|
||||||||
Yet more rubbish editing - should the production campany be fired? |
![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#26 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 29
|
Come on dude, you mentioned Joanna haters in a posting to me, alright its not a direct accusation but its a pretty strong inference.
Regarding the cut you know all too well it was about a cut in the footage during the escalation from calm to Jamie getting angry, in that segment there is no cut, the cut before that is before the confrontation and is irrelevant surely. In any case I'd urge anyone to take a look at it for themselves, and there I'll leave it, as otherwise I think we'll just end up talking in circles. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#27 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,226
|
Quote:
Agreed. I suspect it's because the deal didn't bring in very much, and it was too complicated to explain why it was a good deal anyway. The point is, any benefit you get from the deal effectively counts double, because you are not only gaining it, you are preventing the other team from gaining it.
For example, if the agency increased your sales by 15%, then it's still worth paying them 25% of your total, if the alternative would be for the other team to get them and pay them 25% of the 15%. I think. I can understand them not giving the raw numbers in the main show, because without analysis they'd be misleading. Lord Sugar would look like an idiot for applauding. And I can understand them not giving the analysis, either, because it would be too complicated. I think it's a shame they don't give more details, either on You're Fired or else on their website, where interested people could find out. This goes for a lot of things. I'd like to know Joanna's and Chris's sales figures, for example, but they've not been mentioned. I agree with this, too. People have said Joanna was terrible in the first two episodes, much improved since then, and now relapsed at the end. I don't think she changed much and it's mostly editing. (Also, I don't think she was terrible then or now.) I agree they have a problem explaining the detail. I doubt if much of the population could follow the solution - let alone work it out. They also have an issue where Chris seems not to know what he's doing, but then agrees with LS that he was being shrewd - thats interesting in itself for what it tells us about Chris, but its also not followed up. They may also have a big problem, as you say, if they show that the Chris solution made no difference or was very risky or was the result of floundering - because that would make LS look stupid for assuming it was a good idea shrewdly negotiated. The net result though is that the show has claims made that are not supported by the evidence presented, which may be wrong and may be crucial to who wins. Perhaps they would be better off not designing tasks which depended (or not) on making conclusions none of the candidates were able to make and which need at least additional maths at GCSE to evaluate. |
|
|
|
|
|
#28 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,089
|
Quote:
Come on dude, you mentioned Joanna haters in a posting to me, alright its not a direct accusation but its a pretty strong inference.
Quote:
Regarding the cut you know all too well it was about a cut in the footage during the escalation from calm to Jamie getting angry, in that segment there is no cut, the cut before that is before the confrontation and is irrelevant surely.
I said 'first' shot of Joanna in the doorway because that is what I meant.I wanted to know whether, before the 'escalation' scene, Jamie had either answered her question of behaved in a particularly hostile or obstructive manner. It would have given us a better idea of what was going on. However, as I said in another thread, this whole incident has been blown up out of all proportion |
|
|
|
|
|
#29 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 11,878
|
Quote:
I agree they have a problem explaining the detail. I doubt if much of the population could follow the solution - let alone work it out.
And this was a serious lack, given Lord Sugar claims the programme to be educational. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 00:30.


