Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 

what were your opinions on last years female candidates?


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-03-2014, 00:38
Sherlock_Holmes
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,236
In Series 9 I'd say that there were three strong women (Leah, Luisa and Rebecca) and the rest were pretty weak. In Series 8 I'd say that there were different levels of strengths. Jade and Gabrielle were clearly very strong, but Jenna, Laura, Katie and Bilyana all had strengths to them.
Think that Luisa and Leah were both stronger then all the women in series 8 (only a small compliment, but still). Perhaps an idea to make an allstar cast from all the series combined (as a thread or post) or just a few candidates per series based on any criteria.
Sherlock_Holmes is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 10-03-2014, 07:39
george.millman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,320
Think that Luisa and Leah were both stronger then all the women in series 8 (only a small compliment, but still). Perhaps an idea to make an allstar cast from all the series combined (as a thread or post) or just a few candidates per series based on any criteria.
What would the prize be?
george.millman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2014, 19:41
Sherlock_Holmes
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,236
What would the prize be?
No prize, just for fun. We will see, it is still at least six months until the next series.
Sherlock_Holmes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2014, 21:14
TXF0429
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,631
Think that Luisa and Leah were both stronger then all the women in series 8 (only a small compliment, but still). Perhaps an idea to make an allstar cast from all the series combined (as a thread or post) or just a few candidates per series based on any criteria.
That's an interesting idea, actually - If you had to pick a man and a woman from each series, who would you pick? (Based on Competency) It's an interesting argument.

My Choices

Series 1

Saira Khan
James Max

Series 2

Ruth Badger
Ansell Henry

Series 3

Kristina Grimes
Lohit Kalburgi

Series 4

Claire Young
Raef Bjayou

Series 5

Yasmina Siadatan
James McQuillan

Series 6

Stella English (Though there is NO WAY she'd ever do it)
Chris Bates

Series 7

Susan Ma
Jim Eastwood

Series 8

Jade Nash
Nick Holzherr

Series 9

Leah Totton
Jordan Poulton

As For a six-man Junior Apprentice All-Stars

Series 1

Arjun Rajyagor
Zoe Plummer

Series 2

Zara Brownless
Harry Hitchens

Series 3

Lucy Beauvallet
Andrew Tindall

Of course, if an all-stars edition did exist, then they'd probably go more for big characters, so the likes of Paul Torrisi, Syed Ahmed, Tre Azam, Debra Barr, Stuart Baggs etc. would probably get selected. I can't see Lord Sugar going for it myself; especially if there's no prize. Otherwise, there'd be no point as far as he'd be concerned.
TXF0429 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2014, 21:51
hownwbrowncow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Scotland
Posts: 3,506
I'd like to see a 'second chance' series - like a series where shock firees came back, or ones who were big characters that went early....

People like Karen Bremner, Ifti, SHazia etc...
hownwbrowncow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-03-2014, 08:50
george.millman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,320
That's an interesting idea, actually - If you had to pick a man and a woman from each series, who would you pick? (Based on Competency) It's an interesting argument.

