John Barrowman gives Smooching Lessons to Maria Contestants

“How Do You Solve a Problem Like Maria” is an enjoyable bit of reality TV fluff from Canada. They do musical talent shows soooo much better in Canada than in the USA and Australia.

The aim of the show is to find a leading woman for a stage show of The Sound of Music. By episode 11, the contestants were four in number. It was time for more acting lessons from panellist, Torchwood hero, and musical theatre star John Barrowman – this time, in romantic acting.

Warning: if you have a Barrowman crush, you may end up a little flustered.

Categories: arts & entertainment

Tags: , , , , ,

7 replies

  1. Heh, I saw this last week– not that I mind watching it again. 🙂
    As I commented to a friend of mine, using John Barrowman to test whether or not the women were good at acting in romantic scenes was probably not the best idea– because honestly, so long as these women are attracted to men in the first place, who would have to act? 😛

  2. Good point. As a test of breath control and focus on the singing requirements of such a scene though, not at all bad – having to suppress the shortness of breath etc.
    That man’s charm should be a registered weapon.

  3. Oh, SWOON. He really is ridiculously charming.

  4. The gay/camp jokes on the show are kinda interesting. There are plenty about the host Gavin Crawford (mostly made by him), but none really about Simon Lee (who is camp, but I don’t know if he’s gay), and none at all about John Barrowman.
    They seem to be maintaining a played-for-laughs fiction that Barrowman is straight or bi, and playing the field – a singing Captain Jack.

  5. If you had a Barrowman crush and were flustered by THAT, you’ll probably want to avoid the first program of ”The Making Of Me” in which Barrowman looks at the nature vs. nurture arguments surrounding homosexuality. It’s available here for those made of sterner stuff.

  6. Oh yeah, I watched that last night, and while there was certainly a “getting flustered” element, I think that was overshadowed by how touching the whole thing was– you could see it was a really emotional journey for him.
    Mind you, it only gives the “spark notes” summary of the science involved, and while I’m not familiar with the science itself, I can’t help but think that if you researched it a bit more thoroughly, you’d probably end up with a view that was a bit less gender essentialist than the show suggested. I think that the show simplified things to suggest that straight boys like “boy” things (guns and trucks); straight girls like “girl” things (dolls and glitter), and that gay boys and girls like the opposite. My theory (utterly untested, of course) is that kids who identify as GBLTQ (although of course they often wouldn’t have that terminology) are more likely to question gender norms in other ways, and therefore feel less inclinded to perform their gender traditionally (unless, of course, they’re in a family/social situation in which they’re not allowed to do that). I think it’s a shame that the show represented correlations between gender and sexuality so simplistically, simply because John Barrowman himself has done so much to work against those stereotypes.
    It also bothered me a bit that when they were talking about the whole “gay gene” thing tied to the X-chromosome, and when they were talking about the “older brother” factor, they were only talking about factors that might influence gay men. Now, understandably, JB is male, but it would at least have been nice to at least acknowledge that lesbians exist too, and the theories that they were putting forward regarding men don’t always apply there.
    Having said that, however, John’s interview with the radio presenter who’d been subjected to humiliating “anti-gay” treatment in the 60s, and his interview with the “ex-gay” man in America were just heartbreaking.

  7. Actually I just had the thought, does that count as a “spoiler”?

%d bloggers like this: