DS Forums

 
 

RIP Strictly (as we knew it)


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 28-11-2010, 19:31
-Sid-
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 28,896
I think people are only sensing that when their favourites aren't doing well. This year, I don't have a real favourite (I like Kara, Matt, Scott, Pamela, Patsy, Gavin) all equally. I really don't ret riled up about the judges scoring because of that. I would be more worried if Anne achieved a higher score than any of the others, I would be up in arms then. Otherwise, (apart from Len's attack on Kara the other week) I don't care who is or isn't top. For instance, Matt has weaknesses (his face and his emotions during the dance) and strengths (beautiful mover and technical quite good), and Scott has weaknesses (when a dance goes wrong it goes horribly wrong) and strengths (when he gets it right, it's great). Same with Kara and Pamela (although Kara is the more natural dancer, probably also related to age and agility).

I hope that Anne doesn't make the final, but if any of the top four get there, I will be happy (I will even be happy if Gavin and Patsy make it there, although yesterday I saw that Gavin is really not improving anymore).
Not in my case as my favourites are Kara and Scott and I think both were over-marked and in Scott's case he was placed in the wrong position on the leaderboard.

Moreover, I'm not mad about Matt but I felt he should have been top, but because he's probably doing very well in the public vote I feel like the judges/producers thought he could be risked in the mid-table position, whereas someone like Pamela couldn't so she needed help.

Just my gut feeling of course.

Was that the year they overmarked Kelly Brook, who the public didn't really like, to ensure she was out of the danger zone? I recall Bruno giving her a ten when Brendan had put in an extra, and therefore illegal, lift. And of course Matt Di Angelo managed to sit on a stair for most of the routine, but still got saved..........................or have I got the wrong series?

Basically, I think you are right, they can't save their favourites by using the dance off this year, so they're manipulating the scoring instead.
Yes that was Series 5 - also the year the dance-off was introduced. I wish they'd left well alone.
-Sid- is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 28-11-2010, 19:46
Dollystanford
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,412
I adore kara - her dance was worth a 7
I usually like matt - probably an 8
scott completely forgot half the dance - 4
ann - 1
pamela - don't like her, hated the dance, 6
patsy - not a bad attempt but meh - 5
gavbot - truly awful - 3
Dollystanford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2010, 19:47
Pasta
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,966
Wasn't Matt Di Angelo saved by the public, not the judges?
Pasta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2010, 19:49
Leatherface!!!
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Earth dumbarse
Posts: 4,394
Wasn't Matt Di Angelo saved by the public, not the judges?
No the judges saved him agaisnt Gethin. Tbh I wanted Matt through, I could never warm to Gethin, and I quite like Matts Waltz
Leatherface!!! is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2010, 19:50
zoepaulpenny
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: the land of the hobbit.
Posts: 8,839
see ANN is through again..
zoepaulpenny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2010, 19:50
Nesty12345
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 48
the "death" of these shows is down to the idiots that keep voting for Widdicombe & Wagner.

But really it is down to the program makers who insist in keep putting the John Sargeants, Todd Carty's & Widdecombe in it in the first place.

And Louie Walshes' fault for bringing back Wagner
Nesty12345 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2010, 19:54
Cassie
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Deep in Berkshire Countryside
Posts: 1,578
I adore kara - her dance was worth a 7
I usually like matt - probably an 8
scott completely forgot half the dance - 4
ann - 1
pamela - don't like her, hated the dance, 6
patsy - not a bad attempt but meh - 5
gavbot - truly awful - 3
Totally agree Dollystandford.
What were the judges up to last night? Ridiculous marking for Scott.

I just feel some of the newer pro's aren't as good at choreography as previous dancers, ie Karen, Lilia, Matthew and Ian. Coupled with all the silly changes to the format this series is pretty awful. Not the celeb's fault but instead of enjoyment the show is now causing me severe irritation.

