As someone who is very weary of the Neil Clough edit I am weary of having Katie as my number one pick, but I think a big difference right now is that Katie right now is the only strong winner pick going whereas Neil's series had Leah as a viable alternative. Obvious this could change as we are early in the series. I also share the sentiment of Pamela's emergence in this episode as a potential sign, especially as her small but positive moments all seemed to be highlighted.
There are a couple of edits which are intriguing me at this point. The first is Jenny's Purple Kelly edit which is nothing like I've seen in the apprentice so far, I think it is setting up the audience for a blindside when Jennie's exit comes and it is far more explosive then anyone suspected. Similarly Sarah is getting a terrible hammering right now, probably the worst I've seen in a contestant for a long time.
There are a couple of edits which are intriguing me at this point. The first is Jenny's Purple Kelly edit which is nothing like I've seen in the apprentice so far, I think it is setting up the audience for a blindside when Jennie's exit comes and it is far more explosive then anyone suspected. Similarly Sarah is getting a terrible hammering right now, probably the worst I've seen in a contestant for a long time.
I don't think that the 'Neil Clough' edit was that positive. It was around Episode 6, but in the really early ones he was criticised a bit. He was called a 'backseat driver' by Karren for doing a lot of talking during Zee's pitch, and in Episode 4 he had a PM loss.
Well erm... that was something wasn't it? Ella Jade getting that titanic of an edit was pretty alarming and she's knocked right out!
Episode 4
Summit
Solomon - MORP4 - Really good PM, took the reins in his area of expertise and it paid off. The task was almost solely won by him. He overruled Mark's decision on the YouTube celebrity which was seen to be the correct one. He was a good strong leader, offering a clear strategy, put people in good roles, had the backing of his team, excellent edit. Jemma - UTRN2 - Came up with the name which was praised, but Lord Sugar kept continually mentioning that she's done nothing (Backed up by the edit to us, the viewer) and this causes me to put into negativity. She needs to stand out. And soon. James - CPM3 - Did well on task and had an early interview about how he was calming down and taking a step back and listening to Solomon, but Nick said his influence was being a fool and a later interview covering his arse and ready to blame Solomon didn't exactly speak well of him. Roisin - UTRP2 - Did well and came across well on the video (Her part of the video wasn't the part that was criticised) I definitely think that she could go far based on the the evidence we have at the moment. Did well with the YouTube celebrity. Bianca - UTR1 - Was on Mark's sub-team which was barely seen on Day 1 and she didn't really have any input on the team's choice of YouTube celebrity. Was in the pitches, but barely spoke. She speaks sense generally, but we need to see more of her. Sanjay - INV1 - Was barely seen, though I liked that he was the main person to praise Solomon. Not seen enough for a tone or comment, really. Mark - UTRN2 - Pushed for a YouTube personality, but it was the wrong one and Solomon was backed up by Lord Sugar and the edit. Was a significant part of the major pitching fail at Buzzfeed. Always complains, but doesn't back it up with much. We really could do with seeing how he PMs.
Tenacity
Ella Jade - CPN5 - Utter trainwreck. Messed up the task from the start and the word go with a poor concept and even worse execution. Was seen to suck all the humour out of Felipe's idea and couldn't control the team. The point was made time and time again how bad she was at directing. Came across as desperate and flappy in the boardroom and tried to survive by bringing in the two joke candidates. Deserved to go, but the edit was kinda bizarre considering she'd done pretty well so far. Sarah - UTRN3 - Useless as per usual. Messed up the timing issue, leaving the team with no time to create a name or description. Was utterly deluded as usual and the sexualisation of the women was brought up again. Trying to claim that she deserved credit for the win in Task 1 did her no favours at all. Deserved to go overall, but probably not for this task specifically. Steven - UTRN2 - Was doing OK until he messed up the Buzzfeed pitch. Task-wise, I don't think he did overly poorly, but they did emphasise a lot about how badly he did in the edit. It was his overly aggressive and diva personality that was more negative about his exit, to be honest. He didn't get a sympathetic edit, but I definitely don't think he deserved to go as he'd been OK on task up till now and didn't do anywhere near as poorly as Ella Jade on this one. Felipe - UTRP3 - Came up with the concept, but wasn't blamed for the failure. In fact Lord Sugar said it was a good starting idea. Instead Ella Jade got all the blame for that aspect of the task. The edit was quite sympathetic on him in general, with Lord Sugar saying he wasn't fat. Katie - UTR2 - Contributed and is sort of used as a voice of reason in the team, but though she was critical against Ella Jade, she was overshadowed by Pamela, so I thought it was more toneless this week. Thought bringing up Sarah's sexualisation of the women in Task 1 was a bit unnecessary and harsh, though. Daniel - MORP2 - Wasn't shown much, but correctly identified the fact that people would see the idea as offensive and did try and make moves against this early on, but was shot down. A better episode after two pretty negative ones. Lauren - MORN2 - Failed completely as sub-team leader for the second week running. Not only did she ignore Daniel's early qualms with the idea and do nothing about it, she failed to get the work finished on time. Had a pretty lucky escape, if truth be told and Sarah pointed this out in the boardroom in an exchange that could easily have been edited out. She's skating on thin ice atm. Pamela - CPP3 - Was against Ella Jade all task and the edit backed her up, indicating that she was in the right. Not only this, but she proved to be a much better director than Ella Jade herself and almost rescued the task on Day 2 by making the final video pretty funny. Was the most focus she's been given so far and was probably the second most visible on the task after Ella Jade.
My contender picks:
1. Solomon
2. Katie
3. Pamela
4. Roisin
Thought Solomon got a terrific edit so he overtakes Katie this week. Roisin is creeping her way up and occupies the void left by Ella Jade.
I think quite a few of the boys (Daniel, Sanjay, Mark, Felipe etc) have got potential, but need to show something more. Mark, for example, comes across as intelligent and generally competent, but he isn't very proactive and seems happy to take the Tom P route. Think its a bit too early to tell in general with winner picks, as there's so many candidates, but things are slowly becoming clearer. Would like to see some more of all of the above plus the likes of Bianca.
Solomon - MORP3 - Positive edit from most angles. I don't think his win was at all convincing, personally, but he was one of the few people to get a positive angle this week - and there were certainly negative angles that could have been pushed against him that weren't. Also, the segment about him on YF basically told us he'd do well in this contest.
Jemma - UTR2 - Got praised for coming up with the name, but basically had another low key showing despite LS lampshading her lack of contribution thus far. I'd probably rule her out as a potential winner on the basis that she's been too invisible, though.
Fun fact: Amusingly enough, she has the best W/L record at the moment.
James - MORN3 - James did make one or two reasonable comments, but I felt the 'fool' element was emphasised more than the potential positive attributes. He isn't being portrayed as, well, a serious contender...
Roisin - UTR2 - Main contribution was in the video itself; I didn't feel a tone here. (Share online!)
Bianca - INV1 - Had a few supporting lines, but nothing notable.
Sanjay - INV1 - It's nice to know he knows how to play the bassoon...
Mark - UTRN2 - It felt like it was portrayed that his preference for the lower view count YouTube fellow was in error. It also felt negative when they showed him saying that he disagreed with Solomon's decision, but didn't want to make that big decision. There's an editorial vibe coming across that he's the shift the blame type; we hear soundbites but never see a lot of what he does. Got a feeling he won't be directly in the frame for a little while, though.
