|
||||||||
Anyone else think SCD will lose loads of viewers soon? |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#26 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 12,792
|
Quote:
Agreed. That was the worst change they made last year. She added nothing to the panel. I guess her jive was alright.
The choices they've made on who to keep for partnering and who to consign to just the pro dances is just weird. Are there people who actually dislike any of those 5 dancers? I know there are people who dislike Anton, Brendan, James...just off the top of my head. It does look like they've saved the more polarizing dancers for some kind of controversy. I like to watch people learn how to dance. All the rest is soap opera bs. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#27 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,924
|
[ Quote:
It must be part of an attempt to kill the show.
Ratings will sink like a stone in a pond, justifying the end without too much fuzz.To be replaced by the umpteenth search for a musical star. How else can you explain this ridiculous move? Let them do a show about the sarch for some competent BBC managers: "The Quest for Sanity". Quote:
Agreed. Why try to compete with something that clearly has a different target audience??? It's not going to work
. Both Dancing on Ice and BGT lost large amounts of viewers this year by serving up the exact same things with the exact same people as previous.Both shows will be revamped next year.[dancing on ice didnt even break 9m for its Final] |
|
|
|
|
|
#28 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,924
|
Quote:
Reasons.
1. The exact same format every year no improvements, no change of the stage. Its already been confirmed that strictlys moving to a new studio or the current one will be enlarged and revamped 2. The judges. Are they really big names tbh? Compare there judges to the X Factor's. Keeping Alesha, I'm not a hater but she's caused lots of viewers to stop watching.Why do you need big names to judge a dance show, what are your suggestions WAYNE SLEEP??? and RE Alesha Proof??? 3. Brucie & Tess - enough said. I've hardly seen many fans of them .[yeah because the beeb really want and need another ageism debate 4. The pro's stuff - arguably the top 5 favourite pros except Vincent, Flavia and Erin aren't getting a celeb and will feature far less and now there's rumour's of quitting. Yes Arguable 5. The clash against X Factor, X Factor is getting big changes, a rumoured bigger stage and new judging panel with rumoured guest judges and names such as Lady Gaga and Kylie have been mentioned and SCD get failed girlband singer Alesha on a non singing show. ![]() There will probably be no clash next year as Strictly will l;ikely move its results back to Sunday but this time they'll be live. The x factor isnt getting big changes the 2 current stand in's for Danni Minogue are Ginger Spice and Pixie Lott hardly Gaga or Kylie, perhaps you should stop reading the tabloids and how is Alesha a failed Girlband singer. Your attacks are pathetic. 6. The Z-elebs. No doubt this year's one will include someone from Hollyoaks, 2 people no one liked in Eastenders in about 2006 and have got no work since, someone's ex-girlfriend or ex-wife and someone who can't dance from GMTV and based on who hasn't done a reality show from GMTV it'll be Lorraine Kelly. :yawn: LMAO considering your beloved Chris Hollins was the least well known last year maybe you shouldnt be bitchin about the class of celeb and Jill Halfpenny was once one of those unliked eastenders characters. You say the producers haven't listened, last year every1 was complaining about having too many poor celebs, well the beeb have cut back by 2 celebs this year to afford better ones and increase the quality but yet you rant away giving them no credit I used to love SCD and I loved Chris last year but atm I don't wanna watch it and I don't know why the producer's making all these choices. Listen to what the viewers are saying. ![]() No listen to what Katie says and a few forum fanatics[which I m one of], blogging about a show 4 months before it even starts |
|
|
|
|
|
#29 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,650
|
I think, once again, this shows the utter incompetance of the enitre entertainment department at the BBC. They seem intent in ruining everything they get their hands on. This is what needs to be done:
01. Fewer couples 02. High profile, controversial celebrities who actually have personalities 02. Simpler format. They should go back to how it was originally. 03. Move the entire show to the Blackpool Tower Ballroom 04. Better production standards. The BBC should co-produce it with an events engineering company (eg. PRG) 05. Make the interval act a major part of the show. They should book better interval act guests. 06. Ditch the VIP's in the audience and replace them with audience members who actually look as if they're having a good time. 07. Have seperate performance and results shows The show lives or dies by the standard of celebrities they choose to take part. 2009 had the most boring line-up since the show started and therefore people just lost interest. It doesn't really matter who the professional dancers are or who is on the judging panel (even though Arlene was a big loss to the panel when she was fired), it's the celebrities and how the public react to them is what is most important to the shows success. The Beeb really need to look at personalities when choosing the line-up as opposed to who could be a great dancer. |
|
|
|
|
|
#30 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 22,520
|
TBH I'm reserving judgement - we should really see what the new series is like rather than just dismiss it out of hand. But that said, the signs aren't good.
