Stars In Their Eyes

1181921232454

Comments

  • maycontainnutsmaycontainnuts Posts: 1,488
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Harry Hill isn't having a great time is he? what with the musical,the film and now this debacle
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 29
    Forum Member
    I don't know anyone who enjoyed it, even Splash seemed to be better received.
  • JordyDJordyD Posts: 4,007
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The original SITE, particularly with Leslie Crowther, was a show that wasn't serious, which it shouldn't be, but easy going with a bit of class.

    The fact though, that ITV could have gone the other way, and made it into a very serious show, like XF with tense music and over dramactics, which I think would have been equally devastating to the show.

    At the end of the day, it should be easy going.

    Out of everything last night, I really detested the VTs they played, it was like they was treating them like celebrities, and was really unfunny, they reminded me of the embarrassing VTs of All Star Family Fortunes, which are also not funny.

    Too much padding out. Way too much. To think that Leslie's version offered 5 acts in 30 minutes, and didn't feel rushed at all, just goes to show how bad it's become.
  • oathyoathy Posts: 32,629
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    lmusic wrote: »
    I don't know anyone who enjoyed it, even Splash seemed to be better received.

    agree and if splash had followed the original Dutch format It would have worked much better. just like Stars they had the wrong presenter it really did come across someone at ITV didn't want to risk just giving Harry his own show so dragged Stars back and told him cram as many sketches in as he liked.

    post about the contestants wondering WTF they were doing there was so true. The son who refused to appear he made such a good move. the funniest Joke was about loose women when the highlight was a real life dog getting the best Audience reaction that should tell them everything.
  • Phoenix LazarusPhoenix Lazarus Posts: 17,305
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Harry Hill isn't having a great time is he? what with the musical,the film and now this debacle

    Maybe he'll get a series of Branestawm.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 29
    Forum Member
    I wish they wouldn't tell you who they are going to be - we had it on fast forward and it was so much funnier trying to guess once they stepped out.
  • Lou KellyLou Kelly Posts: 2,778
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I thought it was a fun show and Harry did make me lol quite a few times although I am a an of his style of humour.
  • denver23denver23 Posts: 79
    Forum Member
    HALibutt wrote: »
    haha me too. :D

    Surely people didn't expect it to be exactly the same as it used to be?

    OFGS - What is the point of calling it Stars In Their Eyes if it is not going to have a very close resemblance to what went previously. Perhaps we can accept there would be one or two little minor tweaks but not this rubbish. Surely people were entitled to a more professional approach. How do you think football fans would have reacted when the BBC brought back Match Of The Day many years ago now and the powers that be decided we are going to have this program interspersed with comedy sketches and let these have more air time than actual football? There would, quite rightly IMHO, been outrage.
    The viewers disgust in this instance is more than justified here and I really hope Harry Hill is reading this forum. Whether he is or not (or does) I really could not tell you but if he did have a hand in the running or production of this tripe then shame on him. He has shown no respect to the original.
  • Deacon1972Deacon1972 Posts: 8,171
    Forum Member
    Caught a little of Stars in their Eyes around the family's house, suffice to say it soon got switched off, how dire was that.

    ITV must have had an idea of how it was going to be received as the final is not going to be live, because the only ones that will be watching will be those in the studio. :D
  • cgkcgk Posts: 528
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    denver23 wrote: »
    OFGS - What is the point of calling it Stars In Their Eyes i

    I think the clue is that it's called Harry Hill's Stars in Their Eyes
  • djleekeedjleekee Posts: 1,622
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Well Ive just finished watching Stars In Thier Eyes with Harry Hill and thoroughly enjoyed the whole hour! (I know I might be putting myself out on a limb here)

    As good as it is watching and reminiscing about the old SITE progs - television has moved on and with loads of other talent shows formats around it just wouldnt stand out by replicating the old format. It would probably also have got slated if they had 100% replciated the original format.

    I've always enjoyed Harry Hill stuff (pre tv burp days - even though thats where most people know him from) and appreciate that he isn't that good being himself or doing much non-scripted or off the hoof! Admitedly parts did feel a tad over scripted and over rehearsed but overall I think he gave it his best attempt.

    I did laugh throughout and enjoyed the mayhem he brought from TV Burp and viewed the whole prog as a vehicle for his jokes and not a vehicle for the singers to shine!

    I think if ITV put this on at 6.30 - 7.30 it could do better but I feel it will probably be a big story in the papers on Monday which will only bring more rubberneckers next Saturday and increase the audience (a bit like Splash did!)

    I thought the nod to the previous series was good - including the studio set, the theme music and even having Matthew Kelly at the start. It didnt want to avoid mentioning the previous series at all and was brave in everything that it did.

    Most of the singers were AWFUL on the programme with only the last two being half decent.

    I can totally see WHY everyone is up in arms about the return of SITE in this format but you just need to roll with it, get on board and enjoy the journey.

    It's obviously never going to be the same and I think Harry has made a valiant effort into adding something extra into the format.

