I'm honestly not sure, now I've thought about. I've whinged and I've b*tched, but is Sarah honestly Nancy? No, probably not. All the others who have gone in the live shows have been right to go, I think, not necessarily in that order or at that stage, but I did not see any of them as Nancy.

From before the live shows, all I can remember is Nancy Nancy, and it's so hard to tell if she was right or not. She did a good audition, but we didn't see her do any acting. It's hard to judge and say she'd be better than the other girls left cause she just wasn't tested as much as them.

I do agree with you that with all the girls that have gone, there have been valid reasons for them going, I think the order of them going has just been a bit out.

Personally I don't think Nancy Nancy was right for the role she clearly has a mezzo voice... perfect for Eponine, not so much for Nancy, still even then she's no less suited to the role than the likes of Sam and Niamh IMO.

I saw acting in her face in her first audition in her singing and suspect she would've been a great actress. there must have been something a miss for the judges though. I don't think Sarah was truly right for nancy either.

Should they have people there that have never been on the west end stage to make it a really "green" casting show?

I don't know really... cause it seems unfair on those who are "only" (I mean that nicely, cause they are important) the supporting cast in a show to deny them the chance to take part. And it does take a certain amount of courage for someone like Rachel, who has been a lead and therefore, one would assume, has a foot in the door, to decide to take part in something she could potentially fall flat on her a*se doing.

But at the same time is it fair to pit professionals up against amateurs? though that would reflect a real casting process, which might only privelege professionals and this gives a level playing field.

On the other hand (I said I didn't know!!) why should those who have trained and paid their dues have their jobs taken by any old person off the street?

I'll always be biased towards professionals I'm afraid...

I LOVE YOU GIRAFFE GIRL!

no question, that's it

Surely every session musician must feel the same when they play in an orcestra behind -- say -- Louise Redknapp?

Dave

You can be as talented as you like but you'd better not look like the back end of a bus. Or be the wrong age. Or weight. Or height.

It must just be luck or why would DVO be famous????

Before the Jodie-haters nip in I'll say that I can sort of understand why people have a problem with DVO's image but she is a talented singer and performer.

Dave

DVO?
Then why isn't she working?

She is working, just not in the theatre. Why isn't JB working? All of them have "resting" periods even when they're in demand. I've just seen clips of DVO singing and acting, and I wasn't that impressed, but I'll reserve judgement, as musical theatre is always better live.

JB not working???? Surely it's not possible for him to work any more than he is doing?? His smug botoxed face is everywhere!
(I know he isn't on the stage, but that's only because he is spending so much of his time making us wish we hadn't paid our licence fees).

[quote]
has to be the quote of the day.....

[quote=CASPER1066;23705144]
It most certainly is.

If I may nip back to the DVO point - she's certainly not awful, but she's not brilliant either. I saw Rent both with her and her understudy, and her understudy blew her out of the water.

I am sure that there are many professional understadies who are very good, who for some reason have never quite made it.

Indeed Lee was in that position last year, and I think Connie had at some point been an understudy also (although they made a big point of her working in a call centre).

I would sympathise with a many a pro who gets leap-frogged by an amateur (albeit a talented one) from a show like this - should it happen.

I'd sympathise with one who had entered and was actually better than the amateurs. However, I'm not sure I'd sympathise with a pro who hadn't entered at all... you can't really complain if you didn't take an opportunity that was in front of you which was equally as available to you and the amateurs. Equally, if the pro wasn't as good as the amateurs (mentioning no names ), maybe I wouldn't feel sympathy either... maybe there's a reason they haven't made it big

Smacked wrist However, I have nothing to add, either so back to....

the difference between an amateur and a pro actor with schooling under their belt in the theatre is one thing...
a BIG BREAK.

do you think Graham Norton is fabulous like I do? or do you think he is a campy part of the show that ruins it.

oh I like him. I sometimes think he thinks the whole thing is ridiculous... I find that amusing

and as for being "a campy part of the show"... the whole thing's camp as Christmas

Absolutely. And if it wasn't camp, there's a real danger that a lot of the girls' performances would be totally overdone and cringey. The campness allows us to just revel in the theatricality of it all, which is what 'camp' is all about.

Oh, yes? And which of these do we mean?

Definitions of camp on the Web:


- temporary lodgings in the country for travelers or vacationers.

- temporary living quarters specially built by the army for soldiers.

- a site where care and activities are provided for children during the summer months.

- clique: an exclusive circle of people with a common purpose.

- a prison for forced laborers.

- something that is considered amusing not because of its originality but because of its unoriginality; "the living room was pure camp"

- providing sophisticated amusement by virtue of having artificially (and vulgarly) mannered or banal or sentimental qualities; "they played up the silliness of their roles for camp effect"; "campy Hollywood musicals of the 1940's"

- Camp is an aesthetic in which something has appeal because of its bad taste or ironic value.

- Câmp may refer to several villages in Romania.

"Camp studies" was part of my degree. I know what it means. The penultimate two definitions above come closest to what camp is.

no way! what was your degree? (if you don't mind me asking )

I'm trying to think of a new IDA point to make to push the thread forward thank God tomorrow is Saturday and we get some fresh material!

Oh okay, here's one, off the top of my head. Do you think it makes any difference where the girls sing in the show i.e. first, last, in the middle, as to their chances of surviving that week? Personally, I can see that it could, possibly... if the girl who goes last plays a blinder, it would certainly stick in your mind. But would that be true if she did the same performance first in the evening. I can't say I've ever been blown away by the first song of the week though.

Funnily enough, I was studying musicals as part of my film and psychology degree. Hence where the camp side of things came in. Needless to say, I was happy as a pig in muck studying everything from Meet Me In St Louis to Moulin Rouge.

As to your question... not sure about the order. Has anyone done an analysis on here of where the bottom two usually feature in the running order? I know in one of the ITV shows (X Factor I think?), the first two acts were often in danger.

Not 100% would have to check but I think its towards the end usually may be wrong.

Oh I'm jealous! That can be my next degree then

just gonna work that one out... I have nothing better to do