I also agree that 'outside' influences are affecting the public voting figures. Whether its due to betting odd's or media outlets requiring 'stories' there is definately some dogy votes.
Cassie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2010, 20:04
Zeus
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Leeds
Posts: 10,280
Well I can only speak for myself but I still think the show is flippin' fantastic!
Zeus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2010, 20:10
SheShe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,002
Based on last night's routine, I honestly think Ann could win this. There was very little dancing content, but it was actually funny and 'entertaining'.

If Ann wins, I really don't see how there could be another series - after all, why would any celebrity put in all the hours of training, knowing that someone else could win with a plastic iceberg and a foghorn? It's the same with the X-Factor - if Wagner wins, all pretense of being a singing competition is lost, so I don't think they could continue.



I don't think she'll win. I sincerely hope not.
SheShe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2010, 20:23
lach doch mal
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Sofas are deities
Posts: 16,123
Not in my case as my favourites are Kara and Scott and I think both were over-marked and in Scott's case he was placed in the wrong position on the leaderboard.

Moreover, I'm not mad about Matt but I felt he should have been top, but because he's probably doing very well in the public vote I feel like the judges/producers thought he could be risked in the mid-table position, whereas someone like Pamela couldn't so she needed help.

Just my gut feeling of course.



Yes that was Series 5 - also the year the dance-off was introduced. I wish they'd left well alone.
Fair enough Sid. I have to say I can see where the judges are coming from with Matt, his face was awful, so the dance was a bit ruined for me. I prefered Kara's dance.

I don't know if the judges are really trying to be cunning, at the end of the day, either they know the voting pattern (in which case you are right) or they don't (and then they would be stupid to put a good dancer lower down - maybe Matt just didn't convince them tonight?).
lach doch mal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2010, 20:30
tvaddict37
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: the dance floor
Posts: 1,796
well i'm sorry everyone, but scd has, i believe, got excellent ratings this year. If people like Ann (and Chris Parker) aren't "allowed" to win, why put them in?? Every year there are "under dogs" that get thru. At Least A&A entertain, Chris Parker was plain rubbish, but the voters voted.

As for changes on the show, everything changes. Stop prenetedning you won't watch as you either will or enough other people will for SCD to live on.

As some have said, its entertainment not sport - otherwise Ann wouldn't have been in from the start.
tvaddict37 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2010, 20:37
chipsaunt
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 928
At the beginning of the series, I was disappointed to see that some of my favourite pro dancers were not involved - such as Ian, Darren and Lilia. At the time I thought "well, lets give the newbies a chance". If the changing of the guard was the only problem, it wouldn't be so bad, but some of the new pros are not as good at choreography as the experts such as Lilia and Ian (both of whom I loved and I miss very much).

It is and still can be a great show, if they will stop changing a formula that used to work. I know that ratings are everything but I thought SCD was always popular anyway.
chipsaunt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2010, 20:43
wildwestlady
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Wild and Windy West Wales
Posts: 292
well i'm sorry everyone, but scd has, i believe, got excellent ratings this year. If people like Ann (and Chris Parker) aren't "allowed" to win, why put them in?? Every year there are "under dogs" that get thru. At Least A&A entertain, Chris Parker was plain rubbish, but the voters voted.

As for changes on the show, everything changes. Stop prenetedning you won't watch as you either will or enough other people will for SCD to live on.

As some have said, its entertainment not sport - otherwise Ann wouldn't have been in from the start.
How I disagree with you! Just because something has 'excellent ratings' doesn't mean it's any good. Look at X Factor and the Sun newspaper, for example. Agreed, everything changes but not all change is for the better - just look at our current government. It's lazy thinking to condemn anyone who opposes certain changes for good reason by saying that change is inevitable. And it's equally lazy to say that because it's 'entertainment' anything goes. Sorry to be blunt but I feel pretty strongly about this
wildwestlady is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2010, 21:33
chipsaunt
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 928
How I disagree with you! Just because something has 'excellent ratings' doesn't mean it's any good. Look at X Factor and the Sun newspaper, for example. Agreed, everything changes but not all change is for the better - just look at our current government. It's lazy thinking to condemn anyone who opposes certain changes for good reason by saying that change is inevitable. And it's equally lazy to say that because it's 'entertainment' anything goes. Sorry to be blunt but I feel pretty strongly about this
I agree with you (again). Change is not inevitable and we have TV shows that have stayed pretty much the same for decades (eg. University Challenge), and I feel sad that some people think that everything should be dumbed down.
As in politics, changing things just because you can doesn't necessarily make it better.

