Originally Posted by Monaogg:
“Perhaps they are working on the double, double bluff.
”
“Perhaps they are working on the double, double bluff.
”
I agree on both counts...
The double double bluff for the producers and V&F.
Does the public vote really count at all?
3 of 4
Originally Posted by Monkseal:
“Does the plan to have Denise win at all costs include having judges repeatedly refer to her as a "pro", inviting guests onto "It Takes Two" who make sarcy comments about how she's got nothing to worry about because of all her past experience, and having BBC employees highlight her past dance experience from the second her name is announced as part of the cast?
Bit of a shit plan isn't it?
Does it also include how it's apparently utterly forbidden for the judges to point out that Louis dances everything with a face like a smacked arse, or the producers apparent willingness to go along with Vincent & Flavia's transparently vote-grubbing ploy of an "Argentine Tango" face-off for the final, when they seem to be micromanaging what dances other people do and when down to the last detail?”
“Does the plan to have Denise win at all costs include having judges repeatedly refer to her as a "pro", inviting guests onto "It Takes Two" who make sarcy comments about how she's got nothing to worry about because of all her past experience, and having BBC employees highlight her past dance experience from the second her name is announced as part of the cast?
Bit of a shit plan isn't it?
Does it also include how it's apparently utterly forbidden for the judges to point out that Louis dances everything with a face like a smacked arse, or the producers apparent willingness to go along with Vincent & Flavia's transparently vote-grubbing ploy of an "Argentine Tango" face-off for the final, when they seem to be micromanaging what dances other people do and when down to the last detail?”
I think Denise and Louis are pretty even on rubbishing, sly comments on ITT and negative press. I don't think there is a producer's plan, personally, or if there it isn't for either of these 2. I think the judges individually have their favourites, like every year. I think the way the judges have gone for Louis's thumbs or or Flavia's choreography and not for his lack of performance is really weird but it isn't to help him - if they wanted to help him they'd be following the 'acting coach' storyline and making that his journey. Any more than protecting Lisa is helping her either.
I think Flavia and Vincent were both daft to suggest they had plans for the final. Never goes down well.
If there's a plan for anyone to win this year- I'm not really seeing it. Unless it's a really bad one.
People who get the "Craig/Arlene is needlessly nitpicky over minor technical faults" and "the judges disagree about the pros choreography" have been far more likely to win than the "acting coach" celebs. I can't think of a single celeb who went to an acting coach who won, whereas the last three winners at least have all had the latter thrown at them.
Originally Posted by Monkseal:
“People who get the "Craig/Arlene is needlessly nitpicky over minor technical faults" and "the judges disagree about the pros choreography" have been far more likely to win than the "acting coach" celebs. I can't think of a single celeb who went to an acting coach who won, whereas the last three winners at least have all had the latter thrown at them.”
“People who get the "Craig/Arlene is needlessly nitpicky over minor technical faults" and "the judges disagree about the pros choreography" have been far more likely to win than the "acting coach" celebs. I can't think of a single celeb who went to an acting coach who won, whereas the last three winners at least have all had the latter thrown at them.”
I know I shouldn't try and argue about the show history with you - I can't even remember who the last three winners are without looking it up.
But I still really don't think Louis's treatment by the show in the last couple of weeks is some master plan to make him the winner. Unless as ellieb says, it's a really bad plan. I'm suppose I get gloomy because I'm bracing myself for Louis being a repeat of Austen going out to Lisa in a dance off, but I'm more than happy to be wrong.
Originally Posted by jtnorth:
“I think Denise and Louis are pretty even on rubbishing, sly comments on ITT and negative press. I don't think there is a producer's plan, personally, or if there it isn't for either of these 2. I think the judges individually have their favourites, like every year. I think the way the judges have gone for Louis's thumbs or or Flavia's choreography and not for his lack of performance is really weird but it isn't to help him - if they wanted to help him they'd be following the 'acting coach' storyline and making that his journey. Any more than protecting Lisa is helping her either.
I think Flavia and Vincent were both daft to suggest they had plans for the final. Never goes down well.”
“I think Denise and Louis are pretty even on rubbishing, sly comments on ITT and negative press. I don't think there is a producer's plan, personally, or if there it isn't for either of these 2. I think the judges individually have their favourites, like every year. I think the way the judges have gone for Louis's thumbs or or Flavia's choreography and not for his lack of performance is really weird but it isn't to help him - if they wanted to help him they'd be following the 'acting coach' storyline and making that his journey. Any more than protecting Lisa is helping her either.
I think Flavia and Vincent were both daft to suggest they had plans for the final. Never goes down well.”
It could be something that Flavia and Vincent always insist on though - not doing the AT until the later stages. Flavia hasn't had the AT since Matt di Angilo and Vincent hasn't done one since Rachel.
