Things I learnt from the 2007 Emmy Awards

Nigel Barker is a wimp.
Just before they cut to the last commercial break during the red-carpet show, they said that Nigel Barker would be doing a fashion round-up, sharing with us his best and worst dressed lists. We got the best-dressed alright, but he did not say anything bad about one single celebrity. They briefly showed someone with a ruffly rouched thing around the decolletage of her otherwise quite plain short dress, and there was nary a snark in sight. Pah! Not sure why they could not get Tim Gunn (maybe he has not yet recovered by NY Fashion Week). He would have made a better fashion commentator than Nigel, who tends to revert to "ANTM judge" mode rather too easily.

Steve Carell is my favourite person in America.
Just LOVE him. Possibly my favourite moment of the night was when he bounded onto the stage and started cavorting with his pals Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, after losing in his category to Rick Gervais. What a good sport he showed himself to be and above all, an intrinsic entertainer. One day, the people who vote for these things will recognise him for what he is - the greatest American comedic actor of his generation. I think Michael Scott will be remembered in the annals of American television history - right up there with Archie Bunker and the likes - on the strength of Carell's genius. I think it's great that he's getting so much employment now, both on The Office and in movies; sometimes nice guys can finish ahead.

Award show tears can be sincere.
A few years ago, the New Yorker had an article on the struggles of Hollywood's non A (or B or C) list actors, focusing on one Jaime Pressly. I remember the article mentioning Brittany Murphy or Kate Hudson as actresses that were getting the kinds of gigs that could go to Pressly, but for whatever reasons, did not. When she teared up during her acceptance speech and whispered about "the little engine that could, that finally did", I remembered the Jaime Pressly of that New Yorker article and I completely bought the tears and the emotions behind them.

I do sometimes dislike people because they are beautiful.
Not entirely or just because they are beautiful, but it makes it easier to add to already extant acrimony. Case in point, Katherine Heigl winning Best Supporting Actress in a Drama Series. I don't really give much thought to Katherine Heigl one way or the other, apart from thinking her the 2nd best looking female on Grey's Anatomy (behind the drop-dead gorgeous Kate Walsh). Then she wins in this category, when she is not even the Best Supporting Actress in her own show! Not only fellow nominees Sandra Oh and Chandra Wilson, but castmates Sara Ramirez and Kate Walsh, have shown themselves during the course of the last 2 seasons to be better dramatic actresses. Heigl's fine, and has improved by leaps and bounds since her Rosewell days, but that she should win over Oh and Wilson is laughable. Then she stands there in all her glowing blonde perfection (the white dress was sublime) talking about how hard and long she has worked at this because she counts her years as a child actress, and I think, "Imagine how much harder and longer you would have had to work if you did not look the way you do". And almost irrationally, I dislike her for the moment.

Everything they said about America Ferrera is true.
She has been called America's sweetheart in more than one newspaper article. Her Ugly Betty castmates fall over themselves to praise her and bestow upon her every compliment of kindness, sweetness and humility. In an ensemble show with flamboyant characters and outlandish storylines and in which she plays one of the most normal people, she is the breakout star who has garnered the most media attention. And yet you sense that everyone on the show is SO genuinely pleased for this young lady. I really liked her line about how the real award is "waking up tomorrow and seeing all your faces". It's an improved version of "sharing" the award with cast and crew; this is saying that the award is nice and all, but she's just happy to work with these people, and she does not need any award to validate that. Which I think is really neat.

It might be time for Tony Bennett to retire.
It pains me to say this. I love Tony Bennett. I love the American Songbook and the standards that Tony Bennett sings. The man still has that innate sense of swing so needed by standards singers (Michael Buble needs to take a few more lessons from the master before he gets there totally), and he has more than enough performing experience to cover for the deficiencies in technique that are almost necessarily a byproduct of age. But do we need to continue seeing him being so much less than what he has been? The number with Christina Aguilera was almost painful to watch. She was almost overdoing the slinking and piano-top posing to counterpoint (or compensate for?) his inactivity. He seems capable now of only being "cool" and "swinging", with the purposefully clipped delivery and artfully truncated notes. He used to be capable of romance, tenderness, slyness, cheekiness, irony and a whole lot more.

Wayne Brady could be a rather good Emmy Awards host.
Ryan Seacrest did a professional enough job to move things along, but people expect comedy from an Awards show host. If not a stand-up routine, then a clever topical song and dance. Seacrest left the stand-up comedy intro to Ray Romano (errr, why??) and the song and dance was performed by two animated characters (nice enough singing voices, but the lyrics were only passably funny). Partway through the show, they had Wayne Brady come on to rather transparently shill for his new series on Fox (well, it IS Fox we are talking about). He did what he had to do with his trademark good-natured charm and humour. I have only ever seen Wayne Brady on Whose Line is it Anyway, so this was my first time seeing him work off a script. He (and Kanye West and Rainn Wilson) made it look very spontaneous and unrehearsed. The whole segment was actually a very fun bit and it got me to thinking about Wayne Brady as an Emmy host - he sings and dances like nobody's business (in many, many styles as he showed on Whose Line), he does improv and stand-up and he's pretty darn quick on his feet.

Broadway and The Sopranos is not a comfortable fit.
There is probably some hidden joke here about unfortunate cross-overs in opera (sopranos, get it?) and musical theatre, but I am not going there. The mismatch we were treated subjected to during the "Jersey Boys does The Sopranos" segment was at once so obvious and so mystifying that I wondered if there was indeed a hidden joke that I was missing. There are some elements of the Jersey Boys book that bear similarity to several The Sopranos plots and I could understand the concept as an intellectual conceit. But the execution was really weird and there was no context for either the musical or the series. It came across as random songs from the musical being performed while random scenes from the series were enacted in the background. "You're just too good to be true" being crooned while scenes of violence were shown - what??

British accents are really the best.
The Brits were less of a presence in the Emmys than they were at the Golden Globes earlier this year, but Hugh Laurie and the Prime Suspects gang ably represented the old country in the "Our accent is sexier than yours" stakes. They won, as they usually do. The producers even chose Helen Mirren to give out the final award of the night, giving due recognition not only to a current Oscar winner and a multiple Emmy winner, but also a great classical actress and a Dame of the British Empire with the requisite cut-glass RP accent.

Those Desperate Housewives have pretty darn good agents.
The show itself was not nominated for Best Comedy Series. In the acting categories, only Felicity Huffman was nominated, but we saw the other three Housewives presenting on stage (poor Nicolette Sheridan - Edie has apparently never quite made it to full Housewife status and it might be too late now that she could be dead). Terri Hatcher also got a embarrassing self-deprecating shout-out from Ryan Seacrest in his opening spiel and Eva Longoria got what amounted to a full-page fashion editorial during both the red-carpet show and Seacrest's intro.

Those Heroes need to get themselves better agents.
Heroes was nominated as Best Drama Series. For all that, only Hayden Panettiere was on stage as a presenter. Heroes' only acting nominee, Masi Oka, was stuck behind a MacBook and had the unenviable task of explaining interactive online TV. To rub salt into the wound, he did not even get to say 'and the Emmy goes to ...". He got to introduce the guy who would announce the winner. Well, at least Ryan Seacrest told the world how smart he was as a 12 year old. His agent must have really pulled out all the stops for that.

Roots is the only memorable mini-series the Academy can call to mind.
How else to explain that Roots is brought up and showcased yet again as the production that exemplifies the "power" of the mini-series? I remember watching Roots as a kid and waiting with bated breath for each following episode. It did leave a powerful impression on me, as a non-American pre-teen learning a little about the not always savoury history of the world's most powerful nation. It was gripping and moving. But it is not the only mini-series that I have found affective as a viewer, and it is by no means the one that I found to have the strongest or most profound effect. That accolade belongs to Band of Brothers which I love because of its ideals of nobility, kinship and courage; or perhaps Angels in America for its sheer breadth of ideas and its achievement as a piece of televisual art. Other mini-series that are as memorable as Roots include The Thorn Birds and the two Anne of Green Gables series. Outside of North America, it is a veritable embarassment of riches. From Australia, there is the adaptation of the classic For the Terms of his Natural Life which I still remember almost 20 years since first seeing it, and the truly wonderful Brides of Christ. As for the British, they have elevated the mini-series into an art-form, showing their special mastery in producing period adaptations of classic novels - Brideshead Revisited, Pride and Prejudice 1995, A Dance to the Music of Time, the Poldark series, and a couple of recent gems - Bleak House (2005) and North & South (2004) (an adaptation of Elizabeth Gaskell's classic, and not to be mistaken with the identically named American mini-series based on John Jake's Civil War epic). Seriously, Roots is great and all that, but if the Academy had paid a little more attention to what airs on HBO and PBS's Masterpiece Theatre, it would not need to keep trotting out Roots as the epitome of mini-series perfection.

30 Rock will run more seasons than Arrested Development
Okay, this is not something I learnt from the Emmys, nor something I can claim with any certainty. I just hope that this will happen. The loss of Arrested Development after only 3 seasons, and the final one a truncated one at that, was distressing. 30 Rock, similarly hilarious, clever, subversive, unconventional and watched by too few, deserves at least the six seasons that Tina Fey asked for in her acceptance speech. I hope American tunes in to its second season - please!