    I would personally drop him singing the theme tune as you couldnt really hear his vocals and it didnt add that much to the prog - he should do the comedy and the singers should do the singing. (Maybe give the singers 30 seocnds longer to sing too)

    Overall I'd give it 8/10 and will be watching again next week.
  • denver23denver23 Posts: 79
    Forum Member
    Ian_James3 wrote: »
    To those complaining about the new format, it's 2015, no one would ever take this show seriously if it were to return in it's original format. ITV would never have done that anyway.

    Anyway I'm enjoying it to an extent and it's better than the alternative (The Voice which hasn't changed in four years and despite claiming to be a serious taken show has produced zero successful singers)! It's trashy, silly stuff with Harry Hill's humour stamped all over it.

    Oh come on - As I said in another post what was the point of bringing it back if it is not going to have some resemblance to the original format which surely was much better than what we go last night. A few little tweaks maybe but not this.
  • daicolldaicoll Posts: 434
    Forum Member
    Are ITV producers so devoid of ideas that they have to bring back what was an already failing format.? ...And then butcher it in the hope people will like it. My opinion of ITV was pretty low anyway and now its reached the pits. The real shock is that people actually get paid well for producing this drivel..
  • denver23denver23 Posts: 79
    Forum Member
    cgk wrote: »
    I think the clue is that it's called Harry Hill's Stars in Their Eyes

    You are probably right but even so!
  • SaturnVSaturnV Posts: 11,519
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Quite like HH on tv burp and tittered a couple of times at the sketches but this is a horrible abomination of a show.
    Why does ITV think we're not capable of engaging with a straightforward show?
    They fart about with almost everything they do.
  • denver23denver23 Posts: 79
    Forum Member
    ''I can totally see WHY everyone is up in arms about the return of SITE in this format but you just need to roll with it, get on board and enjoy the journey.''

    -

    I don't think many people will want to roll with it or get on board and even if they did I don't think the journey will last very long. Will surely be axed straight after the Final! Should be anyway if that is the best ITV can offer us!
  • oathyoathy Posts: 32,629
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    denver23 wrote: »
    I can totally see WHY everyone is up in arms about the return of SITE in this format but you just need to roll with it, get on board and enjoy the journey.

    -

    I don't think many people will want to roll with it or get on board and even if they did I don't think the journey will last very long. Will surely be axed straight after the Final! Should be anyway if that is the best ITV can offer us!

    The repeat this afternoon is a bold move. If I was ITV I would stick Death on the Nile or the Mirror Cracked on for the millionth time :D
  • CreamteaCreamtea Posts: 14,682
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Just dreadful. That is all.
  • Fish_and_ChipsFish_and_Chips Posts: 1,333
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Deacon1972 wrote: »
    Caught a little of Stars in their Eyes around the family's house, suffice to say it soon got switched off, how dire was that.

    ITV must have had an idea of how it was going to be received as the final is not going to be live, because the only ones that will be watching will be those in the studio. :D
    Isn't January the time of the year when the likely failures are taken down from the shelves and dusted off and aired on the TV? 😄
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 12,830
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    It's not that awful. I liked the dog grooming in the back of the van.
  • pete137pete137 Posts: 18,342
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    cgk wrote: »
    I think the clue is that it's called Harry Hill's Stars in Their Eyes

    Just because the presenter is in the title it doesnt mean the WHOLE show has to be a vanity project for their own ego. I dong recall "Bruce's Price Is Right" being all about Bruce Forsyth.
  • SurrenderBillSurrenderBill Posts: 19,084
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    petertard wrote: »
    It's not that awful. I liked the dog grooming in the back of the van.

    Care to explain what you liked about it, because I was just staring at the screen in disbelief, I'm not sure that I've seen more blatantly pointless filler.
  • MaccaMacca Posts: 18,434
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    JEFF62 wrote: »
    Kevin O Sullivan in the Sunday Mirror called it promising. Did he actually watch it. He slagged off The Voice and said over to Harry Hill for the promising Stars In Their Eyes!
    He is a Harry Hill fan & he slagged off the original programme on twitter today..

    'Deep breath... here goes: I thought Harry Hill's Stars In Their Eyes was great. Funny and fresh. Why duplicate the old show?'

    https://twitter.com/TVKev/status/554211518469132289
  • kelvokelvo Posts: 3,433
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    denver23 wrote: »
    Oh come on - As I said in another post what was the point of bringing it back if it is not going to have some resemblance to the original format which surely was much better than what we go last night. A few little tweaks maybe but not this.

    Perhaps a few tweaks but at least stick to the format and idea of the original, but this was just too much TV Burp and even in the end this ended up being ruined and became a parody of itself with all the silly sketches.

    If this was supposed to be a parody of Stars in their eyes, then you only need to look at Harry Hill's "parody" of X-factorto see how that faired... :(

    Can only imagine the conversations in ITV towers tomorrow morning... even more so when they see the viewer figures for next week:(
  • Billy_ValueBilly_Value Posts: 22,919
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    just watching the repeat, its car crash TV, its so bad you have to watch, it may even become so bad its good
Sign In or Register to comment.