The only thing is this year, they both have potentials - it makes more of a story than them saying it last year when Flavia was playing the lovely assistant to Russell and Vincent was squiring Edwina
Originally Posted by jtnorth:
“I know I shouldn't try and argue about the show history with you - I can't even remember who the last three winners are without looking it up. But I still really don't think Louis's treatment by the show in the last couple of weeks is some master plan to make him the winner. Unless as ellieb says, it's a really bad plan. I'm suppose I get gloomy because I'm bracing myself for Louis being a repeat of Austen going out to Lisa in a dance off, but I'm more than happy to be wrong.”
“I know I shouldn't try and argue about the show history with you - I can't even remember who the last three winners are without looking it up.
But I still really don't think Louis's treatment by the show in the last couple of weeks is some master plan to make him the winner. Unless as ellieb says, it's a really bad plan. I'm suppose I get gloomy because I'm bracing myself for Louis being a repeat of Austen going out to Lisa in a dance off, but I'm more than happy to be wrong.”
I don't think it's a master-plan to make him win - I think it's an attempt to give him a journey, because he's an important character to the series who has a very strong chance of winning (unlike, say, Colin, or Fern) and it'd be boring otherwise.
I think we're in a very different era from the Series 6/7 era. Everything about the show now, from the judging decisions to the gimmicks, props, comedy VTs and general "dumbing down" is geared towards maximim populism. Moira Ross changed things drastically, and the new producers are aping her approach because it worked incredibly succesfully in terms of ratings. IMO the three most popular celebrities will wind up in the final, whoever they may be. If Louis falls out before then, it'll be because he's thrown it away himself.
Originally Posted by Monkseal:
“People who get the "Craig/Arlene is needlessly nitpicky over minor technical faults" and "the judges disagree about the pros choreography" have been far more likely to win than the "acting coach" celebs. I can't think of a single celeb who went to an acting coach who won, whereas the last three winners at least have all had the latter thrown at them.”
“People who get the "Craig/Arlene is needlessly nitpicky over minor technical faults" and "the judges disagree about the pros choreography" have been far more likely to win than the "acting coach" celebs. I can't think of a single celeb who went to an acting coach who won, whereas the last three winners at least have all had the latter thrown at them.”
When they've done that though- has the celeb in question already been OK at the performance side of things? I'm not sure- I'm genuinely asking. I don't know- if they were trying to help Louis to win, I feel like they'd at least mention the performing to him- that seems to be the aspect about him that bothers people the most. People who are able to perform, seem to be the ones the public like. I may be wrong here- it's just the impression I have. The ones who seem to be enjoying themselves seem to be the ones that get the votes in the end.
Originally Posted by Monaogg:
“If there is any voter sway by the judges it may possibly (a huge speculation on my part though) be down to what they say more than the leader board positions.”
“If there is any voter sway by the judges it may possibly (a huge speculation on my part though) be down to what they say more than the leader board positions.”
I agree - what the judges say is likely to influence thinking more than the scores, unless they're wildly at odds. I imagine the worst scenario for a couple needing votes would be to be in the middle ground (points wise) but having received great comments. I also think it's the outrageous or rude comments that stick in the craw and galvanise sets of fans and make good copy for the papers.
Originally Posted by ellieb123:
“If there's a plan for anyone to win this year- I'm not really seeing it. Unless it's a really bad one.”
“If there's a plan for anyone to win this year- I'm not really seeing it. Unless it's a really bad one.”
I think there are plans and storylines, of sorts, but it's fluid. I think it starts at casting and runs through the series, but they drop some storylines and pick up on others as things unfold (culled from the bumper book of reality show stories
). I don't think there's a 'chosen one' but I reckon they try and do what they can to prop up their 'best assets'.
Originally Posted by ellieb123:
“When they've done that though- has the celeb in question already been OK at the performance side of things? I'm not sure- I'm genuinely asking. I don't know- if they were trying to help Louis to win, I feel like they'd at least mention the performing to him- that seems to be the aspect about him that bothers people the most. People who are able to perform, seem to be the ones the public like. I may be wrong here- it's just the impression I have. The ones who seem to be enjoying themselves seem to be the ones that get the votes in the end.”
“When they've done that though- has the celeb in question already been OK at the performance side of things? I'm not sure- I'm genuinely asking. I don't know- if they were trying to help Louis to win, I feel like they'd at least mention the performing to him- that seems to be the aspect about him that bothers people the most. People who are able to perform, seem to be the ones the public like. I may be wrong here- it's just the impression I have. The ones who seem to be enjoying themselves seem to be the ones that get the votes in the end.”
I don't remember Harry ever getting much criticism for the performance side of his stuff, when that seemed to be the thing most of his detractors held against him. They also went after Ricky Nipple for being pigeon-toed towards the end, rather than the fact that he was far less engaging a "performer" than Chris was. Not that they were trying to get Ricky the win, because it was a done deal, but they were certainly trying to haul him into the final over Ali/Laila/Natalie.
The problem with sending someone to an acting coach, is that it tends to only work if you're an ebuliant personality anyway. Gethin's a natural tv presenter, and Matt Dawson's a massive ham, so it worked for them. They tried to send Gavbot and Mark Foster to acting coaches, and it didn't work, and they had no breakthrough, and it just looked stupid.