My Choices

Series 1

Saira Khan
James Max

Series 2

Ruth Badger
Ansell Henry

Series 3

Kristina Grimes
Lohit Kalburgi

Series 4

Claire Young
Raef Bjayou

Series 5

Yasmina Siadatan
James McQuillan

Series 6

Stella English (Though there is NO WAY she'd ever do it)
Chris Bates

Series 7

Susan Ma
Jim Eastwood

Series 8

Jade Nash
Nick Holzherr

Series 9

Leah Totton
Jordan Poulton

As For a six-man Junior Apprentice All-Stars

Series 1

Arjun Rajyagor
Zoe Plummer

Series 2

Zara Brownless
Harry Hitchens

Series 3

Lucy Beauvallet
Andrew Tindall

Of course, if an all-stars edition did exist, then they'd probably go more for big characters, so the likes of Paul Torrisi, Syed Ahmed, Tre Azam, Debra Barr, Stuart Baggs etc. would probably get selected. I can't see Lord Sugar going for it myself; especially if there's no prize. Otherwise, there'd be no point as far as he'd be concerned.
I agree with your choices for Series 2, 4, 8 and Young Apprentice 1 and 2. Purely on competency, I'd choose Miriam over Saira, Katie over Kristina, Howard over James, Joanna over Stella, Tom over Jim, Luisa over Leah and Steven over Andrew (I may have chosen Ashleigh over Lucy, but can't entirely make up my mind, as for that series I find it really hard to choose a stronger task performer - I explain it further on my thread of a few weeks back on who is the strongest task performer in each series. So I might as well go with Lucy.)

I'd like to see a 'second chance' series - like a series where shock firees came back, or ones who were big characters that went early....

People like Karen Bremner, Ifti, SHazia etc...
Karen and Shazia I'd agree with you on. Ifti not so, as he basically quit the series. He wasn't a shock firing.

Miriam, Liz, Duane, Paloma and Gavin could be likely bets to do that series.
george.millman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-05-2014, 12:25
hownwbrowncow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Scotland
Posts: 3,506
I thought I'd reignite this thread in honour of last year's female candidates.

I genuinely think they were the worst group of female candidates the show has ever had - they focussed to much on glamour etc, and I hope the producers NEVER go down this route again. Yes, I loved Series 9 (well I love every series), but I feel they jumped the shark most definitely. The woman were mostly dump blondes (ie. Natalie, Fran and Uzma), and there were too many Baggs-y types with stupid statements (eg. Jaz, Jason, Alex, Zee).

So, I will now evaluate each of them...

Jaz: I feel she was a very funny candidate, but she literally had no ability! She was perfect first-fired material! When I first saw her when the candidates were revealed I knew she wouldn't get past Week 6
Sophie: I was very disappointed with her. After I saw her audition tape, she quickly became one of my favourites, and I did expect for her to go far, so I was disappointed when she very much flew under the radar for the first three weeks.
Uzma: She claimed to have a creative eye, but no one actually saw much creative input from her! I actually didn't mind her as a person, but she was a bit useless I think!
Rebecca: I feel it was a great shame she got fired so early. She was a brilliant sales woman and had a very cool, calm, collected way of going about things. It was a shame she never got a chance to be PM - she put herself forward for Week 4, but Luisa overruled her because she sells cupcakes?! Haha! I think she would have been a good leader - very organized and calm. I don't know how it was fair for her to take full blame for the motivational speaker... Fran was PM so that decision laid with her! I don't think LS particularly liked her - I think he thought she was just kicking up dirt in the Task 2 boardroom, but I feel they genuinely were just trying to scapegoat her, cos she was a HUGE threat. I genuinely feel that LS was thinking with his cock in firing Rebecca.
Natalie: Terrible woman. In her auditio video, she said she hates weak people. And so it very much made me chuckle when she cried in the boardroom twice! She literally had no positive input into any task apart from the lucky cats in Task 1, but it was a downhill slope from there.
Fran: Fran was a lovely person. But she didn't showcase (m)any skills. She wasn't a great PM in Task 6, adn she was pretty much carried the whole way through. She had lucky escapes in Tasks 2 and 6 IMO.
Luisa: Luisa was probably the best female candidates from Series 9 in terms of ability - she could sell, pitch, she was creative... BUT she had an absolutely abhorrent personality. She was just so immature and catty, and I would NEVER go into business with her. I genuinely would be terrified if I were in the same room as her.
Leah: My favourite female candidate, and probably my favourite overall. I found her very funny (eg. the way she said 'fantastic', in a really dry, monotone way ). Also, I just loved her journey - she was a doctor and she immediately showed natural flare in the process - she showed brilliant skills in sales and pitching. I was quite disappointed that we only got to see her as PM once. She had such an intriguing business plan! Her journey was brought to a close with a fusion of two skills she has.

