The law of diminishing returns is now setting in with IDAFY. As each of the 5 girls left performed their 8th (of 12) competition songs, excluding sing-off’s and songs from Oliver itself, it became clear this week that the format of the show needs tweaking to achieve the best balance between weekly entertainment and the overall tension and interest generated by the competitive, public audition element.

There are 4 main elements we want make up our minds up about: voice, acting, movement including choreography, and I guess the indefinable ‘star’ quality.

We pretty much had a measure of the quality and distinctiveness of each girl’s voice after about 6 solo songs plus the group performances. Even with bad song selection which seems to have weakened both the impact of the show and the singers in the last 3 weeks or so, we pretty much know the last five can hit the notes with accuracy and power. They can all sell, in recent shows, over-sell a song, in their distinctively individual way. Repeating the same process further just muddles everyone and ends up with panel and ALW criticising a performance for lacking qualities the song didn’t permit the singer to display. So: Niamh gets a gentle love song and she lacks edge or strength; Jody get’s a schlocky Cruise-Ship ballad and lacks theatricality; Jessie gets a classic standard where she doesn’t have to move or grimace and she’s the best the Good lord has ever seen, and then gets a pop freak-out so alien to her natural personality that she looks about as comfortable as a Nun cast as a stripper; Rachel produces a knowingly professional but ‘masked-eyed’ performance each week in any genre; and Samantha from the Isle of Sam sings everything with the same uniform vivacity as the unremitting cheerfulness of a Blue Peter presenter turning a cotton reel into a model giraffe.

Our only chance to see ‘acting’ ability is again song choice limited. A block of granite or even Jean-Claude Van Damme could put some acting style into Send In The Clowns whereas some of the crazy-frog-ring-tone songs these game girls have jiggled through have had about as much resonance as Eric Morecombe’s concert piano-playing or William Shatner's singing. In the little midweek exercises they give the girls it is pretty clear that Jessie has the same problem acting as singing – “who do you want me to be?” Jodie looks like a real world-champ contender in a fight scene and makes us fear for Bill Sykes rather than her Nancy; Rachel excels but does not excite; Sam is physically explosive in a dorm pillow fight kind of way; and Niamh loses the plot but ad libs engagingly and with imagination. They’ve all got acting work to do.

Movement is the toughie. The delightful and perceptive DVO solved for me on Saturday the Jessie mystery that has been buggin’ me for weeks: with laser accuracy, desirable Den pointed out that Jessie is a tomboy in a dress whose body says sex and movements say netball. ‘Unfeminine’ DD said with pitiless accuracy. The normally unfailingly gentlemanly lord let off one of his cruel firecrackers under Jolly Jodie likening her stage movement to Meatloaf, which is a bit like telling Darcey Bussell on the Vicar of Dibley, dancing with Dawn French that you couldn’t tell them apart. Rachel’s knowingness grates in her movements as well – as if she is looking in a mirror and likes what she sees. Sam’s as ever a sweet sexy song-socker, whatever the song; and Niamh is the only one really at home and comfortable standing still, but on the move definitely needs Ginger Rodgers not Tina Turner.

How do you define ‘star’ quality? Presence, personality, style, gravitas: all of these and then some. I used to film Gang Shows and the best definition for me is that with about 100 young people on stage, the camera almost ‘searches’ out certain faces, captures and returns to a special ‘kinetic’ quality some people have. It recalls what people have said of ‘stars’ - in a roomful of people – he/she’s the only one you see. When Brando, Depp, Dean, Hepburn (either one), Johanssen et al are on screen you cannot see anyone else. If IDAFY was casting the film of Oliver – there would be no competition – if Niamh’s eyes didn’t get you her physical ‘stillness’ would. But the stage is a different pot of message.

For me it would be better to start with 16 and lose two Nancy’s a week in the first 5 weeks. Then from that 6, 1 a week to week 9; with the final in week 10. From week 6 - 8 each could do a song and an actual acting scene from a musical. In the last 2 weeks the last 4 could do a song of their choice then a scene and a song from Oliver with the Olivers. In the final, the last 2 could do the same two scenes and songs from Oliver and one scene and song of their choice from another musical.