I feel that as regards SCD we need a campaign - write to the BBC or something. There is a Points of View Messageboard (with a lively discussion for SCD) but who knows whether the producers read it?
chipsaunt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2010, 21:44
Paace
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 12,487
I agree with you (again). Change is not inevitable and we have TV shows that have stayed pretty much the same for decades (eg. University Challenge), and I feel sad that some people think that everything should be dumbed down.
As in politics, changing things just because you can doesn't necessarily make it better.

I feel that as regards SCD we need a campaign - write to the BBC or something. There is a Points of View Messageboard (with a lively discussion for SCD) but who knows whether the producers read it?
I agree. We were just commenting how Antiques Roadshow has remained such a fabulous programme down the years even though it has had different presenters.

There is, was no need to change an excellent formula with SCD.
Paace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2010, 21:53
fatskia
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 8,563
I think they have been helped this year by a good selection of celebs and mostly good pairings.

I dont bother watching the results show most weeks now, so I'd have to say they have screwed it up.

The changes to the set are OK.

I had hoped that we would get more and better pro dances and that hasn't happened.

The standard of dancing from my point of view has suffered from all the changes to the rules, gimmicks, comedy in dances that dont need comedy, and props.
I liked Aliona's and Artem's AS. I think Aliona's was within the rules. My preference would be to have kept the old rules and each dance to adhere to the rules and style of dance ie. no Disco substituting for any Latin dance.

Its not dead, it's just got a bit ill, but there are a few plus points this year too.
fatskia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2010, 22:21
Dorabella14
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: 2 cm from Brussels
Posts: 1,477
well i'm sorry everyone, but scd has, i believe, got excellent ratings this year. If people like Ann (and Chris Parker) aren't "allowed" to win, why put them in?? Every year there are "under dogs" that get thru. At Least A&A entertain, Chris Parker was plain rubbish, but the voters voted.As for changes on the show, everything changes. Stop prenetedning you won't watch as you either will or enough other people will for SCD to live on.

As some have said, its entertainment not sport - otherwise Ann wouldn't have been in from the start.
Chris Parker was competing in the very first series,(just 8 couples) done for Children in Need and not all of it was taken very seriously; The finals was a shambles and the presentation of the trophy a huge non-event.

If the show were purely about entertainment, as you insist, then no need for any of the dance couples to train hard. No need for them to do any more than show up, wear some costumes, and 'give it a try'.

So why do the professionals try so hard then to push their untalented celebs to do harder and harder things each week?

Because if they didn't, guess who would complain? Yep, got it in one - the voters. The GBP.

So if the dancers try hard but get ousted by a comic turn, they feel hard done by.
If the dancers don't try hard - their voting support falls away.
But to stay in, all they have to do is some slapstick.

You call that Morton's Fork "entertainment"? More like "panem et circenses" to me.
Dorabella14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2010, 22:22
Phil Ander
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,160
Interesting that Wagner has gone out of the X Factor tonight so stories of the Great British Public trying to sabotage shows are a little premature.

I think after the last series many people thought it was starting to look jaded and needed new ideas. For my part, the standing ovation thing imported form the USA was something I could do with out. On the other hand, the fact that the BBC are paying celebs on the basis of how far they go in the competition has I believe avoided contestants dropping out for non health related reasons.
Phil Ander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2010, 22:40
gagaluv
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 712
Last night's distinctly lacklustre programme, with not one oustanding performance, some error-strewn dances and extraordinarily inconsistent marking from the judges, was for me the final nail in Strictly's coffin.

Presumably in an effort to rival the viewing figures of the dreadful X Factor, the BBC have dumbed the show down to such an extent that it is almost unrecognisable as the quality product it once was. Remember when we used to have regular group dances by the pros on every show? Remember when there were no props? When dances were recognisable as what they were meant to be and there were clear rules? When the music was appropriate to the dance? When the costumes were more than just fringed bikinis? When we had Ian Waite? And Matt Cutler? And Arlene Phillips? When there was no deliberately chosen joke candidate?