WRT : performance, I do think Louis is halfway there. He's mostly overcome the "he and Flavia have no chemistry" stuff and he's clearly far more lively backstage than he was at the beginning. He just needs to translate it to the floor, and throw in a few "I've really loved dancing/learning to dance with Flavia" interviews and he's set.
Originally Posted by fridgesoup:
“I agree - what the judges say is likely to influence thinking more than the scores, unless they're wildly at odds. I imagine the worst scenario for a couple needing votes would be to be in the middle ground (points wise) but having received great comments. I also think it's the outrageous or rude comments that stick in the craw and galvanise sets of fans and make good copy for the papers.
I think there are plans and storylines, of sorts, but it's fluid. I think it starts at casting and runs through the series, but they drop some storylines and pick up on others as things unfold (culled from the bumper book of reality show stories). I don't think there's a 'chosen one' but I reckon they try and do what they can to prop up their 'best assets'.”
“I agree - what the judges say is likely to influence thinking more than the scores, unless they're wildly at odds. I imagine the worst scenario for a couple needing votes would be to be in the middle ground (points wise) but having received great comments. I also think it's the outrageous or rude comments that stick in the craw and galvanise sets of fans and make good copy for the papers.
I think there are plans and storylines, of sorts, but it's fluid. I think it starts at casting and runs through the series, but they drop some storylines and pick up on others as things unfold (culled from the bumper book of reality show stories
). I don't think there's a 'chosen one' but I reckon they try and do what they can to prop up their 'best assets'.”
I think 'they' really, really wanted Victoria to get to Wemberly. The thought of the flying bike riding, bike riding song, Team GB themed outfit would be giddying for them. They might as well have held up 'you are now superflous' on their paddles instead of numbers afterwards
and I think she is a prime example of the way people remember the nice, carefully couched, you were very brave - have a lollipop, comments rather than the actual scores and leader board position.Louis and last week when Craig had to think about what he had done and explain himself on ITT. Twice. Was another example of how one low mark can affect how a dance is remembered rather than the actual total as well.
Originally Posted by sofakat:
“That's just it. I mean, it's just a TV show and not life changing, but I am a fan (with an FF button admittedly) and I am just aghast at some of the decisions and the judging this year.
There are times when the blatant lying of the judges about someone's ability is just farcical and we just sit there and think, 'wtf was that all about?'
”
“That's just it. I mean, it's just a TV show and not life changing, but I am a fan (with an FF button admittedly) and I am just aghast at some of the decisions and the judging this year.
There are times when the blatant lying of the judges about someone's ability is just farcical and we just sit there and think, 'wtf was that all about?'
”
Craig on Saturday said Denises Charleston was the best he had ever seen on Strictly. He gave it 9. Yet when Chris Hollins did his Charleston in 2009, he gave it 10. Now if Denises was the best Charleston he'd ever seen on Strictly why did he give it less than the one Chris Hollins danced?
Originally Posted by Monkseal:
“I don't remember Harry ever getting much criticism for the performance side of his stuff, when that seemed to be the thing most of his detractors held against him. They also went after Ricky Nipple for being pigeon-toed towards the end, rather than the fact that he was far less engaging a "performer" than Chris was. Not that they were trying to get Ricky the win, because it was a done deal, but they were certainly trying to haul him into the final over Ali/Laila/Natalie.
The problem with sending someone to an acting coach, is that it tends to only work if you're an ebuliant personality anyway. Gethin's a natural tv presenter, and Matt Dawson's a massive ham, so it worked for them. They tried to send Gavbot and Mark Foster to acting coaches, and it didn't work, and they had no breakthrough, and it just looked stupid.
WRT : performance, I do think Louis is halfway there. He's mostly overcome the "he and Flavia have no chemistry" stuff and he's clearly far more lively backstage than he was at the beginning. He just needs to translate it to the floor, and throw in a few "I've really loved dancing/learning to dance with Flavia" interviews and he's set.”
“I don't remember Harry ever getting much criticism for the performance side of his stuff, when that seemed to be the thing most of his detractors held against him. They also went after Ricky Nipple for being pigeon-toed towards the end, rather than the fact that he was far less engaging a "performer" than Chris was. Not that they were trying to get Ricky the win, because it was a done deal, but they were certainly trying to haul him into the final over Ali/Laila/Natalie.
The problem with sending someone to an acting coach, is that it tends to only work if you're an ebuliant personality anyway. Gethin's a natural tv presenter, and Matt Dawson's a massive ham, so it worked for them. They tried to send Gavbot and Mark Foster to acting coaches, and it didn't work, and they had no breakthrough, and it just looked stupid.
WRT : performance, I do think Louis is halfway there. He's mostly overcome the "he and Flavia have no chemistry" stuff and he's clearly far more lively backstage than he was at the beginning. He just needs to translate it to the floor, and throw in a few "I've really loved dancing/learning to dance with Flavia" interviews and he's set.”