What I don't understand is that if the BBC wanted to get to the giddy heights of X Factor style ratings, it would be a hell of a lot easier to do so without losing a huge chunk of your current audience (i.e long-time fans of Matt, Ian, Brian, Darren and Lilia). Build and improve on what you've got, don't just dismantle it and try and reassemble it differently. |
|
|
|
|
|
#31 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,650
|
Quote:
TBH I'm reserving judgement - we should really see what the new series is like rather than just dismiss it out of hand. But that said, the signs aren't good.
What I don't understand is that if the BBC wanted to get to the giddy heights of X Factor style ratings, it would be a hell of a lot easier to do so without losing a huge chunk of your current audience (i.e long-time fans of Matt, Ian, Brian, Darren and Lilia). Build and improve on what you've got, don't just dismantle it and try and reassemble it differently. Unfortunately, I've noticed that there is a trend with all BBC Entertainment shows; Strictly Come Dancing 2009 - 10.5m/11.2m for result (lowest rated final since 2005) So You Think You Can Dance?- 5.5m/6m for result Your Country Needs You - 2.9m (lowest rated eurovision selection show since 2003, drop of 2.7m compared to 2009) Let's Dance - 7.2m (drop of 1m compared to 2009) Over The Rainbow - 5.9m/6.9m for result (lowest rated series of ALW show) Eurovision - 5.5m (lowest rated ever, drop of 2.3m compared to 2009) It doesn't help Strictly when the BBC insist on having 2 other dancing shows. This completely saturates the dancing talent show market and makes Strictly less special and less of an even as a result.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#32 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Zingzilla Island
Posts: 3,550
|
Quote:
I think, once again, this shows the utter incompetance of the enitre entertainment department at the BBC. They seem intent in ruining everything they get their hands on. This is what needs to be done:
01. Fewer couples 02. High profile, controversial celebrities who actually have personalities 02. Simpler format. They should go back to how it was originally. 03. Move the entire show to the Blackpool Tower Ballroom 04. Better production standards. The BBC should co-produce it with an events engineering company (eg. PRG) 05. Make the interval act a major part of the show. They should book better interval act guests. 06. Ditch the VIP's in the audience and replace them with audience members who actually look as if they're having a good time. 07. Have seperate performance and results shows The show lives or dies by the standard of celebrities they choose to take part. 2009 had the most boring line-up since the show started and therefore people just lost interest. It doesn't really matter who the professional dancers are or who is on the judging panel (even though Arlene was a big loss to the panel when she was fired), it's the celebrities and how the public react to them is what is most important to the shows success. The Beeb really need to look at personalities when choosing the line-up as opposed to who could be a great dancer. 02. High profile, controversial celebrities who actually have personalities - definately (Chris won because of his personality not his dancing though.) 02. Simpler format. They should go back to how it was originally. - don't know what that is as last year was the first one I saw. 03. Move the entire show to the Blackpool Tower Ballroom - expense? surely its cheaper to film it at the studios. I didn't get why only one week there though - why didn't they do the last 4-5 weeks instead. 04. Better production standards. The BBC should co-produce it with an events engineering company (eg. PRG) - again expense? 05. Make the interval act a major part of the show. They should book better interval act guests. - I thought some of them were ok, but alot didn't sing in tune. Like the sodding backing singers - they are really poor. 06. Ditch the VIP's in the audience and replace them with audience members who actually look as if they're having a good time. 07. Have seperate performance and results shows - agree. One thing I did like alot about last year and DOI could learn from this is the fact the professionals do a routine every week. I'm sad about Brian leaving, I liked him alot, but keeping Anton he's got to be about 50?I also thought that Tess was rubbish backstage but when her and that nutty girl were on together I thought Tess was great doing Bruce's job. I just hate his cringeworthy comments. |
|
|
|
|
|
#33 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ronnie's bed
Posts: 20,566
|
I agree that dumping the 'consistant' part of teh show is ludicrous. SOme of the dancers that have been 'demoted' are highly talented teachers. The ones they have kpet in and the new ones are 'Sexy', 'hunky', less talented or are their to create drama and tantrums ()and comedy Anton).
