Originally Posted by TerryM22:
“Entertainment all the way for me.”
“Entertainment all the way for me.”
Some thought Ann Widdecombe and John Sargeant were entertaining
Tough one <shakes_head> but I'll come off the fence and take technique thank you
Dance technique or entertainment?
2 of 4
Some thought Ann Widdecombe and John Sargeant were entertaining
Tough one <shakes_head> but I'll come off the fence and take technique thank you
Originally Posted by MayD:
“Some thought Ann Widdecombe and John Sargeant were entertaining
Tough one <shakes_head> but I'll come off the fence and take technique thank you”
“Some thought Ann Widdecombe and John Sargeant were entertaining
Tough one <shakes_head> but I'll come off the fence and take technique thank you”
Me too. Any day. Don't just do it for the fee - learn something!
Originally Posted by sofakat:
“Me too. Any day. Don't just do it for the fee - learn something!”
“Me too. Any day. Don't just do it for the fee - learn something!”
I'd do it for diddly squat
Diddly squat thrusts even!!! That would also be a good warm up and my pro could incorporate it into the freestyle dance when I inevitably got to the latter stages of the competition
Good technique and characterisation are important to me. But the music has to be right as well or else the whole thing falls flat on it's face.
Originally Posted by kaycee:
“Are you suggesting that the pros teach each other how to dance? Bit late for that, surely, as all the pros learnt to dance when they were kids.
They are all more than comfortable dancing with different partners, they do it all the time. Have a different couple each week demonstrate one particular dance, and a third party explaining the dance to the viewers if you wish. That might prove popular.”
“Are you suggesting that the pros teach each other how to dance? Bit late for that, surely, as all the pros learnt to dance when they were kids.
They are all more than comfortable dancing with different partners, they do it all the time. Have a different couple each week demonstrate one particular dance, and a third party explaining the dance to the viewers if you wish. That might prove popular.”
No. Just to show how it should be done.
So to recap
Pro Male + Celeb Female
Pro Female + Celeb Male
Celeb Male + Celeb Female
as a finale demo
Pro Female + Pro Male [Toning the flashy stuff down a lot]
same celeb couple or different celeb couple each week in a different dance;
same pro couple or different pro couple each week in a different dance (i.e. not Anton in Latin)
Doesn't have to be live and no backing dancers crashing into the couples.
Similar programme style to the excellent Len Goodman and Dr Lucy Worsley in Dancing Cheek To Cheek
bit of both.
i basically want to see good dancers, but i don't really mind that much if they are exactly true to style, eg are doing proper full on fleckerls or 'just' a set of turns as long as it looks good.
by this reckoning, i think sunetra should have stayed. i dunno what dance her rumba was, but she danced it well, better than mark's imaginary salsa (or whatever it was supposed to be)
i basically want to see good dancers, but i don't really mind that much if they are exactly true to style, eg are doing proper full on fleckerls or 'just' a set of turns as long as it looks good.
by this reckoning, i think sunetra should have stayed. i dunno what dance her rumba was, but she danced it well, better than mark's imaginary salsa (or whatever it was supposed to be)
Everyone has different reasons why they vote. For me, it is about the best dancer which is why I am supporting Pixie and Frankie. But some people vote because they like someone, think someone is the most improved, are entertained by someone. Each to their own.
Originally Posted by QwaarJet:
“Good technique and characterisation are important to me. But the music has to be right as well or else the whole thing falls flat on it's face.”
“Good technique and characterisation are important to me. But the music has to be right as well or else the whole thing falls flat on it's face.”
And some of the music choices this year has been woeful.. It was better when the pros chose the music.
As a dancer, I naturally love to see really good technique, but I have to be honest, I've seen some dancers who have first rate technique, but who are so completely unable to perform a dance, they look terrible and never do well in competitions [I'm not talking SCD but in the "real" world of dance]. What I'm saying is there has to be more than technique.
Originally Posted by kaycee:
“As a dancer, I naturally love to see really good technique, but I have to be honest, I've seen some dancers who have first rate technique, but who are so completely unable to perform a dance, they look terrible and never do well in competitions [I'm not talking SCD but in the "real" world of dance]. What I'm saying is there has to be more than technique.”
“As a dancer, I naturally love to see really good technique, but I have to be honest, I've seen some dancers who have first rate technique, but who are so completely unable to perform a dance, they look terrible and never do well in competitions [I'm not talking SCD but in the "real" world of dance]. What I'm saying is there has to be more than technique.”
And there is a difference between dancing with someone and watching that same person from the audience.
For those who are all technique, there was that show, come dancing and it failed.
It is and always has been technique and entertainment.
The Scott of this world who have neither,do not progress through to the later stages, as people want some of both.
People who have excellant technique but for some reason are not entertaining enough, don't win,
It is and always has been technique and entertainment.
The Scott of this world who have neither,do not progress through to the later stages, as people want some of both.
People who have excellant technique but for some reason are not entertaining enough, don't win,
Originally Posted by henrywilliams58:
“And there is a difference between dancing with someone and watching that same person from the audience.”
“And there is a difference between dancing with someone and watching that same person from the audience.”
That's completely irrelevant as several million peole are not going to be able to dance with that 1 person
Originally Posted by coppertop1:
“That's completely irrelevant as several million peole are not going to be able to dance with that 1 person”
“That's completely irrelevant as several million peole are not going to be able to dance with that 1 person
”
The post to which I replied referred to "technique". This may or may not be obvious to people in the live or TV audience or even to the judges.
Just because most people cannot see it does not mean there is no technique.
Technique is not tricks and flicks. It is not trashy flashy. It is soul.
