The scene:
Guy (or girl) goes on stage to audition, but not before being the centerpiece of a sob story about how so-and-so is on a long journey of recovering from such-and-such, and that performing is simply the next step on this recovery that will eventually bring him or her ultimate closure on aforementioned journey. So, performer goes on stage, does his or her thing, female judge loves it, one of the male judges says “Dawg/Man, you nailed that one.” Everyone (rightfully so) loves it…except for the cranky, outspoken Englishman.
So, tell me where I’ve seen that before. It’s American Idol, obviously. No, no, no, it’s America’s Got Talent. Wait…It’s both.
America’s Got Talent season 5 premiered last Tuesday, June 1st. I was able to catch up on it over the weekend and, after about five minutes of watching, I thought to myself: This looks oddly familiar. Turns out it is familiar--Talent follows almost the exact same formula as Idol. To wit:
1. Hold auditions in big cities. This way, you’ll get an eclectic bunch of people from all sorts of different backgrounds who will come up big or fail miserably.
2. Hire a photogenic presenter that anybody knows. (Talent recently got the memo on that one, going from Regis Philbin to Jerry Springer to Nick Cannon.)
3. Hire a diverse group of judges—a woman that has a soft spot for everyone (in AGT's case Sharon Osborne parallels former Idol judge Paula Abdul) , a man that is real chill (AGT's most recent addition, Howie Mandel plays the role of Idol's Randy Jackson), and a Brit that doesn’t give a crap about offending people (Piers Morgan, meet Simon Cowell).
4. Insert the occasional sob story that will engage the viewers and make them want to root for success.
5. Insert a montage of embarrassingly bad performers. You know, the kind that make you cringe when they are on stage.
I can’t blame AGT for following the mold set by Idol. It obviously works, as seen by Idol being number one in the ratings for six consecutive seasons. And, after all, copycats have worked before. But, so what? Why should a viewer tune in to AGT when they can see the same thing on Idol?
AGT comes with more entertainment and surprise. On Idol, we all know the basic gist of the show: people are going to come on stage and sing, either really well or shockingly terribly, but we know they are going to sing. On AGT, who knows what's gonna happen next. A lot of people will sing, some will impersonate, one will play the turkey baster as a musical instrument (seriously), or a group will defy gravity.
On AGT, something mind-blowing (for better or worse) is going to happen. AGT and Idol may look the same on the surface but, if you dig a little deeper, AGT's shock- and entertainment-value is unsurpassed.
On various rare occasions, it is worth it. Susan Boyle's audition (aka The Day Simon Cowell Smiled) still gives me chills. I cried the first time I watched it.
ReplyDeleteEVERYONE has taken the format from American Idol You managed to hit all the points as to why I can't watch these anymore. I don't doubt that there's talent out there, but I just cant deal with the repetitive format
ReplyDeleteI normally don’t watch either show but I hear enough about it from other people and see clips on tv shows that highlight and/or mock popular tv shows. But now that you mention it, the similarities between the two shows are pretty conspicuous, especially the part about the judges. It seems as though the British judge is always the blunt, straight-shooter, who says whatever, no matter how harsh. These kinds of shows are so formulaic but is there really any other way to go about it? This strategy must be working if people keep watching…
ReplyDelete