See- I knew you'd remember. You're right- Harry didn't really get the comments on his performance side that he probably needed, and that didn't stop him. I don't really remember Chris Hollins' series- I may have wiped it from my memory deliberately! I think Louis is getting there performance wise- as you say, any remarks about his relationship with Flavia being cold have mainly disappeared. I do think if he doesn't crack the performance side he won't win though. I'm a bit unsure on an acting coach- I feel like it may just go in one ear and out the other with Louis- especially as he's not being told by the judges that it's something he needs to improve.
Originally Posted by mindyann:
“I think 'they' really, really wanted Victoria to get to Wemberly. The thought of the flying bike riding, bike riding song, Team GB themed outfit would be giddying for them. They might as well have held up 'you are now superflous' on their paddles instead of numbers afterwards”
“I think 'they' really, really wanted Victoria to get to Wemberly. The thought of the flying bike riding, bike riding song, Team GB themed outfit would be giddying for them. They might as well have held up 'you are now superflous' on their paddles instead of numbers afterwards
”
I can see the gleeful clapping at the production meeting
Originally Posted by wizzywick:
“Craig on Saturday said Denises Charleston was the best he had ever seen on Strictly. He gave it 9. Yet when Chris Hollins did his Charleston in 2009, he gave it 10. Now if Denises was the best Charleston he'd ever seen on Strictly why did he give it less than the one Chris Hollins danced?”
“Craig on Saturday said Denises Charleston was the best he had ever seen on Strictly. He gave it 9. Yet when Chris Hollins did his Charleston in 2009, he gave it 10. Now if Denises was the best Charleston he'd ever seen on Strictly why did he give it less than the one Chris Hollins danced?”
He was fibbing.
Originally Posted by Wiskas:
“Maybe instead of points from ten, we should have a tariff depending on what should be in the dance, and points deducted when they are not there. eg a Paso could have a tariff of 60, with certain required elements, and have points deducted for missing or poorly performed elements.”
“Maybe instead of points from ten, we should have a tariff depending on what should be in the dance, and points deducted when they are not there. eg a Paso could have a tariff of 60, with certain required elements, and have points deducted for missing or poorly performed elements.”
Nice idea but do you think the judges are up to that? On current evidence, they can barely remember how to get dressed in the morning let alone which elements have or have not been included in a particular dance.
Originally Posted by wizzywick:
“Craig on Saturday said Denises Charleston was the best he had ever seen on Strictly. He gave it 9. Yet when Chris Hollins did his Charleston in 2009, he gave it 10. Now if Denises was the best Charleston he'd ever seen on Strictly why did he give it less than the one Chris Hollins danced?”
“Craig on Saturday said Denises Charleston was the best he had ever seen on Strictly. He gave it 9. Yet when Chris Hollins did his Charleston in 2009, he gave it 10. Now if Denises was the best Charleston he'd ever seen on Strictly why did he give it less than the one Chris Hollins danced?”
Sometimes his @rse says things his brain can't keep up with.
Originally Posted by Monkseal:
“I don't remember Harry ever getting much criticism for the performance side of his stuff, when that seemed to be the thing most of his detractors held against him. They also went after Ricky Nipple for being pigeon-toed towards the end, rather than the fact that he was far less engaging a "performer" than Chris was. Not that they were trying to get Ricky the win, because it was a done deal, but they were certainly trying to haul him into the final over Ali/Laila/Natalie.
The problem with sending someone to an acting coach, is that it tends to only work if you're an ebuliant personality anyway. Gethin's a natural tv presenter, and Matt Dawson's a massive ham, so it worked for them. They tried to send Gavbot and Mark Foster to acting coaches, and it didn't work, and they had no breakthrough, and it just looked stupid.
WRT : performance, I do think Louis is halfway there. He's mostly overcome the "he and Flavia have no chemistry" stuff and he's clearly far more lively backstage than he was at the beginning. He just needs to translate it to the floor, and throw in a few "I've really loved dancing/learning to dance with Flavia" interviews and he's set.”
“I don't remember Harry ever getting much criticism for the performance side of his stuff, when that seemed to be the thing most of his detractors held against him. They also went after Ricky Nipple for being pigeon-toed towards the end, rather than the fact that he was far less engaging a "performer" than Chris was. Not that they were trying to get Ricky the win, because it was a done deal, but they were certainly trying to haul him into the final over Ali/Laila/Natalie.
The problem with sending someone to an acting coach, is that it tends to only work if you're an ebuliant personality anyway. Gethin's a natural tv presenter, and Matt Dawson's a massive ham, so it worked for them. They tried to send Gavbot and Mark Foster to acting coaches, and it didn't work, and they had no breakthrough, and it just looked stupid.
WRT : performance, I do think Louis is halfway there. He's mostly overcome the "he and Flavia have no chemistry" stuff and he's clearly far more lively backstage than he was at the beginning. He just needs to translate it to the floor, and throw in a few "I've really loved dancing/learning to dance with Flavia" interviews and he's set.”
