02/27/2008
David Archuleta Sings the Crap Out of "Imagine"
There's one clear front-runner in American Idol: David Archuleta. The teenager could win the whole thing. Unless, of course, Paula Abdul gets to him first. Last night a teary-eyed Paula told Archuleta: "David, you are ridiculous. I wanted to squish you, squeeze your head off, and dangle you from my rear-view mirror. You are, no, honest to god, that is one of the most beautiful songs ever written, and one of the most moving performances I've ever heard."
And here's the latest gossip on a couple of the other men:
The folks over at VoteForTheWorst.com have dug up photos of David Hernandez slinging drinks at recently-closed gay Phoenix nightclub Burn.
And there has been some speculation going on as to whether or not rocker Robbie Carrico is wearing a rug:
"TMZ has learned the 26-year-old long-haired wannabe's mane is actually a wig and it's got "Idol" staffers flipping out. Sources tell us Robbie never talks about his matted down piece and that makes production members feel like it's the blonde elephant in the room. It seems Simon was right last night -- Robbie is a fake!"
Posted 3:25 PM EST by Andy in American Idol, News | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
The kid sucks.
Posted by: Bud | Feb 27, 2008 3:37:16 PM
I knew we could count on you, Andy, I've been checking to see all day if you would post it!
The kid's musicality is impeccable. Combine that with his easy sincerity, genuine humility, and indelible presence, and you have yourself a bona-fide phenom.
His name is spreading like wildfire already, and deservedly so. Here's hoping young David can navigate what is almost certain to be a meteoric rise to stardom--I'll wager like nothing we've yet seen from AI (whether he wins it or not)--with intelligence and grace.
What a pleasure to have him as an entertainer in our midst.
Posted by: rascal | Feb 27, 2008 3:47:18 PM
How have you not posted about Danny Noriega yet? He's young, fabulously gay, and totally proud. He also has an amazing voice.
Posted by: Jon B | Feb 27, 2008 3:50:37 PM
He does not suck. He is a good singer, a cute boy, and seems like a nice person. Not a jaw-dropping kind of performance, but genuine. Thats what counts and it shows he has great potential.
Posted by: Wes | Feb 27, 2008 3:53:44 PM
David Archuleta = meh.
Posted by: Brett | Feb 27, 2008 4:00:18 PM
The kid is a natural born singer. His delivery is so sincere and effortless. It's like he's been singing for 30 years. He doesn't need to win Idol. He's already got a great career ahead of him.
Posted by: JJ | Feb 27, 2008 4:05:29 PM
There's no doubt that David Archuleta can sing, but I think it's funny that people like RASCAL above are so taken by his awww-shucks charm and humility. It's an act. The kid is already a pro. He won Star Search for gawd's sake. In fact, he sang "Imagine" on Star Search! I remember seeing David perform on the Rosie O'Donnel show. American Idol was supposed to be about discovering undiscovered talent. This kid was already discovered a long time ago.
As for David Hernandez, I live in Phoenix and went to Burn a lot. It is well known that most of the bartenders there were straight so that doesn't automatically mean he's gay. However, he was a stripper too at Dick's Cabaret so it seems likely.
Posted by: crispy | Feb 27, 2008 4:11:45 PM
He took every true note out of that song and replaced it with vocalizations.
Posted by: Mike | Feb 27, 2008 4:13:14 PM
That performance really doesn't show what the kid can do, really a great singer. Hernandez has had his moments of hotness, I was actually shocked when I saw the pics of him this morning online. As far as I know he has never really denied being gay, he could be out and proud for all we know. Of course there's always straight guys that bartend at gay bars all over..
Posted by: davey | Feb 27, 2008 4:19:12 PM
Mike's right. The kid can sing, but he should not be singing that song. "Imagine" should be poignant and understated, not full of pop cliche and ornamentation.
Posted by: Chip | Feb 27, 2008 4:27:20 PM
How have you not posted about Danny Noriega yet? He's young, fabulously gay, and totally proud. He also has an amazing voice.
Maybe because he's an annoying, affected, neck-swiveling twink with way too much attitude for a teen.
