I find Craig just as random as the others, and I actually think that although Bruno marks a bit high, his marks tend to make the most sense when considered relative to each other. Craig is overly picky about stuff, but only some of the time. He'll award a ten to utter dross because he liked the theatricality of it - which is fine, but when the next couple comes on, don't give them a laundry list of technical faults when the real reason they're not getting a higher mark is because they didn't ham it up enough for you.
Craig Revel Horwood
2 of 2
I value Craig's scores and opinions the most as he truly searches for perfection, and usually gives good info on the flaws that require addressing. Someone could be 98% perfect and while the rest round up to 10, Craig gives a 9 and a reason (if they aren't running over time). He makes sure a 40 dance is truly perfect (as far he can see from hus vantage point without reruns of video, of course).
Originally Posted by sportgal9:
“However, i'm uneasy at how people can get so excited about such a contrived and juvenile production. This sugar-coated saccharine tv merely panders to the lowest common denominator?”
“However, i'm uneasy at how people can get so excited about such a contrived and juvenile production. This sugar-coated saccharine tv merely panders to the lowest common denominator?”
Yeah. Indeed. However pantomimes do appeal to adults as well as children since adults know when to switch off their discernment and take whatever enjoyment they can. Strictly is much the same. The judges keep credibility because their comments, advice, and marking are based on the reality of the dancing, even if they sit in a pantomime role.
If you feel that Craig is too good for Strictly you can see him play the villainess in the stage show of Annie next year. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-29374872
Originally Posted by Bunthorne67:
“I used to be an examiner at GCSE, A Level and in higher education but became disillusioned with the dumbing down of standards. Positive marking has a lot to do with this. Previously, if a candidate made such a fundamental and glaring error which meant that their answer as a whole was incorrect, they would fail. Nowadays, they get credit for aspects of the answer which they got right (even if the overall solution is incorrect) and can pass; they can even achieve a reasonable grade. It doesn't reflect the real world, of course, as in work or a profession if you have got the final answer wrong then.......I need not elaborate; but this explains the high pass rates which we see today (that and easier or more open and general questions).
Craig represents the old style of marking and if a performance is poor he will mark it with a low score. ,,,, I prefer his marking style over the other judges, but that is just me.”
“I used to be an examiner at GCSE, A Level and in higher education but became disillusioned with the dumbing down of standards. Positive marking has a lot to do with this. Previously, if a candidate made such a fundamental and glaring error which meant that their answer as a whole was incorrect, they would fail. Nowadays, they get credit for aspects of the answer which they got right (even if the overall solution is incorrect) and can pass; they can even achieve a reasonable grade. It doesn't reflect the real world, of course, as in work or a profession if you have got the final answer wrong then.......I need not elaborate; but this explains the high pass rates which we see today (that and easier or more open and general questions).
Craig represents the old style of marking and if a performance is poor he will mark it with a low score. ,,,, I prefer his marking style over the other judges, but that is just me.”
Totally agree with you - Simon made the point that he always listens to what Craig has to say. With regard to teaching, I also agree with you, I teach at a college and our directive is to never give negative feedback - how on earth are these young people to learn that sometimes what you have done is not a pass - this has lead to them believing that whatever they do is fine and acceptable when actually it is not.
With regard to managers always giving positive feedback first, may be what they are told, but not always what they do - life is not always s perfect and people have to accept that I am afraid.
Originally Posted by Bricksy:
“There's got to be lots of retired pro ballroom and latin dancers out there. Surely some of them would be suited for a judging role on SCD? A few of those that have been pros on SCD would do for a start. I have to say though that despite his flaws, CRH is the only judge I haven't become entirely fed up with.
The rapport between the presenter and judging panel is toe-curling.
The whole show needs a re-think. They can't hide the fact that the format is getting a bit worn and using fancy lights and camera work doesn't make up for that.”
“There's got to be lots of retired pro ballroom and latin dancers out there. Surely some of them would be suited for a judging role on SCD? A few of those that have been pros on SCD would do for a start. I have to say though that despite his flaws, CRH is the only judge I haven't become entirely fed up with.
The rapport between the presenter and judging panel is toe-curling.
The whole show needs a re-think. They can't hide the fact that the format is getting a bit worn and using fancy lights and camera work doesn't make up for that.”
Super post.
Summed up the current format perfectly.
I fear the producers are lost on planet Euphoria. As people have suggested, they're mainly number crunchers. Viewing stats will always supersede what's actually best for the show.
Originally Posted by Kirsty18:
“I think having craige is brilliant because you can see how much a 7,8,9,10 means to them if they get it off craige rather then one of the other judges. They all know he is much harsher marker so weather thats because he lack knowledge i don't know. but i don't really care in all honesty. I mean it balances out.