If Louis can sob in a manly way about the terror of nearly being voted out whilst claiming how much he loves Flavia and learning to dance, they might as well pack up now, he'll walk it.
We hate tears on a woman, but we love them on a cute guy.
he's in touch with his emotions. The only trouble is he's not really a pretty crier.
Yes the public vote counts.
It was improved after series 6 when the judges could create ties to distance their favourites from those they wanted out. By tieing them up to series 6 they could have 3 of them on 6 points and the next celeb would only get 3 points. Now if they tie them and they all get 6 points, the next celeb gets 5 points.
The judges can still manipulate the results a bit and I think the producers use them to do so. We saw Craig very upset about an illegal lift in week one and none of the 3 judges seemed to be bothered by it.
We have new producers this series and they want to be successful. As someone pointed out - if you have 3 very popular celebs, its probably in the producers interests to keep them in longer than the unpopular ones.
I'm sure there is a lot of manipulating going on and the public voting figures are studied and decisions made which take account of the voting.
IMO almost everything can be used to manipulate (or try to) the public.
Like Karen being advised what way she should steer things with Choreography Corner.
The editing of all the VTs we see of training etc.
The results are announced in no particular order, so I take that to mean they select all of the positions and then randomly choose whether to swop numbers 2 and 3 around.
The alternative to bringing back the dance off would have been to make the Sunday show entertaining. That would have required thinking, skill, a bit of risk taking and some extra money.
It was improved after series 6 when the judges could create ties to distance their favourites from those they wanted out. By tieing them up to series 6 they could have 3 of them on 6 points and the next celeb would only get 3 points. Now if they tie them and they all get 6 points, the next celeb gets 5 points.
The judges can still manipulate the results a bit and I think the producers use them to do so. We saw Craig very upset about an illegal lift in week one and none of the 3 judges seemed to be bothered by it.
We have new producers this series and they want to be successful. As someone pointed out - if you have 3 very popular celebs, its probably in the producers interests to keep them in longer than the unpopular ones.
I'm sure there is a lot of manipulating going on and the public voting figures are studied and decisions made which take account of the voting.
IMO almost everything can be used to manipulate (or try to) the public.
Like Karen being advised what way she should steer things with Choreography Corner.
The editing of all the VTs we see of training etc.
The results are announced in no particular order, so I take that to mean they select all of the positions and then randomly choose whether to swop numbers 2 and 3 around.
The alternative to bringing back the dance off would have been to make the Sunday show entertaining. That would have required thinking, skill, a bit of risk taking and some extra money.
Originally Posted by Monkseal:
“I don't think it's a master-plan to make him win - I think it's an attempt to give him a journey, because he's an important character to the series who has a very strong chance of winning (unlike, say, Colin, or Fern) and it'd be boring otherwise.
I think we're in a very different era from the Series 6/7 era. Everything about the show now, from the judging decisions to the gimmicks, props, comedy VTs and general "dumbing down" is geared towards maximim populism. Moira Ross changed things drastically, and the new producers are aping her approach because it worked incredibly succesfully in terms of ratings. IMO the three most popular celebrities will wind up in the final, whoever they may be. If Louis falls out before then, it'll be because he's thrown it away himself.”
“I don't think it's a master-plan to make him win - I think it's an attempt to give him a journey, because he's an important character to the series who has a very strong chance of winning (unlike, say, Colin, or Fern) and it'd be boring otherwise.
I think we're in a very different era from the Series 6/7 era. Everything about the show now, from the judging decisions to the gimmicks, props, comedy VTs and general "dumbing down" is geared towards maximim populism. Moira Ross changed things drastically, and the new producers are aping her approach because it worked incredibly succesfully in terms of ratings. IMO the three most popular celebrities will wind up in the final, whoever they may be. If Louis falls out before then, it'll be because he's thrown it away himself.”
OK, fair points, I misunderstood you before.
The show is very different now, yes. I'm not sure that Len, Bruno and Craig are. It's hard to tell because we've had a couple of years break from the dance off. And I suppose it depends if you think they get told who to save or not - it's never occurred to me that they do, but maybe that's naive of me.
Originally Posted by nancy1975:
“Indeedy. We haven't even got there but I predict the same howls of anguish and outrage will be on here in the final weeks if they keep the DO.
I am thinking of a certain couple who may have an Austin done to them or even two couples this year... In answer to the thread, yes of course the voters have influence and rightly so. I sure as hell don't agree with the judges all the time, and they've got it wrong before. Very schadenfreudish when they tried to convince us Snowdonia was the greatest thing since the parting of the Red Sea, with 80/80 and then Bacofoil happened. Or ignoring certain people's faults like Zoe Ball's gapping and Emma Bunton's footwork while laying into others for less. Now that annoys me and others. Much of the public vote will be to right perceived wrongs and good for that.