Posted by: secretagentman | Feb 27, 2008 4:36:45 PM
Holy crap, Crispy, you're right! This thing is rigged! The kid not only sang songs before this competition, he actually sang them in front of other people! Sometimes there were even cameras there! So bogus. And let's not forget all that fame and fortune the winners of Junior Star Search get (you know, of course, that the only reason all the other Junior Star Search winners are not household names is because they become so wealthy on their residuals and royalties that they retired at thirteen).
And oh, yeah, all that blushing and stammering--what a crock. The kid's a better actor than he even is a singer!
Posted by: rascal | Feb 27, 2008 4:36:45 PM
Second both your comments Chip and Mike. I would have preferred if he had had the courage/artistry to sing the song "straight," i.e., without the pop vocal inflections. He obviously knows how to play to the three judges, however. He is a pro, in that regard, with an aw shucks demeanor. As an old friend once joked, "Once you can fake sincerity, you've got it made." Nevertheless, his talent is undeniable.
Posted by: rudy | Feb 27, 2008 4:37:20 PM
Anyone who says that boy can't sing--can't judge talent. I would watch the show except they have those three stooges for judges. I hope young David wins--although I haven't seen any of the other contestants.
Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Feb 27, 2008 4:38:51 PM
For all of you guys who are complaining that AI isn't "real", guess what? There's also no Santa Claus or Easter Bunny.
Of course it's not real! There's not a single 'reality' show on television that's real. Reality is boring.
Posted by: wetcnt | Feb 27, 2008 4:57:31 PM
Yea, WETCNT, a real reality television show would just be a bunch of people sitting around a television... watching reality TV.
Posted by: Wes | Feb 27, 2008 5:11:53 PM
I wouldn't go so far to say the show is rigged, but there are all several ringers this year with professional music pasts. I think it threatens the show's already fragile credibility.
Posted by: crispy | Feb 27, 2008 5:15:34 PM
Not an AI fan, but, that bar looks packed,cute bartenders too, I wonder why it closed?
Posted by: Sebastian | Feb 27, 2008 5:29:33 PM
Hm, not any talent scouts in the comments sections, I see. You guys are harsh! lol David's an obvious star-in-the-making, and his vocals were fantastic. Yes, you could get into an argument over the finer points of the song being more "real" as sung by Lennon, but Archuleta really did sing beautifully. My gripe is...he (on his own, or at FOX's urging?) deliberately left out the controversial lyrics about religion and war. I would like to know who decided to do that, because—and this does have a lot more to do with the song's true meaning than quibbles about inflection—without those lyrics, it's just a spectacular vocal exercise and not the same, meaningful song. I'd still vote for him to win. As for the gay-bar bartender, I wouldn't peg him as gay, but he was a close 2nd last night. (Did I mention I hate this show and, um, never watch?)
Posted by: Matthew Rettenmund | Feb 27, 2008 6:03:45 PM
David A is a great singer and adorable. He's a sure top contender. Danny is also great and truly awesome for being out and proud. It's really depressing to see those that would condemn him for his demeanor. Shame on you guys.
As for David H: I've thought he wasn't straight since the beginning. It's not only because he's good looking. Really, working at a gay club as a bartender means nothing. But it's pretty rare for a straight to work at a strip joint. I'm thinking he's not straight.
(Oh, and "straight" guys that work at gay clubs aren't 0's on the Kinsey scale. Capiche?)
Posted by: Rob (lrdarystar) | Feb 27, 2008 6:22:30 PM
I'm sorry, but I have to agree that David is a superstar in the making -- and so what if he has been in the making for a while?
I'm very critical of a lot of the melismatic chenanigans that go on in pop music these days, but David's interpretation worked, and blew me away. It was just enough to make the song new and not too much to obscure the original melody.
As to not singing the religion and war lyrics... check out his version of the same song when he was 13 (it's on youtube). As he was on a stage where the floor announced "Good Things, Utah" (what is that, Mormon Martha Stewart?) I expected him not to sing "no religion, too" -- but he sang it, and if he can sing it there, I don't think the AI Hollywood stage performance of only verse 3 means anything.
Posted by: Kevinvt | Feb 27, 2008 6:32:01 PM
Since when are contestants having any kind of musical background NOT allowed on AI?? That doesn't make sense. As far as I know, the only stipulations they have for those auditioning is that they be within the age range and have no criminal record.
