Show Discussion (3/22) *Spoilers* - Page 2

Kip · 03-23-2005, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boskeroo

I watch what they let you see of some of the clips and I still have this question....Do any of these ladies really seem like a possible star? they still seem more like reality tershow participants. I would think that if they had an open casting call, they would get half a dozen better performances than they get on the show.

the Lauren-Katie drama was one of the more intriguing aspects of the story.....As a viewer, I'm sorry this part of the story line is over. I still look forward to the show making the candidates act in a scene with Faye Dunaway and Vivica Fox.

I had questions about the quality from the beginning. For instance, the judges pretty much all thought that Donna couldn't act. So how did she make it through to the top 10? I can see casting a Michelynne whose young and untrained but shows a lot of promise, but I would have thought after a nationwide search the level of talent would have been higher.

I didn't know the girls get to perform with Viveca and Faye -- that will be cool.

I'm glad to have to have the Katie-Lauren drama over. I haven't figured out Katie. Does she just not realize how annoying she is? Or does she have no social skills? I don't believe she wanted to be isolated from the other girls -- I think she was just trying to put a good spin on the situation.

Google · Sponsored Links

ladybug · 03-23-2005, 03:31 PM

From the comments David Gallagher (from 7th Heaven) made after each screen test, he probably would have agreed (somewhat, at least) with the panel's decision. He said that Lauren was acting only with her face and just stood in one place for the whole scene.

I'm glad to see Lauren gone. She was too catty and thought she was (as Katie put it) "too cool for school". And she hadn't really improved on her acting skills since the beginning.

Not that I think Katie is a peach herself- she distanced herself by saying she wasn't there to make friends, etc (which there's always at least one person on each reality show that says that) but then she gets upset when the other girls ignore and talk about her. And then she tries to get back into good favor with them, for whatever reason. If I were her, I would have just gone about my business and spent time working on the upcoming screen test (which, apparently she did, since she nailed it). But she does have a tendency to talk too much and not be able to judge the mood/atmosphere of situations (like when she comes back from her mtg with the panel and brags about how the guy asked if she was ready to be skwered).

That expression on Lauren's face when her name was called was just precious. And I don't agree that Neva was better than Lauren. Neva was wooden and didn't act or react well in her screen tests. I think she was too shy. Even when the panel was critiquing her performances, she had absolutely no expression on her face. It was like they were talking to a wall.

onewally · 03-23-2005, 04:46 PM

Kip and Boskeroo raised a discussion of the quality of the contestants on the show. There WAS and open casting call for this show; I think they culled through thousands of applicants.

I skimmed Simon Crowell's (American Idol) book in the library the other day. It was an interesting peek into the dynamics of that show-the judges, the auditions, the contestants themselves. What he said that is pertinent to Kip and Boskeroo's comments concerning the quality of the girls on The Starlet is that people with the total package-talent, looks, personality, poise, ambition, smarts, sex appeal, the ability to connect with the audience, and spark-an ineffable quality that makes that person stand out-are extremely rare. In light of his comments, it doesnt surprise me that there's no diamond in the rough on this show.

I think any of the girls can be trained and polished to act competently. It surprises me how amateurish they are, considering that all (? I'm not too sure on this point) of them have had some experience, some preparation. I would have thought they'd have been schooled to drop the head bobbing and shaking (Mercedes and Katie are really bad), the shoulder shrugging (Katie), the distracting arm waving. It makes you realize how physically still professional actors are in comparison; they express the emotions with their faces and voices.

Marleybone · 03-23-2005, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by onewally

I skimmed Simon Crowell's (American Idol) book in the library the other day. It was an interesting peek into the dynamics of that show-the judges, the auditions, the contestants themselves. What he said that is pertinent to Kip and Boskeroo's comments concerning the quality of the girls on The Starlet is that people with the total package-talent, looks, personality, poise, ambition, smarts, sex appeal, the ability to connect with the audience, and spark-an ineffable quality that makes that person stand out-are extremely rare. In light of his comments, it doesnt surprise me that there's no diamond in the rough on this show.

That makes me think that there's probably a lot of young women out there who do have the complete package but are familiar enough with reality TV that they choose not to put themselves out there in a show like this. Any aspiring actor knows there's already plenty of rejection in this business, so I'm amazed there's anyone willing to risk the humiliation of getting slammed on national television. Maybe it's worth it for the little bit of media exposure they are getting.

Kip · 03-23-2005, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marleybone

That makes me think that there's probably a lot of young women out there who do have the complete package but are familiar enough with reality TV that they choose not to put themselves out there in a show like this. Any aspiring actor knows there's already plenty of rejection in this business, so I'm amazed there's anyone willing to risk the humiliation of getting slammed on national television. Maybe it's worth it for the little bit of media exposure they are getting.

A show like this is potentially huge exposure--especially if the show had turned out to be a hit. Many of the contestants on the first seasons of Survivor and The Apprentice got all kinds of show business gigs.

rt1ky · 03-23-2005, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kip

A show like this is potentially huge exposure--especially if the show had turned out to be a hit. Many of the contestants on the first seasons of Survivor and The Apprentice got all kinds of show business gigs.

But did they get careers and respect? They have to fight to have their talent recognized. The Starlet is a bit different, since it is an acting show, and I'm curious to see who, if anyone will hit it big.

Marleybone · 03-23-2005, 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kip

A show like this is potentially huge exposure--especially if the show had turned out to be a hit. Many of the contestants on the first seasons of Survivor and The Apprentice got all kinds of show business gigs.