It's December, so it must be Star Awards time again

Heck, I forgot about the Star Awards was on and only caught the last half hour. But what an interesting half hour it was! It was the awarding of the top 10 most popular male artistes, a category that had seen its share of excitement during the awards run-in.

Personal highlights:

Christopher Lee probably gave the performance his life when accepting his award. He was dressed in dark colours, the very image of sober respectability and radiating remorse from every dip of his head and tilt of his chin. His words were heart-felt and he wore an expression of grave introspection. It was what most people wanted to see from him; the star with a pricking conscience. Props to him (and his PR advisors).

What was up with Qi Yuwu? I don't keep up with the Mediacorp gossip, so there must be something behind that emotional acceptance speech. It was almost maudlin in its sentimentality and uncomfortable to watch because he was still strangely unemotional despite the choked-back tears.

See, I could have done without the long speeches they requested from the first few award winners because they were under-running. Poor Tay Ping Hui gave it the old college try and said some intelligent things about his year of learning and new experiences. But he eventually ran out of steam and ended on a rather anti-climactic "thank you". The people who could have been entertaining, Mark Lee and Brian Wong, were reduced to few words because they were over-running at that point.

I did really enjoy Gurmit's sheer shock at being among the top 10, and his obvious gratitude and sincerity in thanking his fans and co-workers. His comedic touches were also well-done, especially when he scolded the production staff who were telling him to wrap up his speech. He was not having any of it, and good on him!

Elvin Ng, what were you wearing? It was not quite Liberace, but it was singularly unsubtle. It was actually interesting how most of the old-timers were almost conservatively dressed and then this newcomer bounded up the stage in something that looked like retro-1970's discowear.

Kelvin Tan Wei Lian was in the top 10, and also most popular newcomer. He was wearing white, a clever recognition of his all-round nice-guy image. His speech was nice, especially when he seemed to really feel bad for his fans who splurged money to vote for him. After the drama of his temporary drop from the top 10 list a couple of weeks back, this must have been a huge relief to his fans. It was certainly a relief to me, who is indifferent to Kelvin (despite my previous criticisms of him as Project Superstar winner), because this means to outcry over voting conspiracies or system errors.

Nicky Cheung and Jessica Hsuen were presenting this award. Again, they insist on getting Hong Kong artistes that are not wholly well-versed in Mandarin. Hsuen was fine, although she had trouble with intoning some of the names. Cheung was much less fluent and while that sometimes lent itself to comedy, it also led to some cringe-worthy moments.

I just wish that I had caught the women, so I could play armchair fashion critic. There's always the repeat. Hell, I probably will forget about it.

I haven't seen any of these movies, but I have my Oscar favourites

It's getting to that time of year when the "Oscar movies" get released, as you can tell from a cursory glance at my favourite Oscar blog (well, it's actually the only true Oscar blog that I know of), Oscarwatch.com.

There are still 3 months of campaigning and FYC ads to get through, but even without having seen any of these movies, I already have my favourites to root for in next year's Oscars. I think I have gotten to the stage where I actually condone the Academy giving out awards in recognition of a life-time's contribution, rather than voting based on a given work during a given year.

I just SO badly want Martin Scorcese to finally get a nod for Best Director for The Departed. It is 20 years overdue. And I still think he should have won for The Age of Innocence, which was such a departure for him and so brilliantly, breathtakingly executed.

This month, we lost the genius that is Robert Altman, a director nominated many times and yet never a winner. Of course, he was in good company, joining the likes of Hitchcock and Kubrick. Should Scorcese be denied again, he would be just another great director that has missed out on the golden statuette. In the meanwhile, James Cameron, Ron Howard and Mel Gibson are all Oscar-winning directors. Hmmmfph.

By all accounts, Helen Mirren WILL win Best Actress because she has indeed given the best performance of the year in The Queen. I truly hope she does win it. I still remember the first time I saw her, playing Rosalind in a BBC filmed production of As You Like It. She was radiant and mesmerising. Since then, I have never been less than awe-struck whenever I watch her in a movie or on TV. If Keira Knightley can be nominated for P&P (a fine enough performance, but hardly earth-shattering), surely Dame Helen can win!

That said, I have a soft spot for Kate Winslet and would not mind if she could pull off a victory for her role in Little Children. As Austen fanatic, I will always have a fondness for the actress who portrayed such a thoroughly sympathetic and human Marianne in Sense and Sensibility. Her career since those early days (only 11 years ago!) has been astounding, especially her unerring choice of roles.

There is a lot of buzz over Jennifer Hudson as Best Supporting Actress for her role in the filmed version of the musical Dreamgirls. JHud was my favourite contestant in the third season of American Idol. I particularly liked her rendition of "Weekend in New England" which was the performance that saw her eliminated. There was something about her her personality that was so likeable and she always had that big, beautiful voice. I was very pleased when she won the role of Effie over bigger names, including, apparently, AI3 winner Fantasia Barrino. I don't know if JHud will win an Oscar for her first role, but I certainly hope she gets a nomination and legitimately becomes the most successful AI alumni so far (this coming from a very loyal Clay Aiken fan!).

The buzz is not all that strong and there are a number of high-powered names being bandied about in that category, but I am hopeful that Steve Carell can land a Best Supporting Actor nomination for Little Miss Sunshine. He's Michael Scott, for crying out loud! The man has handed out Dundies, give him an Oscar! I just enjoy Michael Scott so much on The Office, to the extent that I would say that I watch the show for him, and not the Pam/Jim romance that seems to dominate the fandom's interest. Steve Carell's comedic genius has everything to do with that.

Best Actor? If Peter O'Toole can pull off the victory, it will be an honour even more overdue than Scorcese's. The man has 7 nominations, and I still cannot believe that he did not win for Lawrence of Arabia (I greatly admire Gregory Peck, and Atticus Finch is a character that I personally adore, but O'Toole was just vibrant as TE Lawrence).

It's About Bloody Time: The No-Stunts Charity Show

To the folks at Thye Hua Kwan Moral Society, huge kudos for never allowing the showbiz razzle-dazzle to obscure the point of their charity drive.

On the Mediacorp site, this is how the Thye Hua Kwan Charity Show was promoted:

Thye Hua Kwan Charity ShowSun Apr 16, 7pm

No dangerous stunts and no lucky draws; instead be entertained by a charity show that promises an evening of good variety entertainment fun.

Hosted by Guo Liang, Quan Yi Feng and Michelle Chia, the Thye Hua Kwan Charity Show is a three-hour ‘live’ extravaganza featuring more than 30 local and foreign artistes all coming together to raise as much funds as possible for the beneficiaries under the care of Thye Hua Kwan Moral Society.

Excuse the cynicism, but I find it ironic that Mediacorp is now using the lack of stunts as a major selling point, as if they were never part of the "alliance" that made stunts-studded charity shows de rigeur. How easily they forget. And how easily they expect us to forget! I have to give their PR department loads of credit for a very effective demonstration of the "blissful ignorance" approach to image management. N** what??

Certain parties would have found last night's show to be somewhat boring, as it was light on action and heavy on the representation of more "mature" singers (Chen Hui Hui, Jenny Tseng, Lin Xiao). For those who have gotten used to high stunts quotients on such show, this was probably a truly draggy affair, with song after song being performed by a parade of different singers and not even the expectation of some mean-spirited judges' comments to liven things up.

I think it's just a matter of expectations needing to be adjusted. The stunts were good and well, but not really viable in the long run. It was a matter of time before one's altruism (or degree of famewhoring desperation) reached its limit and would bode no more daredevil exploits. I also have to wonder who was picking up the insurance tab on the celebrities that put at least their health, if not their lifes, at risk.

I was fully behind the spirit of last night's show, if only because there were no stunts to be seen. Show business is business at any time, even during charity shows. Artistes boost their public image as much as promoting the worthy cause of choice. That said, I think it's churlish to quibble about the line-up at charity shows. After all, the performers are giving their time for the cause and we should be grateful to anyone who is invited and agrees to contribute. There were probably too many songs last night that came from an era before half the viewing audience was born. But I thought it was clever programming to have something to cater to both young and old. The kiddies got 2moro and Hue. Let the oldies enjoy their Chinese opera and pre-1980s hits.

Selected thoughts on the performers and performances:

• I am not a Fann Wong fan by any stretch of the imagination, but her sand-painting performance was a highlight. She is really quite talented artistically; dare I say it, perhaps more so than as a thespian (I think she is perfectly adequate as an actress, but over-rated compared to the likes of Huang Biren).
• Judging by his electric boogaloo version of Pachebel's Canon, Sylvester Sim should have waited a couple of years and participated in Superband instead of Singapore Idol. Of course, I remember vaguely some rumoured rift between Sly and his bandmates during SI, so perhaps Superband might not have been a viable option. I was actually looking forward to hearing Sly sing, to see if his technique has improved since SI, but he went the instrumental route. Which is telling, or revealing, or something.
• The routines by the Shaolin Martial Arts Group were fantastic, particularly the first one when a group of them just burst onto the stage in a flurry of swirling weapons and flying limbs. I was half expecting someone's hand to be chopped off in the confusion of movement.
  