What does everyone else think?
hownwbrowncow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-05-2014, 12:57
george.millman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,320
I thought I'd reignite this thread in honour of last year's female candidates.

I genuinely think they were the worst group of female candidates the show has ever had - they focussed to much on glamour etc, and I hope the producers NEVER go down this route again. Yes, I loved Series 9 (well I love every series), but I feel they jumped the shark most definitely. The woman were mostly dump blondes (ie. Natalie, Fran and Uzma), and there were too many Baggs-y types with stupid statements (eg. Jaz, Jason, Alex, Zee).

So, I will now evaluate each of them...

Jaz: I feel she was a very funny candidate, but she literally had no ability! She was perfect first-fired material! When I first saw her when the candidates were revealed I knew she wouldn't get past Week 6
Sophie: I was very disappointed with her. After I saw her audition tape, she quickly became one of my favourites, and I did expect for her to go far, so I was disappointed when she very much flew under the radar for the first three weeks.
Uzma: She claimed to have a creative eye, but no one actually saw much creative input from her! I actually didn't mind her as a person, but she was a bit useless I think!
Rebecca: I feel it was a great shame she got fired so early. She was a brilliant sales woman and had a very cool, calm, collected way of going about things. It was a shame she never got a chance to be PM - she put herself forward for Week 4, but Luisa overruled her because she sells cupcakes?! Haha! I think she would have been a good leader - very organized and calm. I don't know how it was fair for her to take full blame for the motivational speaker... Fran was PM so that decision laid with her! I don't think LS particularly liked her - I think he thought she was just kicking up dirt in the Task 2 boardroom, but I feel they genuinely were just trying to scapegoat her, cos she was a HUGE threat. I genuinely feel that LS was thinking with his cock in firing Rebecca.
Natalie: Terrible woman. In her auditio video, she said she hates weak people. And so it very much made me chuckle when she cried in the boardroom twice! She literally had no positive input into any task apart from the lucky cats in Task 1, but it was a downhill slope from there.
Fran: Fran was a lovely person. But she didn't showcase (m)any skills. She wasn't a great PM in Task 6, adn she was pretty much carried the whole way through. She had lucky escapes in Tasks 2 and 6 IMO.
Luisa: Luisa was probably the best female candidates from Series 9 in terms of ability - she could sell, pitch, she was creative... BUT she had an absolutely abhorrent personality. She was just so immature and catty, and I would NEVER go into business with her. I genuinely would be terrified if I were in the same room as her.
Leah: My favourite female candidate, and probably my favourite overall. I found her very funny (eg. the way she said 'fantastic', in a really dry, monotone way ). Also, I just loved her journey - she was a doctor and she immediately showed natural flare in the process - she showed brilliant skills in sales and pitching. I was quite disappointed that we only got to see her as PM once. She had such an intriguing business plan! Her journey was brought to a close with a fusion of two skills she has.

What does everyone else think?
I tend to agree with you on most of these actually. I disagree on Natalie - I'm not sure why, but I thought she was better than she was made out to be. It's possibly because she was my favourite to win after seeing the first two tasks, as she seemed to be one of those who doesn't appear in the edit so much but gets on with things quietly for the first few weeks, and those types often do well. Maybe after that I was just searching for good things about her. But I think she did draw the short straw a little - maybe I need to watch that series again.

I also disagree on saying that Luisa's personality was abhorrent - I appreciate that she's controversial, but I genuinely really liked her. She has been very outspoken since the show, and I tend to agree with her political opinions actually.

Just a question, you liked Leah a lot and hated Luisa, but what do you say about the fact that they appeared to be very good friends on the show? They clashed in the first task when Luisa suggested that a doctor wouldn't be capable of leading the sub-team, but by the end they seemed to get on very well. They have both been very complimentary about one another in interviews, and Luisa has said that Leah is the only candidate that she wouldn't mind losing to.
george.millman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-05-2014, 13:35
hownwbrowncow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Scotland
Posts: 3,506
I don't really know what to say about it to be honest

I am not sure if they stay in touch - I wouldn't have thought that someone like Luisa would be the person Leah would make friends with...

