The World of Goo Boards


    
      
        The World of Goo Boards 
        (http://www.musicfanclubs.org/cgi-bin/ggd/YaBB.cgi)
      

        Goo Goo Dolls >> Goo Goo Dolls >> New Show Gives Bands `Idol' Treatment
        
(Message started by: Shannon on Oct 17^th, 2007, 3:00pm)

Title: New Show Gives Bands `Idol' Treatment
Post by Shannon on Oct 17^th, 2007, 3:00pm

New Show Gives Bands `Idol' Treatment
By LYNN ELBER
The Associated Press
Wednesday, October 17, 2007; 3:07 PM

LOS ANGELES -- There's sheer bravado in the title of Fox's "The Next Great American Band." But the network that gave us "American Idol" is primly cautious about whether it's found another hit talent show.

Debuting 8 p.m. EDT Friday, "American Band" boasts an impressive group of finalists ranging from heavy metal to soul to bluegrass, and it's from the same producers behind "American Idol."

But are audiences ready for what Johnny Rzeznik, the lead singer of the Goo Goo Dolls and a judge on the new venture, describes as "basically like a big battle of the bands"?

"You just have to cross your fingers," said Mike Darnell, Fox's president for alternative entertainment. The No. 1 status of "American Idol," he said, "doesn't necessarily translate to the band show. ... You can't compare anything to `American Idol.'"

Nigel Lythgoe, an executive producer for both series, just wants viewers to give "American Band" a fair shot. He's willing, even eager, to say that "Idol" contestants suffer by comparison to the band hopefuls.

"I can pick out five bands that I can go, `Wow, these guys are tremendous.' You can't do that with the top 12 Idols," Lythgoe said. "We're saying to the public, `Look at this talent and say you don't appreciate it.'"

Rzeznik, who joined after being assured he could be a fully independent judge, pronounced himself "blown away" by the skill and spirit of the best contestants. He also appreciated that the contest goes against the grain of today's music industry.

"People are tired of seeing really manufactured artists, who are very beautiful and can sing but don't have their own body of work," he told The Associated Press. "This is a cool process, not put together by a marketing team, a record company."

The artists "just get up there and do their thing. If the audience likes it, they like it. If not, boom, you're gone," Rzeznik said.

Joining Rzeznik on the judging panel are Sheila E. and British-born TV host Ian Dickson, whom viewers will quickly learn answers to the nickname "Dicko" and comes from the Simon Cowell school of barbed commentary.

The show's format is akin to "American Idol" but with a few tweaks. Instead of nationwide tryouts, bands submitted tapes online and about 60 _ good, bad and ugly _ were invited to audition at Lake Las Vegas, Nev., in what turned out to be 100-plus-degree summer heat.

Those contenders are pared to 12 finalists on the debut episode. Thereafter, two bands per week will be voted off by viewers _ but without an additional results episode a la "Idol," the audience will have to wait until the following week for the outcome.

Also unlike "Idol," which has showcased pop singers from Gwen Stefani to Barry Manilow, there will be no guest acts on "American Band," produced by 19 Entertainment and FremantleMedia North America.

"This really is about the talent," Lythgoe said. Bands also will perform their own songs as well as cover versions of records.

Given the immense success of "American Idol," which Fox safeguards with just one run per year, why the delay in trying a band version? "Idol" averaged more than 30 million viewers for its performance episodes and, even in year six, remained the bulwark of Fox's schedule.

"No one thought of it," said a rueful-sounding Lythgoe. "It was only last season that I was talking to (fellow executive producer) Cecile Frot-Coutaz and we said, `Why have we never done a band show?' ... This is a perfect fit for `Idol.'"

Singers have the spotlight on "Idol" and hoofers are center stage in Fox's "So You Think You Can Dance" and ABC's "Dancing with the Stars," but bands have been left in the shadows _ by TV and by the music industry, said Fox's Darnell.

"There hasn't been a band of the magnitude of those of the '70s and '80s" in recent years, he said. Whether viewers embrace bands the same way they've rooted for individual performers remains to be seen.

"It's a little harder to get your arms around a group of people," Darnell acknowledged. "Our job is to individualize as much as we can. If there's a great lead singer or a great guitarist, someone with a great story, you focus on them."