AI only represents itself as finding people with talent and offering them the chance to truly make it big in front of millions of viewers. And they seem to be accomplishing that with David Archuletta (and others), no matter what his background. I don't see that as being "rigged" at all.
Posted by: Jon | Feb 27, 2008 6:32:45 PM
Jon, American Idol definitely has more rules than just age and criminal records. Contestants are not allowed to have current record deals or talent management agreements. Several contestants this season have previous record deals, but are no longer under contract. That's how they got in. At least two of them have even changed their stage names. Technically, they aren't breaking the rules. But like I said, I think it makes the show a little less credible.
Posted by: crispy | Feb 27, 2008 7:11:00 PM
"Once you can fake sincerity, you've got it made." Thanks, Rudy! NOW I understand why you're so besotted with the Dali Obama. :- )
But back to the youngin’ [and, yes, I LOATHE AI, too, for all the reasons mentioned so I give thanks yet again for YouTube—I think he is sincere in his response to his performances—where is it that written knowing you’re talented and still being moved by people appreciating it must be mutually exclusive? Of course, such freshness wouldn’t last long around you cynical bitches.
As for his performance of this song, THANK GOD someone erased painful memories of John Lennon’s monotonic, dentist drill delivery. Though Lennon wasn’t nearly as bad, Dylan proved long ago that a great lyricist does not a great singer make.
Actually, Miss Patti had managed to to make the song more appealing that just for its lyrics with a 1985 performance that will REALLY be hated by those who dislike anyone straying from Mr. Lennon’s native melody, melisma, and glissandi. WARNING: extreme Pattifying and filling it with the Holy Ghost.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVin-2upY2g
[and for pure amusement here’s another example of a singer, however talented, foolishly trying to duet with Miss P at her peak—how do you say “Oh My Fucking God” in Italian?]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdTQP8Ktwgk
I didn’t enjoy as much the performance below by an understandably uncomfortable Bill Clinton even if it was with 40 Jewish and 40 Arab children.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0F_6plYyTM
Posted by: Michael Bedwell | Feb 27, 2008 7:20:55 PM
Blah, emotionless and boring. He took all the feeling and vulnerability out of the original. I feel bad for John Lennon.
Posted by: JLS | Feb 27, 2008 7:31:56 PM
Wow, Michael Bedwell hates American Idol AND John Lennon. Why am I not surprised?
You really are the most insufferable human being alive. You should consider killing yourself. It's the only way you'll ever find happiness.
Posted by: crispy | Feb 27, 2008 8:06:19 PM
Oh, Crispy Critter—still having problems we see with that 2nd grade education. I never said I hated John Lennon. I said he was limited as a singer. Though he sang far better than you read or write.
Besides, why should I kill myself? I want to be around to see you die of a crack overdose.
Posted by: Michael Bedwell | Feb 27, 2008 8:30:33 PM
The kid is SIXTEEN years old. He was born twelve years after John Lennon's death and over twenty years after John wrote Imagine but somehow people here feel that he should have sung it exactly the way Lennon did or it's crap.
The kid is talented beyond belief and in my opinion his personal expression of this iconic song was beautiful and moving.
In addition to his talent he's cute as a bug and seems to be truly humble and gracious.
What ever people may think about this sixteen year old boy, his performance or his talent, some of the nasty, hateful and bitter comments about him here are really beyond the pale.
Some of you guys seem to just hate life and won't be satisfied until everyone is as bitter and miserable as you are.
That's really sad and a damned shame.
Posted by: Zeke | Feb 27, 2008 10:36:06 PM
Please, Leland or Bedwell or whatever the hell you're calling yourself these days. The only people as bitter as you are the old men rotting away in nursing homes. I have no doubt I'll outlive you.
Posted by: crispy | Feb 27, 2008 10:48:40 PM
Well said, Zeke. Why can't people simply say they didn't care for his interpretation or his performance and leave it at that?
Btw, the kid turned 17 in December but what you wrote is still valid.
Posted by: RJ | Feb 27, 2008 11:28:44 PM
I have a low tolerance for excessively adorable and an even lower tolerance for yet more versions of "Imagine," but he won me over last night, unlike the previous week. David is clearly gifted. He'll be a star no matter what happens on the show, but I can't imagine who'll win over him at this point.