This is not what I watch SCD for. I watch SCD because it isn't X-Factor. I hate X-Factor. THey keep Alesha ho was a failure (IMO) Her comments last year were rubbish or copied from another judge with the "I agree with XXXX" TBH, I just can't be bothered. The meddling from the beeb is pushing me away each year. There was a time I was over excited that SCD was coming back now I wouldn't care if it was axed. |
|
|
|
|
|
#34 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 12,792
|
Quote:
I think, once again, this shows the utter incompetance of the enitre entertainment department at the BBC. They seem intent in ruining everything they get their hands on. This is what needs to be done:
01. Fewer couples Agreed, but that's been confirmed already. 02. High profile, controversial celebrities who actually have personalities Agreed, without Chris & Ola last series would have been incredibly boring... 02. Simpler format. They should go back to how it was originally. This I disagree with, I think all couples should perform ballroom and Latin before elimination, so last year's format worked. 03. Move the entire show to the Blackpool Tower Ballroom The Tower Ballroom is incredibly difficult for the production team - not enough room backstage etc. And never mind the expense and the fact that it's unfair to force the dancers to uproot to Blackpool for 3 months or travel up every weekend - they have families too.... 04. Better production standards. The BBC should co-produce it with an events engineering company (eg. PRG) Yeah, can't argue with that! 05. Make the interval act a major part of the show. They should book better interval act guests. If they can get them, the whole problem last year was that they had a couple of big guest (Bette Middler etc) but couldn't get any more. I don't want to lose the single pro couple dancing to a music act slot at all! 06. Ditch the VIP's in the audience and replace them with audience members who actually look as if they're having a good time. Well, we should still have the contestants' families and friends, but apart from that I agree 07. Have seperate performance and results shows Yes, as long as they're both on Saturday - you can't force the dancers and contestants to work a 7-day week! It doesn't really matter who the professional dancers are or who is on the judging panel (even though Arlene was a big loss to the panel when she was fired), it's the celebrities and how the public react to them is what is most important to the shows success. The Beeb really need to look at personalities when choosing the line-up as opposed to who could be a great dancer. And I disagree entirely with that last comment - who the judges and pros are is in my opinion even more important than who the celebrities are. You can have a celebrity with the best personality in the worl, but without a likeminded pro who can choreograph to that personality as Ola did last year, and judges who can make creative comment that personality will not come across. |
|
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ireland
Posts: 4,312
|
I lost a lot of interest in SCD last year - partly because I was disappointed at the changes made, especially Alesha, and partly because I didn't have a couple to root for. There was no Jodie and Ian, or Austin and Erin, or Mark and Karen, or even Gethin and Camilla. Much as I liked Chris and Ola, I couldn't get behind him in the way I've loved other couples.
This year, without Ian, Darren, Lilia and Matthew (I'm not really a Brian fan), I can see myself losing interest even more. It's not me stamping my feet and refusing to accept change, it's simply that the show won't be able to hold my interest. The only male pro I really like that's left in the competition is James Jordan, unless one of the three newbies grabs my attention. Lilia was my favourite female pro, and while I'll still have Ola and Flavia to root for, I've lost the one I really was invested in. |
|
|
|
|
|
#36 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 4,720
|
With no Camilla or Brian and very little Matt and Ian they have lost a viewer here
|
|
|
|
|
|
#37 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 257
|
Let's just wait and see. I stil think the programme's bigger than any of its individual players, even it seems weaker than originally.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#38 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 426
|
We should all wait and see,
it's the usual mad forum frenzy already, all based on a very limited bit of information, If anyone reads through the various posts then it's obvious that even just on this forum, that opinion is divided. Lots of people are great at assuming that the changes are for the worst, it's like in Football when a team loses its star striker, everyone calls for the manager to be sacked, then the next season when they bring in a replacement and it all goes well, people say it was a good move to get rid of so and so. I'd love to have the crystal ball that some people on here seem to have....... might be able to predict my lottery numbers... |
|
|
|
|
|
#39 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 426
|
At the end of the day, what makes a great series is the quality of the contestants....... And nobody has any idea yet as to whom they might be... so a bit early to write it off
|
|
|
|
|
|
#40 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,650
|
Quote:
At the end of the day, what makes a great series is the quality of the contestants....... And nobody has any idea yet as to whom they might be... so a bit early to write it off
|
|
|
|
|
|
#41 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: leeds
Posts: 439
|
they are trying to ruin strictly
|
|
|
|
|
|
#42 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,966
|
Most changes that are promised I doubt I'll mind and many of the favorite alternate ones proposed here don't actually excite me (I much prefer the intimate sense in the studio to the vastness of Blackpool, for example). Yet the choice of pros to sideline does seem incredibly strange and I would really be interested to hear some sort of explanation of how they were selected. I have a slight fear that they were chosen to open the way for more showmance, since we've lost a married couple, two gay guys and someone with (in the terms of the show) a high-profile romance. Probably an unlikely explanation, but it does worry me.
