I agree up to a certain extent. I am conscious that the edit does hide and play up certain contributions (I personally think the contrast between Tre and Lohit is the best example of this - I think Tre was vastly overrated and Lohit was screwed over by the edit) however they can only do this to a certain extent. At the end of the day, if Helen was strongly responsible for a task win in Weeks 1-5, they'd have had to go to a lot of trouble to hide her. My basic point is that I agree that she was hidden by the edit but I still don't think that she contributed a whole lot in these weeks anyway.
Thinking about it, she was visible in Week 1, but in the sub-team we know didn't sell well. In Week 2, Felicity and Natasha were responsible for the win almost solely. In week 3, her negotiation was hijacked by Jim so it can't have gone that well. In Week 4, we actually saw her struggle with the spray tan and the task was won by Susan (for getting the spray tan) and because the other team did poorly (Lord Sugar noted it was a poor profit margin for the beauty industry). Task 5 was pretty well solely won by Glenn.
Sorry, I feel as though I've gone off track a bit. My point is that yes the edit exists, but I think it's possible to look past the edit and it's difficult to argue Helen did a lot. I thought she was great later on, but the first five tasks, it's difficult to see what she did. Of course I'm basing this all off memory and I'm sure you noticed things I didn't, so I am conscious of that!
You make good points, and in fairness I haven't seen most of Series 7 since the first broadcast, so it's possible that I'd see it differently the second time. I just feel that there is a difference between keeping quiet and getting on with things to win the task (which I think is what Helen did) and deliberately avoiding responsibility (like Alex, for instance). I also feel that they wouldn't have to go to that much trouble to hide her if she did well. With the hundreds of hours of footage they have, if Helen was a strong performer and they were able to gloss that over, it would be entirely possible just to focus on the positive contributions of other team members instead, and edit out any positivity regarding Helen. An inverse example in another series is Simon in the fourth episode of Series 3. They kept in comments about him finding a better place for them to sell sweets than the one they had. However, Sophie has said in interviews that it was actually Simon who found them the poor location in the first place, so he was really just covering up for his own mistake. But as Simon went on to win, they naturally wanted to show small victories by him in early weeks.
With regards to Helen, I feel that she was left out of the early edit on purpose, for the shock value when she came to the forefront later on. If someone holds a really incredible record, you don't want it to be obvious too early. If people had been saying from Week 1, 'Oh yeah, Helen, she seems like a good bet,' it would have spoilt the impact of the later episodes. And there were even some negative things that were shown early on, but again these are selected from hundreds of hours of footage. The missed sale we see of her in Task 1 could for all we know have been the only missed sale she had all day. In Week 4, she stood behind Zoe whilst she was telling Susan off, but if I remember correctly (and I may be wrong as I haven't seen it in a while) she didn't actually say very much herself. It doesn't necessarily mean that she agreed with Zoe, she may just not have wanted to undermine her in case they lost and Zoe turned the finger on her (which is a very reasonable strategy). I'm not saying that these things necessarily were the case, but it is entirely possible that it's all circumstantial.
Basically, the producers can edit the programme to paint whatever picture they want, so long as it ties in with the firing decision. I seem to recall that until about Week 7 in that series, Susan's edit was pretty negative as well, with the 'I'm you and you're me' app and things. I confess at the time I really did not think that she was going very far, but now that the series is over and I can look at it in hindsight, I can see that Susan was a very strong candidate.
1) Ruth Badger. She was robbed.
2) Tre Azam. Complete legend.
3) Helen Milligan, if she'd been in any other year where he wanted an apprentice, she would've walked it.
George 8've just re-watched a couple of episodes of Helens series, and I'm afraid I don't agree that she was showing promise in the early stages. To me she seemed to be just doing enough to convince the PM that she was contributing enough to the task to avoid being taken back into the boardroom in the case of the team losing. Her " backing up" of Zoe in the cosmetics task was a classic example. She had a relatively easy job to do on that one - doing spray tans - the others had drummed up the customers, and Susan had chosen the product. She worked hard doing the tans but didn't actually do much else in that one, apart from ingratiating herself with the PM. Her huge sale of the the car seat in France was down to her having a great product which would have sold itself, no matter who was doing the pitch (incidentally the same can be said of LiZ Locke's success with the babygro thing the series before) a great and innovative product which promotes child safety will always be a big seller.
