Katie gave pieces to camera that were often critical of the others, which were often colourful and insightful. Partly it was the editing - sometimes she would say something that sounded cruel, and then laugh to defuse it, and the BBC cut out the laugh and left the cruelty. She developed a feud with Adam, who was quite popular. When her comments about him became specific, some people thought she was prejudiced. Eg she said something about him going "back up north where he belongs" which viewers took as reflecting disdain for all northerners. The BBC built her up into a pantomime villain and the audience went along with it because they love to hate pantomime villains. They started blaming her for Adam's problems, even though he had been struggling from the beginning (eg he was picked out along with Andy as fall-guy by Simon in ep1, without any input from Katie).
I liked her. I thought she was one of the most competent, and I like "colourful and insightful", and I wasn't a fan of Adam.
Are you sure? She sure didnt seem very competent given her poor performance in the Shoe task, the art task, the France task... Heck! Practically every single task she took part in (Save for the shopping one) did she fail a bit at.
Even in the shopping task she didnt actually remember that being late to the boardroom would give a lesser fine than actually MISSING an item.
The only thing really she seemed remotely good at was manipulating people to not take her into the boardroom and the ability to kiss up to PM's
The BBC built her up into a pantomime villain and the audience went along with it because they love to hate pantomime villains.
She built herself into a pantomime villain. Or at least I hope she did, because everything about her from the minute she applied (putting her credentials as a man-thief as evidence of her business savvy, silly stereotypical comments about feminine women, people from the North, people who watch shopping channels, wishing death on Adam and calling him a drunk, and making cheap personal shots about Kristina's orangeness) indicates that she'd have to be pretty dense not to know that that's how she would be received, and she came across as too savvy for that.
I didn't hate her as much as many people did (I don't think she and Kristina were all that different undearneath it all, and a lot of times her insults were clearly supposed to be taken as theatre) but of course she was objectionable. She set out to be.
As for her competence I thought she was in the top tier that year, but her performance in the trainers task including that garbled incoherent pitch she gave was evidence that she wasn't nearly as good as she thought she was.
Are you sure? She sure didnt seem very competent given her poor performance in the Shoe task, the art task, the France task... Heck! Practically every single task she took part in (Save for the shopping one) did she fail a bit at.
She did well on the Art task, where she charmed the artists and got them on board - those she was allowed to meet. Her approach to selling (ie to develop a rapport with customers) would have been appropriate in the real world, and she was a little slow to adapt to the artificial time limit. She did well on the French task, too, doing everything her team leader wanted. The leader made some mistakes but, eg, she never approved of buying cheese from Makro so we shouldn't blame her for that. I'm not sure what you mean by the shoe task. She won both times she led the team. She was unlucky to be stuck on the same team as Adam, who lost 4 times in a row, twice as team leader. She also had poor leaders in Andy and Ghazal, both of whom got fired for their leadership. Generally she performed pretty well; for example, on the second task she seemed to be the only one thinking ahead to what they should do in the evening, when leader Tre was getting too distracted by hands-on detail.
Even in the shopping task she didnt actually remember that being late to the boardroom would give a lesser fine than actually MISSING an item.
A mistake made by the other 3 members of her team, including team leader Adam, so it's hardly fair to single her out for that mistake.
The only thing really she seemed remotely good at was manipulating people to not take her into the boardroom and the ability to kiss up to PM's
That's a rather slanted view. Her team leaders appreciated her and didn't blame her for the failures. Even Adam, who hated her, didn't blame her for dismal performance on the zoo task.
Are you sure? She sure didnt seem very competent given her poor performance in the Shoe task, the art task, the France task... Heck! Practically every single task she took part in (Save for the shopping one) did she fail a bit at.
Even in the shopping task she didnt actually remember that being late to the boardroom would give a lesser fine than actually MISSING an item.
The only thing really she seemed remotely good at was manipulating people to not take her into the boardroom and the ability to kiss up to PM's
To be fair, had the Art task been more realistic (i.e. not involving selling intensely in a short space of time), Katie's approach would have been far more effective. She knew how to work potential customers.
