Options
Better to be a runner-up?
lady_xanax
Posts: 5,662 Forum Member
✭
By getting down to the top ten or top three, youget the exposure without being forced into a mould. Now it doesn't seem cool to win, do you think the runner ups are relieved they didn't win?
0
Comments
Little Mix have done extremely well as winners of X Factor so they've overshadowed Marcus Collins for example, yet Amelia Lilly fared better coming 3rd.
Being runner up worked out for the best for acts like G4, Rhydian, JLS and Olly.
I don't know how it was better she came third? She's no more successful than Marcus.
It depends on the act, however those who come second have more option of record deals, over the winner who is automatically put to Cowell.
You got this exactly right!!!! 100%!!!
Ultimately the winner of The X Factor is.... Who ever Simon wants it to be.
Exactly.It is who Simon wants regardless of whether they win or not.He is always very clear during the show who he believes in. 2014 his eye was on Fluer,Stereo Kicks,Ben and possibly Jay.He has to sign Ben and he liked him but whether he heavily invests in him to make him sucessful remains to be seen especially as Ben wants a band now.
It was more a comparison between Marcus and Amelia. I'd say Amelia had the better career just based on her single You Give Me Love which did better in the charts than Marcus' lame cover of (a cover of) Seven Nation Army.
I agree with your second point, and for me this is why X Factor as a whole fails. If the winners struggle to have genuine success whilst 2nd, 3rd, etc... place contestants do better it just makes me think "what's the point?" and I suspect this is why the show has lost so many viewers over the last few series.
Surely it says something when the final of 2014 had the worst viewing figures since 2005. Yet Shayne Ward still managed to sell 750k of his single in one week. With single sales now flourishing compared to 2005, Ben selling 214k is disappointing although Sam Bailey did even worse.
Unfortunately people are beginning to realise this is not the case and it is all up to Cowell anyway.
Who wins is utterly irrelevant.
How do you figure that out? He has no control over the voting.
I reckon the judges/producers also know the voting figures for each week.
Look at Nicholas McDonald in 2013. In week 6 he performed last and sang Someone Like You receiving 31% of the vote that weekend - 5% more than Sam Bailey. I don't care what anyone says - those first six live show performances of Nicky's were spot on.
They saw the voting figures and panicked. I'm still convinced everything was set up for Sharon Osbourne to finally have her win, and Nicholas was potentially going to screw it up because, as I've posted elsewhere, he was more popular than the producers wanted him to be. The thing is, he had six weeks of near flawless performances to back him up (and his version of Dream A Little Dream Of Me couldn't have been any better, imo).
From week 7, he was pretty much given early slots in the running order and was given the most pathetic song choices to minimise his chances of winning.
Of course he knows who he wants to win and may manipulate things. But he doesn't control ultimately who the public votes for.
Ray has done well in the fields you've mentioned, but he has still been a flop. The show is about finding a recording artist who will sell with longevity - possibly worldwide. Ray performing on DOI and performing in Musical Theatre is not what a successful X Factor contestant would set out to achieve - they're kind of consolation prizes once a recording career has failed. It's like saying Jake Quickenden hasn't been an X Factor flop because he won I'm A Celeb.
Jake came second though, so it's a double flop in that case.
This may be the ideal but in practice the show has generated a whole range of what might be deemed to be successes in a wider interpretation of the term. It's obvious that some contestants apply to the show for exposure and - hopefully - fame. I am pretty sure that this is what motivated Stevie Richie, just as I'll bet it motivates even some of the really terrible acts which are included in the audition phase for so-called entertainment purposes. The compulsion to be on telly seems overwhelming even at the price of ridicule.
Look at someone like Rylan Clark - he is now a daytime presenter on a mainstream channel and even participated in the recent Grayson Perry documentary. I've seen his portrait hanging in the National Portrait Gallery. That may not represent success by your criteria but I'll bet he regards himself as having had a successful outcome from the show.
I'd say he'd be wanting both Fleur and Ben to do well since they were his acts .
That's what I meant about Ray - it's nine years this year since he was on XF, and he's been in work with one thing or another through all that time. He hasn't given up on the music and plans to release another album if he can, but at least he has something to fall back on, unlike a lot of the acts. He'll always be in the entertainment business.
Actually you have reminded me that I saw posters for the shows he's been in and his face and name was headlining them so that's no bad thing, is it? A lot of performers (my daughter is an aspiring dancer) would give anything to be in his shoes and enjoy his level of success.
Oh yes, of course, Jake DIDN'T win I'm A Celeb. So yes. flop all round
There is some truth in that but overall it is acts he believes in considering that Ella and Tamera were on shows he wasnt on.The public can choose a winner but it is where he wants to invest.I am not sure if Ben will do well ,he is better off with a band but will Simon buy his band idea?? Only time will tell.
Since when did not winning become a flop?Getting on I'm A Celeb is a win for Jake regardless.