Actually I don't think the Celebaquarium has gone over very well on DWTS and I would not be surprised if they bring back the red room this year. It is much more intimate. I noticed that they started closing the celebaquarium off a off a little bit. They did it so the couples could watch the other couples dancing live and be part of the show but it really doesn't work as far as the backstage interviews go. I hate it.

eh but whats to stop the pros and celebs bumping into each other in the dressing rooms?

But that won't matter, becaue prior to the show neither the celeb's or pro's will know who is dancing with whom.

The pro's will probably know who the Celeb's are going to be, just not which Celeb they will each be partnered with.

That would hilarious, cos you'd get random really tall people with littleuns (can you imagine if Chris Hollins had got Natalie Lowe?)

Or if they took turns to pick who they wanted, leaving the duff ones till last (like school netball teams), well - we all know how THAT would end. To quote Jake Lyle from earlier:

"Brendan, you'll be dancing with Ann Widdicombe"

Alternatively.... "OMG! What have I got this time? Must try and get out first week....."

Maybe they could add a new spin - the celebs all have to change pro partners every week. Imagine - someone of Denise Lewis's height having to dance with Vincent !

I love the idea of this show

However, I wonder if any members of the public will be able to get tickets, or will the audience be top-heavy with "celebs" as it normally is for SCD?

So the fact that they meet three weeks before the live shows will ensure that the celebrities will be able to dance this year?

This isn't about improving the show or ensuring that it's better than last year it's purely to do with trying to trump the X Factor for viewers which will by then will be at boot camp stage.

3 weeks is far too short a time, but I guess any keen celeb can learn from someone else (and hope nothing gets revealed in the press) or simply get their 'beginner's guide to the rumba etc' DVDs and start practicing long before that.

I like the idea of the show. Would love to see a few surprises for the pros and celebs in respect of whom they will be partnering!.

I think that you will find that your assumption is incorrect, as this happens every year - the couples have always been given a good few weeks before the first proper show, to allow for some basic training and practice.

Even if that is the case, the BBC should be able to do whatever it wants with it's flagship entertainment show.

I can't stand the mindset in this country that XF is superior and has a god given right to be top dog. In fact, maybe every TV channel in this country should show a black screen during the running time of XF every Saturday and Sunday night because it would be cruel to steal viewers from XF wouldn't it?

TV schedules during primetime are supposed to be competitive and diverse, not monopolistic which is what ITV want to do every weekend during the Autumn.

You miss my point. I'm aware that the dancers and the celebs meet and start practising a few weeks before the live shows start. The issue is why SCD need a live show to introduce the celebs and the dancers for the first time.

In 2008 and I think in 2007 SCD screened preview shows the week before the first live show showing the celebs meeting the dancers for the first time and starting to practice dancing. Last year that was abandoned in favour of an additional live show on a Friday night.

It appears that SCD have concluded that was a mistake as the public were clearly not convinced by the chemistry let alone the dancing of the dancers and their celeb partners. Rather than revert to showing the celebs meeting their dancers as before SCD want to convince the public that the dancers and their celeb partners are on a level by meeting for the "first time" on a live show.

Even if SCD don't give the impression that the celebs and their partners are dancing for the very first time the whole idea just appears to be a PR exercise to gain viewers and present an image that the show is going to be "better this year". I'm just not convinced at all.

As I recall, they had such a programme a number of series ago. And, as the comments in this thread have shown, the concept was (and still is) very much welcomed. The only difference is that the show will be broadcast much closer to it happening (unlike previous times).



In your opinion, maybe,.There are other possibilities of course, such as last year's series being too long, too many couples, last year comprising celebs who were less than engaging with the viewers, celebs who were not well-known etc.



I don't get this "on the level" bit, however such a programme so soon after the celebs/pairings have become known, will be likely to be welcomed by many, as it will build on the sense of anticipation. However, a cynic might of course see it otherwise.



Sorry? They never have attempted to give that impression before, especially when it is normally made clear that the couples met a few weeks prior to the 1st live show..


And why ever not? Why shouldn't the BBC trumpet its flagship Saturday evening programme, and try to build up interest and anticipation at a time that is most appropriate? That's all part of the publicity machine isn't it. What would you have them do - start the series with no fanfare, no attempt to build things up, no attempt to provide any background or insight into the pairings? No attempt to stir up interest from the public & media alike? That's a recipe for disaster (unless you are happy to see SCD only being watched by the hard-core fanbase)?

Remember, two sayings, one of which is slightly modified:

Change not only has to take place, it has to be seen to have taken place.

and

If you've got it, flaunt it..

I liked the preview shows that were aired for Strictly 2007 & 2008.

I certainly felt like I got to know the celebrities better than in 2009.

I could live with that for over half a million per series.

It can't be that tough sitting back whilst a make up artist makes one look ten years younger or waiting around in a star dressing room where one can take a gentle snooze whilst waiting for the reverential knock on the door to awaken Mr. Forsyth that it's all actions go.

Is what he does worth over a quarter of a million for roughly 3 months work? I venture not - and if he finds the task too arduous there are plenty of younger presenters gagging for the opportunity to show their mettle on the beebs flagship show.