Yeah, the public does have power. Darren and Lilia won from being third in the judges marks. Snowdon, Ball and Pamela went out third. But as well, I believe that the public have a great sense of justice and fair play and I well remember a letter in the national press after Sergeantgate which angrily said we'd have stopped voting for him at the quarter final and supported the others. Now that I believe, I am sure he'd have not got any further but the judges tried to manipulate and lecture the public on their choices far too much that series and it really rankled. It has been proven without a dance off that the public choose good winners that they like the best and there was no good reason to bring it back IMO.”
“Indeedy. We haven't even got there but I predict the same howls of anguish and outrage will be on here in the final weeks if they keep the DO.
I am thinking of a certain couple who may have an Austin done to them or even two couples this year... In answer to the thread, yes of course the voters have influence and rightly so. I sure as hell don't agree with the judges all the time, and they've got it wrong before. Very schadenfreudish when they tried to convince us Snowdonia was the greatest thing since the parting of the Red Sea, with 80/80 and then Bacofoil happened. Or ignoring certain people's faults like Zoe Ball's gapping and Emma Bunton's footwork while laying into others for less. Now that annoys me and others. Much of the public vote will be to right perceived wrongs and good for that.Yeah, the public does have power. Darren and Lilia won from being third in the judges marks. Snowdon, Ball and Pamela went out third. But as well, I believe that the public have a great sense of justice and fair play and I well remember a letter in the national press after Sergeantgate which angrily said we'd have stopped voting for him at the quarter final and supported the others. Now that I believe, I am sure he'd have not got any further but the judges tried to manipulate and lecture the public on their choices far too much that series and it really rankled. It has been proven without a dance off that the public choose good winners that they like the best and there was no good reason to bring it back IMO.”
While I'd agree with much of your post (something I think I've done previously, I think ...
), I don't think any couple's fate this year can quite compare with what happened to Austin in SCD6. Sergeantgate opened up such animosity between the producers/judges and the public that continuing to keep in two contestants who were consistently unpopular with viewers over the one contestant who could have realistically taken on Tom Chambers beggared belief. I'm not sure we've got anywhere near that territory yet - although your theory intrigues me ...!Whether the new producers - who have come from DOI - will pay any attention to that dark episode in Strictly's history remains to be seen ... but I would have thought they'd be unlikely to go down such an extreme route. Having said that, it's obvious that some contestants are being judged quite differently from others, and it's going to be tough to sustain that, the fewer there are left. Conversely, that in itself isn't anything new.
SCD is currently enjoying a surge in popularity over TXF - and, given the situation the BBC finds itself in presently, the onus will be on them to keep on delivering the feelgood factor with as much 'drama' as possible. It's impossible to underestimate how much currently rides on the show's continued success - so the producers have a very difficult path to walk ...
Originally Posted by Wiskas:
“I'd be interested to know about previous years - at what point in the series did we get the 'shock' bottom 2 contestant? It seems convenient that Kimberley was in the bottom two last week, just before she was due to mime on the results show, and just when things were getting a bit slow. It could have introduced a bit of tension - if you cared whether she got knocked out or not, which I don't. She was never in danger with Fern being the other bottom two contestant.
I don't watch other public-vote reality shows, but for some reason I think SCD is the only one where the judges' votes count towards who is in the bottom two, or am I talking complete rubbish (again)?
Being a conspiracy theorist, it seems to me that if there was nothing to hide then the details of the public vote would be made public and the results would be called out in the actual order, not this 'no particular order' malarky.”
“I'd be interested to know about previous years - at what point in the series did we get the 'shock' bottom 2 contestant? It seems convenient that Kimberley was in the bottom two last week, just before she was due to mime on the results show, and just when things were getting a bit slow. It could have introduced a bit of tension - if you cared whether she got knocked out or not, which I don't. She was never in danger with Fern being the other bottom two contestant.
I don't watch other public-vote reality shows, but for some reason I think SCD is the only one where the judges' votes count towards who is in the bottom two, or am I talking complete rubbish (again)?
Being a conspiracy theorist, it seems to me that if there was nothing to hide then the details of the public vote would be made public and the results would be called out in the actual order, not this 'no particular order' malarky.”
Big Brother has no judges vote but the vote is now tiny and predictable and entirely shaped by twists, biases, imposed storylines and coverage. I'm A Celebrity has no judges vote - but again controls the storylines and coverage. Some people just vanish from the screen. The vote has been a negative factor for years - as the few who vote put the same people into trials, and no one else gets much of a chance unless they survive till the end. Dancing On Ice has a public vote and it has a bad record of good performers getting no votes, a strong anti-judge vote keeping bad perfromers in, and an ITV show bias in its winners. It has a skate off - just like SCD - to stop the best of the bottom 2 leavingfor someone who falls over every week. X Factor is completely distorted by song choices and a final judges vote that can pick whoever they want. The voting and the sing off often have nothing to do with singing ability or record saleability - because the show is divorced from its outcome. The show is about providing panto entertainment and providing a star for a perticular market - like One Direction for teen US girls or Jedward for panto TV and real pantos. A weak winner who won't sell doesn't matter if the advertising revenue comes in , people watch and every now and then someone saleable for something else than singing turns up. If they are lucky, any good singers who are spotted on recent series are picked up separately, wherever they come. The Andrew Lloyd Webber shows are more interested in a particular choice for singer = which goes beyond singing impact on the show - and the song choices and comments and running order can steer the result. ALW however retains the ability to keep his choice in until the very last vote, and, by then, it may be over.