• Awww, the Campus Superstar finalists were really endearing in their short appearance. They brought some youth to proceedings that had tended towards the geriatric prior to their arrival. Teresa and Zhiyang were particularly good - both in their vocals and their donation appeals.
• Jenny Tseng is SUCH a professional. Her voice is a little past its best, showing some signs of spread in her lower range, but she is the consumate professional. In the middle of her medley, I picked up the phone to donate. I had planned to donate all along, but was thinking of doing it at the end, so as not to buy into the whole "which performer pulled the most calls" nonsense. But Jenny so impressed me, I broke my own vow.
• The Bollywood number was something of a shambles but rather enjoyable in its clumsy execution. I loved the bright colours of the costumes, which really suited the ladies. Zoey Tay is looking in great shape nowadays and the vibrant colours lent her a very flattering glow. Chen Hanwei and gang looked suitably dapper in their groomsmen get-up. The entire enterprise certainly looked the part. It was just the dancing that left something to be desired. Anyone who has ever seen a Bollywood movie knows that the average Hindi actor and actress can dance up a storm. I was not expecting anyone to be Hrithik Roshan or Aishwarya Rai (the best dancers I have seen in Hindi films), butthese Mediacorp artistes came nowhere close to measuring up to even the more mediocre of the Bollywood performers.
• I wonder of Lin Xiao's brand of 1970's flamboyance ala Liberace makes people uncomfortable nowadays. He can most definitely sing, but as Simon Cowell might say, "To be honest, I found the whole thing a bit weird". I think it was the ghastly white corpse of the day make-up he was sporting.
• When the mentally disabled kids rushed up to hug Mr Lee, the THK chairman, the donation numbers just went through the roof. This was definitely a lump in the throat moment, and the high point of the whole show for me. I was tempted to donate at this point, but did not have a phone on hand. It was obviously genuine and completely unrehearsed and all the more effective for it.
• The hosts struck just the right tone - they were persuasive without being desperate, sympathetic without being pathetic and very poised and professional at all times. Rather a nice change after the emotional blackmail exerted by certain hosts of previous charity shows.
• To end on a shallow note, Qian Yifeng's outfit was so unflattering when the woman is built like a runway model. Why? Michelle Chia's was slightly better, but not by a lot. Is this unflattering high-waisted style in fashion now?
  

The smartest boobs in town: Miss Singapore Universe 2006

Last year, I was prompted to blog about the MSU pageant because of the horrific fashion on display. This year, I did not watch the whole pageant, juggling between the Superband Superjam, CSI and Chelsea playing West Ham in the EPL. From what I did see:

• Was host Adrian "The Horndog" Pang speaking from a script? The tongue out, salivating act got old before the 8 pm mark.
• The judges: Oy!! Sponsors aside (and what a can of worms it is to have sponsors also judging), could they not try to up the glam quotient a bit more than that? Denise Keller is fine. Joanne Peh is fine. But BOTH of them at the same time? A bit of overkill. We needed a youngish male celebrity to balance things out.
  
• The mothers in the evening wear section: Why?? So the judges could tell what these women would look like in 30 years? Is that part of the judging criteria now? "Sure, you're hot now, but if that's what the future holds, sorry, bzzzt!"
  
• Why the monotonous colour code of black for the evening wear parade? It's a classic, classy colour. But in such competitions, we expect to comment on at least one contestant's unfortunately garrish tastes. It's part of the fun of watching beauty pageants. Talk about letting the viewer down.
• The swimwear segment - sigh, this is one of the Trump pageant trademarks that I am least fond of - godawful choreography and background music. The choice of orange for the bikinis was at least original, but not complimentary to the fairer-skinned contestants.
  
• The top 10 Q&A session- the transitions to the recorded question segments were atrociously amateurish. Were the technical people so dazzled they could not press a button on time (and could not do it properly 10 times over)?
• The questions: good questions for the most part, and genuinely testing the contestant's poise and wit under pressure. I felt that a few of the questions were much harder than others (the one on laws that should be changed is particularly challenging) but there is luck involved even in beauty pageants.
• I didn't hear anyone mention "world peace" - but I did not catch all the interview sessions.
• The winner Carol Cheong: sizzling physique, but not particularly beautiful nor well-spoken, in my opinion. Passably okay as a winner, but not oustanding.
  
• Conspiracy theory time: the judges obviously knew from the start who their top 5 would be. The same few women kept coming up top of the rankings. I was waiting for things to fall apart when a few of the "chosen ones" faltered at the Q&A, but the judges managed to pull them through. It was all very much like figure skating - separate points for technical elements and artistry. If they fall short on one (usually the technical part, ie the demonstration of the ability to make sense), one could always compensate with points for presentation (ie the aesthetics of looking good in a swimsuit and a low-cut V-necked gown).

Do they choose the winner with the Miss Universe pageant in mind? Or are they after Joanne Peh mark 2? Someone whom they can groom into a starlet to blood the talent pool at Mediacorp? It seems to me to be more of the latter than the former, which is in the grand tradition of Hong Kong pageants. I suppose it is a legitimate enough way to go about things. After all, the odds for a Miss Universe from Singapore are slim anyway, so Mediacorp might as well realise their investment by getting some "talent" out of it. I expect to see Genecia (or is it Geraldine) Luo on Channel 8 sometime soon. 1st runner-up Jade Seah will sooner or later turn up on some infotainment program and be the thinking woman's Fiona Xie. As for the winner? After she comes back from the MU pageant, she will be hosting shows like Villa Wellness. Or maybe be the object of desire on Eye for a Gal. After all, she had already openly espoused the value of such "unscripted" reality tv programs.

What is up with the New Paper's coverage of this pageant? If anything, it was the media that hyped up the whole "brains" quotient of this year's contestants. It seems disingenuous to suddenly get all huffy about the "touted" postgraduate-degree-holding contestants being outshone by their less academicall decorated counterparts. I certainly did not think that the scholars would somehow do better in the Q&A section. If anything, I think sholastic training could be detrimental to the ability to produce soundbites (which, in essence, if what is needed to do well in this part of any beauty pageant). If asked "If you could change one law in Singapore, what would it be and why?", any scholar worth her salt would:

a) seek to clarity what exactly is meant by "change". Does it include abolishment or merely amending? Does the introduction of new legislation constitute change?

b) diagram the current legislative framework in Singapore

c) perform a gap analysis of laws versus environmental requirements

d) perform a feasibility analysis

e) request extension of deadline due to additional research needed.

See, it is not possible to condense a scholar's thoughts into 60 seconds. It's not that she does not have anything intelligent to say. Just that she needs a lot more time to say it!

As for that final question on Singaporean men and how they are perceived as second best to foreign men, I wish someone had said:

"Darling, you ever tried asking a foreign man to take you to the IT show at Suntec?"

Putting Sly to Shame: Campus Superstar Finale

The Campus Superstar Grand Finale on Sunday turned out to be possibly the best of the big local reality talent-search finales. The quality of the performances was high, in particular during the second half, the judges were entertaining, there was drama and tension aplenty and even the filler acts by eliminated contestants were enjoyable.

In contrast:

Singapore Idol: The atmosphere was electric and the formula is tried and tested. There was a great Dick Lee number, "Idol Paradise" but as a competition, this was a washout. Sylvester Sim was singing so below par, the judges were resorting to highly creative critiques to keep the tone positive. Uneven.

Project Superstar: Kelvin Tan was beset with nerves that night, making for uneven performances. There was also a lack of drama because he was going to win, even if he croaked out all his songs in broken Swahili. Predictable.

Superhost: Apart from Lee Teng, the other finalists were not having particularly stellar nights. Eventual winner, Charlyn Lin recovered some of her usual eloquence towards the end but had a relatively lacklustre night by her standards. Disappointing.

Star Idol: Oh, don't even get me started. Both the finalists, Leo and Bryan, are not much in the way of actors. The roles they were assigned to play were stereotypical, and if one was truly paranoid, designed to boost Bryan's likeability factor while downplaying Leo's. Mark Lee was a campy delight but could not salvage the wreckage of overacting going on around him. Awful.

Campus Superstar, on the other hand, made for most enjoyable viewing for all 3.5 hours of its duration. The quality of singing was not consistently high during the first part of the night, but all four finalists were trying hard and even the failed performances were oddly compelling. The two grand finalists are genuinely good singers and it was just so pleasant to listen to them. There was also something rather charming about these teenaged kids doing their thing on that stage, with that particular brand of enthusiasm that only the very young possess.

