. But change. As the world's most popular TV show starts its seventh season tonight at 8 on Fox/5, we offer five reasons why this could be the best one ever. Then, five reasons why seven could be "Idol's" unlucky number:
1. Much better performers this year
That's the advance word - or spin, anyway - from the "Idol" camp, and there's no reason not to believe this. The focus this year was improving the front line, and in a recent conference call, Simon Cowell said, "We got a better top 12, more interesting than [the 12] last year."
In a separate phone interview, "Idol" brain trust/exec producer Nigel Lythgoe slightly disagreed: "I said last season that we had the strongest top 12 and I still stand by that, [but] were there any outstanding individual performers? No, I don't think there were." He added that there were previous seasons "where I wanted to curl up and die [because] I was constantly surprised Americans kept in the competition."
Of this year's crop, he says three or four "could easily be signed" by a label.
And the flip side:
May I remind you of the Sanjaya effect? The tendency for the outrageously bad or silly to survive and for the outrageously good to occasionally get dumped? "Idol" may have some fine singers in season 7, but who's to say they'll survive?
2. The Writers Guild Strike
The theory goes: Because there's so much junk on the air now - "American Gladiators!" - that viewers will give "Idol" an even bigger bear hug. There's reason to believe this; after all, "Idol" is huge even when there's good scripted stuff on. The calculus now suggests: Huger.
And the flip side:
Nice little theory, but even Cowell and Lythgoe think it's bunk, and they may be right. Ever pragmatic, Cowell says: "People will [still] have a choice with other channels and we have to make a better show than last year and that's the reason we'll gain or lose viewers." Says his pal Lythgoe: "We're going to have to be successful hopefully in our own right. If there's nothing on TV, [maybe] the American public will go outside and play sports - or my favorite would be to go learn a ballroom dance."
He also adds, the other networks rarely air anything solid opposite "Idol" anyway.
3. More kids, fewer superstars
This is one of the biggest changes of the new season. "Idol's" cutting back all those so-called mentor sessions that in past years tended to be more about the mentor - Diana Ross or Andrea Bocelli - than the mentee. Good reason for that: Some of the mentors are massive talents with worldwide fame. Says Lythgoe, "When these huge stars were made available, we really wanted to put them in there with the kids, [but] we forgot there's only a certain amount of time that we had to fill, and we were filling it with stories about the mentors and not celebrating the contestants. That's where we made a mistake." He added, "We were having other people singing their songs" - like Maroon 5 - "that had nothing to do with 'Idol.'"
"This season, we go back to what we used to do, which is tell the kids' stories."
And the flip side:
continue
Some editions have been grand, some less so. Which was which? That was strictly a matter of opinion and the maddening and unpredictable hobgoblin known as "taste."
Then, something happened last year. It started quietly enough - maybe a sort of revulsion at the early contestant rounds, which featured a tsunami of false notes and bad hair. Then, there was Sanjaya, who became a national joke. Melinda Doolittle, the finest singer in "Idol" history, was prematurely ejected. Ratings slid slightly, teens abandoned the show by the millions, the summer tours were sparsely attended and potential buyers remain allergic to winner Jordin Sparks' self-named CD.
In other words, there was no disagreement whatsoever on the sixth season: It stunk.
That's why change is afoot at "Idol." Nothing dramatic, mind you. But change. As the world's most popular TV show starts its seventh season tonight at 8 on Fox/5, we offer five reasons why this could be the best one ever. Then, five reasons why seven could be "Idol's" unlucky number:
1. Much better performers this year
That's the advance word - or spin, anyway - from the "Idol" camp, and there's no reason not to believe this. The focus this year was improving the front line, and in a recent conference call, Simon Cowell said, "We got a better top 12, more interesting than [the 12] last year."
In a separate phone interview, "Idol" brain trust/exec producer Nigel Lythgoe slightly disagreed: "I said last season that we had the strongest top 12 and I still stand by that, [but] were there any outstanding individual performers? No, I don't think there were." He added that there were previous seasons "where I wanted to curl up and die [because] I was constantly surprised Americans kept in the competition."
Of this year's crop, he says three or four "could easily be signed" by a label.
And the flip side:
May I remind you of the Sanjaya effect? The tendency for the outrageously bad or silly to survive and for the outrageously good to occasionally get dumped? "Idol" may have some fine singers in season 7, but who's to say they'll survive?
2. The Writers Guild Strike
The theory goes: Because there's so much junk on the air now - "American Gladiators!" - that viewers will give "Idol" an even bigger bear hug. There's reason to believe this; after all, "Idol" is huge even when there's good scripted stuff on. The calculus now suggests: Huger.
And the flip side:
Nice little theory, but even Cowell and Lythgoe think it's bunk, and they may be right. Ever pragmatic, Cowell says: "People will [still] have a choice with other channels and we have to make a better show than last year and that's the reason we'll gain or lose viewers." Says his pal Lythgoe: "We're going to have to be successful hopefully in our own right. If there's nothing on TV, [maybe] the American public will go outside and play sports - or my favorite would be to go learn a ballroom dance."
He also adds, the other networks rarely air anything solid opposite "Idol" anyway.
3. More kids, fewer superstars
This is one of the biggest changes of the new season. "Idol's" cutting back all those so-called mentor sessions that in past years tended to be more about the mentor - Diana Ross or Andrea Bocelli - than the mentee. Good reason for that: Some of the mentors are massive talents with worldwide fame. Says Lythgoe, "When these huge stars were made available, we really wanted to put them in there with the kids, [but] we forgot there's only a certain amount of time that we had to fill, and we were filling it with stories about the mentors and not celebrating the contestants. That's where we made a mistake." He added, "We were having other people singing their songs" - like Maroon 5 - "that had nothing to do with 'Idol.'"
"This season, we go back to what we used to do, which is tell the kids' stories."
And the flip side:
continue
Comments
Post a Comment