Actually it won't be the launch show will be on at the same time as the X factor is still showing auditions.

The show itself will actually start at the same time as the Judges homes episodes.

if you're going to make a big statement like the one you made perhaps you should get the basic facts right.

He doesn't attend the Friday rehearsals. He turns up on Saturday for the final run through. They showed what he does on ITT last year and it didn't look that strenuous to me, apart from the fact that doing a live show is always a bit nerve-wracking. Virtually everything he says is scripted and on the autocue (in VERY LARGE LETTERS) and although he writes some of the most toe-curling jokes himself, they don't exactly tax the brain cells.

I cannot comment directly as I do not work within the industry. But if it ws that easy, and that undemanding, I guess that we would see far more stars making it to the top ....


See comment above, and also bear in mind that this is an entertainment industry, where top-flight performers DO command high salaries (just as top-flight footballers command £11,000 per week for what appears to be maybe 4 or 5 hrs work a week,at most, even though it's more).Entertainers/presenters in the top level of that indussrty do command high salaries/payments, just as top footballers do (and just as their salaries dwarf those of the lesser clubs in the lower divisions). That's how it is

Then again, I suppose that we are all free to try to attain those same heights aren't we, after all, it can't be that difficult an industry to break into ......

Thanks, I was not sure, I stand corrected.


So why don't more people do such work? Why are there not more such presenters/performers who could be dragged off the streets and out of the pubs/clubs to be a successful presenter?

Maybe because it is not as easy a job (as demonstrated by some less-capable performers), or that the top-flight is rather more difficult a tier to crack?

Or maybe it's easy being an armchair critic?


But I have no wish to turn this thread into another "Brucie must go/he can't read an autocue" thread (there's plenty of those around to comment on). The initial point was that, as in other programmes, there is far more of a presenter's time taken up with the programme than just the time that we see them on screen, just because they only appear for 90 mins does not mean that is the sum total of their workload.

Have I upset a Brucie fan?

Please take my post as intended - part serious, part tongue in cheek.

I fully appreciate that sublime talent in entertainment/sport etc. will always be richly reward by virtue of supply and demand: but imo Bruce does not fit into the rarity category occupied by the likes of Ronaldo, Messi, Ziddane et al. He does not have the pulling power of Nadal or Federer - not to mention those world class performers in the field of music - Placido Domingo, Jose Carreras, Rolando Villazon and J D Flores.

Villazon - now there's a talent that can pack opera houses world wide; it would be interesting to know how much the beeb paid him for Popstar to Superstar in comparison to Brucie's fee.

I'd like to correct an earlier error (post 40) - his remuneration is over half a million, not as I posted a quarter of a million.
Last edited by Ignazio : 15-08-2010 at 13:19

I agree with what you're saying - but Popstar to Operastar was ITV, was it not? Even so, I don't think it's unreasonable at all for the BBC to pay in the similar region as commercial channels for its stars... after all, if they don't pay competitively then who would work for them?

oops

Sure the beeb should pay a competitive rate - but there's a difference between a realistic reward and an excessive remuneration for someone who has constantly shown that it's pipe and slippers time.

There are plenty of young presenters more than capable of stepping into Bruce's shoes - give them a go!

At least we'd be spared the discomfort of misread autocues, cringeworthy jokes and embarrassingly attention seeking singing and dancing.

Between the exorbitant fees paid to Bruce and Alesha I think the beeb can be justly accused of wasting the licence payers money.

I'm speaking for myself here - their supporters have every right to disagree with me.

No. I do however appreciate that certain sectors and levels of the entertainment industry do support relatively high salaries/earnings. And the whole Bruce should stay/go thing has been discussed & chewed over so many times on here, I have no intention of revisiting that particular side road.


OK, however sometimes on these forums it is rather difficult to determine whether such comments are indeed serious or not.


Well, I was not looking to make direct comparisons between specific people. Just a generic comment regarding relative earnings between areas of the entertainment industry (if you class, as I do, football as part of that industry). Premier League footballers can be earning £11,000 a week every week all year for maybe appearing on a pitch twice a week (and not always for the full 90 mins). Sometimes they get the £11,000 (I use that figure as an example of course) even if they sit it out on the bench. £11,000 a week for sitting down!

But of course, there are many hidden training sessions to attend, much in the way of fitness to be maintained, skills to be improved, things that we might not always be aware of.

I don't disagree with you, Ignazio. I think I phrased my reply badly.

I think, however, the fact that particularly with Bruce there seems to be an equal number of people who think he's good as there are who... don't (and you can count me in the latter here) means that I'm not sure it's clear cut that they're wasting license fee money. Alesha, on the other hand is probably less easy to defend on this score if we're basing it on a pay:audience reaction - although I don't believe we know what she's actually paid?

(Personally I think that whatever they're paying Bruce, Tess and Bruno is far too much if it's above minimum wage, but that's just my own preferences showing! )

now that's a show I really enjoyed, where the judges were generally civilised to each other and to the contestants

shame we couldn't get a knitted Rolando though