Last night I felt I was present at a wake, with all the other people involved frantically trying to pretend the body was still alive. For me it's not just Bruce who is on his way out - I'm afraid it's the show itself.
OTT much! Some of your points are also a bit thinly based. Every results show this series has had a pro dance or two, I don't understand how props can ruin an entire programme, the dances are still recognisable (yes there maybe more lifts involved and there needs to be clearer cut stuff about that, but apart from that, all the dances seem the same as years gone by). And there have always been those kind of costumes on strictly from day 1.

Im sorry that's how you feel, but it seems rather outlandish compared to what your complaining about.
gagaluv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2010, 22:43
gagaluv
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 712
Also to make the point, this year's strictly has done amazingly in the ratings so I doubt the BBC will take much notice of an petitons or complaints when they're doing so well (they even beat the X factor when the two shows overlap).
gagaluv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2010, 22:49
Vincy82
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 7,535
Last night's distinctly lacklustre programme, with not one oustanding performance, some error-strewn dances and extraordinarily inconsistent marking from the judges, was for me the final nail in Strictly's coffin.

Presumably in an effort to rival the viewing figures of the dreadful X Factor, the BBC have dumbed the show down to such an extent that it is almost unrecognisable as the quality product it once was. Remember when we used to have regular group dances by the pros on every show? Remember when there were no props? When dances were recognisable as what they were meant to be and there were clear rules? When the music was appropriate to the dance? When the costumes were more than just fringed bikinis? When we had Ian Waite? And Matt Cutler? And Arlene Phillips? When there was no deliberately chosen joke candidate?

Last night I felt I was present at a wake, with all the other people involved frantically trying to pretend the body was still alive. For me it's not just Bruce who is on his way out - I'm afraid it's the show itself.
Ye of short memory. There was always a joke element, ie John Seargent, Fiona Phillips, etc; the only difference is that this year the voting public have been well and truly brainwashed into keeping that arrogant old woman in. Seems to me also, its becoming a showcase for Anton's 'comedic value'.
Vincy82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2010, 22:54
Paace
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 12,487
Interesting that Wagner has gone out of the X Factor tonight so stories of the Great British Public trying to sabotage shows are a little premature.

I think after the last series many people thought it was starting to look jaded and needed new ideas. For my part, the standing ovation thing imported form the USA was something I could do with out. On the other hand, the fact that the BBC are paying celebs on the basis of how far they go in the competition has I believe avoided contestants dropping out for non health related reasons.
I didn't know this . Where did you read this as I would like to check it out?
Do you know if all the celebs are getting paid the same rate?
Paace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-11-2010, 23:01
dome
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 52,176
I didn't know this . Where did you read this as I would like to check it out?
Do you know if all the celebs are getting paid the same rate?
It was reported before the show, they are all on the same rate.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/t...ntestants.html
dome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-11-2010, 08:34
wildwestlady
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Wild and Windy West Wales
Posts: 292
OTT much! Some of your points are also a bit thinly based. Every results show this series has had a pro dance or two, I don't understand how props can ruin an entire programme, the dances are still recognisable (yes there maybe more lifts involved and there needs to be clearer cut stuff about that, but apart from that, all the dances seem the same as years gone by). And there have always been those kind of costumes on strictly from day 1.

Im sorry that's how you feel, but it seems rather outlandish compared to what your complaining about.
Funny that my 'thinly-based ' points have met a lot of agreement from other posters. As to the dances seeming the same as in the past: all I can say is that you can't have been paying very close attention. And could you please clarify the meaning of the term 'outlandish' and indeed the sense of the whole of your last sentence?
wildwestlady is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-11-2010, 09:33
MarkBluemel
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 491
Based on last night's routine, I honestly think Ann could win this. There was very little dancing content, but it was actually funny and 'entertaining'.
You must have drunk more than me before watching.

From where I sat, it was witless and excruciatingly, embarrassingly awful.
MarkBluemel is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:46.