I would be more interested if AI was a real talent contest. But it is obviously not.
Because AI is television, it has to be entertaining. Which means there have to be contestants where writers can pen their pithy replies for Simon and clueless retorts for Paula.
I made a point to read some of the stories written about this year's AI. The majority of them agreed that some woman named Melinda was by far the best of this year's AI lot. But the AI insiders said she lacked personality and that the predominately young female audience/voters leaned toward the others.
Another talented performer was released because he did not "properly respect the judges." And he "wasn't enthusiastic enough."
Paula's gaffe a few weeks ago pointed out (again) that the show itself is scripted. Which may have backfired on cute David, since the judges were obviously favoring him over the last couple of episodes.
AI is good television. But it is rarely a barometer of talent.
Kelly Clarkson and Carrie Underwood have become big sellers. But two other success stories were not winners -- Clay Aiken and Daughtry.
The fate of other AI winners:
Ruben Studdard -- released two albums that didn't sell
Fantasia Barrino -- released two albums that didn't sell. Now concentrating on acting.
Taylor Hicks -- sold 700,000 albums, but no radio hits and no plans for a second album. Has committed an open-ended run in the play Grease.
Jordin Sparks -- debut album sold well. Left AI brass unhappy with her diva behavior on last season's AI tour. Canceled several dates on current tour due to throat problems.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Little-Acorn