Thoughts on the finalists:

• Renfred Ng: Weeks ago, after the 2nd time I heard him sing, I dubbed him "that non-singer". I know the boy is young and it's unkind to be overly critical, but I did think he was very out of place in this finale. His fans would have done him a favour by not putting him in the position of having to sing "Kiss Goodbye". This was just painful; he manfully soldiered through the song and kept on pitch most of the time, but it was so effortful that I feared he would collapse from exhaustion. He is a good dancer, but not so good that it makes up for his vocal shortcomings.
• Geraldine See: Good old "Dean" has an interesting voice and manages to be both edgy and approachable. It's too bad that the extreme ends of her range are so unstable and her vibrato pretty much uncontrolled. There is a very appealing sincerity about her when she performs and when she is on form, she is vocally arresting. I don't know if it's a question of training or talent, but she's young enough to have time to find out.
• Teresa Tseng: This girl is in the mould of the old-school nightingales with her pure, crystalline soprano (think Teresa Teng). She has my favourite voice of the whole bunch of them. However, she does have a tendency to be too much of a choir soloist with her text-book phrasing and over-emphasis on producing pure notes. As long as she opens her mouth, she will sing prettily because she has been gifted with a pretty voice. But for all I know, she could have been singing about her grandmother's garden during her solo performances on Sunday. Girl needs to learn the Maria Callas creed of singing ugly in order to invest her performances with individuality and character. She's a good singer but as yet, a poor performer.
• Ng Chee Yang: The boy is obviously musical and for one so young, almost alarmingly assured in his technique. I am not the biggest fan of this sort of counter-tenorish male voice, but this kid knows how to make very pleasing sounds. When he gave his lower register a workout in his duet with Chew Sin Huey, I thought it sounded rather good and wished he had used it more often throughout the competition. I thought he was a deserving overall champion. While one might argue that Teresa is the better singer (maybe, maybe not) or has a better voice (I do prefer hers to his), he is definitely by far and away the better performer and interpreter of music. His performance of "Kiss Goodbye" was a real highlight, not just of this finale, but of any of the local singing competitions (like Taufik Batisah's "Me and Mrs Jones", a defining performance).

Other thoughts from the finals:

• So nice to hear Hong Junyang singing again. Watching him week in and week out as co- host of Campus Superstar, I had forgotten what a very appealing voice he has. He is perfectly eloquent and professional host, but when he sings, he really comes alive and projects star quality. His duet with Teresa was manna to the ears. His vocal tone (which is light and clean) was a perfect match to hers.
• Chew Sin Huey's voice sounded really rough, which is saying something given her usual huskiness. Disappointingly, she had a few sour notes during her duet with Chee Yang. I kept thinking that the duet would have sounded better had he sung with someone else and that is sad, because I really thought Sin Huey should have been the ladies' champion in last year's Project Superstar. At first I thought that the song had been pitched too low for her but her solo bits did sound like they were smack in the middle of her comfort zone. Besides, Chee Yang's range is so vast, he could comfortably have accommodated almost any female singer he duets with. I think perhaps Sin Huey was just having a slightly off night. Her ragged vocals were also an odd fit with Chee Yang's smoother sound.
• Kelvin Tan minus competition nerves is a much better proposition than Kelvin Tan in last year's PSS finale. I liked the simplicity of the two songs he sang, with the unfussy guitar self-accompaniment. He still has a nasal quality to his high notes that I think would be rather grating if one listened to an entire album of it. Somewhere in his middle register, there are a few truly lovely vocal tones, but he does not seem to use that voice very much.
• The judging after Teresa sang with Junyang was the comedic highlight of the night for me. The poor girl must have been mortified as judge after judge kept pointing out her seeming infatuation with Junyang during the song. I don't know if it was just an act, but she showed more animation during those 3 minutes beside Junyang than she has all season. Something in the way she laughed and smiled at the judges' comments suggested that she might have a bit of a star-struck crush on the guy. Who knows? I was just glad that she offered up such comedic fodder for the judges! She even roused Lee Sisong to crack something like a joke.
• The eliminated contestants were just great during their group songs, so infectiously fun and "hang loose" about the whole endeavour. If anything, it was the older Kenneth Lim who looked rather self-conscious and awkward.
• Lee Weisong and Lee Sisong: identical twins who manage to look exactly alike and completely different at the same time. What a contrast in personalities and presentation.

Collective Famewhoring: Star Awards 2005

Another year, another Star Awards. Another opportunity for the "stars" of Mediacorp to show off dubious fashion on stage. Another windfall for telecom companies. Another piggy-bank busting bout of phone-voting. Another blatant display of self-congratulations.

I didn't watch the whole thing from start to end (I tend to tune out of the long introductory banters, and the musical performances), but I caught all the main awards.

Talking points:

1) I think Zoe Tay hates Fann Wong.
Their rivalry for the Number 1 position at Mediacorp has always seemed friendly, although neither pretended to be bossom buddies with the other (I think they are just much too different in personality and temperament to be really close). But tonight, Zoe Tay displayed a bit of manipulation that reminded me of the concubines in War and Beauty. She again took it upon herself to push Chris Lee and Fann Wong together. Last year, she was pushing for them to kiss. This year, she was pushing him to propose. It was just painful to watch how obviously embarassed and distressed she made Fann Wong. This is not the action of a well-meaning friend. I suspect that Zoe Tay was engaging in a deliberate bit of bitchery disguised as good-natured teasing and matronly patronage.

2) Zoe Tay: errr, what was she doing there?
Since she was not nominated for an acting awards, and was not eligible for the Top 10 awards, she seemed like surplus requirement most of the night. And yet, there she was, interjecting when Chen Han Wei won his Best Actor award. I know that they are good friends, but was that really necessary? As for the bit of nonsense with Christopher Lee and Fann Wong, who made her the resident match-maker? She just came across as such a typical nosey-parker, busy-body housewife. I hate to say it, but that display was rather low-class. So much for the glamourous clothes and the endorsements of diamonds and other such classy products.

3) Cut out the pointless banter
While I am getting on Zoe Tay's case, the discussion with Christy Chung about beautiful mothers was really self-indulgent, self-promoting and more famewhorish than any of the thank-you speeches we had all night. (To be fair, Christy Chung brought it up first). But it wasn't just these two; the Taiwanese presenters for the Hosting award went up to where the nominees were seated, and did ... what, exactly? That exercise did not achieve anything other than to delay proceedings by another few minutes.

4) Cameramen and producers: learn some subtlety!
When the presenters of the Lead Acting awards were discussing how actors can convey emotions and communicate using their eyes, we were treated to a gratuitous shot of Kelvin Tan, the visually impaired winner of Project Superstar. Oy, could we try to be less heavy-handed about these things?

5) Lost in translation.
Every year, there are foreign stars invited who do not speak Mandarin with a high degree of comfort. I am all for inviting such talent to up the glamour quotient, but could we grant them the dispensation to speak the whatever language they are more comfortable with? In Hong Kong, I have seen them invite stars from Japan, Korea, Taiwan and China. The invited presenters speak their own languages, and have a co-presenter who is able to translate to Cantonese.

6) Who's the bigger superstar?
Okay - Lydia Sum vs Christy Chung; Patrick Tse Yin vs Andy Hui. Chung and Hui are definitely younger, and probably more "in", but in terms of legend status, we are definitely looking at Sum and Tse. And yet, the plum presenter slots - ie, the last two of the night, the Top 10 Awards - were given to Chung and Hui.

7) Fashion statements
When Joanne Peh had to push up the neckline of her strapless dress, I thought she should have worn her shawl on stage. That just did not look good of TV.
The female shoes this year went the high stilletto way. Huang Biren is probably the tallest woman there and still she wore the highest heels of the night! Wow, those must be killers to walk on.
Zoe Tay's dress was very nice indeed, especially next to Christ Chung's overly-fussy number.
I really liked Jeanette Aw's white dress, but the netting showing below the hemline was too precious.
The men were very soberly dressed, very conventional suits seemed to be the order of the day.
In all, an elegant night, fashion-wise.

Shooting Stars

Not so long ago, the entertainment industry had a rather painful fondness for trying to make actors into singers. Just give them a couple of months of voice training, put them in the recording studio and film a pretty music video. Voila, you have a pop star with a ready built fan-base from their acting efforts.

Remember Fann Wong's album, Christopher Lee's EP, Zoe Tay's CD (I think Zoe might want to drop this from her CV)? In Hong Kong, Louis Koo and Flora Chan, among others got into the act. Their recorded efforts were acceptable, their live singing not so much.

With so many musicians struggling to break into the industry, I hate the fact that actors can get recording contracts despite having no training and no discernible musical talent. It is all a cynical marketing ploy and thankfully, there is much less of it going on now.

I thought that there could be nothing worse than forcing actors to be singers. Then I watched Channel 5's "Shooting Stars". Well, there IS something worse - forcing singers to be actors.

Shooting Stars is the "Singapore Idols drama series", starring 5 of the Singapore Idol finalists. We haven't seen all of them in action yet, but of the ones we have seen so far, the experiment with acting singers is a mixed success.

Taufik Batisah
Acting Chops: His acting is perfectly decent. Not a De Niro, but he pulls of "intense" with commendable aplomb. He isn't skilled enough for subtle characterisation, but he does not overact and is quite at ease in front of a camera.
Act or Sing? : Sing, with small acting jobs now and then. With a lot of training and experience, he could get as good at acting as he is at performing, but why not stick to what he does best?

Sylvester Sim
Acting Chops: Ouch! Painful, painful, painful. It's just painful to watch him act. So wooden and utterly uninteresting to watch. Whether in love, worried, angry or upset, his facial expression never changes. And let's not forget the bad diction; he was almost incomprehensible. Just painful.
Act or Sing? : Sing. And never, ever, act again. Never. Please.

