Great post.

But what really matters is not how much past experience they've got, but what the public perception of that experience is. Dani was best known for appearing on CBBC comedies, whereas Denise was best known for appearing in musicals and West End theatre - it's really not surprising that Denise got all the 'ringer' stick and Dani didn't.

I agree.

I could not disagree more strongly. Where you see smug, I see happiness that Natalie is improving. Artem pushes his partners to the limit and it must be amazing for him to watch Natalie grow, and grow she must of course, because for all her dance training, it did not involve ballroom dancing.

Natalie just bores me to tears now. We all know the judges will be falling over themselves to give her good marks. Artem looks like he needs a slap, I see no chemistry between them at all. Just boring.

It's a bit like a grown up playing football with some kids, pushing them out of the way to score a goal. I don't see the point. As for their chemistry, i fail to see even a glimmer.

Susanna also came on the show as an accomplished dancer but because she isn't as good as Natalie, she gets away with it.

Indeed its all a bit random what gets noticed. Dani's CV which listed her dance skills, went un-noticed last year. The most qualified male ever was Tom and no one complained as he went on to win. He had not only a similar experience to the kids who went to stage school, but he also did the three year course at Guildford - one of the top drama colleges.He could do this before he even started the show http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cXw3fv8Fcg Jill had also done a three year drama college course.

I think your first point is the key one. Natalie can only journey to the point that she produces something comparable to what Jill, Kara, Rachel, Alesha or Ali at their best produced. Improving her mark from 95% to 97% may not be enough. The judges may, and probably will, overtell us that she has is brilliant, but the public may need more. That requires the right song, sung well, and the right choregraphy - and a moving performance of them. Its not in her gift whether she gets the right combination - and unknown if she can achieve the right wow/emotional factor impact if she does.

I think this is a very important point
she needs a vehicle* to get her from vile abusive domestic violence in CS back into a new tv show/role. I suspect that is what the agent put her forward for.
This is her journey.



* vehicle.. journey... see what i did there?

At least Natalie shows some feeling and passion in her dances, unlike that dreary wind up doll Sophie.

Comparing Natalie to Tom, Dani or any previous constestant isn't comparing like with like. She, unlike them, trained as a dancer. Which is rather different from training as an actor or going to stage school, as part of which you get minimal dance training. (I know this because I was recently introduced to someone who trained alongside Natalie - he eventually dropped out and moved into retail but has been in the audience several times to support Natalie). So let's be real - she has an advantage no other Strictly contestant has ever had.

The public need more than all things you list. They need a character they like. And being teacher's pet isn't the way to win over the audience - maybe why Fiona, Mark and Dave are all surviving and other contestants the judges prefer are starting to end up in the dance-off.

Additionally, if Natalie tops the judges' leader board every week, the producers should start to worry. It means the show is getting predictable - and given that it's already inevitable that Natalie will be given a pass to the final, that's not a good thing. Strictly has a narrative and viewers expect surprises. Natalie offers none - she's technically great and we know the judges will score her highly every week. There's no narrative there ...

Great post.

Bravely put.

I don't understand why people call Nat smug that is just a an excuse to have a dig without any evidence to support it. I would rather they just said they don't like her and left it at that.

I believe in the first couple of weeks Nat trained the most hours perhaps some of the others should train more and they may get a bit closer to her standards.

BIB Like someone else said before me, Bravely put .

Well said, Great Post!

Some contestants will probably never or may never be close to reach her standards no matter how long they train because they never trained to be professional dancers (well until the age of 19 when she unfortunately had to quit )..

Unfortunately no matter how many hours they train it will never match 16 years under Natalies belt. You can't pick up technique in a few weeks as I'm sure you've heard the pros say many times. It takes years of practice.

You have said this before so I'm guessing you don't know much about dance it sounds like.

Don't you see it - if they trained 24/7 for the whole three months of Strictly they would still not come anywhere near Natalie's standards and I think it's unreasonable to expect it of them too.

There is a reason you started the thread `Natalie isthe best ever on SCD` in the first couples of weeks of the series.

It's fairly easy to understand. There is the odd refreshing exception but most people don't have the front to be honest and risk looking petty or ignoble and being ridiculed. So they hide true feelings behind a smokescreen of tangled (il)logic, inconsistently applied dogma and hypocrisy constructed to make their opinions look (they hope) reasonable and legitimate or even righteous. All done safely in the knowledge that plenty of other disingenuoids will agree with it.

We all understand human nature. We all know that criticism is so often motivated by bitterness or jealousy or resentment or schadenfreude but how often do people cop to it? It happens occasionally - I saw an example from an FM in this forum recently - but the vast majority fear it will make them look bad so they prefer to go down the BS route.

Their lies may even be good enough to convince themselves but they don't convince me.

Google results for Kelly Brook say that she trained primarily as a dancer at Italia Conti i.e. she trained at the same place for the same reason that Natalie did (except she didn't get injured before the end of the course so presumably she actually completed her training and didn't stop dancing entirely at the age of 19). Jill went to a dance school between the ages of 3 and 14 (a school which makes it obvious from their website that they turn out professional dancers) and then did other bits of dance training at drama school.

Sounds to me as though Kelly Brook is the contestant with the highest level of prior dance training.

There are all sorts of reasons why Natalie might not appeal to people and why if we look at past series of Strictly it doesn't look hugely likely that she'll have the popularity to win, but a quick Google of past contestants shows others who had comparable training to Natalie, whose actual degree from Italia Conti appears to have been in Acting and Musical Theatre. It is possible to do a 3 year degree in dance from there. Even if she started that course instead, she clearly didn't finish it (presumably due to her injury).

Great post.

In which you try to psychoanalyse anyone who doesn't like your favourite and put them down as bitter, jealous, resentful liars because they disagree with what you think ...?



Hilarious!

Might it just be because Natalie is more overqualified than anyone else who's ever been in Strictly (including Kelly Brook)? And so many people don't see the point in her being there?

If Natalie is your favourite and you want her to win, fine. But can you not respect others' opinions without resorting to passive-aggressive character assassination?

Aside from anything else, it's off-topic: we're talking about whether or not Natalie has a journey.

I applaud you, great post and so very very true. Obviously not in 100% of cases but as a generalisation it rings a bell.

If Nat was so good she would not have trained the most hours in the first couple of weeks and perhaps she still does, she has worked hard to be as good as she is. I respect anyone elses opinion what I cant stand is the pathetic excuse to have a cheap dig at her like saying she makes funny faces or she is arrogant that imo is just desperation..