To open this post, I cede the floor to Mary Magdalene, as imagined by Tim Rice for the Broadway production of Jesus Christ Superstar:
I’ve been living to see you.
Dying to see you, but it shouldn’t be like this.
This was unexpected,
What do I do now?
Could we start again please?I’ve been very hopeful, so far.
Now for the first time, I think we’re going wrong.
Hurry up and tell me,
This is just a dream.
Oh could we start again please?
I’m a firm believer that, for all their flaws, TV casting shows have so far produced net gains for the industry as a whole. They do come with their faults, of course, but on the whole they’ve combined enjoyable television with increased awareness of musical theatre to an audience that wouldn’t normally consider such things.
Or at least, that’s what I thought before Superstar. The whole show, which finishes tonight, seems to be setting itself up to fail, doing so many things that both prevent the programme from being as entertaining as it could be, and from it being taken as seriously in the industry as it could have done.
Now, for the first time*, I think TV casting is going wrong. Dear ITV, could we start again, please?
No? Oh, well, here’s what I’d change if we could.
* NB: I didn’t watch Grease is the Word.
1. Make it a weekly show
There’s something about the build-up to, and fallout from, a light entertainment elimination show that inherently suits a week-long gap between shows. From Strictly Come Dancing to Dancing on Ice, not to mention the BBC’s four previous Andrew Lloyd Webber shows, there’s an ability for the contestants to take any criticism and actually work on addressing any flaws or gaps in their skills. For the show itself, it generates far more press coverage, with each performer’s exit interviews being regurgitated as “news” stories by the tabloid press both in print and online. And that feeds into a buzz that builds excitement, making the final an event.
In contrast, Superstar’s daily format has meant that there’s been little to no time for the performers to address any constructive points the panel may have made; no time for the audience to digest the thoughts of each outgoing actor; and next to no buzz for the show itself.
That latter point isn’t solely down to scheduling, of course — but the show’s PR factor has undeniably been affected by the lack of breathing space between shows.
2. Make a big deal of the exit
When Superstar was announced, there were many jokes on Twitter about the manner of the departing wannabe Jesus’s exit. Would he be divested of his robe, like they did with the Josephs in Any Dream Will Do? Would he have to hand back a sequinned crown of thorns to Andrew Lloyd Webber, as the Dorothys did with their shoes in Over the Rainbow?
In the event, the exit fell flat. After making the ridiculous decision to start each live show with the eviction of the previous night’s loser, producers wisely switched as quickly as possible to making the eviction the finale of each show — although it meant that the voting format changed every night for the first few shows. But even then, the lack of a big production number makes each exit something of an anticlimax.
3. Make Andrew Lloyd Webber special
Given the subject matter, it’s probably wise that Superstar has cut down on the number of times he’s been referred to as “The Lord”. But sticking him behind an X Factor-style desk is a horrible clash between his very English eccentricities (bad jokes, non sequiturs and all) and a Cowell-like cross-Atlantic celebrity figure.
He’s already treated differently from the other judges: he alone gives them a pre sing-off “pep talk”, and he alone judges the sing-off. The set design should have reflected his role as the dotty granddad who holds all the power.
4. Hire a presenter who’s a little more at ease
I never saw Amanda Holden when she was in Shrek. However, one of the very first musical theatre productions I ever reviewed professionally (for a long-dead online publication) was the West End production of Thoroughly Modern Millie, in which she was competent but never looked comfortable. Her presenting performance in Superstar has reminded me very much of that.
I know Graham Norton’s not to everyone’s taste, but he never feels like reading an autocue is a chore, and also gives the impression that going off-script is always possible. Neither could, with the best will in the world, be said of Holden.
5. Assemble a panel with more experience
Getting the mix of judges for these sort of shows has always been a problem. The BBC started out with theatre producers (David Ian and Bill Kenwright — although they gained rebukes for the former as he was judged too close to the commercial theatre project being cast) and voice coach Zoe Tyler before bringing in performers for the jazz-hands factor. As the years went on, they regrettably went more for star name status rather than experience in giving instruction — although Over the Rainbow’s Sheila Hancock was a sheer delight in her undisguised disdain for some of the show’s more frivolous aspects.