Daphne Khoo
Acting Chops:She seems to be playing herself, so this might not be much of an acting stretch. That said, she is natural and unaffected. Her "manja girl" act is likeable and sweet rather than being irritating. She also successfully plays off her fellow actors.
Act or Sing?: Act. I don't much carre for her singing voice, but see real potential in her to act if she wants to pursue it as a career.

Olinda Cho
Acting Chops:The girl has a larger than life personality which seeps through her acting. That is not necessarily a bad thing, but might limit her versatility. Her acting style is rather broad and has a somewhat exaggerated quality. She does show comic instincts and might be more comfortable without a script.
Act of Sing?: Sing, and do a side-line in variety-show hosting. The girl has a great voice which should not go to waste.

A word on the music in the series: Kudos to Ken Lim for letting the kids record the closing songs aired during the credits of their respective feature episodes. I quite like the song that Sly sings (if he enunciated better, I might even be able to figure out what the song is about!). Taufik's and Daphne's (which she co-wrote) are also good generic pop songs, certainly comparable to anything we hear on the radio nowadays.

Project Superstar Finale

The good:

• The competition format was well thought out, with the finalists going head-to-head in five rounds ala boxing. Because each round offered a different challenge to the performers, both finalists were really tested on their versatility and technique. I especially liked the a capella and duet/trio singing segments.
• The original song written for Kelvin Tan was very pleasant on the ear.
• JJ Lin was cool, professional and the consumate musician.
• Slight slip-up by Jeff aside, the two co-hosts did a thoroughly professional job. Nothing earth-shattering, but they got the job done.
  
• The also-rans (aka as the eliminated contestants) were energetic and clearly having a good time during their group performance slots. The energy level kept the crowd in high spirit while the finalists were resting or having wardrobe changes.
• We got to see beaten male and female finalists, Junyang and Xinhui singing solo and doing a duet together. Both in very good voice, especially Xinhui. The two of them also had some on-stage chemistry going there!
• Kelvin sang his first two songs very well, and was especially good on his a capella number, with some help from his back-up brothers. When the boy isn't suffering from nerves, he can sound great.
• Kelly showed her all-round performance skills; dancing, posing and singing up a storm. Her range of music was rather impressive - up-tempo, jazzy, R&B type sounds, dance beats and an old-fashioned love ballad. She pulled off her final power ballad MUCH better than I expected. A huge improvement over her ladies' final performance two weeks back.
• The judges being refreshingly frank and critical when the performances called for it. They started out pretty much handing out bouquets all over the place and I thought we were in for a repeat of Singapore Idol' finale. Then they told Kelly she was slightly off during her a capella segment and pointed out Kelvin's lack of proper technique when trying to do R&B riffing. Maybe next year, Ken Lim and gang will be similarly less PC during Singapore Idol?

The not-so-good:

• Anthony Png's continued nonsensical non-jokes. He must be the only person who finds himself amusing. If they do Project Superstar again next year, can they get him changed - or have a no-jokes clause in his contract?
• Kelvin's loss of steam towards the end. His final two songs were quite painful. It was a pity, because the songs were lovely and he just didn't do them justice at all. You could see his visible loss of confidence during the end of his duet/trio performance, and it just went downhill from there.
• On a related note, Kelvin's rather one-dimensional choice of songs. All his songs, bar the duet/trio, were slow-tempo major-key ballads. He cannot sing a string of such songs in concert; there's only so much of sameness that an audience can take.
• The judging which had no effect on the final result. It was entertaining and insightful to hear what the professionals had to say, but maybe they should have left off the part where the judges chose their winners for each round. I think "losing" 2 of the first 3 rounds contributed to Kelvin's breakdown in his final two songs.
• The dancing by the eliminated contestants. They tried hard and they should get credit for that, but boy, some of the lack of co-ordination was not pretty to behold. Worse, some of this people can't keep in tune while standing still, so having them dance and sing at the same time is NOT such a bright idea.
• The unco-ordinated "cheering" of the fan groups. Shouldn't they have rehearsed this a bit more? Kelvin's fans were particularly incomprehensible; whenever they were called to cheer, I heard just a wall of noise, with only two words being discernible - Wei Lian. And I am guessing here.
  

The uncomfortable:

• This is going to sound totally insensitive but I have to say it. Staging this finale at Singapore Indoor Stadium, with all the bright lights, razzle-dazzle and huge audience, highlighted how much Kelvin sticks out like a sore thumb in this competition. Because he isn't able to move much, he looked awkward and lost on that vast stage.
• While the eliminated contestants were prancing around doing their group numbers, I found myself wondering how they would have choreographed around Kelvin if he had been amongst them. Perhaps it was just as well that he was one of the finalists and performed solo most of the night.
• During the duet/trio with JJ Lin and Kelly, Kelvin was put at a great disadvantage. Not only because he could not visually communicate with his partners, but because the style of music was out of his depth. JJ was grooving and riffing, while Kelvin tried valiantly to squeeze some R&B out of his balladeer's soul. It just did not work. Of course, part of the point was versatility, and the expectation was for the finalists to adjust to their singing partners. It just seemed far to much to ask of Kelvin.
• Kelly outperformed Kelvin throughout most of the night, but there was always the feeling that the performances counted for nothing. Even if Kelvin had forgotten his lines and stopped dead in the middle of a song, or had his voice crack, he would still have won. This competition was dead in the water the night that Kelvin survived his horrible "old song with new twist" disaster.

Project Superstar was a great success, if media coverage post event is anything to go by. The marketing types have decided to use Kelvin's blindness as a selling point, which is good strategic thinking, I suppose. I also think it is rather insulting to Kelvin as a musician and an artiste, but he seems quite happy to go along with it. The reality of the music industry is that success can be shortlived, so maybe he is smart to milk it for what it is worth while he can. I wish him well.

Kelly is something of the forgotten woman in this media explosion. I suppose it is difficult to not fade into the background when Kelvin has such a compelling Cinderella story. It is not her fault that she is conventionally attractive and talented and has a typical background. Wholesome normality just does not make good media coverage material. Remember Sly and his mother's legal problems? Or Sly and his ROM debacle with Maia Lee? Kelly needs a little scandal to get the column inches. But she's got her recording contract (and seemingly with the higher profile of the two sponsoring recording companies), her youth and good looks. That is as great a start as anyone could get.

The Glory and Agony of Victory

A few victories in the past few days that saddened me:

• Kelly Poon beating Chew Sin Huey in the Project Superstar female finals. I acknowledge that Kelly is a decent singer and has the package of a Mandopop star - ie, sweet, pretty and youthful. But good heavens, Sin Huey sang circles around her during their final show-down. HUGE circles, maybe even intergalactic orbit in circumference. And yes, I know that Sin Huey does not have the look and styling figured out, but she sang so much better that I thought those other considerations were completely moot. Kelly's English song was such a bad miscalculation for her voice - like Sly singing Music of the Night in last year's Singapore Idol Final 3 show - and her performance of it was a disaster.
• Kelvin Tan beating Junyang in the male finals. Oh well, it's not like I did not expect it. I did think that maybe Junyang had a chance because he had a sizeable advantage over Kelvin in the judges' scores. I thought both were rather poor, but they were obviously ill (and if it wasn't obvious, the numerous mentions of their illness by the judges and contestants themselves certainly kept us constantly reminded!). It was a disappointing final overall, but I thought that Junyang edged it in terms of vocals, and trumped Kelvin by the wirth of a continent (Asia) in terms of performance. Kelvin's insecure technique drives me crazy. He has a good sense of phrasing but his unsupported high notes just ruin the effect of his melodic lines. And don't even get me started on how his blindness was being brought up time and again - Qian Yifeng was practically a charity show host at times, and the judges themselves could not leave the topic alone.
• Chelsea beating Arsenal last night in the first battle of the Premiership giants. Not that I am an Arsenal supporter, but outside of Aston Villa and Liverpool, my football-supporting principle is simple: support any team that Chelsea play against. Apart from my dislike of Mourinho, which I think I have mentioned more than once, I dislike what they have done to the economics and politics of soccer. The entire Essiaen mutiny affair has its roots in Chelsea's disruption of the normal workings of market forces. Fine, they can afford it and it is their money to spend as they wish; but there is such a thing as responsible spending. My quibbles with Chelsea aside, last night's result was due to a fluke goal. A draw would have been a much fairer result. Horribly for non-supporters, Chelsea are enjoying the luck of a championship-winning team; that last minute winner against Wigan last week, and a fluke goal against Arsenal. And the quality of the match was also a bit of a let-down. I couldn't help but feel that neither team was performing anywhere near its peak. Not that the winners would care. Chelsea will take the 3 points, however uninspiringly they were won.

