[Red Moon]

Who is right and why?

The X Factor - for or against?

Is The X Factor as exciting as ever or is it looking old and tired? We weigh up the pros and cons.

The X Factor final – a must-see

By Neil Midgley

2008 hasn't seen many things get better. Share prices and house prices have plummeted. Thousands have lost their jobs. We had endless weeks of Sarah Palin. And yet, from ITV, shines out one glorious triumph: the current series of The X Factor, which ends on Saturday.

Last year's contestants were all a bit odd. This year, even the odd ones have been oddly normal: even kooky Diana Vickers turns out to have a standard teenage love life.What's more, they can sing. Eoghan Quigg – when he's not busting out Busted songs – has a roof-raising voice that's matched only by his hairdo.

But this year belongs to Cheryl Cole. The X Factor's new judge showed that you don't have to be mean to express an opinion; that you don't have to be Simon Cowell to make a decent song choice. Alexandra Burke, who must surely win on Saturday, has quite plainly blossomed in the sunshine of Cole's tutelage. Somehow WAG glamour has brought out more in contestants this year than Sharon Osbourne's mumsy self-regard did in series gone by.

Think back to last year's final: a listless Celtic face-off between Rhydian and Leon. Saturday's show will have a proper competition, with proper singers who are – perhaps all – destined to be proper pop stars. Don't miss it.

The X Factor final – a big bore

By Michael Deacon

At the end of the audition stages two months ago, I wrote that this year's series of The X Factor was below-par because of the format: it felt too long and mechanical and repetitive.

Well, I've changed my mind.

Now I think it's below-par because of the contestants and the judges.

The contestants have been nothing special (and The X Factor, in the past, has found special contestants: special in the sense of gifted, like Leona Lewis, or special in the sense of entertainingly absurd, like Same Difference). Alexandra has talent, but style-wise she's just a counterfeit Leona. Simon Cowell called Diana, who sounds precisely like the banshee from The Cranberries, the "most relevant" contestant – evidently forgetting that The Cranberries haven't had a Top 20 hit in this country for almost 10 years. Eoghan Quigg is this year's Ray Quinn: it's hard to concentrate on his singing because his startled man-child face is so eerie.

When the contestants have shown talent, the judges have squashed it flat. In the audition stages, JLS were a promising and potentially quite edgy R&B group. Under the tutelage of Louis Walsh, they've become a boy band: dilute, drippy, drearily middle of the road. In other words, he's transformed them into Westlife. Everything the man touches turns to cheese.

Dannii Minogue may as well not be there, and not just because she's got no acts left. Last year she was useful: she brought out the worst in Sharon Osbourne. But when Osbourne left, so did Dannii's purpose. Now she does nothing but praise – and, on what's supposed to be a fiery reality show, there's nothing duller a judge can do. Well, except weep. Cheryl – please.

The X Factor used to be a wonderful show. Next year, it may be wonderful again. Those of us who have been disappointed with this series can at least reflect that, next time, Eoghan won't be there. And neither, with any luck, will Louis and Dannii.

Source: Daily Telegraph

[robb]

Hmm.....well, viewing figures are up....
However, a number of acts this year have flattered to deceive (austin,laura,rachel and diana especially), and we have been left with a final between one good singer, an average teeny-loved boyband, and great all-rounder egghead.....
We also have Princess Cheryl this year......the media-worship of this admittedly good-looking girl-band singer, who cries on request (but with a not so nice history) is bordering on the ridiculous. When does the backlash begin?

[Red Moon]

Originally posted by robb
When does the backlash begin?

I think that backlash has already started to happen on the forum and that is spreading to the show.

Many of us of TiBB have commented on how the show has become a popularity contest and the talent contest element of the show is diminishing. Even simple Simon has said on the show how he feels the show is changing with comments like "If this was a talent contest". Clearly the format of the show at present has run its course and something needs to change if the show isn't going to become a farce like "Strictly come Dancing" did with the John Sergeant affair.

Will I be enjoying the final this year, well yes, but I will be angry with the X-Factor voting public for not making it the best final ever by but voting out some of the best X-Factor talent in years.

[robb]

Just one thing about the 'John Sergeant affair'...............SCD is SUPPOSED to be about novice dancers.....half of them have obviously danced before!! That's why people voted for John.....
On the other hand, the 12 XF finalists have been hand-picked after auditions. They are SUPPOSED to be talented. Some of them were not, and others were not as good as we originally believed they were............

[Red Moon]

Originally posted by robb
Just one thing about the 'John Sergeant affair'...............SCD is SUPPOSED to be about novice dancers.....half of them have obviously danced before!! That's why people voted for John.....

Very true, but the same thing could happen in the X-Factor, where the public vote for the worse of the 12 acts all the ay to the end just to wind up the judges.

Originally posted by robb
On the other hand, the 12 XF finalists have been hand-picked after auditions. They are SUPPOSED to be talented. Some of them were not, and others were not as good as we originally believed they were............

The problem is the acts aren't chosen on the X-Factor by talent alone as was pointed out in an article from the Daily Telegraph;

A finalist in one of such show, who has to remain nameless, told me about their own journey to the very first round, when they had to audition before researchers three times before they were put on the shortlist to be viewed by the televised panel. Now, this is someone who eventually almost went whole way, a performer obviously gifted enough to have been in with a shout of winning the big prize. But they almost didn’t make it past the researchers, because, initially, they were not considered good value for televisual entertainment.

But there is another side to this. If an auditionee had to jump through three sets of hoops to get on TV despite the fact that they were obviously musically talented, how do the hopeless, non musical, utterly self–deluded candidates ever get that far? Because their uselessness is the very point. Because the show requires victims, targets for the judges jokes. Because the audience doesn’t just want to see gladiators going into combat, they want to see hapless Christians being fed to the lions. It’s the kind of thing that has been amusing audiences since the Roman Empire. You can call it old fashioned entertainment. That doesn’t make it right.

If they were just picked for talent then maybe the show would have the shocking and stupid voting we see on the show from time to time.

Article Source: Daily Telegraph

[Z]

Originally posted by Red Moon

Very true, but the same thing could happen in the X-Factor, where the public vote for the worse of the 12 acts all the ay to the end just to wind up the judges.

That did happen - Rachel and Daniel finishing above Laura and Austin.