And failure during the French task had nothing to do with her.
I think Jenny Celerier was a LOT worse than Katie Hopkins personally.
Plus, if we are to have a contestant that will cause lots of arguements, I'd rather it be someone like Lucinda than Katie. Lucinda was much more likeable than Katie, she was extremely distinct in her personality. I loved her dreamy ways and her berets. She also was a pretty good candidate, and she caused lots of arguements without being so nasty or bullying.
I think Jenny Celerier was a LOT worse than Katie Hopkins personally.
Agreed. I was amused to see that Jenny and Kristina have gone into business together, thus confirming my low opinion of both.
Plus, if we are to have a contestant that will cause lots of arguements, I'd rather it be someone like Lucinda than Katie.
It took me a long, long time to decide I didn't like Lucinda. She was really hard to figure out. It was her shouting out during Helene's You're Fired that really confirmed she was in the wrong for me. Also her poor performance on the last few tasks.
I think Jenny Celerier was a LOT worse than Katie Hopkins personally.
Plus, if we are to have a contestant that will cause lots of arguements, I'd rather it be someone like Lucinda than Katie. Lucinda was much more likeable than Katie, she was extremely distinct in her personality. I loved her dreamy ways and her berets. She also was a pretty good candidate, and she caused lots of arguements without being so nasty or bullying.
Agreed. I was amused to see that Jenny and Kristina have gone into business together, thus confirming my low opinion of both.
It took me a long, long time to decide I didn't like Lucinda. She was really hard to figure out. It was her shouting out during Helene's You're Fired that really confirmed she was in the wrong for me. Also her poor performance on the last few tasks.
I think they were all pretty dire towards the end last year.
Lucinda had far more going for her than either Alex or Helene. She should have made the final at least.
I can't help feeling that the overall quality of the participants has declined over the series in favour of 'entertaining characters.'
Agreed. I was amused to see that Jenny and Kristina have gone into business together, thus confirming my low opinion of both.
It took me a long, long time to decide I didn't like Lucinda. She was really hard to figure out. It was her shouting out during Helene's You're Fired that really confirmed she was in the wrong for me. Also her poor performance on the last few tasks.
I think they were all pretty dire towards the end last year.
Lucinda had far more going for her than either Alex or Helene. She should have made the final at least.
I can't help feeling that the overall quality of the participants has declined over the series in favour of 'entertaining characters.'
I thought they were all pretty dire all the way through last year. Only Lee, Claire, Raef and Sara stood out to me as being candidates worth consideration and Lee was limited, Claire completely untrustworthy, Raef self-indulgent and slippery and Sara prone to massive errors of judgment (business and social).
Lucinda as a candidate for the job was no better than Michael Sophocles (likability being another issue, and even then I was willing her to shut up on a minute by minute basis in the last few episodes) and her being in the final would have been a foregone conclusion and basically a waste of time.
The best she could have hoped from from her time of the show was to come out liked and media marketable - she managed both. A job with Siralan was never an option.
Lucinda had far more going for her than either Alex or Helene. She should have made the final at least.
I never rated Alex much. Helene I felt wasn't great, but wasn't as bad as she was made out to be either. Lucinda was lucky on the wedding task to have a strong team. I thought her management of the ice cream task was pretty poor, and on the final two tasks she was pretty much a liability. I'd rather work with Helene than Lucinda.
I can't help feeling that the overall quality of the participants has declined over the series in favour of 'entertaining characters.'
It's hard to say. There have always been vivid characters and incompetent ones. Some of the most memorable cock-ups were in the first two series.
I never rated Alex much. Helene I felt wasn't great, but wasn't as bad as she was made out to be either. Lucinda was lucky on the wedding task to have a strong team. I thought her management of the ice cream task was pretty poor, and on the final two tasks she was pretty much a liability. I'd rather work with Helene than Lucinda.