And to be more positive, a few victories that pleased me:

• Kimmi Raikonnen winning the Turkish Grand Prix. It was done in some style too. Too bad Montoya had to suffer a hiccup just two laps from the end, allowing Alonso to take 2nd place points. I don't think Raikonnen can close the gap to Alonso now. Even if he wins every race in the remainder of the season, Renault is too consistent for Alonso to not score championship points in these races.
• Taufik Hidayat winning the World Badminton Championship. The boy is so talented, and yet until today, not a winner of any of the badminton annual "grand slams" (All-England, World Cup, Grand-Prix finals, World Championship). I haven't seen this yet, but he apparently quite handily disposed of World no. 1 Lin Dan. Although it is great when people win with guts and determination, sometimes it is nice to see the talented ones win. I reckon that's why people support Brazil at the soccer World Cup and why even Americans cheered for Roger Federer when he beat Andy Roddick at Wimbledon. If we take out the beauty in spectator sports, who would ever watch anymore? Taufik Hidayat has the knack of making badminton look not only exciting but also elegant. It is a gift that not always brings titles and we should celebrate when it does.

Affirmative Action or Objective Observation?

A few weeks ago, there was a promo spot on TV urging us to watch "Project Superstar".

Words flash on the screen, white upon black background:

Do you vote ...

Because of his good looks?
(Cut to shot of generic spiky haired pretty boy contestant)

Because of her beauty?
(Cut to shot of doe-eyed pretty girl contestant)

Out of sympathy?
(Cut to particularly unflattering shot of Kelvin Tan Wei Lian, a visually handicapped contestant)

That was just about the most offensive and tasteless thing I had ever seen on any Mediacorp channel (and I am watching the second season of Nip/Tuck!!). Even 8 Days, a publication of Mediacorp Publishing, took Mediacorp TV to task for airing this promo. I was thrilled that someone had the guts to rap a sister organisation on the knuckles. It must be really bad when even your "family members" are giving you a very public thumbs-down.

And it was really bad. It was insulting both to the contestant and the people who vote for him. It seemed to suggest that the only reason he gets any votes at all are because of sympathy; the only reason anyone votes for him is because they pity him. His talent is given short shift (in fact, the entire promo seemed to discount talent as a reason for anyone voting, which might tell you something about how the industry sees its cash cows). Worst of all, the choice of visuals made it seem like a battle of the beautiful people against the less telegenic. Okay, we KNOW that having good looks usually gives someone an unfair advantage in life (hey, like I said, I watch Nip/Tuck!). Does the media need to perpetuate and hammer the point quite so blatantly?

I don't know how much the promo might have hurt Kelvin Tan, or even if it did at all. It was certainly insulting, but it might not have done him any damage in terms of votes. In fact, it might even have spurred a few outraged viewers to vote for him, just to snub Mediacorp for airing something that was so politically insensitive. At the time, I was mainly horrified that his blindness was being exploited for the purposes of marketing and promoting a TV show. Even worse, it was being exploited in a way that made him the butt of a not very funny joke.

The guy should be allowed to compete with others as their equals. It is for him to win our votes with his performances, just as it is for him to lose our votes, turn us off or simply bore us. His blindness should not be an issue in the competition. If it isn't an issue when he is performing, then it should not be made a selling point by advertisers, promoters and headline writers.

I am not saying that everyone should treat him as it he wasn't visually challenged and just allow him to bang into things or fall over. I am just saying that in a competition, his blindness should not be exploited; not by himself to win pity votes and not by others to get a bit of cheap publicity. Nor should his blindness be a reason for the judges to soften their critiques, as I believe they have done more than once.

One month later, and Kelvin Tan is one of the last 2 male contestants standing. He is competing in the male finals, and has every chance of sweeping into the grand finale as the male champion. What has brought him here? His journey to the final has shown us the two very different sides of Affirmative Action.

When I said that his blindness should not be an issue when he competes, I was talking from the principles of affirmative action. The disadvantaged should be given more than equal access to opportunities so that they might compete as equals with mainstream society. When we bend our own internal rules and reshape our preconceptions, we are practising Affirmative Action. When we say "Give Kelvin Tan a chance to compete on Project Superstar", we are asking saying "Let's judge him on his talent, it doesn't matter if he is visually impaired". When we do this, we are practising Affirmative Action, and I believe strongly in the need for it in unequal societies (ie ALL societies).

When we move beyond affirmative action, we pay people like Kelvin Tan the ultimate compliment. We objectively observe and judge them on their talents and abilities, as we would anyone else. They are able to prove their worth against a wider common denominator. Instead of being "a great singer for someone who is blind", they get to be simply "a great singer". The full-stop is everything.

But then there is the other side of Affirmative Action - the one that never moves on to objective observation. This is the side that thinks that the disadvantaged will always need to be given special treatment. I have seen a lot of this in the rise of Kelvin Tan. People say things like, "He has managed to do so much when you consider that he is blind. We must continue to support him". Now, this is a lovely and noble sentiment. But it doesn't really do him any favours. Like it or not, it smacks of pity. Yes, I have no doubt that people are motivated by his talent, but statements like this do show that it is NOT ONLY about the talent.

Fine, it should NOT be JUST about the talent. This is a competition to find a superstar. Talent is part of it, yes, but so is stage presence, likeability, appearance and that ever elusive X factor. Okay, then. Judge Kelvin Tan on these - on measures and attributes of a superstar. Not on his "struggle" and "what he has overcome". You may admire him for his inspirational courage but you should vote for him because of his inspiring performances. I think that is what he would want.

I don't know Kelvin Tan, so I cannot speak for him. I am certain that he is proud to represent the visually impaired community. I am sure he is proud that he has shown what can be accomplished by people with disabilities. But I am sure he would not want his success to be defined along those narrow terms. He would want to do well because he is good, not because he is blind.

If Kelvin Tan wins because of misguided affirmative action, what will happen to him in the big bad world of the pop music industry? It is fickle and greedy and not for the faint-of-heart. If the people who helped him win do not stick with him, he might be swallowed whole by the industry. And that would be sad indeed, because he does seem such a nice, sweet-natured fellow. My fear for him is that if he wins for the wrong reasons, his fan-base might not survive intact beyond the few weeks of post-finale fanfare. Those that throw votes his way because they want the underdog to win might not stick around to support his long-term career. They might deliver him his impossible dream and leave him to deal with his nightmare. He deserves better than that. He deserves to win if his people like his performances. Just as he deserves to lose if people preferred his opponent's performances. It really IS that simple.

My objectively observations about Kelvin Tan:

1. He can definitely sing, no question about it. His technique is sometimes suspect and he appears to need more training, but he usually pulls through because he has innate musicality.
2. The quality of his voice is uneven. His chest voice is very pleasant, although unremarkable. His higher notes are extremely nasal, because he doesn't seem to quite know how to project his head voice properly.
3. He is wildly inconsistent. He can score a hattrick one week and three own-goals the next. Sometimes he can do both on the same night, or even within the same song. The night with the "oldies done in a new way" theme, he sang so poorly, I thought he deserved elimination just for that alone.
4. He seems to be a very, very nice, genuine and sincere person. It's touching how the other contestants always seem so pleased for him when he makes it to the next round. He appears well liked.
5. When interviewed, he is articulate and well-spoken. He is humble and truly grateful for the experience he is having on Project Superstar.
6. He really needs to back away from the sappy ballads. I almost feel bad saying this, but when he sings these slow "touching" songs, he goes overboard with the emoting, so that it becomes overwrought and veers towards artifice. Maybe I am just cynical and unable to process the sincerity of his performances. But really, the quavering upper lip and the furrowed brow? So hammy!
7. His stage presence has improved but is still closer to zero than hero. It has nothing to do with his blindness The problem is his lack of charisma. Ray Charles was blind and so was Stevie Wonder, yet they could electrify a room while rooted to the piano seat.
8. He's a decent performer. He can have a career as a singer in some capacity. But he is not a superstar.

This mini-thesis is not about Kelvin Tan, although his name gets mentioned a lot. It's not even about Project Superstar. It's about good people who want to do good things, but might end up not helping and instead hurting those they seek to help. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Project "Superstar"

Let me call it now, weeks before the actual event. The winner of the Project "Superstar" Grand Final will be a male singer.

Last year, I predicted that Singapore Idol would be won by a guy, although the female finalists outnumbered the males and all the early talk was about the female power-houses (Jessea, Beverly and Olinda, I think). My logic back then was that the voting demographic skewed heavily towards younger girls, probably the tweens and teens. Unless there is a future Stefanie Sun among the contestants, guys are going to have a natural advantage. Particularly young, cute guys with nice smiles, that seem relatable and non-threatening. Witness Taufik, Christopher and Sylvester (not that I find Sylvester cute at all, but hey, I'm not in the typical voting demographic).

Applying that same logic to "Superstar", a guy is going to win. The female contestants do not quite fit the teen-idol mould that appeals to the tween and teen female demographic (typified by Stephanie Sun's winning combination of sweetness and youthful energy). A couple of them have the looks, but seem to be suffering from nerves, rendering their performances rather anaemic.

Even without the logic, I think the male contestants in "Superstar" are generally MUCH superior to the females. If they did not structure the show such that the two genders compete separately, we might have had 7 males and only 3 females making up the 10 semifinalists. The only female singer that can compete with the top guys is Kelly Poon and she might not have the votes to carry her through to the final 2. I think she suffers a bit from being perceived as the judge's favourite, which might not endear her to those who are predisposed to disliking "teachers' pets".