Several of the most successful reality TV shows just do away with the public vote - Masterchef (times 3) and the The Apprentice just leave it to their judges. The Apprentice keeps some people past their fail by date for Tv value but mostly it keeps its most able to the end - as does Masterchef. The result is the winner may still be controversial, but usually the best people all make it to the last stages and the stories unfold a bit more naturally.
No show releases its public vote in progress because releasing it would completely distort the show. People would vote for whoever was in trouble last week - putting someone esle in undeserved trouble - and the outcome could be clear 3 months early in some shows. People would then not vote as their favourite was obviously in trouble. no one would vote for all the people they thought were good who were in trouble. A few shows release figures after the series ends, but they tend to be the ones where the people are new and have nothing to lose, or they have an excuse for a low vote (couldn't skate or face spiders) If its revealed you can't act or move or get votes however on SCD, your employment prospects would fall. Strictly is in a poor position there too because it can't cover the risk of unpopularity by paying more - IAC and DOI can pay more so more people amy risk it.
Originally Posted by wizzywick:
“Craig on Saturday said Denises Charleston was the best he had ever seen on Strictly. He gave it 9. Yet when Chris Hollins did his Charleston in 2009, he gave it 10. Now if Denises was the best Charleston he'd ever seen on Strictly why did he give it less than the one Chris Hollins danced?”
“Craig on Saturday said Denises Charleston was the best he had ever seen on Strictly. He gave it 9. Yet when Chris Hollins did his Charleston in 2009, he gave it 10. Now if Denises was the best Charleston he'd ever seen on Strictly why did he give it less than the one Chris Hollins danced?”
How quickly they forget!
Old age, bad mood or maybe the HRT wasn't kicking in?
Originally Posted by Alli-F:
“If Louis can sob in a manly way about the terror of nearly being voted out whilst claiming how much he loves Flavia and learning to dance, they might as well pack up now, he'll walk it.
We hate tears on a woman, but we love them on a cute guy. he's in touch with his emotions.
The only trouble is he's not really a pretty crier.”
“If Louis can sob in a manly way about the terror of nearly being voted out whilst claiming how much he loves Flavia and learning to dance, they might as well pack up now, he'll walk it.
We hate tears on a woman, but we love them on a cute guy.
he's in touch with his emotions. The only trouble is he's not really a pretty crier.
”
Can't be as bad as Lisa surely? At least there's less make-up to ruin. Maybe Victoria can give a few tips.*
*lest I am jumped upon by her supporters, that was a meta-joke about some FMs saying she was faking her tears. I believe they were 100% genuine. Please don't lynch me. Ta.
Originally Posted by ellieb123:
“ See- I knew you'd remember. You're right- Harry didn't really get the comments on his performance side that he probably needed, and that didn't stop him. I don't really remember Chris Hollins' series- I may have wiped it from my memory deliberately!
I think Louis is getting there performance wise- as you say, any remarks about his relationship with Flavia being cold have mainly disappeared. I do think if he doesn't crack the performance side he won't win though. I'm a bit unsure on an acting coach- I feel like it may just go in one ear and out the other with Louis- especially as he's not being told by the judges that it's something he needs to improve.”
“
See- I knew you'd remember. You're right- Harry didn't really get the comments on his performance side that he probably needed, and that didn't stop him. I don't really remember Chris Hollins' series- I may have wiped it from my memory deliberately! I think Louis is getting there performance wise- as you say, any remarks about his relationship with Flavia being cold have mainly disappeared. I do think if he doesn't crack the performance side he won't win though. I'm a bit unsure on an acting coach- I feel like it may just go in one ear and out the other with Louis- especially as he's not being told by the judges that it's something he needs to improve.”
Ah I can remember bemoaning the fact they never mentioned Harry's hands for weeks & weeks. Yet Chris (and Tom) got pulled up for his hands all the time. Apart from his thumb Louis also gets away with hands looking like dustbin lids occasionally.