With Superstar, it seems we’ve lost both experience and theatrical sparkle. True, Dawn French lightens the whole mood — although if it were a gay man making the sort of comments she gets away with, or a straight man judging young women, a lot of her humour would come across as just plain creepy (cf. Barry Humphries and the Nancys on I’d Do Anything). Melanie Chisholm started off as an astute observer in the pre-recorded opening stages, but her move into the live studio rounds has emasculated her — possibly because she’s realised she’ll be sharing a stage with whoever the public votes in. It’d be hard to lay into an actor’s performance one week, and then play Mary Magdelene to his Jesus the next.
Still, she does shine compared to Jason Donovan — who seems to want to take the John Barrowman/John Partridge role of the West End experienced leading man, but lacks either the experience of the former or the showmanship of either.
6. Make it less obvious when you’re trying to steer the audience
Every series, the producers have favoured some performers over others. I’ve never held to the belief that they have “decided” who they want to win, more that the people behind the TV show are keen on maintaining a balanced mix of contestants for as long as possible.
One of the ways they achieve this is to reduce individuals, with all their myriad strengths and flaws, to one single attribute. Rachel in I’d Do Anything was “bossy”, or “driven”, for example; Seamus in Any Dream Will Do was conceited. And, in this series, it seems to have been decided early on that Nathan would be “arrogant Jesus”.
The attempts to portray him in this light were particularly noticeable as every other performer’s VT and judges’ comments were broadly constructive. Nathan’s, however, were relentlessly negative. One can quite understand why he might have felt the need to drum up support on Twitter. Several of the other contestants have too: maybe not quite so brazenly, but certainly at a level that makes Lloyd Webber’s outburst on Monday’s show — where he angrily laid into Nathan with no small amount of ferocity — seem like there was an ulterior motive.
Which brings me to:
7. Give contestants social media training
Andrew’s outburst in Nathan’s direction over his use (or misuse) of Twitter may, or may not, have been uncalled for. On Twitter itself as that show went out on Monday, opinions were divided.
Whatever the situation, I do think that calling one performer out like that on national television ended up making nobody look good. It may have contributed to Nathan leaving that night, or it may not have done. In a way, that’s immaterial: what it indicates is that the contestants either weren’t briefed on how they should and shouldn’t converse on social media, that they were briefed but only in basics, or that the production team hadn’t really thought about how to deal with people who exceed what they’re told to do.
The competitors do seem to have been given some indication that they mustn’t tweet the whole voting numbers, but I’d be surprised if the guidance has gone much beyond that. These days, that’s not enough. Contestants who go through to live shows should receive basic media training in advance — but in the past, that has been limited to managed situations where interviews are conducted with a PR in the room. Social media’s benefits come from the direct, unmediated interaction between personality and audience — and so, people who find themselves in the public eye need to be aware of the pitfalls.
Modern performer contracts are starting to include social media clauses. That’s not to say any foolish tweeting should be treated as a breach of contract in the first instance, more it’s an indication of how seriously it’s being taken. TV shows need to be aware too — and, if a performer starts acting on Twitter in a way that could damage the reputation of both performer and TV show, that should be handled privately rather than on screen.
8. Make up your mind what you’re casting for
Are we looking for a rock singer who doesn’t have to act too much — or a new West End-calibre leading man? The panel seem to change their minds from sentence to sentence.
Either way, Lloyd Webber’s comments last night about the paucity of leading men unfairly denigrated those who are currently working, I feel — although I’m sure that wasn’t his intent. I do think there are fewer men with “above the title” pull than there are women, but there are ways to say that without putting down existing performers.
9. Give the performers songs with a bit more range
I’m fed up with trained musical theatre performers having to wring out every last drop of emotion and nuance from anodyne pop and rock songs - and then have their over-emoting praised as “acting”.