The women tonight were generally lackluster and made some truly wretched song choices.
Posted by: Ernie | Feb 27, 2008 11:42:14 PM
I have a low tolerance for excessively adorable and an even lower tolerance for yet more versions of "Imagine," but he won me over last night, unlike the previous week. David is clearly gifted. He'll be a star no matter what happens on the show, but I can't imagine who'll win over him at this point.
The women tonight were generally lackluster and made some truly wretched song choices.
Posted by: Ernie | Feb 27, 2008 11:43:39 PM
@JON
I believe the only requirements of eligibility for AI are that one be a legal U.S. resident (don't need to be a citizen), have no current major recording contract, have no current agent (a management contract with 19E is mandatory if you make it to the top 24) and not currently under a legal cloud (i.e. no current or pending criminal investigations).
Since season 1, competitors have been a mix not just of ages but of experience in the music industry. The show has NEVER barred individuals from competing who have had prior professional experience or success or who have previously appeared on other talent shows.
Posted by: RJ | Feb 27, 2008 11:46:16 PM
Oops... and be within the age range of 16-28 at the initial audition, of course.
Posted by: RJ | Feb 27, 2008 11:49:05 PM
For anyone who thinks they're on solid ground by defending an iconic song that shouldn't be messed around with, I have news for you: It's only the truly revered and classic songs that do get re-interpreted, again and again. Great songs must live in the realms of performance and interpretation or else die, forgotten; relegated to occasional discovery as quaint time-capsules or interesting curiosities. I suspect John Lennon himself would much rather see his music be on the lips of young performers and in the minds of new generations, than preserved like some fly in amber.
Sing the songs, people, sing the songs.
Posted by: rascal | Feb 27, 2008 11:58:51 PM
RASCAL, very well put.
In my opinion Lennon's genius and mastery was in his brilliant song writing rather than in his performance skills.
I think Lennon would have been very proud and pleased to see this kid's interpretation of his song. I also think he would be glad that the kid would choose this song, understanding at such a young age its significance to current events.
Posted by: Zeke | Feb 28, 2008 12:45:26 AM
Zeke, great points all. I will add that I want to believe that I can spot a fake, and in my opinion David Archuleta is as humble as he is talented. No doubt he's not perfect, but then again who truly is perfect. For me it is the heartfelt honesty he brings to his performances as much as the raw talent he surely possesses. And it's a shame that anyone would harbor such ill-will for the kid -- I mean he's barely seventeen. Let's hope he proves those of us on his side correct and wins this season of AI.
Posted by: robertmalcolm | Feb 28, 2008 1:33:01 AM
David's performance was very moving and well done. I look forward to seeing his career unfold.
The cynical comments are way off. It should be clear to anyone who reads faces that the boy is sincere.
Posted by: ME | Feb 28, 2008 1:38:30 AM
Zeke wrote "The kid is SIXTEEN years old. He was born twelve years after John Lennon's death and over twenty years after John wrote Imagine but somehow people here feel that he should have sung it exactly the way Lennon did or it's crap."
It doesn't matter how long ago it was written, or how the original person sang it. David stripped the song of nuance. The nuance and the sincerity has to be in the voice - it's a song dammit - not in a face or a pose.
Posted by: Mike | Feb 28, 2008 4:35:37 AM
RUDY,
picking up where we left off: some of us have other things to do. you called me "more uneducated..." and blah, blah.
a person is educated or uneducated. a person can be more educated than another, but an uneducated person cannot be less educated. uneducated is an absolute: think of dead or not dead; there is no undead -- it is either one or the other. otherwise, it is pure fanatasy.
anyway, i cannot think of a more non-un-not useful way to spend my time.
in short, you are not worthy of my time.
go away little girl.
Posted by: nic | Feb 28, 2008 6:20:52 AM
david archuleta is a true talent.
Posted by: nic | Feb 28, 2008 7:20:55 AM
Of Nicky, What are you blathering on about? Just when I think you have established a new personal low, you sink further. Remember the first rule of holes: when you are in one (especially self-created) stop digging.