And about Natalie, I am really not sure why you think that... She was genuinely rubbish in my opinion... I don't remember her doing anything good in Task2, but she was on the subteam that messed up a few batches of beer, and also she didn't come across well in the boardroom!
hownwbrowncow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-05-2014, 13:39
george.millman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,320
I don't really know what to say about it to be honest

I am not sure if they stay in touch - I wouldn't have thought that someone like Luisa would be the person Leah would make friends with...

And about Natalie, I am really not sure why you think that... She was genuinely rubbish in my opinion... I don't remember her doing anything good in Task2, but she was on the subteam that messed up a few batches of beer, and also she didn't come across well in the boardroom!
I'm not going to bother debating the Natalie point. I liked her at the time, but I haven't watched it since airing so if I re-watched it I may change my viewpoint. I never go into a debate without being informed enough to argue my point coherently. All I can say is that I liked her at the time.

I don't know if they stay in touch, but they came across as being very close on the show, and as I said, they have been incredibly complimentary towards one another in interviews. They're definitely on good terms.
george.millman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-05-2014, 14:08
Matt_Harbinson
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 35
I think that Rebecca, Leah and Luisa were the only ones who were strong in last series. They all had a side of them that was abrasive and catty but they were generally very credible which was shown throughout their time on it. I still have no idea how Rebecca went out over Francesca on the corporate day task.
Matt_Harbinson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-05-2014, 14:31
george.millman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,320
I think that Rebecca, Leah and Luisa were the only ones who were strong in last series. They all had a side of them that was abrasive and catty but they were generally very credible which was shown throughout their time on it. I still have no idea how Rebecca went out over Francesca on the corporate day task.
I don't think that applies just to the women though, that is rather across the board for that series, I think. Either they were just bad, or they were good on the tasks but could never win for other reasons. The only people who could justifiably have won are the three people you mention and Neil. Out of sixteen people, only four of them could ever have won. That is not a good selection of candidates. Series 8 had a far better selection, as did quite a few of the previous series.
george.millman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-05-2014, 15:52
hownwbrowncow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Scotland
Posts: 3,506
I agree with what you've both said. Almost everyone in the series had major negative points to them, leaving us with perhaps a bit of an underwhelming winner (Yes, I know I said she was my favourite, but she was hardly Yasmina Mk II).

I just think they got a bit of a fright after series 8 didn't gl down too well - and they knew the problem was with the characters, but instead of getting more funny ones and ones with more personality, they just selected a bunch of goons. I repeat, I am still a HUGE fan of the show, but it has changed so much from Series 1's original, innocent vision of the show.
hownwbrowncow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-05-2014, 15:59
george.millman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,320
I just think they got a bit of a fright after series 8 didn't gl down too well - and they knew the problem was with the characters, but instead of getting more funny ones and ones with more personality, they just selected a bunch of goons. I repeat, I am still a HUGE fan of the show, but it has changed so much from Series 1's original, innocent vision of the show.
I still don't see why Series 8 was so criticised, it was one of my favourite series and I thought there were plenty of entertaining scenes. Bilyana, Jane, Azhar, Jenna, Gabrielle, Adam and Ricky all had their moments.
george.millman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-05-2014, 16:49
hownwbrowncow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Scotland
Posts: 3,506
I've never quite been able to put my finger in it George... I just know that when I rewatch Series 8 I find it much harder to get into than any of the others.

I genuinely think the problem lies with the candidates in some way or another...
hownwbrowncow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-05-2014, 17:52
george.millman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,320
I genuinely think the problem lies with the candidates in some way or another...
You can't blame the candidates. They're not there to be entertaining, they're there to go into business with Lord Sugar. They have no responsibility to the viewers, in my opinion.
george.millman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-05-2014, 18:12
hownwbrowncow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Scotland
Posts: 3,506
Ok let me rephrase that.