Tenacity
Ella Jade - CPN4 - Nobody really had a good word to say about her, and she was flailing a lot.
Sarah - MORN3 - Nobody really had a good word to say about her, either... She wasn't given much responsibility, but didn't seem to manage the little she had. I'll miss her, though, and from a producing perspective wonder if it was a great idea to fire the two car-crash entertainers like that.
Steven - UTRN2 - Basically delivered a very frenetic, incoherent pitch to the Buzzfeed crew, and was portrayed as someone not worth listening to. I think he's another contestant, like Lindsay, who the show wasn't really good for.
Felipe - UTR2 - His contribution was mainly in the concept and the video. I think the sympathetic angle was mainly to show up the conceptual issues, rather than to benefit Felipe... I also felt like there was a barb to Sugar's comment about lawyers: just get this vibe Felipe's not a contender.
Katie - MOR3 - I didn't think this had much tone. Something felt a little murky, but I can't quite remember what.
Daniel - UTR2 - Was the main antagonist to the 'Fat Daddy' idea, which was a good thing, but didn't really do anything else to get a real tone. Did get a bit of a narrator role at times, maybe a hint of positivity overall.
Lauren - MORN2 - A passively negative edit for her; the name and description was left to her subteam, and she was leading that.
Pamela - MORP3 - Got praised for good direction unlike Ella-Jade. Other than Solomon, the only one to get a directly positive edit.
Solomon, Katie, Pamela and ... maybe Sanjay? Would be a sort of contenders list. Not seriatim. Bianca and Roisin are on the fringes, and I feel like James could go far even if I don't really see him as a contender to actually win.
Solomon - MOR P 4, he did a good job as PM and I'd have been surprised if he lost this task though going against Ella Jade I did think there was a possibility he'd lose but he did come through even though it wasn't a massive win only a 218 views difference, different day could have easily swung the other way as neither concepts were in my opinion great. Definitely made the right choice for their you tube star based on the task requirements which shows he has a good awareness of situation.
Jemma - UTR P 2, bit surprised that she wasn't more prominent than she was but having said that I disagree with TXF0429s analysis of the cut, we didn't see much of her but she clearly contributed in what seemed to be a positive manner. I don't think we can take Lord Sugar's comments to seriously at this stage but she needs to up her game big time if she wants any chance of investment.
James - MOR M 3, very much made to be the funny guy here and I think he came off as nicer than he has done particularly in light of the thug allegations. I think he did do some good work but there was an awful lot of clowning about.
Roisin - MOR 2, not a spectacular performance this week but based on when we did see her she is very much a contender in my opinion.
Bianca - UTR 2, she's starting to come off as a bit negative to me and I'm not too sure about what she does but she did seem to contribute.
Sanjay - INV 1, is he becoming the male version of Jemma?
Mark - UTR N 2, when we did see him he did contribute quite well but is clearly a bit of a coward as far as I'm concerned not being willing to make the decision himself and admitting as much on screen though in all fairness the decision probably was the PM's to make but he still could have gone one way or the other whilst adhering to the PM's choice which he didn't do.
Tenacity
Ella Jade - CP N 4, very disappointed in her performance, tried to make excuses for her but she just kept going into them. She didn't seem to grasp production well enough to get on with the task which considering this was very close to what she was supposed to be going into for her business its a bit shameful really. Her behavior at the end of the boardroom was disgraceful I was embarrassed watching her and is not how a professional should act under any circumstances, it got on to being quite pitiful really. Having said that its really unfortunate about her father and I wish Ella Jade and her family all the best and hopefully she'll get her You're fired moment at some later point in the series if only to defend/explain her behavior at the end of the boardroom.
Sarah - UTR N 2, absolutely useless, she did exactly what she was supposed to and that was it and even then she didn't do that properly. I was not surprised by her firing what so ever and really my biggest surprise was that she somehow managed to stay on the winning team for 3 weeks, the fact she had a PM win was entirely by fluke and all the rest of the team pretty much said they won it for her rather than anything she contributed herself. In the end of the day she came out looking a lot better on You're fired than she did in the show but on tasks she was useless and in my opinion archaic in her style at times.
Steven - OTT N 2, overall wasn't there much but when he was there it was very much over the top as was Steven's style, all style and no substance sums it up really. Quite pleased in some ways really as I predicted this before the show started that he'd go week 3 or 4 though I was never exactly a big fan of his anyway so as far as I'm concerned his removal from the process was no great loss.
Felipe - MOR P 2, after two nondescript tasks he seems to be doing not too bad as his idea wasn't entirely terrible it just wasn't executed very well which had a lot to do with Ella Jade not having a clear idea of what she wanted which is crucial on a task like this.
Katie - UTR 2, was very quick to turn on Ella Jade after their seeming alliance in the past 3 weeks and strikes me as a bit of a Luisa character but she does seem to be more likable as a person than Luisa but maybe that's just me.
Daniel - UTR N 2, all I remember is a lot of humming and hawing and not much in the way of action, very unimpressive in terms of performance so far.
Lauren - MOR 2, I don't really remember what she did, I know I saw her but there seems to be a lack of contribution.
Pamela - MOR M 3, could she be this year's dark horse? Was making a positive contribution and seemed to do a good job of directing which Katie did state but based on what we saw that seemed to be the case. I think there were one or two where she was a bit negative towards Ella Jade that were bordering on a bit vicious which I think is a negative hence the mixed tone.
Bianca - UTR - 2 - Seemed to do OK in the BuzzFeed pitch and interviewing the Youtubers, but wasn't shown enough for a tone. James - CP N 4 - Was ready to lay the blame on Solomon if they lost when it was his childish fooling about was the biggest fault with Summit's videos and was probably what put the BuzzFeed guys off promoting their video. Jemma - UTR N 2 - Suggested the name 'Dare to Dine' and talked to the YouTube guy. Sugar remarked that he hadn't seen much of her when he moved her to Summit and she still failed to make any impact, pushing her into a negative edit. On the other hand, she's the only candidate to have a 100% winning record! Mark - MOR M 3 - He was fairly visible, wasn't shown constantly criticising and did OK for his part of the pitch but ducked the decision over which YouTuber to collaborate with. I can't decide how I feel about him as a candidate, hence the mixed rating. I'd like to see him as PM to see whether he really can 'walk the walk' as well as 'talk the talk'. Roisin - MOR P 3 - Did well in her role as the straight woman to James' clown in the video. Sanjay - INV - 1 - He likes musicals and bassoons and won the race to answer the phone. Solomon - MOR P 4 - Secured a convincing PM win in his field, managing his team well and was shown making the right decision to choose to collaborate with Oli White rather than the chef guy with less views. Only negative was the failure of the BuzzFeed pitch which Tenacity also lost.