I’m not one of those that says every number has to be from the musical theatre genre — but songs that give trained performers a chance to be more than just singers would be great. There’s more to Jesus in JCS than just being able to reach the high notes in Gethsemane — let’s see these supposed triple threats stretched in all three areas.
And finally…
10. Promote musical theatre more
Having guest performers on stage during Superstar is no bad thing. But wouldn’t it be so much better if they each had been from current West End shows? There has been much concern about whether the West End could cope with an expected drop in demand over the Olympics season — concern kicked off by none other than Andrew Lloyd Webber, who predicted a “bloodbath”.
While this bizarre, daily pre-Olympics schedule for Superstar has done the programme no favours, it could at the very least have given Lloyd Webber and the ITV Studios team the opportunity to showcase an entertainment medium that could really do with the help over the next few weeks.
I still like casting shows. I’ll still be watching tonight. For me, though, Superstar should come to represent the nadir. If any future shows are commissioned they should strive to be better, and to recognise that they don’t need to deny their musical theatre heritage to be entertaining.
What a great and intelligent blog. Unlike mine which are all personal opinion and jokes. This says what I've been writing and tweeting about since the show began. Deeply knowledgeable and packed with authority without being overly opinionated or emotional.
I shall RT this blog for my readers to get an alternative and keenly observed view on the program.
Ian
Hopefully the terrible ratings for this show should mean there won't be any more reality casting shows. I've watched all the other musical reality casting shows but avoided this one from the outset as I knew it would be terrible and I made the right decision.
Couldn't agree more Scott! I was always going to watch the programme, I just can't help but be drawn to this type of show. However it just hasn't worked this time for all the reasons you have said. The three I like happen to have reached the final but I can't say I'm truly bothered who wins and I certainly won't be spending my hard earned cash on a seat I'm afraid
SPOT ON, SCOTT!
Would love to hear what Tim Rice thinks of it all too.
JC
I was always going to watch the programme too but ALW has now lost much credibility in my eyes. I record it to miss the adverts and Amanda Holden's shouting. She is the first thing that is wrong with the show (apart from too many advert breaks), why does she have to be carried down the stairs each night, why does she feel the need to get the contestants to kiss and hug her; some of them seem really awkward about this but feel its expected of them, why does she have nothing interesting to say and why does she want them to break their legs every night!! Someone described her as 'vacuous beyond belief'. Spot On. Oh bring back Graham....
I have always loved ALW & his music, even his Love Never Dies, seeing it twice and I go regularly to London to West End Shows, but his behaviour on the Superstar show, particularly towards Nathan has been disgraceful. His 'Nurture not Torture' has gone out the window and his favouritism and manipulation is clearly obvious. I was shocked at how vitriolic he was on Monday might towards Nathan without I suspect having found out what had gone on re tweeting the picture (I believe ALW has said he's not IT literate at all so presumably heard about it tenth hand and thought 'good I can use this to get rid of Nathan' who he clearly didn't like). Nathan was the most 'rock god like' which is what ALW kept saying he wanted. I feel really let down by him (ALW) and wont think of him the same way again. Nathan's sing off with Roger was ridiculous, they might just as well have done without it as ALW was getting rid of Nathan regardless of how awful the other person was (and he was).
The judges are OK, quite amusing sometimes and certainly preferable to Barry Humphries. But mostly they just give OTT comments to all contestants apart from the ones they want out (or have been told the lord wants out). Dawn's 'you'd make a good Judas' was clearly scripted and very false.
The format and voting has been a complete mess - why give out numbers before the boys sing? Oh yes of course if they didn't , there would be no time to call (and no money from the calls).
The whole thing was rushed, badly thought out, poorly produced with shades of a Cowell production creeping in all over, was this why we had to be subjected to Ms Holden? I think in all the episodes ALW kept reiterating 'dont vote for your favourite but for someone who you think can play the part' and then we keep getting the vacuous one trilling ' your must vote for your favourite to keep him in' !! Similarly Jason said on ITV Daybreak this morning in one breath 'its been so difficult to find the right person' and in another ' we have 4 all so talented, who could each do it.