The problem lies with the selection of the candidates.
hownwbrowncow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-05-2014, 16:05
Matt_Harbinson
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 35
I don't think that applies just to the women though, that is rather across the board for that series, I think. Either they were just bad, or they were good on the tasks but could never win for other reasons. The only people who could justifiably have won are the three people you mention and Neil. Out of sixteen people, only four of them could ever have won. That is not a good selection of candidates. Series 8 had a far better selection, as did quite a few of the previous series.
I agree with you, I meant across the women but thought Neil was good as well. I liked Jordan at the start as well but he just went downhill from half way in. I think Series 8 contestants were mostly good and Series 6 and Series 7 had a mostly strong array of candidates as well. I think Series 3 was the worst in terms of candidates followed closely by 9.
Matt_Harbinson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-05-2014, 17:09
george.millman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,320
I agree with you, I meant across the women but thought Neil was good as well. I liked Jordan at the start as well but he just went downhill from half way in. I think Series 8 contestants were mostly good and Series 6 and Series 7 had a mostly strong array of candidates as well. I think Series 3 was the worst in terms of candidates followed closely by 9.
Jordan was the best candidate if you're looking purely at task performance and nothing else. He was a very strong performer, I'll give him that much. But as a candidate generally, he was dreadful as he was completely unqualified to win the series, and him being there took the chance away from some other man who might have really wanted to do well and had a good business plan to do it with.

I think Series 4 can be added to your list of series without very decent candidates generally.
george.millman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-05-2014, 17:52
hownwbrowncow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Scotland
Posts: 3,506
I agree about Series 3 and 4! Series 4's still my favourite though.
hownwbrowncow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-05-2014, 18:13
george.millman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,320
I agree about Series 3 and 4! Series 4's still my favourite though.
Do you tend to like series without very competent candidates?
george.millman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-05-2014, 19:59
platelet
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: GL51 0EX
Posts: 6,975
Do you tend to like series without very competent candidates?
There were series with very competent candidates?
platelet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-05-2014, 20:24
hownwbrowncow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Scotland
Posts: 3,506
Do you tend to like series without very competent candidates?
Not necessarily... Series 1 is deemed as the most competent bunch of candidates - and it was one of my favourite series.
hownwbrowncow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-05-2014, 20:36
george.millman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,320
There were series with very competent candidates?
Yeah... Series 1, 5, 7, 8 and the first two series of Young Apprentice, I would say.
george.millman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-05-2014, 14:24
lightdragon
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Rebel County
Posts: 14,519
My thoughts on last years ladies.

Jaz:I'd like to give her the benefit of the doubt in that she may have calmed down after the first week and become a decent candidate. However she was too excitable and her team saw an easy target in case of failure. Pretty much as the boys team saw Jason, but without Neil Clough to ensure the win.
Sophie:You hardly noticed she was there, and her boardroom list of things she couldn't do left little doubt that there wasn't much she could do.
Uzma:Always quick to blame others, or over emphasisng her contribution.
Rebecca: Still shocked. She did the task that was given her. Okay the wine tasting was a bad idea, but that was for Fran to overrule. Bringing in the speaker probably saved them from losing more of the money, and was the only thing credited as a good idea by the people that went.
Natalie:Lucky to have got this far.
Fran: Seemed like she had a pretty good business plan, she wasn't earth shattering as a candidate, but you could see with an accountant she might be able to do something with it.
Luisa: Ergh. On the outside her business sounds okay, but just how profitable can an online wholesaler for everything cakes be?
Leah: Her plan was probably going to be the most profitable. I just find it sad that there may be an endless market of people that aren't content with their looks that would go to her for some quicky lip plumping.
lightdragon is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:45.