Tenacity
Daniel - MOR P 3 - Was critical of the 'Fat Daddy' idea, correctly suggesting that people may find it offensive. Came across positively overall. Felipe - UTR - 2 - Suggested the 'Fat Daddy' idea but interestingly avoided any blame for it's failure in what could have been edited to be a quite negative episode for him, suggesting he's here to stay for a while. Ella Jade - MOR N 4 - The seed of doubt planted last week came to fruition this week as she failed as project manager on a task in an area she has experience in. She did a poor job at directing the first two videos and failed to acknowledge Daniel and Pamela's valid criticisms. Katie - MOR M 3 - While she was good in the videos, she could have taken a more active role in the task given that she makes fitness videos and seemed to be happy to pass all responsibility to Ella Jade. Lauren - MOR N 3 - Manager of the sub-team who uploaded a video without giving it a title or description and choose the YouTube collaborators who weren't that great IMO. Pamela - MOR P 3 - After being under the radar for the first few weeks, Pamela came into the limelight with a very positive edit this week. She was shown rightly criticising Ella Jade's decisions and direction before directing Tenacity's third video which it was pointed out she did better than Ella Jade had. Sarah - UTR N 2 - Another negative edit for Sarah as it was shown that the rest of her team didn't have any confidence in her. Was (unfairly I think) blamed for the video being uploaded without a title and description and her attempt to over-sexualise the girls in week 1 was brought up in the boardroom. Steven - OTT N 2 - Blamed for the BuzzFeed failure thanks to his rambling pitch which he thought was brilliant and reverted to over the top histrionics in the boardroom, literally talking himself into a firing.
Quick observation on Katie. She's develops the critique of Ella. It matches his Lordship's assessment - either because he folows her logic, or she agrees with where he is going anyway. Thats usually a good sign if its there in the edit - being able to analyse is a plus, thinking like him helps more, not doing it in a way that he has a problem with, is a big tick in the box. . Katie was also shown accepted her share of blame for perhaps making the video too serious. People shown showing self insight, and admitting what he's probably thinking , tend to do well - that suggests trustworthyness, and analytical ability. She doesn't get a negative edit for that - and its a big plus for a contestant Being serious about her own field isn't a negative point for them to make either. She also got herself, doing what she is proposing, on air too. The audience and his Lordship have seen that she can do what she says she can themselves. We have now seen her in her gymn outfit as well as her business suit.
SUMMIT
Bianca UTR2 No real tone, not 100% sure what she does all day.
James OTTN4 Berk.
Jemma UTRM2 Weird one, this. She's been singled out by Lord Sugar as doing naff all - which has been a death sentence, this series, for Scott, Lindsay, Sarah. Unlike them, she's staying in the shadows and winning. Difference is, whenever she does get a moment in the spotlight, she's always seen to be doing something good and sensible. She may be marked for death already... or, she may be this series' best-kept secret.
Mark MORM2 Was seen to be wrong on a hugely important key decision... but! For all the right reasons. He didn't argue with the PM, just proffered his opinion. Sensible, dependable, gets on with it.
Roisin MORP2 Made the best of a bad lot.
Sanjay UTR1 I remember him laughing at the shit video. A lot. But he hasn't made enough of an impression. I couldn't tell you if his contribution was positive or negative. I just know that, like James, I feel a bit uneasy when he's on screen.
Solomon MORP3 Clear, decisive, some good business skills, but a bit of a manchild - laughing at the stupidest stuff. Essentially a Stella edit, where the PM gets loads of praise for what was a properly awful win, so I have no doubt that he'll at least reach interviews.
TENACITY
Daniel CPN2 Hard to say. His objections to Fat Daddy proved right on the money... but he objected to the concept, rather than their videos, and the concept was pretty good? Either way, he was droning on about it after the fact when, by that point, he should've just been getting on with the work. It's only slightly negative... but negative nonetheless.
Felipe UTRP2 Quite sympathetic, praised for his concept. Was seen to be likeable, rather than a particularly good businessman.
Ella-Jade OTTN4 Poor Ella-Jade. Helpless, hopeless. All buzzwords and flapping. An absolute meltdown.
Katie MORP3 Sensible, evenhanded, blunt but never unfair. Katie contributes ideas, owns her mistakes, and never shifts blame. She's great.
Lauren UTR2 I don't remember much of a tone. She was involved in Descriptiongate, somehow?
Pamela MORP3 Pamela, bluntly, was portrayed as everything Ella-Jade wasn't. It took a couple of moments to identify exactly what was going on when the two were arguing on the first video, but it quickly became clear that Pamela was trying to rescue the task. They may well have won under her stewardship.
Sarah OTTN3 Her fire shone brightly, and burned out quickly. An amazing candidate, living her fourth consecutive week in her own little world.
Steven OTTN3 Didn't actually do too much on this task, but dropped what few balls he was given. Deserved to go on his boardroom technique alone. We hardly knew ye.
Contenders:
1. Katie
2. Pamela
3. Jemma (If she's not dismissed next week for doing nothing!)
4. Solomon
Jemma - UTR N 2 - Suggested the name 'Dare to Dine' and talked to the YouTube guy. Sugar remarked that he hadn't seen much of her when he moved her to Summit and she still failed to make any impact, pushing her into a negative edit. On the other hand, she's the only candidate to have a 100% winning record!
Jemma UTRM2 Weird one, this. She's been singled out by Lord Sugar as doing naff all - which has been a death sentence, this series, for Scott, Lindsay, Sarah. Unlike them, she's staying in the shadows and winning. Difference is, whenever she does get a moment in the spotlight, she's always seen to be doing something good and sensible. She may be marked for death already... or, she may be this series' best-kept secret.Pamela MORP3 Pamela, bluntly, was portrayed as everything Ella-Jade wasn't. It took a couple of moments to identify exactly what was going on when the two were arguing on the first video, but it quickly became clear that Pamela was trying to rescue the task. They may well have won under her stewardship.
I feel like Jemma may be this year's Helen... very quiet for a few weeks, unless you consciously choose to watch her, at which point she becomes very positive, and keeps being on winning teams. Of course, now that I've said that she's bound to be fired next week!
Pamela - MOR P 3 - After being under the radar for the first few weeks, Pamela came into the limelight with a very positive edit this week. She was shown rightly criticising Ella Jade's decisions and direction before directing Tenacity's third video which it was pointed out she did better than Ella Jade had.
Pamela MORP3 Pamela, bluntly, was portrayed as everything Ella-Jade wasn't. It took a couple of moments to identify exactly what was going on when the two were arguing on the first video, but it quickly became clear that Pamela was trying to rescue the task. They may well have won under her stewardship.
Didn't Pamela's video get even fewer views than Ella Jade's though? I've heard a few people mention that they felt she was the one who got away a bit this episode.
Didn't Pamela's video get even fewer views than Ella Jade's though? I've heard a few people mention that they felt she was the one who got away a bit this episode.
It wasn't really raised in the edit though. We only know that by microanalysing the episode. Pamela gets a positive edit because she was against episode villain Ella Jade and because a number of candidates (and Karren iirc) gave a number of interviews about how good she was as director (or how much better she was than Ella Jade).
It wasn't really raised in the edit though. We only know that by microanalysing the episode. Pamela gets a positive edit because she was against episode villain Ella Jade and because a number of candidates (and Karren iirc) gave a number of interviews about how good she was as director (or how much better she was than Ella Jade).
I suppose, but what Karren says isn't necessarily the word of God when you look at things objectively. The most obvious point is her criticism of Susan's 'Are the French very fond of their children?' question. I don't think it was at any point portrayed as though Susan was a poor Project Manager (indeed, the other occasion that she managed Nick was full of praise for her), in that task she managed a record-breaking team and she is generally regarded as one of the strongest candidates there has been. I think it would be clear to any viewer with a modicum of common sense that whilst Nick and Karren are in the position of being able to comment on the candidates' success or failure, their personal opinions are just that, and in many cases it will be possible to look at things in a different way. There have even been occasions on which they have disagreed on things. It doesn't mean that they're wrong, but there are numerous interpretations of a situation, and of the capabilities of the candidates involved. Maybe most viewers tend to take things at face value and I'm just in a minority of people who tries to think more independently, but I would have thought that that was so blindingly obvious that any viewer over the age of around 13 would understand it.
