I don't think anyone could've picked most of that cast out of a lineup prior to air. Lea Michele and Matthew Morrison if you knew recent Broadway -- but they weren't exactly Audra McDonald. Jayma Mays maybe, and Jane Lynch was vaguely recognizable -- but the vast majority of the cast was brand new.
But for that matter, as far as American viewers go (which weren't the target audience at the outset I know, but they're very much in the mix now so I think the point is valid), I don't think most people could have picked DA's cast out of a lineup either, with the exception of MS, EM and (maybe) HB and/or BC.
LM has worked on Broadway since she was 8, so yeah, I think she's a seasoned performer even though she's young. SA was EXTREMELY popular and is largely credited (along with Wicked and Rent) with making Broadway relevant to youth culture. MM was well known in theater circles as well (Hairspray, Light in the Piazza, etc.). And, no they're not Audra McDonald, but except for the core gleeks who loved the show in the beginning (like me, except I wasn't really in "fandom") and other smart people (like you :-)), most of Glee's viewers don't know who AM is either.
JM I believe was recognizable from Heroes and Ugly Betty (ooh, have we ever talked about UB's downward spiral?). JL was CERTAINLY recognizable. I mean how many Apatow flicks has she been in?
The rest were fresh faces, though in Jenna Ushkowitz's case, she also was recruited from Broadway (just wasn't as well known). Kevin McHale was from a boy band background I believe. Mark Salling was a (struggling?) musician. Cory Monteith was a Canadian actor. Heather Morris was a dancer (notably one of Beyonce's "Single Ladies"). Rivera and Agron had some background in acting/dancing and were trying to get that break. Same for Amber Riley more or less (with singing). I think only Colfer was a true newbie. But, as you say, none were well known. (But they weren't like Glee competition winners either, if you catch my drift.)
where only Patrick Dempsey had the least bit of name recognition.
I think most people knew who Sandra Oh was too. She did a lot of small roles in film -- most memorably, her turn in Sideways. And actually Sideways was great timing for her (in her career) because it came out right as GA was being cast IIRC. ... But ok, yes, no one really knew much about the original cast.
"The West Wing" or (from my understanding) "Mad Men" -- where you had more of a journeyman ensemble, with a few "fresh faces" thrown in there, IMO. When you have that, you put the show on the shoulders of the actors (and in each case, to great success). But something like Glee or Grey's or LOST, you put the show on the shoulders of the concept (also to great success)
It's an interesting point ... but I don't know if we're really disagreeing here. My original remark was that it was a mix of fresh faces and veteran performers. Veteran doesn't mean older or even famous necessarily (and actually Mad Men is a great example of that because no one on that show except John Slattery and Robert Morse were readily recognizable, but most of them, as you say, WERE experienced).
Though Glee and DA S2 both showed that the concept and the acting, respectively, can't cover up bad plotting.
And yet to me, both were unquestionably better in their S2s than their S3s. HFPA and SAG agreed with respect to Glee ... I guess we'll see about DA.
but in the press, I think DA S3 is ranked above DA S2 in terms of quality
I guess I wonder what the empirical basis for this is. I remember S2 reviews (here, mind you, not in England) and the critics loved it (yes, they had their issues with fake!Patrick and Matthew's sudden recovery, etc. but overall it was well reviewed). S3 it seems to me wasn't as universally well liked ... I saw A LOT more snark towards DA and if not, snark, then ... boredom? I would say 60% of the critics disliked the CS of Doom and those who defended it didn't exactly say they liked it. It was more ... "aw, c'mon everyone this could be a blessing in disguise." In other words, looking at the glass as half-full. You don't have to do that when a show is really good and everyone knows it.
But for that matter, as far as American viewers go (which weren't the target audience at the outset I know, but they're very much in the mix now so I think the point is valid), I don't think most people could have picked DA's cast out of a lineup either, with the exception of MS, EM and (maybe) HB and/or BC.
LM has worked on Broadway since she was 8, so yeah, I think she's a seasoned performer even though she's young. SA was EXTREMELY popular and is largely credited (along with Wicked and Rent) with making Broadway relevant to youth culture. MM was well known in theater circles as well (Hairspray, Light in the Piazza, etc.). And, no they're not Audra McDonald, but except for the core gleeks who loved the show in the beginning (like me, except I wasn't really in "fandom") and other smart people (like you :-)), most of Glee's viewers don't know who AM is either.
JM I believe was recognizable from Heroes and Ugly Betty (ooh, have we ever talked about UB's downward spiral?). JL was CERTAINLY recognizable. I mean how many Apatow flicks has she been in?
The rest were fresh faces, though in Jenna Ushkowitz's case, she also was recruited from Broadway (just wasn't as well known). Kevin McHale was from a boy band background I believe. Mark Salling was a (struggling?) musician. Cory Monteith was a Canadian actor. Heather Morris was a dancer (notably one of Beyonce's "Single Ladies"). Rivera and Agron had some background in acting/dancing and were trying to get that break. Same for Amber Riley more or less (with singing). I think only Colfer was a true newbie. But, as you say, none were well known. (But they weren't like Glee competition winners either, if you catch my drift.)
where only Patrick Dempsey had the least bit of name recognition.
I think most people knew who Sandra Oh was too. She did a lot of small roles in film -- most memorably, her turn in Sideways. And actually Sideways was great timing for her (in her career) because it came out right as GA was being cast IIRC. ... But ok, yes, no one really knew much about the original cast.
"The West Wing" or (from my understanding) "Mad Men" -- where you had more of a journeyman ensemble, with a few "fresh faces" thrown in there, IMO. When you have that, you put the show on the shoulders of the actors (and in each case, to great success). But something like Glee or Grey's or LOST, you put the show on the shoulders of the concept (also to great success)
It's an interesting point ... but I don't know if we're really disagreeing here. My original remark was that it was a mix of fresh faces and veteran performers. Veteran doesn't mean older or even famous necessarily (and actually Mad Men is a great example of that because no one on that show except John Slattery and Robert Morse were readily recognizable, but most of them, as you say, WERE experienced).
Though Glee and DA S2 both showed that the concept and the acting, respectively, can't cover up bad plotting.
And yet to me, both were unquestionably better in their S2s than their S3s. HFPA and SAG agreed with respect to Glee ... I guess we'll see about DA.
but in the press, I think DA S3 is ranked above DA S2 in terms of quality
I guess I wonder what the empirical basis for this is. I remember S2 reviews (here, mind you, not in England) and the critics loved it (yes, they had their issues with fake!Patrick and Matthew's sudden recovery, etc. but overall it was well reviewed). S3 it seems to me wasn't as universally well liked ... I saw A LOT more snark towards DA and if not, snark, then ... boredom? I would say 60% of the critics disliked the CS of Doom and those who defended it didn't exactly say they liked it. It was more ... "aw, c'mon everyone this could be a blessing in disguise." In other words, looking at the glass as half-full. You don't have to do that when a show is really good and everyone knows it.
Reply
Leave a comment