In my opinion of the finalists, Roger shouldn't be there, he should have gone out in both sing-offs, Rory has no charisma (for this part) and no acting skills but the lord seems to like him goodness knows why. Ben is the best of the 3 by a mile and will probably do an adequate job but I wont be spending money on seeing him in this tour - previously I would have seen (and did see) all LW shows, the Joseph one many times as the leading man had everything for the part which the boys in Superstar have not (for the arena tour, even though they may be talented in other areas). Its a sorry day for musical theatre that this show was ever aired and this has a lot to do with ALW's actions in it. Had it been a BBC production done weekly and with a different presenter, who knows how it would have turned out.
Love this blog Scott, you have managed to say everything I have been thinking about this show. It hasn't worked and I feel a lot has been because of the 'we want a rock star' statement, then getting rid of the rock type singers. Then the 'we need you to show your acting ability' and giving them songs that are very bland and just end up with a lot of over emoting. Oh to have had at least one night of MT numbers. So much easier to see what they can do. The descision to make it nightly is just ridiculous. All they can have time for is to learn the next night's numbers, not act on any feedback. All a shame as I have really enjoyed this type of show, more to my taste than the X Factor things, and I feel this will sound the death knell. Love them or hate them I do think they have helped bring a lot of people to theatre that never went and I think a lot have gone to lots of other shows as well. Surely a good thing.
Thank you for this review Scott. I do agree with everything you have said about the problems with the show.
I like Dawn French, but you make a very valid point about her comments. Were she a bloke they would be seen in awfully bad taste.
For my part, I was disappointed to hear the show would be an arena tour rather than at a West End theatre where we could see the actors acting - so I never intended buy a ticket. I did however have high hopes for the TV search as I had enjoyed the BBC searches so much. Alas Superstar doesn't have the fun factor that made the others so enjoyable.
Pity! A wasted oppertunity.
As usual, Scott dear, you have put your finger on the most pertinent points:
1. The daily shows
2. Amanda Holden
3. The songs the contestants are given
4. The judging panel
5. ALW's input.
Re 1. I've found the daily shows hard to follow, because as you rightly say, we the viewers need some time to "digest" what the contestants have to offer. At the same time we need more time to get to know them. If the show was presented on BBC, we would be rid of the pesky adverts and the time could be used to get to know the boys.
Even more important, the boys would have sufficient time to train and learn between the shows. Now you can almost feel them being out of breath from running from pillar to post and singing as best they can.
Re 2. Oh Graham, where are you? Says it all, really.
Re 3. Have the contestants been given a MT song at all? Even if it's a "rock show" JCS is also a MT show, so we have to know that the contestants can handle that kind of music. ALW's motives for chucking David out last night in favour of Rory, is a mystery to me. He has praised David on every show (last night's as well) for his acting and for his voice, and then he lets him go for someone who's had one and the same expression on his face through all the shows (i.e. absolutely no acting abilities) and a clear ( and too thin ) voice. What would Rory make of Close Every Door from Joseph? He wouldn't have been able to sing it!
Re 4. There hasn't been a lot of constuctive critisism from the panel to help the contestants.
I like Mel C's enthusiasm, which is understandable as she'll have to work with the winner. Jason D is bland, bland, bland. Dawn F I usually adore, and she has made me chuckle here too, but her comments about Roger is way out. ALW seems to have lost his ability to say anything negative about anyone,- except to Nathan where he went far too far,-
which leads me to
Re 5. I'm not sure where ALW is sitting is important or not, but with Amanda Holden's hints about the "Lord", which is blatantly stolen from Graham, he seems misplaced at the end of the table. His role is unique, as he's the one who's been deciding who stays and who goes every night, it should be marked by sitting him at least slightly apart from the rest of the panel.
Of course ALW will have his favourite. That's his right,- but he's been very confusing in getting across, both to the contestants and to the viewers, what it is he wants.
Now, as many of the other posts have said, I too have followed the former BBC shows except the search for Dorothy, and they have given me so much pleasure. Any Dream Will Do gave us the delectable and wonderful Lee Mead. We had Connie Fisher singing her way into our hearts in Sound of Music, and we had Jodie Prenger cavorting and singing her heart out in Oliver.