And besides, most of those comments were when the task was still going on, so they hadn't realised at that point what sort of views the videos would get. Bearing that in mind, the only thing they could say about Pamela over Ella Jade was that she was more pleasant to work with, which doesn't say that much about her actual skill with directing.
Didn't Pamela's video get even fewer views than Ella Jade's though? I've heard a few people mention that they felt she was the one who got away a bit this episode.
It may have - I haven't done the calculations - but I think what is very clear and what the edit highlighted is that she was a much better creator than Ella-Jade, she created a far more credible product (which is available on the Apprentice website, and yes, it's decent) and did a much better job of conveying the original Fat Daddy concept, which was praised. Her video wasn't anywhere near as nasty, it was more light hearted - it was on-brief, in a way that Ella-Jade's videos simply weren't.
I rather suspect that if Pamela's video got fewer views than Ella-Jade's, it was because the damage had already been done. The first episode was rubbish, who'd carry on to the third? That's true of both teams, and I think they were relying on their "celebrity ambassadors" to prop the third one up. Either way, this thread isn't so much about finding the facts of which candidates performed well and which badly as finding the story the edit's trying to tell. Their actual performance isn't really relevant, we're looking at where the emphasis is. If her lower view count was discussed in the boardroom and cut in the editing room, that's probably because it isn't relevant to the "journey" we'll be seeing over the next couple of weeks. There's about ninety things going on at once - they don't have time to show us every candidate's pros and cons, so they have to pare it down to the essentials, and can only really include red herrings if they're discussed or dramatically interesting.
Ellie Reed, in S7, made a few contributions that didn't make the edit - she mentioned in an interview that she took one of the Ampi-Apps pitches, presumably she took a less surreal and distressing approach than Edna and helped win the task, but it was cut out entirely. I liked Ellie, and I don't doubt that she gave a great pitch, but I also don't doubt that she was rather less essential than some of her teammates. With only thirty minutes of task to get through each week they couldn't place more focus on her positive contributions because her subsequent dismissal would've seemed unjust. (Even moreso than being DOUBLE FIRED for making what was clearly the better advert!)
It may have - I haven't done the calculations - but I think what is very clear and what the edit highlighted is that she was a much better creator than Ella-Jade, she created a far more credible product (which is available on the Apprentice website, and yes, it's decent) and did a much better job of conveying the original Fat Daddy concept, which was praised. Her video wasn't anywhere near as nasty, it was more light hearted - it was on-brief, in a way that Ella-Jade's videos simply weren't.
I rather suspect that if Pamela's video got fewer views than Ella-Jade's, it was because the damage had already been done. The first episode was rubbish, who'd carry on to the third? That's true of both teams, and I think they were relying on their "celebrity ambassadors" to prop the third one up. Either way, this thread isn't so much about finding the facts of which candidates performed well and which badly as finding the story the edit's trying to tell. Their actual performance isn't really relevant, we're looking at where the emphasis is. If her lower view count was discussed in the boardroom and cut in the editing room, that's probably because it isn't relevant to the "journey" we'll be seeing over the next couple of weeks. There's about ninety things going on at once - they don't have time to show us every candidate's pros and cons, so they have to pare it down to the essentials, and can only really include red herrings if they're discussed or dramatically interesting.
Ellie Reed, in S7, made a few contributions that didn't make the edit - she mentioned in an interview that she took one of the Ampi-Apps pitches, presumably she took a less surreal and distressing approach than Edna and helped win the task, but it was cut out entirely. I liked Ellie, and I don't doubt that she gave a great pitch, but I also don't doubt that she was rather less essential than some of her teammates. With only thirty minutes of task to get through each week they couldn't place more focus on her positive contributions because her subsequent dismissal would've seemed unjust. (Even moreso than being DOUBLE FIRED for making what was clearly the better advert!)
I don't think the edit should be trying to tell any story actually. I realise that they have to cut out a huge amount of footage - that is unavoidable - but at the same time the edit should be objective. They shouldn't select footage specifically to make a certain person look better or worse than they really are, they should tell a story as close to what actually happened as they possibly can. I do realise that editing a programme of this length into an hour-long episode is exceptionally difficult.
I don't think the edit should be trying to tell any story actually. I realise that they have to cut out a huge amount of footage - that is unavoidable - but at the same time the edit should be objective. They shouldn't select footage specifically to make a certain person look better or worse than they really are, they should tell a story as close to what actually happened as they possibly can. I do realise that editing a programme of this length into an hour-long episode is exceptionally difficult.
They physically cannot - that is an impossible request. To be objective, they would have to show everything, the second you cut something, you warp the account just a little bit. The trick is to warp it so that it roughly matches what actually happened. It's not true that Ellie Reed did nothing, but it is true that she failed to stand out or didn't stand out often enough, so as an editor you have no choice but to play down the moments where she stands out.
They physically cannot - that is an impossible request. To be objective, they would have to show everything, the second you cut something, you warp the account just a little bit. The trick is to warp it so that it roughly matches what actually happened. It's not true that Ellie Reed did nothing, but it is true that she failed to stand out or didn't stand out often enough, so as an editor you have no choice but to play down the moments where she stands out.
I think they did it better in the early years. Ben, Raj and Sebastian did more than they were credited with, but they were still shown to be doing more than they would be these days. Admittedly in those days there were fewer candidates to play with, but only two less than most of the current series, not including this one.
I think they did it better in the early years. Ben, Raj and Sebastian did more than they were credited with, but they were still shown to be doing more than they would be these days. Admittedly in those days there were fewer candidates to play with, but only two less than most of the current series, not including this one.
That's probably fair! S1 was bloody good. There are moments where the edit chafes, and I think those are the moments where it's least true to life, moments where they try to sell Jim Eastwood as a villain because Lord Sugar will later take exception to him - but I think Solomon would probably be a better example of that, this week. It's Stella English syndrome: she had a really crap win in week 2, her team designed a rubbish product and only shifted 100 of them, but because she was going to become important later on the edit positively fawned over her.
Those are the bits that feel like manipulation, and those are the bits that stick in the throat, but I don't think what they've done with Pamela is nearly as jarring. It was a pretty silly task to begin with - counting YouTube hits is questionable, editing the description would've taken a couple of seconds, it was all very arbitrary and artificial - but Ella-Jade really did give the editors plenty to play with and Pamela really did do a better job (not perfect, but respectable) of realising the team's initial concept. If her video did get the least views... it's possible someone mentioned it, and it's possible that someone argued the toss with Pamela, but I don't think a low view count signified that her video was worse than the other two.
I kind of get the sense that the success or failure of the third video mostly depended on picking the right celebrity ambassador. They really needed a quality video to arrive before the Buzzfeed pitch, I think by the time Pamela got behind the camera they'd already missed the window, she was just on damage control. You could quite fairly argue that Pamela is being given credit for a contribution that made very little difference to the ultimate outcome of the task, but I think what the edit emphasises is not that she was a key player, but that Pamela understood the humour of the concept better, and that if she had directed the first couple of videos she would've been more likely to create a product that might have got Buzzfeed on side.