Originally Posted by thenetworkbabe:
“Big Brother has no judges vote but the vote is now tiny and predictable and entirely shaped by twists, biases, imposed storylines and coverage. I'm A Celebrity has no judges vote - but again controls the storylines and coverage. Some people just vanish from the screen. The vote has been a negative factor for years - as the few who vote put the same people into trials, and no one else gets much of a chance unless they survive till the end. Dancing On Ice has a public vote and it has a bad record of good performers getting no votes, a strong anti-judge vote keeping bad perfromers in, and an ITV show bias in its winners. It has a skate off - just like SCD - to stop the best of the bottom 2 leavingfor someone who falls over every week. X Factor is completely distorted by song choices and a final judges vote that can pick whoever they want. The voting and the sing off often have nothing to do with singing ability or record saleability - because the show is divorced from its outcome. The show is about providing panto entertainment and providing a star for a perticular market - like One Direction for teen US girls or Jedward for panto TV and real pantos. A weak winner who won't sell doesn't matter if the advertising revenue comes in , people watch and every now and then someone saleable for something else than singing turns up. If they are lucky, any good singers who are spotted on recent series are picked up separately, wherever they come. The Andrew Lloyd Webber shows are more interested in a particular choice for singer = which goes beyond singing impact on the show - and the song choices and comments and running order can steer the result. ALW however retains the ability to keep his choice in until the very last vote, and, by then, it may be over.
Several of the most successful reality TV shows just do away with the public vote - Masterchef (times 3) and the The Apprentice just leave it to their judges. The Apprentice keeps some people past their fail by date for Tv value but mostly it keeps its most able to the end - as does Masterchef. The result is the winner may still be controversial, but usually the best people all make it to the last stages and the stories unfold a bit more naturally.
No show releases its public vote in progress because releasing it would completely distort the show. People would vote for whoever was in trouble last week - putting someone esle in undeserved trouble - and the outcome could be clear 3 months early in some shows. People would then not vote as their favourite was obviously in trouble. no one would vote for all the people they thought were good who were in trouble. A few shows release figures after the series ends, but they tend to be the ones where the people are new and have nothing to lose, or they have an excuse for a low vote (couldn't skate or face spiders) If its revealed you can't act or move or get votes however on SCD, your employment prospects would fall. Strictly is in a poor position there too because it can't cover the risk of unpopularity by paying more - IAC and DOI can pay more so more people amy risk it.”
“Big Brother has no judges vote but the vote is now tiny and predictable and entirely shaped by twists, biases, imposed storylines and coverage. I'm A Celebrity has no judges vote - but again controls the storylines and coverage. Some people just vanish from the screen. The vote has been a negative factor for years - as the few who vote put the same people into trials, and no one else gets much of a chance unless they survive till the end. Dancing On Ice has a public vote and it has a bad record of good performers getting no votes, a strong anti-judge vote keeping bad perfromers in, and an ITV show bias in its winners. It has a skate off - just like SCD - to stop the best of the bottom 2 leavingfor someone who falls over every week. X Factor is completely distorted by song choices and a final judges vote that can pick whoever they want. The voting and the sing off often have nothing to do with singing ability or record saleability - because the show is divorced from its outcome. The show is about providing panto entertainment and providing a star for a perticular market - like One Direction for teen US girls or Jedward for panto TV and real pantos. A weak winner who won't sell doesn't matter if the advertising revenue comes in , people watch and every now and then someone saleable for something else than singing turns up. If they are lucky, any good singers who are spotted on recent series are picked up separately, wherever they come. The Andrew Lloyd Webber shows are more interested in a particular choice for singer = which goes beyond singing impact on the show - and the song choices and comments and running order can steer the result. ALW however retains the ability to keep his choice in until the very last vote, and, by then, it may be over.
Several of the most successful reality TV shows just do away with the public vote - Masterchef (times 3) and the The Apprentice just leave it to their judges. The Apprentice keeps some people past their fail by date for Tv value but mostly it keeps its most able to the end - as does Masterchef. The result is the winner may still be controversial, but usually the best people all make it to the last stages and the stories unfold a bit more naturally.
No show releases its public vote in progress because releasing it would completely distort the show. People would vote for whoever was in trouble last week - putting someone esle in undeserved trouble - and the outcome could be clear 3 months early in some shows. People would then not vote as their favourite was obviously in trouble. no one would vote for all the people they thought were good who were in trouble. A few shows release figures after the series ends, but they tend to be the ones where the people are new and have nothing to lose, or they have an excuse for a low vote (couldn't skate or face spiders) If its revealed you can't act or move or get votes however on SCD, your employment prospects would fall. Strictly is in a poor position there too because it can't cover the risk of unpopularity by paying more - IAC and DOI can pay more so more people amy risk it.”
Thanks so much for your informed post. Good to hear it from an insiders' point of view.
It actually makes more sense when you compare the shows and the formats because they are all - whatever the subject or format - out to get as many viewers as possible and hit their ratings.
Originally Posted by sofakat:
“Thanks so much for your informed post. Good to hear it from an insiders' point of view.
It actually makes more sense when you compare the shows and the formats because they are all - whatever the subject or format - out to get as many viewers as possible and hit their ratings.”
“Thanks so much for your informed post. Good to hear it from an insiders' point of view.
It actually makes more sense when you compare the shows and the formats because they are all - whatever the subject or format - out to get as many viewers as possible and hit their ratings.”
^^^ What Sofakat said. Thanks very much, that makes so much sense now.
3 of 4