Even in her PM successes - Jim won her the biscuit task, and Tom came up with the concept of the pie restaurant - Helen was pretty much a passenger on them - Helen may have managed them well, but she lacked creativity and ideas - which was shown up with that appalling business plan.
George 8've just re-watched a couple of episodes of Helens series, and I'm afraid I don't agree that she was showing promise in the early stages. To me she seemed to be just doing enough to convince the PM that she was contributing enough to the task to avoid being taken back into the boardroom in the case of the team losing. Her " backing up" of Zoe in the cosmetics task was a classic example. She had a relatively easy job to do on that one - doing spray tans - the others had drummed up the customers, and Susan had chosen the product. She worked hard doing the tans but didn't actually do much else in that one, apart from ingratiating herself with the PM. Her huge sale of the the car seat in France was down to her having a great product which would have sold itself, no matter who was doing the pitch (incidentally the same can be said of LiZ Locke's success with the babygro thing the series before) a great and innovative product which promotes child safety will always be a big seller.
Even in her PM successes - Jim won her the biscuit task, and Tom came up with the concept of the pie restaurant - Helen was pretty much a passenger on them - Helen may have managed them well, but she lacked creativity and ideas - which was shown up with that appalling business plan.
Well, I disagree with you, but there isn't much I can say that I haven't already said. All I can say is that I saw a hell of a lot more in her than you did, although I accept that it has been a while since I last saw the series.
As for Helen, the first time I watched the series, I must confess that in the Week 4 Beauty task, I thought she was an assistant provided by the spray tan company.
Comments
You make good points, and in fairness I haven't seen most of Series 7 since the first broadcast, so it's possible that I'd see it differently the second time. I just feel that there is a difference between keeping quiet and getting on with things to win the task (which I think is what Helen did) and deliberately avoiding responsibility (like Alex, for instance). I also feel that they wouldn't have to go to that much trouble to hide her if she did well. With the hundreds of hours of footage they have, if Helen was a strong performer and they were able to gloss that over, it would be entirely possible just to focus on the positive contributions of other team members instead, and edit out any positivity regarding Helen. An inverse example in another series is Simon in the fourth episode of Series 3. They kept in comments about him finding a better place for them to sell sweets than the one they had. However, Sophie has said in interviews that it was actually Simon who found them the poor location in the first place, so he was really just covering up for his own mistake. But as Simon went on to win, they naturally wanted to show small victories by him in early weeks.
With regards to Helen, I feel that she was left out of the early edit on purpose, for the shock value when she came to the forefront later on. If someone holds a really incredible record, you don't want it to be obvious too early. If people had been saying from Week 1, 'Oh yeah, Helen, she seems like a good bet,' it would have spoilt the impact of the later episodes. And there were even some negative things that were shown early on, but again these are selected from hundreds of hours of footage. The missed sale we see of her in Task 1 could for all we know have been the only missed sale she had all day. In Week 4, she stood behind Zoe whilst she was telling Susan off, but if I remember correctly (and I may be wrong as I haven't seen it in a while) she didn't actually say very much herself. It doesn't necessarily mean that she agreed with Zoe, she may just not have wanted to undermine her in case they lost and Zoe turned the finger on her (which is a very reasonable strategy). I'm not saying that these things necessarily were the case, but it is entirely possible that it's all circumstantial.
Basically, the producers can edit the programme to paint whatever picture they want, so long as it ties in with the firing decision. I seem to recall that until about Week 7 in that series, Susan's edit was pretty negative as well, with the 'I'm you and you're me' app and things. I confess at the time I really did not think that she was going very far, but now that the series is over and I can look at it in hindsight, I can see that Susan was a very strong candidate.
2) Tre Azam. Complete legend.
3) Helen Milligan, if she'd been in any other year where he wanted an apprentice, she would've walked it.
Even in her PM successes - Jim won her the biscuit task, and Tom came up with the concept of the pie restaurant - Helen was pretty much a passenger on them - Helen may have managed them well, but she lacked creativity and ideas - which was shown up with that appalling business plan.
Well, I disagree with you, but there isn't much I can say that I haven't already said. All I can say is that I saw a hell of a lot more in her than you did, although I accept that it has been a while since I last saw the series.
LOL
That was exactly my thought as well
2) Stuart Baggs
3) Tre Azam