I agree with rwebster that this thread is about looking at the narrative shown through the edit for each candidate rather than being an objective look at which candidates performed best on each task.
I think George is right about Pamela's video getting less views than Ella Jade's - 800 for Pamela's and 2600 for Ella Jade's two IIRC and if my maths is right - but that fact didn't fit the narrative of the episode. The story was that Ella Jade fell apart as project manager after looking good in the first few weeks (hence my comment that the previous week's small seed of doubt re Ella Jade came to fruition this week) while Pamela emerged from the side lines to try to save the task, making her look like a credible candidate in comparison to Ella Jade.
The edit had to be negative for Ella Jade this week, otherwise her firing would have seemed more inexplicable. Similarly Steven and Sarah were both explicitly blamed for the failure of the BuzzFeed pitch and the video being uploaded without a title and description when in both cases there were other candidates there when those 'mistakes' happened who could arguably have also been culpable for the errors, but weren't highlighted in the edit.
I agree with rwebster that this thread is about looking at the narrative shown through the edit for each candidate rather than being an objective look at which candidates performed best on each task.
I think George is right about Pamela's video getting less views than Ella Jade's - 800 for Pamela's and 2600 for Ella Jade's two IIRC and if my maths is right - but that fact didn't fit the narrative of the episode. The story was that Ella Jade fell apart as project manager after looking good in the first few weeks (hence my comment that the previous week's small seed of doubt re Ella Jade came to fruition this week) while Pamela emerged from the side lines to try to save the task, making her look like a credible candidate in comparison to Ella Jade.
The edit had to be negative for Ella Jade this week, otherwise her firing would have seemed more inexplicable. Similarly Steven and Sarah were both explicitly blamed for the failure of the BuzzFeed pitch and the video being uploaded without a title and description when in both cases there were other candidates there when those 'mistakes' happened who could arguably have also been culpable for the errors, but weren't highlighted in the edit.
I think that as a conversation flows, various points will naturally come to the forefront in this way. A thread may be created to discuss an edit, but the edit and its relation to the actual events go hand in hand with one another, and when discussing one, the other will naturally come up. Therefore, I see no issue with the conversation turning that way. Having said that, I completely see your point about how Pamela didn't really cause the task failure - I didn't actually have any objection to Pamela's contribution, I was just raising the idea that maybe she didn't come across quite as well as the editors wanted her to.
My only consternation with Pamela's edit is whether it was to show a counterpoint to Ella Jade or to show her as a potential long-term contender. Solomon's edit was pretty clearly setting him up for the long haul (and I have this bad gut feeling he could be another Tom P...)
I had the same wonder with Sanjay's edit where he got contrasted against Lindsay and Nurun's lazy failness in the factory for the candles task by being shown doing all the hard work; I haven't seen much else from him so it could be a one off. Same with Pamela.
It's a 'wait and see' thing, I think, since the air-time for quite a lot of people's been so scarce.
In fairness, Ella Jade had an under-the-rader but positive edit in previous tasks. She has appeared to be a decent saleswoman, and someone who isn't afraid to get stuck in. I thought she was getting the edit of someone who would gradually come to the forefront as a contender, but obviously not.
In fairness, Ella Jade had an under-the-rader but positive edit in previous tasks. She has appeared to be a decent saleswoman, and someone who isn't afraid to get stuck in. I thought she was getting the edit of someone who would gradually come to the forefront as a contender, but obviously not.
I would've classified her as MORP in both the first task & the fashion task.
Comments
Roisin: CPM3
Nurun: UTRN2
James: MORN3
Lindsey: UTRN2
Solomon: UTR1
Bianca: UTR1
Sanjay: INV1
Mark: MOR2
Katie: CPP4
Felipe: UTR2
Jemma: INV1
Ella-Jade: MORP2
Sarah: OTTN3
Daniel: MORM2
Lauren: UTR1
Pamela: UTRP2
Stephen: MORN2
Winner Picks:
1) Katie
2) Solomon
3) Ella-Jade
4) Pamela
As someone who is very weary of the Neil Clough edit I am weary of having Katie as my number one pick, but I think a big difference right now is that Katie right now is the only strong winner pick going whereas Neil's series had Leah as a viable alternative. Obvious this could change as we are early in the series. I also share the sentiment of Pamela's emergence in this episode as a potential sign, especially as her small but positive moments all seemed to be highlighted.
There are a couple of edits which are intriguing me at this point. The first is Jenny's Purple Kelly edit which is nothing like I've seen in the apprentice so far, I think it is setting up the audience for a blindside when Jennie's exit comes and it is far more explosive then anyone suspected. Similarly Sarah is getting a terrible hammering right now, probably the worst I've seen in a contestant for a long time.
They must mean Jemma, just looked up Purple Kelly
Episode 4
Summit
Solomon - MORP4 - Really good PM, took the reins in his area of expertise and it paid off. The task was almost solely won by him. He overruled Mark's decision on the YouTube celebrity which was seen to be the correct one. He was a good strong leader, offering a clear strategy, put people in good roles, had the backing of his team, excellent edit.
Jemma - UTRN2 - Came up with the name which was praised, but Lord Sugar kept continually mentioning that she's done nothing (Backed up by the edit to us, the viewer) and this causes me to put into negativity. She needs to stand out. And soon.
James - CPM3 - Did well on task and had an early interview about how he was calming down and taking a step back and listening to Solomon, but Nick said his influence was being a fool and a later interview covering his arse and ready to blame Solomon didn't exactly speak well of him.
Roisin - UTRP2 - Did well and came across well on the video (Her part of the video wasn't the part that was criticised) I definitely think that she could go far based on the the evidence we have at the moment. Did well with the YouTube celebrity.
Bianca - UTR1 - Was on Mark's sub-team which was barely seen on Day 1 and she didn't really have any input on the team's choice of YouTube celebrity. Was in the pitches, but barely spoke. She speaks sense generally, but we need to see more of her.
Sanjay - INV1 - Was barely seen, though I liked that he was the main person to praise Solomon. Not seen enough for a tone or comment, really.
Mark - UTRN2 - Pushed for a YouTube personality, but it was the wrong one and Solomon was backed up by Lord Sugar and the edit. Was a significant part of the major pitching fail at Buzzfeed. Always complains, but doesn't back it up with much. We really could do with seeing how he PMs.
Tenacity
Ella Jade - CPN5 - Utter trainwreck. Messed up the task from the start and the word go with a poor concept and even worse execution. Was seen to suck all the humour out of Felipe's idea and couldn't control the team. The point was made time and time again how bad she was at directing. Came across as desperate and flappy in the boardroom and tried to survive by bringing in the two joke candidates. Deserved to go, but the edit was kinda bizarre considering she'd done pretty well so far.
Sarah - UTRN3 - Useless as per usual. Messed up the timing issue, leaving the team with no time to create a name or description. Was utterly deluded as usual and the sexualisation of the women was brought up again. Trying to claim that she deserved credit for the win in Task 1 did her no favours at all. Deserved to go overall, but probably not for this task specifically.