You might say I’m taking it too seriously and pulling the balance too much away from entertainment to the serious audition process. But for me the most improved performers in the show have been the Panel. Denise Van Outen has emerged as a perceptive, consummate professional with a superb eye for the essential; John Barrowman having learned that repeating the same thing makes it one third as effective not 3 times, and again knows his stuff; and Barry has thankfully become more Humphries than Humbert to offer good, if sometimes fairly sexist or fattist advice. And Lord Rubber despite his occasional ‘own-back’ cruel barbs for a lifetime of being called ugly, knows his popular theatre stuff.

As reality TV shows go, this one has developed into one of the best and has acquired a growing assurance that lets us see inside the world of entertainment and performance our culture is so taken with, in a way that is fun. It is also entertaining, and after the 1st couple of weeks of tits-and-tarts production ethos, has made us all love the vicarious feeling of being impresarios. The phenomenal cross-gender, age-neutral affection generated for Lee Mead demonstrates the fact that the general public loves this role. They relish feeling on the inside of show business and showing the Lord Rubber’s and Cameron Macaroon’s that they know a thing or two about who and what they want to see as they board the charabancs for the big night out in the West End. And why not? As the song has it – “Life’s too long to worry and too short to cry” so let’s have some fun – on TV or stage.

And yes I am still in mourning the loss of Niamh – the only really interesting casting left. (It’s OK Julie – I’m still here). Rachel will get it – but she won’t make you cry.


<Added>

Sorry

hadn't meant to write in anagrams.

z

Whoo-hoo Zettel! Another bundle of goodies. Thanks!
I agree with almost everything you say. BUT! I don't think any of these candidates has - or had - any real charisma, and for me, the programme loses because of this. They are all talented young women - but none stands out, leading-lady wise. What I feel is missing is edge.Not even sure how I define this, but it's something that Hepburn certainly had. A certain held-back you-cannot-control-me, a certain wildness. The other thing that's missing is conflict. Yes, Barrowman, Van Outen, Humphries and M'Lord are all very professional, very good at their jobs. But give me Bruno and his dippy fellow judges on Strictly Come Dancing any day. Or even Simon Cowell, on a good day. (For entertainment value, I mean, rather than as examples of good human beings). I used to love Dragons Den - because of the rivalries and digs between the dragons. When Barry Humphries opens his mouth, I know pretty much what's going to come out. If Dame Edna were sitting in his place, I think it would be more watchable. Having said all this, IDA is a great show to have on whilst doing the washing up. I wish I had a red button, so I could sing along. But for sitting down and hardly daring to drop my eyes to my meal, give me The Apprentice, any day.
Susiex

Thanks Susie

What is 'washing-up?'

I know what you mean about 'edge' but I've been quite impressed at the way the panel has begun to tell some uncomfortable but necessary professional truths, especially as you see the improvement in performance is they listen. My problem is that the format is too repetitive for the past 3 weeks and is leading to the girls over-acting, over-singing etc from trying too hard. It is also an important truth that we are deciding on a theatrical performer on the basis of cinematic performance.

I think there is a lackof charisma in the final 4. Plus something else: all but Sam adn Rachel have always been grateful and thrilled when they are piked to go through. But S and R both seem sort of indignant or suprised when they aren't picked. Plus mauch was made of Niamh's age but Sam is only a tad older.

regards
z

My problem is that the format is too repetitive for the past 3 weeks and is leading to the girls over-acting, over-singing etc from trying too hard.

Totally agree. And, as we said before, it's based (falsely) on the ability to sing pop songs as opposed to act.
I'd find it much more interesting if they were auditioning for a Fagin. (But of course that won't happen. You have to have the requisite number of 'beautiful people' and a token Humphries.)
Susiex

Susie

'Sralan' Sugar would make a great Fagin. And How about Michael Sobollocks for the Artful Dodger?

Z

Perfect!
Susiex