In the Dec. 21 finale, three bands will vie for a record contract and, just maybe, an instant career like the ones handed to "American Idol" winners from Kelly Clarkson to Carrie Underwood.

Or not. Dues remain to be paid, predicted Rzeznik.

"Whoever wins this contest, they're still going to have to go out there and prove themselves. Just because they got a running start and television exposure doesn't mean they're going to be playing in arenas right away," he said. "They're going to have to earn that."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/17/AR2007101701560.html

Title: Re: New Show Gives Bands `Idol' Treatment
Post by DWG on Oct 17^th, 2007, 4:17pm

lol...I was too lazy to read the article when I saw how long it was.
My bad.

Title: Re: New Show Gives Bands `Idol' Treatment
Post by laurengoo on Oct 17^th, 2007, 9:43pm

on 10/17/07 at 16:17:10, DWG wrote:

lol...I was too lazy to read the article when I saw how long it was.
My bad.

I haven't read it 'yet'. I just scrolled down to see your answer!

Title: Re: New Show Gives Bands `Idol' Treatment
Post by DWG on Oct 18^th, 2007, 11:14am

Okay, I'm not such a slacker...I read it now.

I really disagree with what this guy says:
"It's a little harder to get your arms around a group of people," Darnell acknowledged. "Our job is to individualize as much as we can. If there's a great lead singer or a great guitarist, someone with a great story, you focus on them."

If it's a band, I think they should be judged on how well they, as a group, perform together. To single out "the singer" or "the guitarist" is making the mistake of creating an "idol" within the band. In the case of a lead singer, this could result in them going off on their own as a solo artist.

Title: Re: New Show Gives Bands `Idol' Treatment
Post by Shannon on Oct 18^th, 2007, 11:29am

on 10/18/07 at 11:14:12, DWG wrote:

Excellent point DWG. I wonder if they're trying to focus on an individual in the group as a way to focus on 'something' positive rather than tearing them down? John talks about that a bit in the long Buffalo News article I posted this morning.

Title: Re: New Show Gives Bands `Idol' Treatment
Post by ChickenCookie on Oct 18^th, 2007, 12:18pm

on 10/18/07 at 11:14:12, DWG wrote:

I agree. I get the feeling they're doing this to further ride of the coat-tails of American Idol, afraid that perhaps the band concept might be lost on the American public. I think they give us too little credit. ::)

Title: Re: New Show Gives Bands `Idol' Treatment
Post by nmf016 on Oct 18^th, 2007, 3:21pm

http://blog.meevee.com/my_weblog/2007/10/next-great-amer.html

Similar interview, touches on band vs individual.

Title: Re: New Show Gives Bands `Idol' Treatment
Post by Saz_Goo on Oct 19^th, 2007, 8:13am

To be entirely fair, though, isn't that what the music industry does anyway? I'm probably a bit out of touch because a) I'm in the UK and b) I haven't read a music magazine for at least 3 years :P but I've found a lot of the time that the media focuses on the lead singer most of the time anyway, as do music videos etc. So surely if they're focusing on the lead singer or the most dynamic member of the group, they're only preparing them for the kind of attention they'll get if they make it anyhow?

I mean, the attention with the Goos has evened out a bit now, but how many times is Mike sidelined when they interview the group? And how many interviews did Robby get when DUTG was released in comparison to John?

The music industry assumes people have a short attention span and they seem to prefer having someone who can be the "face" of the group, it's handy for marketing and stuff. I'm not saying that's right, I think it sucks. But I can see it from NGAB's view, they're just doing what the magazines and TV shows will do at a later date anyhow, and maybe preparing the bands for the inevitable fact that some members will be singled out for public attention more than others.

Blimey, that was a bit of a rant. Sorry. :-X

Title: Re: New Show Gives Bands `Idol' Treatment
Post by DWG on Oct 19^th, 2007, 11:16am

I think it's an unfortunate thing that has developed over the years. Think of how it was years ago, let's say with a band like the Beatles. How would things have been different for that band if the only member who was ever focused upon, or interviewed, was Paul McCartney? They might have become one-dimensional. But instead, every member of the band became well-known, and people got to know each man's personality; each one of them influenced the music, and we got to know how each bandmember made his own unique impact upon it. Same with a band like the Eagles, or the Rolling Stones. Times have changed, and not necessarily for the better in this regard.