Steven - UTRN2 - Was doing OK until he messed up the Buzzfeed pitch. Task-wise, I don't think he did overly poorly, but they did emphasise a lot about how badly he did in the edit. It was his overly aggressive and diva personality that was more negative about his exit, to be honest. He didn't get a sympathetic edit, but I definitely don't think he deserved to go as he'd been OK on task up till now and didn't do anywhere near as poorly as Ella Jade on this one.
Felipe - UTRP3 - Came up with the concept, but wasn't blamed for the failure. In fact Lord Sugar said it was a good starting idea. Instead Ella Jade got all the blame for that aspect of the task. The edit was quite sympathetic on him in general, with Lord Sugar saying he wasn't fat.
Katie - UTR2 - Contributed and is sort of used as a voice of reason in the team, but though she was critical against Ella Jade, she was overshadowed by Pamela, so I thought it was more toneless this week. Thought bringing up Sarah's sexualisation of the women in Task 1 was a bit unnecessary and harsh, though.
Daniel - MORP2 - Wasn't shown much, but correctly identified the fact that people would see the idea as offensive and did try and make moves against this early on, but was shot down. A better episode after two pretty negative ones.
Lauren - MORN2 - Failed completely as sub-team leader for the second week running. Not only did she ignore Daniel's early qualms with the idea and do nothing about it, she failed to get the work finished on time. Had a pretty lucky escape, if truth be told and Sarah pointed this out in the boardroom in an exchange that could easily have been edited out. She's skating on thin ice atm.
Pamela - CPP3 - Was against Ella Jade all task and the edit backed her up, indicating that she was in the right. Not only this, but she proved to be a much better director than Ella Jade herself and almost rescued the task on Day 2 by making the final video pretty funny. Was the most focus she's been given so far and was probably the second most visible on the task after Ella Jade.
My contender picks:
1. Solomon
2. Katie
3. Pamela
4. Roisin
Thought Solomon got a terrific edit so he overtakes Katie this week. Roisin is creeping her way up and occupies the void left by Ella Jade.
I think quite a few of the boys (Daniel, Sanjay, Mark, Felipe etc) have got potential, but need to show something more. Mark, for example, comes across as intelligent and generally competent, but he isn't very proactive and seems happy to take the Tom P route. Think its a bit too early to tell in general with winner picks, as there's so many candidates, but things are slowly becoming clearer. Would like to see some more of all of the above plus the likes of Bianca.
Solomon - MORP3 - Positive edit from most angles. I don't think his win was at all convincing, personally, but he was one of the few people to get a positive angle this week - and there were certainly negative angles that could have been pushed against him that weren't. Also, the segment about him on YF basically told us he'd do well in this contest.
Jemma - UTR2 - Got praised for coming up with the name, but basically had another low key showing despite LS lampshading her lack of contribution thus far. I'd probably rule her out as a potential winner on the basis that she's been too invisible, though.
Fun fact: Amusingly enough, she has the best W/L record at the moment.
James - MORN3 - James did make one or two reasonable comments, but I felt the 'fool' element was emphasised more than the potential positive attributes. He isn't being portrayed as, well, a serious contender...
Roisin - UTR2 - Main contribution was in the video itself; I didn't feel a tone here. (Share online!)
Bianca - INV1 - Had a few supporting lines, but nothing notable.
Sanjay - INV1 - It's nice to know he knows how to play the bassoon...
Mark - UTRN2 - It felt like it was portrayed that his preference for the lower view count YouTube fellow was in error. It also felt negative when they showed him saying that he disagreed with Solomon's decision, but didn't want to make that big decision. There's an editorial vibe coming across that he's the shift the blame type; we hear soundbites but never see a lot of what he does. Got a feeling he won't be directly in the frame for a little while, though.
Tenacity
Ella Jade - CPN4 - Nobody really had a good word to say about her, and she was flailing a lot.
Sarah - MORN3 - Nobody really had a good word to say about her, either... She wasn't given much responsibility, but didn't seem to manage the little she had. I'll miss her, though, and from a producing perspective wonder if it was a great idea to fire the two car-crash entertainers like that.
Steven - UTRN2 - Basically delivered a very frenetic, incoherent pitch to the Buzzfeed crew, and was portrayed as someone not worth listening to. I think he's another contestant, like Lindsay, who the show wasn't really good for.
Felipe - UTR2 - His contribution was mainly in the concept and the video. I think the sympathetic angle was mainly to show up the conceptual issues, rather than to benefit Felipe... I also felt like there was a barb to Sugar's comment about lawyers: just get this vibe Felipe's not a contender.
Katie - MOR3 - I didn't think this had much tone. Something felt a little murky, but I can't quite remember what.
Daniel - UTR2 - Was the main antagonist to the 'Fat Daddy' idea, which was a good thing, but didn't really do anything else to get a real tone. Did get a bit of a narrator role at times, maybe a hint of positivity overall.
Lauren - MORN2 - A passively negative edit for her; the name and description was left to her subteam, and she was leading that.
Pamela - MORP3 - Got praised for good direction unlike Ella-Jade. Other than Solomon, the only one to get a directly positive edit.
Solomon, Katie, Pamela and ... maybe Sanjay? Would be a sort of contenders list. Not seriatim. Bianca and Roisin are on the fringes, and I feel like James could go far even if I don't really see him as a contender to actually win.
Solomon - MOR P 4, he did a good job as PM and I'd have been surprised if he lost this task though going against Ella Jade I did think there was a possibility he'd lose but he did come through even though it wasn't a massive win only a 218 views difference, different day could have easily swung the other way as neither concepts were in my opinion great. Definitely made the right choice for their you tube star based on the task requirements which shows he has a good awareness of situation.
Jemma - UTR P 2, bit surprised that she wasn't more prominent than she was but having said that I disagree with TXF0429s analysis of the cut, we didn't see much of her but she clearly contributed in what seemed to be a positive manner. I don't think we can take Lord Sugar's comments to seriously at this stage but she needs to up her game big time if she wants any chance of investment.
James - MOR M 3, very much made to be the funny guy here and I think he came off as nicer than he has done particularly in light of the thug allegations. I think he did do some good work but there was an awful lot of clowning about.
Roisin - MOR 2, not a spectacular performance this week but based on when we did see her she is very much a contender in my opinion.
Bianca - UTR 2, she's starting to come off as a bit negative to me and I'm not too sure about what she does but she did seem to contribute.
Sanjay - INV 1, is he becoming the male version of Jemma?
Mark - UTR N 2, when we did see him he did contribute quite well but is clearly a bit of a coward as far as I'm concerned not being willing to make the decision himself and admitting as much on screen though in all fairness the decision probably was the PM's to make but he still could have gone one way or the other whilst adhering to the PM's choice which he didn't do.
Tenacity
Ella Jade - CP N 4, very disappointed in her performance, tried to make excuses for her but she just kept going into them. She didn't seem to grasp production well enough to get on with the task which considering this was very close to what she was supposed to be going into for her business its a bit shameful really. Her behavior at the end of the boardroom was disgraceful I was embarrassed watching her and is not how a professional should act under any circumstances, it got on to being quite pitiful really. Having said that its really unfortunate about her father and I wish Ella Jade and her family all the best and hopefully she'll get her You're fired moment at some later point in the series if only to defend/explain her behavior at the end of the boardroom.