Last edited by Pasta : 16-06-2010 at 18:31. Reason: typo |
|
|
|
|
|
#43 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 12,792
|
Quote:
Most changes that are promised I doubt I'll mind and many of the favorite alternate ones proposed here don't actually excite me (I much prefer the intimate sense in the studio to the vastness of Blackpool, for example). Yet the choice of pros to sideline does seem incredibly strange and I would really be interested to hear some sort of explanation of how they were selected. I have a slight fear that they were chosen to open the way for more showmance, since we've lost a married couple, two gay guys and someone with (in the terms of the show) a high-profile romance. Probably an unlikely explanation, but it does worry me.
But in terms of showmance of the ones who are left: James and Ola are married, Erin is married, Brendan is getting married, Flavia, Vincent, Kristina, Natalie and Katya are all in relationships and I doubt anyone would have a showmance with Anton! it seems new pro Jared Murillo is also in a relationship. That just leaves Aliona (not sure if she's in a relationship or not) and two of the new boys: Artem and Robin. So 5 pros cut, 2 new ones who could have potential showmances ( |
|
|
|
|
|
#44 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,966
|
Quote:
But in terms of showmance of the ones who are left:
James and Ola are married, Erin is married, Brendan is getting married, Flavia, Vincent, Kristina, Natalie and Katya are all in relationships and I doubt anyone would have a showmance with Anton! it seems new pro Jared Murillo is also in a relationship. That just leaves Aliona (not sure if she's in a relationship or not) and two of the new boys: Artem and Robin. So 5 pros cut, 2 new ones who could have potential showmances ( |
|
|
|
|
|
#45 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 12,792
|
Quote:
Oh, I know it's nonsense. I didn't say it was rational!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#46 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 426
|
Quote:
Nope, true - it's the BBC, I think we just have to assume there is no rationale behind it! (I was just pointing out how ludicrous it would be if that was the reasoning!)
|
|
|
|
|
|
#47 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 5,093
|
The main problem with Strictly is that it isn't as good as the US version Dancing With The Stars.
The US show is far more entertaining and the standard of Celeb contestant far outstrips the poor selection they put on over here. The do actually have stars taking part not also rans trying to reinvigorate their flagging career. The voting system on the US version is far more honest as well as there have often been instances when a couple were at the top of the leader board but the power of the home voters still meant they ended up in the bottom two. Even the final decision of who goes is down to the viewers choice and the judges can't intervene. There's no dance offs at the end with the judges engineering who they want to go through. The UK show is just a poor relation as far as I'm concerned. |
|
|
|
|
|
#48 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,135
|
Whilst I am really really disappointed that most of my fave pros won't be competing with celebs this year, I will be watching still. I do think the show needed freshening up but for me, the changes I would like to see are in production values, format and presenters.
For me, getting bigger name celeb contestants isn't a big issue - if you look at past winners, how many are "big" names anyway? Also, possibly setting aside season one, none of the winners were showmance couples. IMO what all the winners do have in common is how much enjoyment they had in the dancing and how their pros brought out their full potential and fun factor. What I want is to see the enjoyment of it all, be taken out of myself with the glitz, glamour and fun - I can get drama, tears and tantrums on nearly every other show! This is one of my biggest disappointments with the pros "lost" as they have a track-record of bringing that out in their celebs and the partnerships they forged are a big part of my enjoyment of the show. I'd like to see the beeb use celebs that all have a small amount of dance experience already, and level the playing field in the early weeks in particular and to stop concentrating so much on the histrionics/pressure of it all in the training VTs. As for choice of pros, I think the ones who have stayed are the ones that create the most column inches and media attention - I don't mean that negatively, or disrespectfully to anyone or that they don't deserve to stay - just imo that could be the reason. |
|
|
|
|
|
#49 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Away with the faries
Posts: 27,378
|
Quote:
To save it??? Darcey as a permanent would consign Strictly to the dustbin for good!
![]() I'm happy to wait and see how the show goes, BUT I do think the wrong pros were relegated to the dance group for the reasons already given -[LIST][*]they are all excellent teachers[*]they are amongst the most popular pros[*]they are all better dancers than at least three of the other pros[/LIST]I can see almost any other change working well, but the BIG risk to bring new guys in for the Fallen Five. |
|
|
|
|
#50 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: White Rose County
Posts: 1,547
|
If it ain't broke don't fix it.
![]() BUT you never know it may be good *I hope*
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 06:44.






he's got to be about 50?