Project "Superstar" is grandiloquently named, even more so than Singapore "Idol". The title says it - this is a search for a superstar, not just a reasonably talented performer. It's a tall order and I think the producers have set their sights much too high. The contestants seem likeable enough, but there is not one "superstar" in the whole bunch. Nobody quite has that spark which marks a "star", never mind a "superstar". When a few are still struggling with the basics of singing, the "superstar" part is really a stretch.

To make things worse, the format of the show seems to encourage them to be generically sweet and nice. I guess coming across as a nice person helps to rake in the votes. But the end effect is that they seem interchangeable - the guys all have non-black spiky hair, the girls all have sweet, toothy smiles and all of them have colourless personalities. I am sure that these people are very lively and fascinating and interesting in real life, but we are not seeing ANY of this on the show. Everyone seems to love everyone else, every one hugs each other and cries at each result show, everyone says basically the same thing when he/she is not eliminated, everyone who is eliminated says basically the same thing on his/her farewell video.

It's a pity, because there are several things about Project "Superstar" (sorry, I just cannot leave off the " ", because they are absolutely necessary) which I think are better done than in Idol, which Superstar has a lot in common with.

I like that the judges usually give in-depth critiques, often alluding to the technicalities of singing. In fact, I think they spend just as much time on "breath support", "head voice", "chest voice" and "relaxed jaw" as they do on things like performance and "feel". It's an acknowledgement that singing is much more than sounding rather okay in a karaoke bar; it requires training, skill and technique. In four seasons of American Idol, the closest we ever got to a technique-related critique was the oft-mentioned "pitchy".

I also like the fact that the judges' scores count towards the final scores of the contestants. At least the professionals have a small say. But having the audience know the judges' marks can have its drawbacks. Fans of low-scoring contestants could go on a voting rampage to save their darling. Fans of high-scoring contestants could be lulled into a false sense of security. Or, like I suspect with William Tanoto Tan and Kelly Poon, people could just dislike them because the judges so obviously favour them. It might be better that the judges' scores only be revealed during the result show.

The idea of making the contestants sing duets is also a great one. Singing harmony is a great way to expose weaknesses and also a great way to develop musicianship. And the sadist in me enjoys about watching these attention-grabbing famewhores having to work together and share the limelight with a competitor. If they weren't all so boringly nice about everything, this could have been a recipe for screaming matches and temper tantrums. See, if they did this on American Idol, we would get to watch backstage footage of contestants quarrelling over line allocation, trying to upstage each other and hurling assorted accusations and insults. Perhaps the "Superstar" producers were aiming for this. They just underestimated the good breeding (and incurable need to be liked) of Singaporean youngsters.

So, as Project Non-Offensive Nice-Looking Singer enters its semi-final rounds, let me stick out my neck about the grand final: it's going to be a nice-looking boy versus a nice-looking girl, they'll both sing at least one love-themed ballad, the judges will be very nice, the guy will win and be very nice about his victory, and the girl will lose and be very nice about her defeat. The show will do nicely in the ratings and everyone will get a nice feeling from watching it.

This post brought to you by the word "Nice".

Pondering Pageantry: Miss Singapore Universe Pageant

I was flipping through the latest issue of 8 Days and came across their one page coverage of the Miss Universe Singapore finals, held 2 weeks ago. I was overwhelmed by work back then, or I would have said something about the pageant earlier.

There was a photograph in 8 Days that reminded me about the one thing that I was dying to comment about. For a change, it's not about how unimpressive or embarassingly inarticulate most of the contestants are (this is my usual sore point about local pageants in Singapore and Malaysia). The thing that most affronted my senses was the fashion parade during the announcement of the top 10 finalists. A few of the horrendous dresses are on full display in page 12 of this week's 8 Days.

I was not really paying attention to the whole pageant, so I might have missed some announcement about what the ladies wore during that segment. Were those clothes designed by some local top-notch designer, or perhaps by students in a fashion design school? The loud prints and clashing colours were in themselves already too much to take. What really pushed the dresses over the line from "ugly" to "hideous" was the way they were cut. These dresses looked like costume rejects for a retro-1960's musical revival. Yikes! I half expected to blink and suddenly see the ladies wearing their hair in foot-high beehives. I know that retro, vintage fashion is back in style now, but it certainly is not meant to look this BAD!

The garishly blinding spectacle was also not helped by the contestants' one-hand-on-hip pose. This was so cheesy and played up to all the stereotypes of beauty pageants being a meat market display. What was wrong with standing with the hands naturally at the side? Hand-to-hip poses work fine when modelling and that's about it. When the ladies were maintaining the pose for long periods of time as they stood still, I felt certain someone would get a muscle pull in their lower arm.

Away from the clothes, it was an enjoyable pageant to watch. The top finalists were satisfyingly articulate and gave intelligent answers. The questions asked in the top 10 round were varied and did not encourage the "world peace" type of response, which was a refreshing change. One contestant did try to insert a referrence to 'racial harmony' when asked about her favourite cultural festival outside of her own culture. She must have been studying her copy of "Answering Beauty Pageant Questions for Idiots, 1995 edition".

The final question was very good, too: "What is the greatest strength and the greatest weakness of a woman?". Actually, I was concerned that this might turn into an opportunity to parrot a oft-quoted line that they must learn in Beauty Pageant Basics 101 about how "women are capable of anything if they believe in themselves". A few of the answers were in the same spirit, but spoken without the cringe-worthy sentiment. Maybe they have revised those Beauty Pageant text-books!

Some questions that I wish they would ask in a beauty pageant:

"If you had to choose between being incredibly stupid and being horribly ugly, which would you choose, and why? (Please note that whichever you don't choose, it doesn't mean you would be the complete opposite. Ie, if you don't choose to be horribly ugly, it would just mean that you are conventionally unattractive.)"

"Which current world leader of a democratic country would you most want to kick in the backside? Why? What's stopping you?"

"If you had a chance to have dinner with three famous serial killers from the past, who would you choose and why?"

"What qualities do you have that would make you a good role model for young teenagers who aspire to become anime artists?"

"If you run for election and become Prime Minister of your country, which three campaign promises will you break in your first month in office? "None" is not an option, get real, young lady."

"If your hair could talk, and you could ask it one question, what would you ask, and why?"

"What do you consider more important, mascara or lip gloss?"

Gratuitous Ratings Grabbing

In case anyone thinks I only bitch about TV, I bitched at some length about the Matrix Trilogy over at An Unused Voice. I've decided to use that blog for recording my thoughts on movies as well as books. I get through movies much more quickly than books, so I can update more! I tend to watch movies more than once and having a record of my own "reviews" will be one way to track if my impressions change upon subsequent viewings.

Back to this present rant, which IS about reality TV. I watched American Idol 4 for the first time on Wednesday night and thought it was the single worse episode of any Idol series I had ever seen. Yes, even worse than the semi-finals in Season 3 with the brothers Roman and Jesus (remember how totally wretched the singing was that night?). What was strange was that the talent was quite good and the singing was a whole lot better than most of the finalists in AI 3. With the age limit raised to 28, there was also definitely a better mix of contestants, with some of the more mature people actually displaying interesting personalities (no offence to the kids last year, but could John Stevens, Jasmine Trias and Diana Degarmo have been any more boring?). But the episode itself really stank. They took one whole hour to let us know which 2 of the 4 rooms were "safe". In past seasons, these revelations were made at the end of the final Hollywood episode, taking up maybe 15 minutes at most. Now it stretched over the full hour, complete with back-stories, people crying and breaking down and "in-depth" interviews. In case anyone had forgotten, the producers really wanted to reinforce that AI is first and foremost Reality TV, and secondly a talent search.

So I thought Wednesday's episode was the worse ever. Well, that was until I saw Thursday's episode. This was the one where they would reveal which 24 were going on to the voting rounds. I actually rather looked forward to this, as this was supposed to mark, for me, the "true" start of the AI4 season when we finally get down to the talent that may have a chance at success. I was expecting that there may have been another round of auditions to narrow the 44 down to 24. What did we get instead? Absolutely no new singing at all! Lots of people walking down corridors and taking long rides in elevators. Lots of crying and stoic looks and squeals of triumph.

What was the point of the previous episode then? They could have dispensed with choosing the 2 "safe rooms" with 44 people and just gotten straight to picking the 24 moving on to the next round. After all, BOTH decisions were based on exactly the same sets of auditions. It's not like they made the 44 sing again. When the picked the 44, they had more or less made up their minds about the final 24. We could have been spared an entire unnecessary episode!

In a way, I admire the genious of the producers in squeezing every ounce they can out of this franchise. They know they have a ratings winner and can get Americans to watch anything leading to the annoucement of the final 24. So why not stretch it over 2 weeks intead of 1, and 4 episodes instead of 2? The editing and packaging of the episodes have been exemplary in the Reality TV scheme of things. Drama, tension, nerves, bratty behaviour, overwhelming joy; it's all been spliced together and voiced-over in just the right way to appeal to both the MTV crowd and viewers of The Bachelor (which are, unthinkably, legion). It's all very slick and entertaining, but so cynically calculated that I find it appalling.

