another wildcard spoiler

Comments

• [Deleted User] Posts: 1,558

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  08/10/10 - 13:10 #2

  ellenpagerocks wrote: »

  16 acts, not 13, the show on the 16th is also 2 hours and 30 mins
  
  http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/s103/the-x-factor/news/a281059/strictly-to-clash-with-x-factor-again.html

  
  That is good news if that is true.
  
  Why not just put 16 acts through in the first place?

  0
• [Deleted User] Posts: 8,145

  Forum Member

  ✭

  08/10/10 - 13:10 #3

  am I missing something, where does it say 16? I can only see it say 'an increased number'....

  0
• [Deleted User] Posts: 9,152

  Forum Member

  ✭

  08/10/10 - 13:14 #4

  ballyclark wrote: »

  That is good news if that is true.
  
  Why not just put 16 acts through in the first place?

  
  Because a wildcard twist builds up the drama

  0
• twin Posts: 1,044

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  08/10/10 - 13:21 #5

  Well we can all see who they are here !! (Hope the link works!)
  
  
  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1318562/X-FACTOR-2010-Wild-cards-guessed-are.html

  0
• [Deleted User] Posts: 1,865

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  08/10/10 - 13:31 #6

  Wildcard stint would have been better if we the public were given the power to vote for our favourite acts from those who didn't make it through.

  0
• RocknRolla Posts: 437

  Forum Member

  ✭

  08/10/10 - 14:34 #7

  LDN wrote: »

  Wildcard stint would have been better if we the public were given the power to vote for our favourite acts from those who didn't make it through.

  
  I'm glad that didn't happen, as we would have got Gamu instead of Treyc

  0
• [Deleted User] Posts: 1,558

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  08/10/10 - 14:41 #8

  bazaar1 wrote: »

  am I missing something, where does it say 16? I can only see it say 'an increased number'....

  
  I think the implication is that this week is a 2 and a half hour show with 16 acts. Next week is also 2 and a half hours so it would suggest 15 acts next week rather than a lesser number.

  0
• [Deleted User] Posts: 8,145

  Forum Member

  ✭

  08/10/10 - 16:05 #9

  ballyclark wrote: »

  I think the implication is that this week is a 2 and a half hour show with 16 acts. Next week is also 2 and a half hours so it would suggest 15 acts next week rather than a lesser number.

  
  ah ok! I thought I was being thick :o

  0
• [Deleted User] Posts: 6,207

  Forum Member

  ✭

  08/10/10 - 16:53 #10

  I think 16 is too many .The ones going nearer last will have the advantage

  0
• [Deleted User] Posts: 1,865

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  08/10/10 - 17:20 #11

  BillyNidNod wrote: »

  I think 16 is too many .The ones going nearer last will have the advantage

  
  Exactly. No one will remember the first five or six acts and the last few will have a major advantage over them.

  0
• [Deleted User] Posts: 9,152

  Forum Member

  ✭

  08/10/10 - 17:38 #12

  Here's something that hadn't crossed my mind with 16 finalists this year does that mean we'll have more people on the live tour

  0
• [Deleted User] Posts: 548

  Forum Member

  ✭✭

  08/10/10 - 17:40 #13

  lol @ the paige disguise ... lol loving it

  0
• Ellef Posts: 4,052

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  08/10/10 - 18:02 #14

  y_cul wrote: »

  lol @ the paige disguise ... lol loving it

  
  It doesn't quite work, does it? Love it.

  0