As for ALW inferring that there aren't any good, possible WE leads at the moment, I think he was having a " senior moment"! That's the kind way of putting it.
I will of course watch tonight's final, and I think and hope that Ben will win. He's the only one who hasn't been in the sing-off, he has by far the best voice, his acting is good and he comes across as a very nice, young man.
I started reading the comments but quite frankly got bored - yes there are things that could have been done better but I think that the panel ate an inspired choice with a welcome reigning in of egos and concentration in the task at hand . I do think 'The Lord' should be situated separately and Amanda needs to slow down as a presenter but on reflection of the recent bout of reality shows this is a pleasure to watch and I wish everyone the best of luck xxxx
OMG Amanda Holden why did u wear that stupid dress u look like an idiot.Come to think of it how did u get the job?????
As usual Scott, I agree with your comments. I wasn't going to watch the programme, but as I have enjoyed the other MT search shows, I have been drawn to it. It has given me so many things to moan about.
Graham has been greatly missed.
Personally I haven't been overly impressed by any of the singers voices and or acting.
The choice of songs have been weird, for reasons already listed by others. (So many were used on Any Dream Will Do. Why?)
To have the programme on every day is just plain daft.
The judges comments, not helpful for improvement in the most part. But since the contestants have no real time to include improvements, I suppose it doesn't matter. (Missing Zoe or the like.) At least none of them have (quite) reached the very bad place inhabited by Barry Humphries.
I have played a guessing game the last few shows as to who will be getting the bad vibes from the judges.
Overall impression of the show, a plastic version of the BBC's gold standard.
I wish all the contestants the best for their future careers, just hope that there is improvement before I see them in a show in the West End.
I'm not unhappy to see the end of the show. (I was never going to see the production, I don't really 'do' arenas.)
So Ben has won, oh well I can walk the dogs now.
Amanda Holden was the big mistake made in this show.She was totally inept.She should also get a new dresser,that dress tonight was a joke.Bad show.
I agree that Amanda Holden was a bad choice,she was terrible but I have to say I loved the show,Ben was my pick to win,he has an amazing voice,ALW may well have been a little harsh on Nathan but let's be honest he was so full of himself he was unreal,I'm sad the show has ended.
Oh well,- the best man won! Congrats Ben,- you deserve it! Good luck with the tour.
Re Amanda's dress,- yes, it's my bin liners. I was wondering where they'd got to.
One thing I'm not going to miss, is Amanda's strident voice. She gives me ear ache.
MelC did a good performance tonight, but have to say I've heard that beautiful song sung much better.
As for Getsemane,- have you ever heard Lee Mead sing it? Here is a YouTube video. Not the greatest sound, but this is how it shold be done:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbUadyhqTBs
I finally realized what was wrong with the show: It was an ALW show on the cheap!
I absolutely love the show and have booked tickets for the arena tour but also agree with many of the negative comments expressed. However, it's easy to be a critic and perhaps we shouldn't take it all so seriously. Some of ALW's decisions seem a little contradictory though. He said he was looking for an all-round actor/singer but last night chose Rory in the sing-off, who although a brilliant singer and very pleasant to watch, is no actor. If he was looking for a rock singer why did he not choose Nathan in the sing-off rather than Roger. I think all the artists are extremely talented and personally found it hard to find a favourite although I did find Nathan extremely watchable.
Still, what do we know. Superstar may not be his finest hour but with the good Lord's genius and success in writing such wonderful musicals who cares!
Well good luck to Ben and in fact to all the guys. It is a tough business and I do wish them good fortune. I think Ben has been the best overall, but for me not strong enough for the part. I really hope he proves me wrong.
I agree with the comments about Amanda and as for her dress tonight, well she obviously has a good sense of humour!
Irene, I totally agree with 'who cares!' I suppose I must do a bit to spend 20mins writing my post.