Bruno, Len or Darcey will never go below a 5. Where as craige will so the scores don't end up the same.
People respect crags scores much more as a 10 from him means so so so so much more then a 10 from any of the other judges purely because he is a harsher marker. and i like that
”
“I think having craige is brilliant because you can see how much a 7,8,9,10 means to them if they get it off craige rather then one of the other judges. They all know he is much harsher marker so weather thats because he lack knowledge i don't know. but i don't really care in all honesty. I mean it balances out.
Bruno, Len or Darcey will never go below a 5. Where as craige will so the scores don't end up the same.
People respect crags scores much more as a 10 from him means so so so so much more then a 10 from any of the other judges purely because he is a harsher marker. and i like that
”
Pretty much says it all, just had the same conversation with my son last night, the fact Craig is harder to please means his praise means SO much more.
I think I heard that he gives each pair written notes after the show ........ how to improve etc.
He takes the dance very seriously. Good for him.
He takes the dance very seriously. Good for him.
Originally Posted by summertime09:
“Pretty much says it all, just had the same conversation with my son last night, the fact Craig is harder to please means his praise means SO much more.”
“Pretty much says it all, just had the same conversation with my son last night, the fact Craig is harder to please means his praise means SO much more.”
Originally Posted by alan29:
“I think I heard that he gives each pair written notes after the show ........ how to improve etc.
He takes the dance very seriously. Good for him.”
“I think I heard that he gives each pair written notes after the show ........ how to improve etc.
He takes the dance very seriously. Good for him.”
I agree. He's excellent.
When someone has spent days working their asses off tk learn a dance the very least a judge shoild do is critique it. Anything less than that is to just ignore their effort IMHO.
Craig loves it!
He's made his name and fortune out of being "Mr Nasty" and the more the other judges rant and rave at him, the more he can play up his image and make money.
I'm convinced the spats between Craig and Len are always rehearsed before the show and they are good friends behind the scene's.
What's funny though is the guy who is supposed to be the "villain" is the only one who actually talks any sense, but that's the fault of TPTB and the huge change that took place after the John Sargent debacle.
He's made his name and fortune out of being "Mr Nasty" and the more the other judges rant and rave at him, the more he can play up his image and make money.
I'm convinced the spats between Craig and Len are always rehearsed before the show and they are good friends behind the scene's.
What's funny though is the guy who is supposed to be the "villain" is the only one who actually talks any sense, but that's the fault of TPTB and the huge change that took place after the John Sargent debacle.
Originally Posted by Nesta Robbins:
“Craig adds gravitas and balance to an often fluffy and featherweight judging panel.”
“Craig adds gravitas and balance to an often fluffy and featherweight judging panel.”
Craig is often wrong when judging.
Originally Posted by crannyfaddock:
“Interesting comments...
I know nothing about dancing whatsoever but I do like a fair system.
Craig imo is often correct but agree his delivery of critique can be a bit mean.
Darcy was a dancer so I suppose qualifies her but for me she lacks any personality....didn't like her programme that recreated famous dance scenes.
Len is a mean bully, lacks respect for Craig who is a top notch director and choreographer.
Bruno is pointless, he is like an oversexed box of demented frogs.
I used to like Arlene, but she went. She was a good foil for the other 3.
Oh and eta..... For me Simon's AT was meh, I like him but it was clumpy and his hands were ugly
”
“Interesting comments...
I know nothing about dancing whatsoever but I do like a fair system.
Craig imo is often correct but agree his delivery of critique can be a bit mean.
Darcy was a dancer so I suppose qualifies her but for me she lacks any personality....didn't like her programme that recreated famous dance scenes.
Len is a mean bully, lacks respect for Craig who is a top notch director and choreographer.
Bruno is pointless, he is like an oversexed box of demented frogs.
I used to like Arlene, but she went. She was a good foil for the other 3.
Oh and eta..... For me Simon's AT was meh, I like him but it was clumpy and his hands were ugly
”
Well, to be fair, CRH is a highly qualified dancer and has won Olivier Awards fo Choreography, which tends to make me think he probably knows what he is talking about. Yes, he can be arch and acetic, but his critiquing is accurate and mostly fair; his put downs are always justified if a little harsh... Mrs Tonioli is hilarious and also an exquisite dancer. La Bussell is/was a ballet dancer, so her comments about frame are born of a complete understanding of the concept. Len is guilty of excessive mugging and the "Cheeky Cockney" is getting a bit Marcus. (Wearing!)
He is the judge that offers the most realism and constructive criticism however he clearly favourites certain dancers over others.... I mean, a nine for both Jake and Mark but only eights for Simon and Frankie - ridiculous!
2 of 2