Posted by: rudy | Feb 28, 2008 7:47:07 AM
I agree with Paula, David is friggin' adorable and I for one am glad I am not so cynical as to not be able to appreciate the cute little bugger. I don't want to squeeze his head off though. That is sort of sick. I usually have Idol on while doing other things but I must say I was forced to stop and watch David. Danny Noriega did annoy me last week but less so this week. Humility is not a bad quality Danny. Finding the correct mix of humility and sassy is key for a fabulous flamer IMO.
Posted by: Timothy | Feb 28, 2008 9:22:14 AM
WOW...
Some of you guys are truly nasty and bitter people.
If you don't like the show and don't believe in it for entertainment sake.Than don't watch.
And the obsurtity of attacking a teenager because you don't believe he had enough nuance's in a song....rediculous.
John Lennon would be ashamed that a kid is being viciously attacked for interpriting his music,and doing a nice job of it too boot,by arm chair critics.
And then turning your nasty attitudes on each other...talk about eating your own.
Please...seek help and get a life.
Posted by: griffin1573 | Feb 28, 2008 10:26:28 AM
Wait did I read that right or is Leland Frances now calling himself Michael Bedwell?
LOL - as if he needed to create another name underwhich to vent his nasty bitterness - like sooooo many others here do.
What a maroon....
Posted by: Derek | Feb 28, 2008 10:55:59 AM
"Of Nicky"? ha, ha! wtf?
"blathering"? "Remember the first rule of holes: when you are in one (especially self-created) stop digging."?
Rudy, have you ever had an original thought?
the question is purely rhetorical.
Posted by: nic | Feb 28, 2008 11:33:39 AM
Nicky, Why do you keep posting? It is now beyond peradventure that you have a masochistic fetish to display your boundless stupidity. I thought at first that you were merely uneducated but you have succeeded in showing yourself to be ineducable, i.e., merely stupid. Far be it for me to dissuade you from your rhetorical self-immolation.
The topic of the thread was DA's rendition of "Imagine". I stated my opinion that that although I did not care for his vocalization, he is obviously talented. Moreover, I acknowledged his professionalism in knowing how to play to his audience. Yes, I also repeated a snarky comment, but did not apply it to him.
Now Nicole, it is an opinion. Anyone is free to disagree. You however, chose to be disagreeable. Sarcasm escapes you; informed opinion escapes you; the basic rules of capitalization and grammar escape you. In sum, polite discourse is a foreign subject with which you have not the slightest acquaintance.
So, go unbunch your panties. You and they are wound too tight.
Posted by: rudy | Feb 28, 2008 12:34:41 PM
Ok after weighing the arguments of both sides, I say Rudy wins by a knock out.
Posted by: Derek | Feb 28, 2008 12:50:59 PM
ouch! well, you put me in my place. ha!
"peradventure"? whom are you trying to impress? and, who helped you write that missive? you should hire someone else.
i've had enough of your silliness. "nicky," "nicole"? grow up.
i will no longer respond to you.
Posted by: nic | Feb 28, 2008 1:30:35 PM
NIC, what, are you twelve years old?
You really should know who you're dealing with before you launch one of your childish, sarcastic and/or misinformed attacks. RUDY doesn't need anyone to help him write a smack down (he’s a very highly educated man). Of course, it makes it all the easier when he finds himself in a rhetorical pissing match with someone who doesn't know the difference between "who" and "whom" and when to use the subjective or objective form.
I would tell you to avoid tilting at windmills like Don Quixote but I doubt you would understand the literary reference since the clever and appropriate “eecummings” reference that RUDY lobbed at you the other day went right over your head.
I guess it should be pretty clear to you by now that your ignorance and sarcasm isn’t as cute and clever as you might think it is. I particularly didn’t appreciate your misinformed and inaccurate sniper attack on me the other day.
It’s extremely rare that I allow myself to be drawn into these bitch fights. People have to work real hard to get on my bad side (not a good place to be) but by repeatedly and unnecessarily attacking my friends (and me) you’re well on your way.
By all means challenge people’s comments and opinions when you disagree with them but grow up a bit a drop the ad hominem personal attacks that seem to come with your every disagreement. And for goodness sake, if you are going to make a personal attack, make sure you have your facts straight.