Helene spent her time milling around drinking cups of coffee.
She never generated any ideas, she couldn't sell, and she couldn't organise or inspire a team. Lucinda, on the other hand, proved time and time again what a good leader she was.
Helene was a backstabber and about as much use as a chocolate teapot. I couldn't work with her.
No wrong wrong wrong. The shoe task she was the ideas person and controlled the team leader all the way into a ditch through her own ideas.
The French task she never stood up or even did much as she was too busy being luvy-duvy with the Team Leader
And the Art Task she again controlled the team in a backseat way and regardless of if it was a real-sell situation or not, she had to modify her sales technique's to fit it and she didnt at all.
Are you sure? She sure didnt seem very competent given her poor performance in the Shoe task, the art task, the France task... Heck! Practically every single task she took part in (Save for the shopping one) did she fail a bit at.
Even in the shopping task she didnt actually remember that being late to the boardroom would give a lesser fine than actually MISSING an item.
The only thing really she seemed remotely good at was manipulating people to not take her into the boardroom and the ability to kiss up to PM's
I couldn't agree more, she has been vastly overrated by some people who seem to be looking back on her with rose tinted spectacles. Personally, I don't think Katie was ever looking for a career with Alan Sugar, she is a ruthless self promoter and was clearly looking for a job in television of some sort.
I couldn't agree more, she has been vastly overrated by some people who seem to be looking back on her with rose tinted spectacles. Personally, I don't think Katie was ever looking for a career with Alan Sugar, she is a ruthless self promoter and was clearly looking for a job in television of some sort.
I'll go along with that view.:)
Michelle Mone dismissed Katie's self-importance brilliantly and was totally memorable.:D
I see Debra as the next KH figure too but it is still very early days.
Unfortunately, I don't think we'll ever get a candidate as entertaining as Katie Hopkins again.
Yes, we've had the likes of Ruth Badger, Tre Azam and Raef Bjayou who've been absolutely brilliant to watch because they're actually rather likeable despite the initial first impressions of the majority. But if you've looking for a monster, nobody will come close to Katie...
I thought Claire Young was destined to be 'the next Katie' last year, but it just didn't happen. (This is probably because she was the closest ever to being fired without actually being fired, which really scared the sh't out of her.) I suppose the fact I was looking for a replacement villian shows how much of an impact Katie Hopkins really had on The Apprentice.
All I can say is... don't go looking for a replacement because you'll end up disappointed. Jenny Celerier was probably the closest thing we had to 'the next Katie' last year and she paled in comparison.
Just accept each candidate for who they are. That's my advice.
Comments
that brings back a lot of memories.
I agreed with her take on most of the candidates and I felt that she was pretty competent overall.
I liked her. I thought she was one of the most competent, and I like "colourful and insightful", and I wasn't a fan of Adam.
Even in the shopping task she didnt actually remember that being late to the boardroom would give a lesser fine than actually MISSING an item.
The only thing really she seemed remotely good at was manipulating people to not take her into the boardroom and the ability to kiss up to PM's
She built herself into a pantomime villain. Or at least I hope she did, because everything about her from the minute she applied (putting her credentials as a man-thief as evidence of her business savvy, silly stereotypical comments about feminine women, people from the North, people who watch shopping channels, wishing death on Adam and calling him a drunk, and making cheap personal shots about Kristina's orangeness) indicates that she'd have to be pretty dense not to know that that's how she would be received, and she came across as too savvy for that.
I didn't hate her as much as many people did (I don't think she and Kristina were all that different undearneath it all, and a lot of times her insults were clearly supposed to be taken as theatre) but of course she was objectionable. She set out to be.
As for her competence I thought she was in the top tier that year, but her performance in the trainers task including that garbled incoherent pitch she gave was evidence that she wasn't nearly as good as she thought she was.
Yes, that was classic TV. Michelle firmly gave her a good ear-bashing on ' You're fired'.
A mistake made by the other 3 members of her team, including team leader Adam, so it's hardly fair to single her out for that mistake.