'6. Make it less obvious when you’re trying to steer the audience
Every series, the producers have favoured some performers over others. I’ve never held to the belief that they have “decided” who they want to win, more that the people behind the TV show are keen on maintaining a balanced mix of contestants for as long as possible.'
Of course they've decided!
ALW & CM aren't going to risk their cash & productions and then let the audience decide. Jodie Prenger is a case in point and luckily for them she was great. On I'd Do Anything Cameron Mackintosh & ALW told the audience who they wanted and it wasn't her. You can't get more blatant that that!
Winners Connie, Lee & Danielle were the chosen ones. where was the steering in those programmes? Clearly, the votes cast each week showed exactly who was going to win. The chosen ones. Therefore, no steering was necessary.
I have managed to mostly miss Superstar - there have been plenty of other things for me to do and watch over the past couple of weeks. One of the good things about the once a week format is it doesn't mean cancelling your entire social life for - a show has to be really compelling to make me do that!!
I just wanted to comment on the steering thing, though, as it doesn't always work out as badly as it seemed to here. One of the things that made IDA so absolutely brilliant was the tension between Cam Mac and ALW wanting Jessie and John Barrowman and Denise van Outen wanting Jodie. Having all the judges toe the party line makes that impossible.
Well Scott how I agree with you the whole thing was very flat and the everyday thing was not really a good viewing idea. I have to admit to have used the recorder as I cannot stand adverts. Shame this did not work what a fantastic show it could have been in the old format maybe with the odd changes. Cannot understand the attitude of ALW re performers especially Nathan poor man. Ben however is a worthy winner. But as I said before for the first time I did not engage in the program . I did with all the others and still have the recordings of them. As for the judges, well you said it all, I do feel also that they could have had guests from Westend musicals it would have been great for the boys.
Lets hope lessons will be learned from this.
I've come very late to this, but I did watch most of the series, missed the final as I was at a concert watching someone who really can sing.
I have to agree with everything that Scott summed up so well. My biggest disappointment I'm afraid was Andrew Lloyd Webber, his treatment of Nathan, (who I didn't care for either) on live TV was shameful.
I'm not sure that the search for Jesus was ever going to make good TV, (I'm with Tim Rice on that one) although I do think that the BBC and the old format, may have saved the show from the abysmal ratings it got.
I would love to see Jesus Christ Superstar in the West End, (not in arenas) and I have my own idea of who should be cast as Jesus, (or even Judas) and let the reality shows choose someone for another show.
The only other thing I would say it's a pity it didn't work, because it was about time ALW looked for another leading man, as opposed to a Maria, Nancy, or Dorothy.
I loved the camper-than-christmas style of the BBC shows, which was perfect for productions such as The Wizard of Oz and Joseph. Superstar was far too X-Factor, and not enough Any Dream Will Do or Britain's Got Talent. It missed Graham Norton and John Barrowman, or even an Ant-and-Dec duo. Amanda Holden was hugely problematic. In trying to increase the sexy glam factor, ITV missed what the BBC got right. The campness, the weekly scheduling, the showbusiness all went down the pan.
As a fan of Andrew's previews shows (particularly Any dream will do), I'm afraid I have to agree with you on pretty much everything you've said.
Following the lack of a decent exit (which did at least improve from "what, is he gone?", to "oh well, bye then" when they moved it to the end of the show), the most glaring problem to me was the host. Was there a single show where she didn't fluff her lines? How many times did she get the phone numbers wrong? Go back to acting Amanda, because live TV is not for you.
Speaking of phone numbers, the move from early exits to late exits was really confusing. There was one show where the lines had been open since the night before, but you were asked to vote again. Were you meant to be looking at both performances, or just that night's? Would your votes carry over to the following day, as they had with previous shows? It wasn't at all clear until after lines had closed.
By the start of the following show the Jesuses had kept the same phone numbers for two consecutive shows, then right at the start Amanda said "lines are now open". Great - I've still got the number of my favourite from last night, I'll call that shall I? Actually no - that number's been reallocated to another contestant and you need to hang on to hear their new numbers. It wouldn't have been difficult to tweak the phrasing to make that obvious.