Sarah - UTR N 2, absolutely useless, she did exactly what she was supposed to and that was it and even then she didn't do that properly. I was not surprised by her firing what so ever and really my biggest surprise was that she somehow managed to stay on the winning team for 3 weeks, the fact she had a PM win was entirely by fluke and all the rest of the team pretty much said they won it for her rather than anything she contributed herself. In the end of the day she came out looking a lot better on You're fired than she did in the show but on tasks she was useless and in my opinion archaic in her style at times.
Steven - OTT N 2, overall wasn't there much but when he was there it was very much over the top as was Steven's style, all style and no substance sums it up really. Quite pleased in some ways really as I predicted this before the show started that he'd go week 3 or 4 though I was never exactly a big fan of his anyway so as far as I'm concerned his removal from the process was no great loss.
Felipe - MOR P 2, after two nondescript tasks he seems to be doing not too bad as his idea wasn't entirely terrible it just wasn't executed very well which had a lot to do with Ella Jade not having a clear idea of what she wanted which is crucial on a task like this.
Katie - UTR 2, was very quick to turn on Ella Jade after their seeming alliance in the past 3 weeks and strikes me as a bit of a Luisa character but she does seem to be more likable as a person than Luisa but maybe that's just me.
Daniel - UTR N 2, all I remember is a lot of humming and hawing and not much in the way of action, very unimpressive in terms of performance so far.
Lauren - MOR 2, I don't really remember what she did, I know I saw her but there seems to be a lack of contribution.
Pamela - MOR M 3, could she be this year's dark horse? Was making a positive contribution and seemed to do a good job of directing which Katie did state but based on what we saw that seemed to be the case. I think there were one or two where she was a bit negative towards Ella Jade that were bordering on a bit vicious which I think is a negative hence the mixed tone.
Picks
1. Soloman
2. Katie
3. Pamela
4. Roison
Summit
Bianca - UTR - 2 - Seemed to do OK in the BuzzFeed pitch and interviewing the Youtubers, but wasn't shown enough for a tone.
James - CP N 4 - Was ready to lay the blame on Solomon if they lost when it was his childish fooling about was the biggest fault with Summit's videos and was probably what put the BuzzFeed guys off promoting their video.
Jemma - UTR N 2 - Suggested the name 'Dare to Dine' and talked to the YouTube guy. Sugar remarked that he hadn't seen much of her when he moved her to Summit and she still failed to make any impact, pushing her into a negative edit. On the other hand, she's the only candidate to have a 100% winning record!
Mark - MOR M 3 - He was fairly visible, wasn't shown constantly criticising and did OK for his part of the pitch but ducked the decision over which YouTuber to collaborate with. I can't decide how I feel about him as a candidate, hence the mixed rating. I'd like to see him as PM to see whether he really can 'walk the walk' as well as 'talk the talk'.
Roisin - MOR P 3 - Did well in her role as the straight woman to James' clown in the video.
Sanjay - INV - 1 - He likes musicals and bassoons and won the race to answer the phone.
Solomon - MOR P 4 - Secured a convincing PM win in his field, managing his team well and was shown making the right decision to choose to collaborate with Oli White rather than the chef guy with less views. Only negative was the failure of the BuzzFeed pitch which Tenacity also lost.
Tenacity
Daniel - MOR P 3 - Was critical of the 'Fat Daddy' idea, correctly suggesting that people may find it offensive. Came across positively overall.
Felipe - UTR - 2 - Suggested the 'Fat Daddy' idea but interestingly avoided any blame for it's failure in what could have been edited to be a quite negative episode for him, suggesting he's here to stay for a while.
Ella Jade - MOR N 4 - The seed of doubt planted last week came to fruition this week as she failed as project manager on a task in an area she has experience in. She did a poor job at directing the first two videos and failed to acknowledge Daniel and Pamela's valid criticisms.
Katie - MOR M 3 - While she was good in the videos, she could have taken a more active role in the task given that she makes fitness videos and seemed to be happy to pass all responsibility to Ella Jade.
Lauren - MOR N 3 - Manager of the sub-team who uploaded a video without giving it a title or description and choose the YouTube collaborators who weren't that great IMO.
Pamela - MOR P 3 - After being under the radar for the first few weeks, Pamela came into the limelight with a very positive edit this week. She was shown rightly criticising Ella Jade's decisions and direction before directing Tenacity's third video which it was pointed out she did better than Ella Jade had.
Sarah - UTR N 2 - Another negative edit for Sarah as it was shown that the rest of her team didn't have any confidence in her. Was (unfairly I think) blamed for the video being uploaded without a title and description and her attempt to over-sexualise the girls in week 1 was brought up in the boardroom.
Steven - OTT N 2 - Blamed for the BuzzFeed failure thanks to his rambling pitch which he thought was brilliant and reverted to over the top histrionics in the boardroom, literally talking himself into a firing.
1. Solomon
2. Katie
3. Pamela
4. Mark
Bianca UTR2 No real tone, not 100% sure what she does all day.
James OTTN4 Berk.
Jemma UTRM2 Weird one, this. She's been singled out by Lord Sugar as doing naff all - which has been a death sentence, this series, for Scott, Lindsay, Sarah. Unlike them, she's staying in the shadows and winning. Difference is, whenever she does get a moment in the spotlight, she's always seen to be doing something good and sensible. She may be marked for death already... or, she may be this series' best-kept secret.
Mark MORM2 Was seen to be wrong on a hugely important key decision... but! For all the right reasons. He didn't argue with the PM, just proffered his opinion. Sensible, dependable, gets on with it.
Roisin MORP2 Made the best of a bad lot.
Sanjay UTR1 I remember him laughing at the shit video. A lot. But he hasn't made enough of an impression. I couldn't tell you if his contribution was positive or negative. I just know that, like James, I feel a bit uneasy when he's on screen.
Solomon MORP3 Clear, decisive, some good business skills, but a bit of a manchild - laughing at the stupidest stuff. Essentially a Stella edit, where the PM gets loads of praise for what was a properly awful win, so I have no doubt that he'll at least reach interviews.
TENACITY
Daniel CPN2 Hard to say. His objections to Fat Daddy proved right on the money... but he objected to the concept, rather than their videos, and the concept was pretty good? Either way, he was droning on about it after the fact when, by that point, he should've just been getting on with the work. It's only slightly negative... but negative nonetheless.
Felipe UTRP2 Quite sympathetic, praised for his concept. Was seen to be likeable, rather than a particularly good businessman.
Ella-Jade OTTN4 Poor Ella-Jade. Helpless, hopeless. All buzzwords and flapping. An absolute meltdown.
Katie MORP3 Sensible, evenhanded, blunt but never unfair. Katie contributes ideas, owns her mistakes, and never shifts blame. She's great.
Lauren UTR2 I don't remember much of a tone. She was involved in Descriptiongate, somehow?
Pamela MORP3 Pamela, bluntly, was portrayed as everything Ella-Jade wasn't. It took a couple of moments to identify exactly what was going on when the two were arguing on the first video, but it quickly became clear that Pamela was trying to rescue the task. They may well have won under her stewardship.
Sarah OTTN3 Her fire shone brightly, and burned out quickly. An amazing candidate, living her fourth consecutive week in her own little world.
Steven OTTN3 Didn't actually do too much on this task, but dropped what few balls he was given. Deserved to go on his boardroom technique alone. We hardly knew ye.
Contenders:
1. Katie
2. Pamela
3. Jemma (If she's not dismissed next week for doing nothing!)
4. Solomon
I feel like Jemma may be this year's Helen... very quiet for a few weeks, unless you consciously choose to watch her, at which point she becomes very positive, and keeps being on winning teams. Of course, now that I've said that she's bound to be fired next week!
