Many talent tilts are telecast these days, but their ultimate outcome after they’ve concluded generally indicates that “winning” is only the beginning of the struggle to attain genuine and long-lasting stardom.
That cautionary and disappointing reality shows that jurors and “viewer-voters” sometimes or even often don’t make the right choices where real star potential is concerned, because they’re all too easily swayed by subjective considerations, motivations, powerful “connections, well-organized and -funded “vote-generating machines,” etc.
To really make it in the biz for the long term, so-called winners have to be backed up by mentors, handlers and managers who know the paramount importance of unique stellar appeal in making viewers fall loyally “in love” with new talents.
This runs counter to the standard show biz notion that hopefuls who obediently subscribe to the industry’s “young, beautiful and tisoy” template have better chances of becoming stars, because that’s “what the audience wants.”
That “template” rule may work in a factory engaged in the expedient mass production of top stars’ clones or alter egos, but not when it comes to creating real stars—not just of tomorrow, but of 10 years after that.
Another wrongheaded view is that starlets should pattern themselves after today’s most popular and in-demand stars—which is why we have such a plethora of young comers who do their darnedest to come across as “the new Piolo Pascual, or Anne Curtis, or _______ (fill in the blank).”
Out of sight
In actuality, these younger copycats just end up being disparagingly compared to the established stars they’re aping, and quickly drop out of sight—and out of mind—most of them, for keeps!
No, the best path to stardom is to be unique, to be true to yourself, and to offer “something” that nobody else can. After all, when Piolo and Anne launched their careers, they didn’t set out to be “the new this or that,” they just focused on “selling” themselves to producers, directors and fans.
They didn’t have an easy time of it, either—which means that new hopefuls also have to be prepared to pay their dues, and to prove that they deserve to be loved for the long term.
ACTOR Piolo Pascual
In Piolo’s case, there was a long period when he was popular and busy, but wasn’t regarded as a good actor, because his portrayals were too predictable and lacked believability and “edge.” He had to act in some challenging and “counter-image” indie productions to finally be admired for his thespic gifts.
For her part, Anne was initially limited by her “inaccessibility” as a stellar performer, so she had to “masa-fy” herself by cohosting the “anything goes” noontime program, “It’s Showtime,” where she’s sometimes as gauchely and shamelessly masa as a luminary can get.
She also learned to laugh at herself and her limitations, like her “untuned” singing voice, and this has added to her “honest” and “vulnerable” appeal.
It’s likely that stars like Piolo and Anne didn’t arrive at their career-changing realizations by themselves, but were helped or even forced to see the light by their handlers, managers and mentors. Which is why new stars’ own career managers are crucial in enhancing their stellar prospects.
Many new talents fail to make their mark because their managers aren’t knowledgeable, hardworking or candid enough to do that.
So, even before young hopefuls join TV talent tilts, they should already have a good management team with realistic long-range plans for their incipient careers.
That way, if they do end up winning those competitions, they won’t end up as one-month or even one-year sensations who turn out to be sputtering and dismal duds. And their victory will be utilized savvily, to take them all the way—to real and permanent stardom!