This show has had a different host every season, which I don't really mind, because I actually kind of enjoy having a different host to freshen things up every year. But I am really enjoying Nick Cannon as the host so far, and I hope he will stay around, unlike Philbin and Springer. He adds a nice comedic touch to the show, if you ask me.
First of all, America's Got Talent is a very diverse show, and it features all kinds of talents, if you can actually call some of the acts "talents." My main gripe with this show is every single episode, except for the final few of course, are structured exactly the same way. They will open up with a pretty good act, but you know they don't really have a shot at winning. Then there will be a slew of horrible acts that will most likely get X'd out by the judges, but there is always a great act in between that may have a legit shot at winning the competition. More bad acts follow this, and they finally close out the show with a single jaw dropping act. I think this can somewhat take away the element of surprise from the show, because you pretty much know ahead of time who's going to be good, and who's going to be not so good. And on top of that, most of the time when someone is going to be great and get high reviews from the judges, they will show the contestant giving a pretty in-depth explanation of their past, and things of that nature. It always gives the shows a good close, but like I said, it sometimes can feel slightly predictable.
The judges are pretty much the stereotype of the trio from any show like this, but I like them, and they all have their own personality. Hasselhoff is open-minded, yet honest with the performers. Sharon is always nice about her feedback, but is not afraid to criticize, and then there is Piers, the no-nonsense Brit who either loves your performance or despises it. If he doesn't like it, he will ridicule you to the death, but if he likes it, he will praise you greatly.
Many people complain about the fact that there is always a singer in around the final five contestants, but I find those people to be ignorant. That's not the shows fault, people. America votes for the finalists, and the show itself has nothing to do with who goes into the finals. And by the time it comes down to the final two, there is always a talent that is unique compared to all the previous winners of the competition, and all the winners are set apart.
Most people will prefer American Idol to this, but I happen to disagree. Those people are too biased to see that American Idol is, for the most part, one of the most repetitive shows on television. The only thing you see every single year is singers. But on America's Got Talent, you are exposed to many different talents, and that's what makes this show so good.
First of all, America's Got Talent is a very diverse show, and it features all kinds of talents, if you can actually call some of the acts "talents." My main gripe with this show is every single episode, except for the final few of course, are structured exactly the same way. They will open up with a pretty good act, but you know they don't really have a shot at winning. Then there will be a slew of horrible acts that will most likely get X'd out by the judges, but there is always a great act in between that may have a legit shot at winning the competition. More bad acts follow this, and they finally close out the show with a single jaw dropping act. I think this can somewhat take away the element of surprise from the show, because you pretty much know ahead of time who's going to be good, and who's going to be not so good. And on top of that, most of the time when someone is going to be great and get high reviews from the judges, they will show the contestant giving a pretty in-depth explanation of their past, and things of that nature. It always gives the shows a good close, but like I said, it sometimes can feel slightly predictable.
The judges are pretty much the stereotype of the trio from any show like this, but I like them, and they all have their own personality. Hasselhoff is open-minded, yet honest with the performers. Sharon is always nice about her feedback, but is not afraid to criticize, and then there is Piers, the no-nonsense Brit who either loves your performance or despises it. If he doesn't like it, he will ridicule you to the death, but if he likes it, he will praise you greatly.
Many people complain about the fact that there is always a singer in around the final five contestants, but I find those people to be ignorant. That's not the shows fault, people. America votes for the finalists, and the show itself has nothing to do with who goes into the finals. And by the time it comes down to the final two, there is always a talent that is unique compared to all the previous winners of the competition, and all the winners are set apart.
Most people will prefer American Idol to this, but I happen to disagree. Those people are too biased to see that American Idol is, for the most part, one of the most repetitive shows on television. The only thing you see every single year is singers. But on America's Got Talent, you are exposed to many different talents, and that's what makes this show so good.