Didn't Pamela's video get even fewer views than Ella Jade's though? I've heard a few people mention that they felt she was the one who got away a bit this episode.
It wasn't really raised in the edit though. We only know that by microanalysing the episode. Pamela gets a positive edit because she was against episode villain Ella Jade and because a number of candidates (and Karren iirc) gave a number of interviews about how good she was as director (or how much better she was than Ella Jade).
I suppose, but what Karren says isn't necessarily the word of God when you look at things objectively. The most obvious point is her criticism of Susan's 'Are the French very fond of their children?' question. I don't think it was at any point portrayed as though Susan was a poor Project Manager (indeed, the other occasion that she managed Nick was full of praise for her), in that task she managed a record-breaking team and she is generally regarded as one of the strongest candidates there has been. I think it would be clear to any viewer with a modicum of common sense that whilst Nick and Karren are in the position of being able to comment on the candidates' success or failure, their personal opinions are just that, and in many cases it will be possible to look at things in a different way. There have even been occasions on which they have disagreed on things. It doesn't mean that they're wrong, but there are numerous interpretations of a situation, and of the capabilities of the candidates involved. Maybe most viewers tend to take things at face value and I'm just in a minority of people who tries to think more independently, but I would have thought that that was so blindingly obvious that any viewer over the age of around 13 would understand it.
And besides, most of those comments were when the task was still going on, so they hadn't realised at that point what sort of views the videos would get. Bearing that in mind, the only thing they could say about Pamela over Ella Jade was that she was more pleasant to work with, which doesn't say that much about her actual skill with directing.
I rather suspect that if Pamela's video got fewer views than Ella-Jade's, it was because the damage had already been done. The first episode was rubbish, who'd carry on to the third? That's true of both teams, and I think they were relying on their "celebrity ambassadors" to prop the third one up. Either way, this thread isn't so much about finding the facts of which candidates performed well and which badly as finding the story the edit's trying to tell. Their actual performance isn't really relevant, we're looking at where the emphasis is. If her lower view count was discussed in the boardroom and cut in the editing room, that's probably because it isn't relevant to the "journey" we'll be seeing over the next couple of weeks. There's about ninety things going on at once - they don't have time to show us every candidate's pros and cons, so they have to pare it down to the essentials, and can only really include red herrings if they're discussed or dramatically interesting.
Ellie Reed, in S7, made a few contributions that didn't make the edit - she mentioned in an interview that she took one of the Ampi-Apps pitches, presumably she took a less surreal and distressing approach than Edna and helped win the task, but it was cut out entirely. I liked Ellie, and I don't doubt that she gave a great pitch, but I also don't doubt that she was rather less essential than some of her teammates. With only thirty minutes of task to get through each week they couldn't place more focus on her positive contributions because her subsequent dismissal would've seemed unjust. (Even moreso than being DOUBLE FIRED for making what was clearly the better advert!)
I don't think the edit should be trying to tell any story actually. I realise that they have to cut out a huge amount of footage - that is unavoidable - but at the same time the edit should be objective. They shouldn't select footage specifically to make a certain person look better or worse than they really are, they should tell a story as close to what actually happened as they possibly can. I do realise that editing a programme of this length into an hour-long episode is exceptionally difficult.
They physically cannot - that is an impossible request. To be objective, they would have to show everything, the second you cut something, you warp the account just a little bit. The trick is to warp it so that it roughly matches what actually happened. It's not true that Ellie Reed did nothing, but it is true that she failed to stand out or didn't stand out often enough, so as an editor you have no choice but to play down the moments where she stands out.
I think they did it better in the early years. Ben, Raj and Sebastian did more than they were credited with, but they were still shown to be doing more than they would be these days. Admittedly in those days there were fewer candidates to play with, but only two less than most of the current series, not including this one.
That's probably fair! S1 was bloody good. There are moments where the edit chafes, and I think those are the moments where it's least true to life, moments where they try to sell Jim Eastwood as a villain because Lord Sugar will later take exception to him - but I think Solomon would probably be a better example of that, this week. It's Stella English syndrome: she had a really crap win in week 2, her team designed a rubbish product and only shifted 100 of them, but because she was going to become important later on the edit positively fawned over her.
Those are the bits that feel like manipulation, and those are the bits that stick in the throat, but I don't think what they've done with Pamela is nearly as jarring. It was a pretty silly task to begin with - counting YouTube hits is questionable, editing the description would've taken a couple of seconds, it was all very arbitrary and artificial - but Ella-Jade really did give the editors plenty to play with and Pamela really did do a better job (not perfect, but respectable) of realising the team's initial concept. If her video did get the least views... it's possible someone mentioned it, and it's possible that someone argued the toss with Pamela, but I don't think a low view count signified that her video was worse than the other two.
I kind of get the sense that the success or failure of the third video mostly depended on picking the right celebrity ambassador. They really needed a quality video to arrive before the Buzzfeed pitch, I think by the time Pamela got behind the camera they'd already missed the window, she was just on damage control. You could quite fairly argue that Pamela is being given credit for a contribution that made very little difference to the ultimate outcome of the task, but I think what the edit emphasises is not that she was a key player, but that Pamela understood the humour of the concept better, and that if she had directed the first couple of videos she would've been more likely to create a product that might have got Buzzfeed on side.
I think George is right about Pamela's video getting less views than Ella Jade's - 800 for Pamela's and 2600 for Ella Jade's two IIRC and if my maths is right - but that fact didn't fit the narrative of the episode. The story was that Ella Jade fell apart as project manager after looking good in the first few weeks (hence my comment that the previous week's small seed of doubt re Ella Jade came to fruition this week) while Pamela emerged from the side lines to try to save the task, making her look like a credible candidate in comparison to Ella Jade.
The edit had to be negative for Ella Jade this week, otherwise her firing would have seemed more inexplicable. Similarly Steven and Sarah were both explicitly blamed for the failure of the BuzzFeed pitch and the video being uploaded without a title and description when in both cases there were other candidates there when those 'mistakes' happened who could arguably have also been culpable for the errors, but weren't highlighted in the edit.
I think that as a conversation flows, various points will naturally come to the forefront in this way. A thread may be created to discuss an edit, but the edit and its relation to the actual events go hand in hand with one another, and when discussing one, the other will naturally come up. Therefore, I see no issue with the conversation turning that way. Having said that, I completely see your point about how Pamela didn't really cause the task failure - I didn't actually have any objection to Pamela's contribution, I was just raising the idea that maybe she didn't come across quite as well as the editors wanted her to.
I had the same wonder with Sanjay's edit where he got contrasted against Lindsay and Nurun's lazy failness in the factory for the candles task by being shown doing all the hard work; I haven't seen much else from him so it could be a one off. Same with Pamela.
It's a 'wait and see' thing, I think, since the air-time for quite a lot of people's been so scarce.
I would've classified her as MORP in both the first task & the fashion task.
Well, that emphasises my point even more than what I said (I'm not hugely familiar with the edgic rankings).
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/18XBMeypNgGXuiqarNYnpSMumnBVy70t_9COk0kayouY/edit#gid=0
As the chart shows however from episode 5 to 8 the number of winner picks you can make goes down from 4 to 3.