That's what I meant for it maybe being worth it to them for the exposure. That would be the only reason to put yourself through that. No pain no gain, right?

boskeroo · 03-23-2005, 09:56 PM

is one of the things that potentially makes this good reality tv. It's actually sort of meaningful. A recurring role on a real series is likely to be a far better professional prize than going on tour with 19E and singing whatever they make you sing, wear, etc.

I don't think of HIllary Duff as a good actress and I'm sure there were as many takes as she needed, but I have to say some of last night's clips made her look like Vanessa Redgrave. They weren't necessarily awful in the same way weak performances on Idol aren't awful in an absolute sense most of the time. It just makes you realize that there's more to being merely competent even in forgetabble productions than we think.

fwiw, Lindsay Lohan appears to be hugely talented vs. the starlets.....just thinking back to things like the Parent Trap...However, I don't know how well Lindsah Lohan the singer would do on American Idol. I'm not sure Hillary Duff would be able to get more votes than Mikalah Gordon :}

AIer_admirer · 03-24-2005, 09:52 AM

Well, it is for a WB show. One of the actresses on One Tree Hill (the same role the starlet would win) was an MTV VJ so she had very little experience, and now she fits right in. I wouldn't discount the talents of these girls, especially once they wind up on the show. Anybody can really shine if they make the most of the experience. Sometimes they just need that opportunity.

As Marleybone says, it's all about exposure and possibly getting that one role casting agents will remember you for. The winner's challenge is to separate themselves from the reality TV show aspect. Plus it's really about networking too. Working with Faye or Vivica can really work in your favor if you know the right people.

03-23-2005, 04:46 PM	#13
onewally FORT Fanatic Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 687	Kip and Boskeroo raised a discussion of the quality of the contestants on the show. There WAS and open casting call for this show; I think they culled through thousands of applicants. I skimmed Simon Crowell's (American Idol) book in the library the other day. It was an interesting peek into the dynamics of that show-the judges, the auditions, the contestants themselves. What he said that is pertinent to Kip and Boskeroo's comments concerning the quality of the girls on The Starlet is that people with the total package-talent, looks, personality, poise, ambition, smarts, sex appeal, the ability to connect with the audience, and spark-an ineffable quality that makes that person stand out-are extremely rare. In light of his comments, it doesnt surprise me that there's no diamond in the rough on this show. I think any of the girls can be trained and polished to act competently. It surprises me how amateurish they are, considering that all (? I'm not too sure on this point) of them have had some experience, some preparation. I would have thought they'd have been schooled to drop the head bobbing and shaking (Mercedes and Katie are really bad), the shoulder shrugging (Katie), the distracting arm waving. It makes you realize how physically still professional actors are in comparison; they express the emotions with their faces and voices. Last edited by onewally; 03-23-2005 at 04:58 PM.

03-23-2005, 09:56 PM	#18
boskeroo FORT Fan Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 164	the prize is one of the things that potentially makes this good reality tv. It's actually sort of meaningful. A recurring role on a real series is likely to be a far better professional prize than going on tour with 19E and singing whatever they make you sing, wear, etc. I don't think of HIllary Duff as a good actress and I'm sure there were as many takes as she needed, but I have to say some of last night's clips made her look like Vanessa Redgrave. They weren't necessarily awful in the same way weak performances on Idol aren't awful in an absolute sense most of the time. It just makes you realize that there's more to being merely competent even in forgetabble productions than we think. fwiw, Lindsay Lohan appears to be hugely talented vs. the starlets.....just thinking back to things like the Parent Trap...However, I don't know how well Lindsah Lohan the singer would do on American Idol. I'm not sure Hillary Duff would be able to get more votes than Mikalah Gordon :}

03-24-2005, 09:52 AM	#19
AIer_admirer FORT Fogey Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: That state that's split up by the bay Posts: 1,341	Well, it is for a WB show. One of the actresses on One Tree Hill (the same role the starlet would win) was an MTV VJ so she had very little experience, and now she fits right in. I wouldn't discount the talents of these girls, especially once they wind up on the show. Anybody can really shine if they make the most of the experience. Sometimes they just need that opportunity. As Marleybone says, it's all about exposure and possibly getting that one role casting agents will remember you for. The winner's challenge is to separate themselves from the reality TV show aspect. Plus it's really about networking too. Working with Faye or Vivica can really work in your favor if you know the right people. __________________ "The difference between reality and fiction? Fiction has to make sense." Good luck to the Good Guys on the Inferno!

03-23-2005, 03:31 PM	#12
ladybug FORT Regular Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 78	From the comments David Gallagher (from 7th Heaven) made after each screen test, he probably would have agreed (somewhat, at least) with the panel's decision. He said that Lauren was acting only with her face and just stood in one place for the whole scene. I'm glad to see Lauren gone. She was too catty and thought she was (as Katie put it) "too cool for school". And she hadn't really improved on her acting skills since the beginning. Not that I think Katie is a peach herself- she distanced herself by saying she wasn't there to make friends, etc (which there's always at least one person on each reality show that says that) but then she gets upset when the other girls ignore and talk about her. And then she tries to get back into good favor with them, for whatever reason. If I were her, I would have just gone about my business and spent time working on the upcoming screen test (which, apparently she did, since she nailed it). But she does have a tendency to talk too much and not be able to judge the mood/atmosphere of situations (like when she comes back from her mtg with the panel and brags about how the guy asked if she was ready to be skwered). That expression on Lauren's face when her name was called was just precious. And I don't agree that Neva was better than Lauren. Neva was wooden and didn't act or react well in her screen tests. I think she was too shy. Even when the panel was critiquing her performances, she had absolutely no expression on her face. It was like they were talking to a wall.