Posted by: Zeke | Feb 28, 2008 8:32:29 PM
ZEKE,
so much for your holier-than-thou bull-shit.
i guess i was right about you after all.
btw, speaking of the "other day", strom's last name is thurmond not "thurman." before you start sic-ing your sics on people, you might proof your own comments. while your at it, look up "ad hominem". you'll find that i didn't attack you personally. it wasn't "to the man" or in your case "to the girl".
i think i am more educated than you or your pal.
but, i'll take your rancor in stride. it was your girlfriend rudy that started this, not you.
Posted by: nic | Feb 28, 2008 10:08:40 PM
and, ZEKE, i am growing weary of you and your gal pal's histrionics. for christ's and buddah's and krishna's and the man-in-the moon's sakes or whatever your maleable brain is worshipping at this specific moment's sake, gimme a fuckin' break.
Posted by: nic | Feb 28, 2008 10:27:29 PM
hey Nic, have you ever heard the phrase, "when you're in a hole, stop digging"?
you're in over you're head, dude, give it up.
Posted by: rascal | Feb 29, 2008 8:48:50 AM
Nicky, "More educated" than Zeke or I? That is debatable, but unlikely, in both scholarly pursuits and in life experience. What is now beyond question is that however many years you spent getting "edumacated," it obviously did not "take". It had no beneficial effect. You prove the maxim that "stupid is as stupid writes".
Moreover, your latest little rant against Zeke is nothing but an ad hominem attack. That is not surprising, since personal attacks are the ultimate resort of the cowardly. What a spectacle of ineptitude you have made of yourself. You are a veritable font of disagree-ability.
As for being Zeke's "girlfriend," I freely admit that I would court him with all the persuasive power that I could muster, but for the fact that we are both married to others and have been for many years. That does not prevent me, however, from admiring his intelligence and humanity, in essence his fulsome manly demeanor. (It does not hurt that he is also damn handsome.) Zeke is beautiful inside and out. In contrast, Nicolette, you are rotten to the core a/k/a "bone ugly".
^5 Rascal! Unfortunately for Nicole, res ipsa loquitor ("the thing speaks for itself").
Posted by: rudy | Feb 29, 2008 9:40:39 AM
rudy,
look up "fulsome", and get back to me, idiot. zeke has shown himself to be as much. you know, it's not the words, but the use of them that counts.
rascal, who rattled your cage? and yes, that "digging a hole" phrase rings vaguely familiar. where did i hear that recently... hmmm... let me think.... was it from rudy!? (though not original to him.) do any of you have an original thought?
bring it bitches!
Posted by: nic | Feb 29, 2008 10:20:50 AM
on second thought, i'm done with this thread. unless you want to post your creds on line, there is no purpose in running this fool's errand. zeke, you and rudy have a virtual love affair. far be it from me to spoil that. my work here is done.
Posted by: nic | Feb 29, 2008 10:38:27 AM
one last thing, zeke. explain to me and the world at large how i missused "who" and "whom." go ahead, you listless son of a bitch. i daresya!
Posted by: nic | Feb 29, 2008 12:36:37 PM
sorry, my finger lingered too long on the "s".
Posted by: nic | Feb 29, 2008 12:54:49 PM
Well, there you go: Nicky finally admitted to himself that he is a fool running an errand. That has been plainly obvious to the rest of us for quite some time. In particular, the use of the phrase "bring it bitches" reveals all one needs to know about Nicolette, Towleroad's delusional and stupid little troll.
Posted by: rudy | Feb 29, 2008 1:11:16 PM
ruby,
is that the best you have? roflnao.
Posted by: nic | Feb 29, 2008 4:31:15 PM
Gracious.
But the boy can sing, right?
Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Feb 29, 2008 4:46:34 PM
yes, DERRICK, the boy can sing. and you can, too. in your own way.
Posted by: nic | Feb 29, 2008 5:17:21 PM
Nicky, Finally "on topic". Capitalization, grammar, and intelligent thought still elude you, but it appears that the short bus finally arrived at Towleroad. Lo and behold, the sole passenger is Nicky, our resident trollette.
Posted by: rudy | Mar 1, 2008 2:03:04 PM