Guardians of social values have always argued against gratuitous sex, nudity, violence and gore on TV. Isn't it about time someone stood up against gratuitous padding of epidoes and wasting of viewers' time?

That said, I am looking forward to seeing next week's 3 episodes of AI4. The fact the new format necessitates 3 episodes a week is a stroke of brilliance on the part of the producers. I do admire that. Unlike the last 2 episodes, this is actually not gratuitous padding; it's just the best way to get at the final 12 within the new structure of the competition. And the new stucture in itself does make a lot of sense and would ensure a more balanced group of finalists. Now, if they truly wanted to pad things out, they could have had the boys and the girls singing on alternating weeks, thereby having only 2 episodes a week, but having the entire semifinal process last 6 weeks instead of 3, a total of 12 episodes instead of 9.

Maybe, seeing what we have been spared, the last 2 episodes weren't so bad after all!

Blogging on Blehdom

Is reality TV (at least the American breed of it) running out of steam? Recently, we have seen:

a) Too many uninspiring finalists and not enough good singers on American Idol 3. Jasmine Trias making it to the final 3 should tell you something about the season. Or the fact that Jon Peter Lewis was the token male teen-heart-throb of the season. The final showdown was a whole lot of nothing, with Fantasia being crowned winner the day Latoya London got herself kicked off. Just insipid, on the whole.

As for the winner, I grant that Fantasia has musicality, style and stage presence, but boy, does her voice ever grate! I have heard her latest single (I don't care enough to find out the song's title, sorry) on radio, think it's a cool song but I cannot get past her voice. There is a quality to it that makes me reach for the tuning dial. I think this may be yet another instance of "visceral cringe". And Fantasia on the AI Christmas Special was a high-octane wailing banshee. It was positively painful to listen to her. I hear she's a bit of a critic's darling and I certainly don't wish her any ill, but I do. not. get. it. Bleh.


b) The most boring season ever of Survivor with the Vanuatu edition. This was even more boring than Survivor: Thailand, where Brian had the whole lot of them wrapped around his finger so early on, we could have skipped every episode from the "not-a-merge" onwards and just watched the reunion episode. At least Brian was somewhat interesting in his Machiavellian way. Chris from the Vanuatu season seems to aspire to be another Richard Hatch but just is not half as interesting. When he won, my reaction was more "Whatever" than "Wow!".

And all that harping on Twila's swearing on her son got really OLD really quickly. We went through this with Lil and her scout's uniform, and it wasn't even all that fascinating the first time. This season seemed to recycle old ideas from past seasons, but in a much more boring way. Single-sex tribe (much better handled in Amazon), swapping members (much better in all previous seasons), puzzle challenges (ditto), getting the "loved-ones" to participate in challenges (also ditto). And Chris was supposed to be the villain who lied to everyone (the biggest victim, of course being Jeff's darling Julie) but that was also done before by Johny Fairplay in the Pearl Island season. Now, I cannot stand Johny Fairplay AT ALL, but he was a much superior villain than Chris ever was.

The reunion show was also just the absolute pits; it was all about Jeff, his girlfriend Julie and her friends, Ami and Leeann. Chris was the winner and got barely one third the time lavished on this trio. I mean they finished 4th, 5th and 6th! And still they got more air time than the top 3 put together. I really liked it when Jeff hosted the reunion show for Suvivor Amazon, but this convinced me that maybe it's time for change. Bleh.


c) Freddy and Kendra winning the Amazing Race. Sigh; this was my all-time favourite reality TV series. Then they went and spoilt it all by casting all these unpleasant (Jonathan), melodramatic (Victoria), whiny (Hayden), elitist (Kendra), ugly Americans. The nice teams got eliminated early, leaving only Kris and Jon to carry the flag for the non-bickering folk of the world. I watched the finale with someone who was watching any episode of TAR for the first time ever. Halfway through, he observed that "These two (Kris and Jon) are certainly more amiable than the others." Which really did about sum it up.

Freddy and Kendra winning was all the more difficult to swallow because the 2nd place team were such nice people, while the winning team had ... well, Kendra. The one who said that the Senegalese just kept "breeding and breeding". And who said that Freddy was "worthy of having my children". I think this choice of words says something about the type of person she is. I know we are not supposed to extrapolate a person's entire character from edited representations on TV, but how else can one read a person who talks about others being "worthy" of doing something with her? It just smacks of ignorance, elitism and a highly refined sense of entitlement. I think, sometimes, one can tell a lot about a person from one turn of phrase. That one phrase can distill the core of your belief system.

Worst of all, in all the post-show interviews, Kendra has not once apologised for her "breeding" comment. She has chosen instead to say that the viewers cannot understand how difficult it was for her to see all that poverty. And of course, that the editors showed that statement out of context. Well, I am sorry, but she said something tasteless and we are the ones who have misunderstood her? Frankly, I don't care what she thinks about what we (the viewing public) think. The apology she owes is to the people in Senegal to whom she referred to as "breeders". I half suspect she doesn't think they are worth apologising to, or apologising over.

And for what is worth, Bolo (the male half of the wrestlers team) said that he would not "spit on Kendra if she's on fire". Gossip from the other contestants have also suggested that both Freddy and Kendra in real life are like what we saw on TV, snooty and think they are better than other people. Even Hayden and Aaron (who were in the "Model Alliance" with F&K) apparently were not very positive about them. I think it speaks volumes when fellow contestants are not bothering to be politically correct about you. Well, they have their million dollars, their model looks and each other. They can keep these for as long as they last (with plastic surgery, the model looks may just last the longest).

I only wish the season had a different winner, so that I could overlook much of its mediocrity and celebrate a likeable winner. This season went to great places (they went to Berlin! where I was just months ago) and the scenic shots were gorgeous as ever, but far too many forced bunchings rendered any lead completely meaningless. You start with a 3 hour lead, then hey presto! The next task is at a place that only opens in 7 hours' time, so everyone behind you catches up. I know this is part of TAR and has been since season one, but it was out of hand this season. Certain episodes had 2 or more bunching opportunities. That's either poor planning or trying to manufacture close finishes. What it did do was to ensure that teams could get by without being particularly good, as long as they had some luck. Adam and Rebecca was in the top 3, which ought to tell you something. I always maintain you can tell about the quality of a season by seeing who ends up in third place.

To wit:
TAR 1: The Guidos. A great racing team, even if they were not particularly likeable while on the race.
TAR 2: Page and Blake, the brother and sister team. They were young, quick and resourceful. Blake was always up to some new "creative" way of getting things done, which was not always helpful, but was the sign of a good racer.
TAR 3: Ken and Gerard, the brothers with the sense of humour. Sigh, my favourites, who raced strongly from the start and could have won if they only hailed a taxi from the right place.
TAR 4: Jeff and David, the surfer dudes. They were pretty anonymous throughout the race, but they had strength and speed, even if they tended to get lost rather a lot. Still, not the worse team in TAR by a long shot.
TAR 5: Nicole and Brandon, the Christian models. The one time I had any problem with them was when they refused to shave their heads for the fast forward. Other than that, this was a competent team, and deserved their place in the top 3.
TAR 6: Adam and Rebecca. He was afraid of many, many things. She did not help much but nagging at him a lot. They got lost, bungled up some stuff, were saved by a non-elim, and ended up in the top 3.

Point made, I think, and case closed. Super bleh on season 6.


The 2nd season of The Apprentice in now airing, and I have missed all but Ep 1 due to various factors, amongst which being that it often clashes with the football. However, from what I saw in Ep 1, not one single candidate came anywhere near the calibre of Bill and Kwame, or even Amy and Troy, from season 1. We did get many photogenic and bitchy females, and a few gym-constructed square-jawed dullards. I suppose that ultimately, the blue-print for reality TV is The Bachelor.

I am not even watching American Idol 4, although I may start once they are down to the finalists. All the forced hilarity, histrionics and manufactured drama of the audition episodes are not as riveting as they used to be. Again, it's not like they were such great TV the first time around. AI has always been the most watchable when it's down to the semifinals and finals, when there is more singing and less "reality TV". Actually, I think it's disgraceful how little they actually sing on AI. During the theme nights, the kids get to sing less than 90 seconds of a song, while the judges and Ryan blather on about nothing very interesting. They managed to get in more singing in both Singapore Idol and Malaysian Idol (perhaps because our judges were less verbose) which is why I have found these local versions more enjoyable from a musical aspect, even if the contestants here did not hold 12 second notes or reach a sustained high C (or generally show-off the way the AI contestants do, because that is what passes as impressive in the context of AI).

Survivor Palau starts this week. This better be an improvement over All Stars and Vanuatu, or I am ready to give up on the Survivor franchise. TAR comes back in March, which is much too soon. It was just recently that I celebrated Chip and Kim winning Tar 5 and TAR 7 is about to begin. There can be too much of a good thing. Witness what happened to Who Wants to be a Millionaire? If they had not churned out season upon season back-to-back, the concept would not have lost its public appeal so quickly (and it didn't help to have Celebrity edition, Kids edition, JC edition, Family edition etc. Just overkill).

Do I have hope left for American reality TV? Check back in 13 weeks when Survivor Palau nears its conclusion.