|
||||||||
Will they let under 16s audition again after this series? |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 562
|
Will they let under 16s audition again after this series?
Allowing the under 16s in this year seemed to end in disaster, with only one getting through and then having to leave after a bullying scandal was uncovered. Even when Emily did perform, it was like watching a really bad high school concert.
Do you think Simon will let the under 16s in again next series? I really hope not. I cringed watch them. Most would start bubbering and begging at the slightest hint of criticism and just didn't seem emotionally mature enough to handle it, even when the criticism was really gentle and constructive. The judges looked terrified at the idea of having to give these kids critisim. A lot of the adults who enter don't seem emotionally mature enough so I've got no idea what they were thinking letting such young kids in. True, there are kids who are mature for their ages and probably could hack it, but I thought it was a bad idea from the start. I hope they keep it 16 and over again from next series onwards. I really don't think it worked and hurt this series more than helped it. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 422
|
I think you're right. It's an experiment that has not really worked. On a more basic level than all of your very good points however, is that these under-16s are unlikely to be successful popstars anyway. Who would buy the records? What on earth could they sing about without it seeming either totally ridiculous or entirely inappropriate? Ah well, Simon is only human after all, bless.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 19,908
|
Probably not. Lady Shiverz was supposed to be the one that "proved that lowering the age limit was the right thing to do" yet she gave two atrocious performances, was outed as a happy slapping thug and then thrown off the show.
Just one of many plans that went completely t*ts up this series. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 35,432
|
Quote:
Probably not. Lady Shiverz was supposed to be the one that "proved that lowering the age limit was the right thing to do" yet she gave two atrocious performances, was outed as a happy slapping thug and then thrown off the show.
Just one of many plans that went completely t*ts up this series. Stephanie was only 15, I think she could have made lowering the age limit worthwhile had she been put through.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,118
|
I don't think that, by and large, the Under 16s have the maturity to cope with the live finals and the media hype (good or bad) that will surround them. There will always be the odd one or two that will be the exception to the rule, but I don't think its worth the risk.
I wasn't comfortable with the fact the age had been lowered and nothing has happened subsequently to make me change my mind. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 622
|
Wasn't Pheobe 15 when she auditioned?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,198
|
Quote:
Wasn't Pheobe 15 when she auditioned?
She was and I think the age was a major factor in not allowing her to be one of the final 3 girls. That and Sharon's brain.... ![]() She thought Emily was better as a contender because of the positive views on YT.So, she couldn't have two young ones in finals and choose ..wrongly. Hardly the way to judge talent. She should have LISTENED to their voices... |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,894
|
I actually thought that Emily had loads of potential and could have been great. She did suck in the live shows but I thought her first audition was amazing. Pity about the happy slapping.
![]() In answer to the question, I don't imagine they'll change the rules back, but I don't think any of the under sixteens will get far next year. They'll let them audition and all (and they are great material for the early shows) but it would take one phenomenal under 16 talent to make the final 12. |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 562
|
Quote:
In answer to the question, I don't imagine they'll change the rules back. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Formerly Wton, Now - London
Posts: 219
|
Quote:
Me neither, much to my annoyance. If they changed it back it would be admitting they were wrong, and I can't see them doing that.
I agree that they should never have lowered the age limit, I'm sure Simon based it on that girl who auditioned in XF3 and admitted she couldn't go through because she was only 14 - when she auditioned again this year she was turned away at boot camp thus defeating the whole object of lowering the age. |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,806
|
Quote:
I don't think that, by and large, the Under 16s have the maturity to cope with the live finals and the media hype (good or bad) that will surround them. There will always be the odd one or two that will be the exception to the rule, but I don't think its worth the risk.
I wasn't comfortable with the fact the age had been lowered and nothing has happened subsequently to make me change my mind. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: AMJO - With Love! xxxx
Posts: 5,841
|
I'm glad they tried it this year - I blended in well with the younger contestants at boot camp, and made some good friends. The standard amongst them was pretty high, although I don't think all the ones we saw were necessarily the best.
However, partly because of that, having under 16s in the competition doesn't seem to have worked well this year, so I wouldn't be surprised either way next year. In some ways I actually think it'd be more sensible of them to raise the age limit, maybe to 18 (now that I've had my chance!) although the maturity of the contestants is largely based on how they are as individuals, the youngest contestants would be more likely to be able to cope with the pressure of being on the show, and to have had experience of performing before, and therefore give better performances, but I doubt that'll happen as of course the young ones can make interesting "stories" for as long as they stick around. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Depression Street
Posts: 5,656
|
I hope they do. I was going to audition
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,239
|
I don't think they'll do another series this year.
The reason they lowered the age limit, in my eyes, is that they can't let down all the kids who have watched the show over the years hoping to audition. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: scotland (:
Posts: 17,356
|
They better, Steph could win it if they did
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,640
|
Does anyone know what happened to Paris (I think she was called). Very pretty blonde girl who was about 15, who'd auditioned the previous year but was too young. She had a beautiful but operatic-style voice, and was put through to boot camp, but that was effectively the last we saw of her.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: AMJO - With Love! xxxx
Posts: 5,841
|
Quote:
Does anyone know what happened to Paris (I think she was called). Very pretty blonde girl who was about 15, who'd auditioned the previous year but was too young. She had a beautiful but operatic-style voice, and was put through to boot camp, but that was effectively the last we saw of her.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 41,094
|
I just think that they chose the wrong 'under 16's this year.
That said, I think that if they want to promote this age group, then a separate show altogether would be a better idea rather than lumping them with older contestants. There are too many legalities etc that have to be considered and I don't think it is fair to the overs or under 16 years age group to let them be on the same show. |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The jobcentre thanks to you!
Posts: 2,499
|
I think they should allow contestants to be aged under 16 next year (if there is a next year), but only if they are called Stephanie Woods.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,200
|
They shouldn't because if you think about it, they are still young and at school.
They need to at least finish their GCSE's before doing new things. |
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 5,200
|
I don't think they should stop a certain category just because on the happy-slapper and the crying kid, but I've never thought anyone auditioning under 16 was a good idea - too many star-struck kids and pushy 'stage mums' to deal with.
Three categories next year - one each for Simon, Dannii and Louis. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 18:38.


Stephanie was only 15, I think she could have made lowering the age limit worthwhile had she been put through.