That's a rather slanted view. Her team leaders appreciated her and didn't blame her for the failures. Even Adam, who hated her, didn't blame her for dismal performance on the zoo task.
To be fair, had the Art task been more realistic (i.e. not involving selling intensely in a short space of time), Katie's approach would have been far more effective. She knew how to work potential customers.
And failure during the French task had nothing to do with her.
Plus, if we are to have a contestant that will cause lots of arguements, I'd rather it be someone like Lucinda than Katie. Lucinda was much more likeable than Katie, she was extremely distinct in her personality. I loved her dreamy ways and her berets. She also was a pretty good candidate, and she caused lots of arguements without being so nasty or bullying.
It took me a long, long time to decide I didn't like Lucinda. She was really hard to figure out. It was her shouting out during Helene's You're Fired that really confirmed she was in the wrong for me. Also her poor performance on the last few tasks.
Agreed with every single word. Well said!
I think they were all pretty dire towards the end last year.
Lucinda had far more going for her than either Alex or Helene. She should have made the final at least.
I can't help feeling that the overall quality of the participants has declined over the series in favour of 'entertaining characters.'
Good post matey!
I thought they were all pretty dire all the way through last year. Only Lee, Claire, Raef and Sara stood out to me as being candidates worth consideration and Lee was limited, Claire completely untrustworthy, Raef self-indulgent and slippery and Sara prone to massive errors of judgment (business and social).
Lucinda as a candidate for the job was no better than Michael Sophocles (likability being another issue, and even then I was willing her to shut up on a minute by minute basis in the last few episodes) and her being in the final would have been a foregone conclusion and basically a waste of time.
The best she could have hoped from from her time of the show was to come out liked and media marketable - she managed both. A job with Siralan was never an option.
It's hard to say. There have always been vivid characters and incompetent ones. Some of the most memorable cock-ups were in the first two series.
Helene spent her time milling around drinking cups of coffee.
She never generated any ideas, she couldn't sell, and she couldn't organise or inspire a team. Lucinda, on the other hand, proved time and time again what a good leader she was.
Helene was a backstabber and about as much use as a chocolate teapot. I couldn't work with her.
must get relativley far in the competition
The French task she never stood up or even did much as she was too busy being luvy-duvy with the Team Leader
And the Art Task she again controlled the team in a backseat way and regardless of if it was a real-sell situation or not, she had to modify her sales technique's to fit it and she didnt at all.
This amused me:
Jayboy84, Southampton says...
9:03am Wed 18 Mar 09
"who models herself on the Sex in the City man-eater Samantha"
So she models herself on a 50something old slapper who does anything that moves?
Strange way of selling yourself in a business world... I'll have to try that in my next interview.
"What can you offer the company?"
"I can be the office bike"
"You're hired"
I couldn't agree more, she has been vastly overrated by some people who seem to be looking back on her with rose tinted spectacles. Personally, I don't think Katie was ever looking for a career with Alan Sugar, she is a ruthless self promoter and was clearly looking for a job in television of some sort.
I'll go along with that view.:)
Michelle Mone dismissed Katie's self-importance brilliantly and was totally memorable.:D
I see Debra as the next KH figure too but it is still very early days.
Yes, we've had the likes of Ruth Badger, Tre Azam and Raef Bjayou who've been absolutely brilliant to watch because they're actually rather likeable despite the initial first impressions of the majority. But if you've looking for a monster, nobody will come close to Katie...
I thought Claire Young was destined to be 'the next Katie' last year, but it just didn't happen. (This is probably because she was the closest ever to being fired without actually being fired, which really scared the sh't out of her.) I suppose the fact I was looking for a replacement villian shows how much of an impact Katie Hopkins really had on The Apprentice.
All I can say is... don't go looking for a replacement because you'll end up disappointed. Jenny Celerier was probably the closest thing we had to 'the next Katie' last year and she paled in comparison.
Just accept each candidate for who they are. That's my advice.