Primarily,I want to be entertained,I want to be moved,I want to get the vibe of the dance.
Is that possible without a certain amount of 'technique'?
(Do we all have the same understanding of the meaning of technique?)
I think the question posed in the title of this thread may be invalid as the issue is not a simple dichotomy.
Is that possible without a certain amount of 'technique'?
(Do we all have the same understanding of the meaning of technique?)
I think the question posed in the title of this thread may be invalid as the issue is not a simple dichotomy.
It depends on what you find entertaining surely?
Some people found it entertaining to watch Anne Widdecombe do what ever it was she did each week. Or watch Russell Grant get fired out of a cannon. That's not my thing but I accept it takes all sorts and there needs to be something for everyone.
For me there has to be an element of good dancing. I like to see improvement too.
Some people found it entertaining to watch Anne Widdecombe do what ever it was she did each week. Or watch Russell Grant get fired out of a cannon. That's not my thing but I accept it takes all sorts and there needs to be something for everyone.
For me there has to be an element of good dancing. I like to see improvement too.
Originally Posted by Starpuss:
“ It depends on what you find entertaining surely?
Some people found it entertaining to watch Anne Widdecombe do what ever it was she did each week. Or watch Russell Grant get fired out of a cannon. That's not my thing but I accept it takes all sorts and there needs to be something for everyone.
For me there has to be an element of good dancing. I like to see improvement too.”
“ It depends on what you find entertaining surely?
Some people found it entertaining to watch Anne Widdecombe do what ever it was she did each week. Or watch Russell Grant get fired out of a cannon. That's not my thing but I accept it takes all sorts and there needs to be something for everyone.
For me there has to be an element of good dancing. I like to see improvement too.”
There is so much talk in this forum about the show being "Saturday Night Light Entertainment".
What is it? Different things to different people.
I would like to see them learn to dance - but for my sake not theirs. i.e. If I can't see the training videos and them actually learning to dance so I can perhaps learn and copy I am not interested. If it is just a snap shot every week I'd rather see ready trained professionals perform.
I am not interested in any ITT or Mezzanine chit-chat.
Originally Posted by coppertop1:
“For those who are all technique, there was that show, come dancing and it failed.
It is and always has been technique and entertainment.
The Scott of this world who have neither,do not progress through to the later stages, as people want some of both.
People who have excellant technique but for some reason are not entertaining enough, don't win,”
“For those who are all technique, there was that show, come dancing and it failed.
It is and always has been technique and entertainment.
The Scott of this world who have neither,do not progress through to the later stages, as people want some of both.
People who have excellant technique but for some reason are not entertaining enough, don't win,”
The original never failed but ran it's course with geographical districts performing as teams against each other
The dancers were professional and amateur experienced competitive pairs plus formation teams
Yes it was a more selective target audience but it created the original widening of general public interest in ballroom and Latin
Originally Posted by coppertop1:
“For those who are all technique, there was that show, come dancing and it failed.”
“For those who are all technique, there was that show, come dancing and it failed.”
LOL ... perhaps you could explain exactly how 'that show' failed ?
"Come Dancing" ran for almost 40 years.
Originally Posted by henrywilliams58:
“The post to which I replied referred to "technique". This may or may not be obvious to people in the live or TV audience or even to the judges.
Just because most people cannot see it does not mean there is no technique.
Technique is not tricks and flicks. It is not trashy flashy. It is soul.”
“The post to which I replied referred to "technique". This may or may not be obvious to people in the live or TV audience or even to the judges.
Just because most people cannot see it does not mean there is no technique.
Technique is not tricks and flicks. It is not trashy flashy. It is soul.”
I daresay you are talking with your AT hat on, but you CAN see technique otherwise how would judges be able to see it and judge it. The technique in ballroom and latin is physical, it is the precise placement of feet, whether on heel or toe, the direction of those feet, whether outside partners, or in line, direction of dance, whether contra body movement or contra body position etc...
It is the application of technique learned and applied CORRECTLY that is the difference between a dance looking good and not.
From either angle I want to see and will support whoever loves dancing. Last year this was Natalie. The sheer joy she got from dancing outshone everyone else. This year there are many who have got the dancing bug, so far more difficult to call.
Originally Posted by saoir:
“LOL ... perhaps you could explain exactly how 'that show' failed ?
"Come Dancing" ran for almost 40 years.”
“LOL ... perhaps you could explain exactly how 'that show' failed ?
"Come Dancing" ran for almost 40 years.
”
Yes, it is no longer on the television.
I can't find any reference to its demise but being a viewer till the bitter end IIRC , before Strictly its audience share had dropped dramatically and they tried out several new hosts, Terry Wogan and Angela Rippon to try to rejeuvante it, but audience share still dropped like a stone, it's lost it's prime time slot ,was allocated a death slot and then was no longer produced.
A story of its failure I believe.
Originally Posted by Jennifer_F:
“I daresay you are talking with your AT hat on, but you CAN see technique otherwise how would judges be able to see it and judge it. The technique in ballroom and latin is physical, it is the precise placement of feet, whether on heel or toe, the direction of those feet, whether outside partners, or in line, direction of dance, whether contra body movement or contra body position etc...
It is the application of technique learned and applied CORRECTLY that is the difference between a dance looking good and not.”
“I daresay you are talking with your AT hat on, but you CAN see technique otherwise how would judges be able to see it and judge it. The technique in ballroom and latin is physical, it is the precise placement of feet, whether on heel or toe, the direction of those feet, whether outside partners, or in line, direction of dance, whether contra body movement or contra body position etc...
It is the application of technique learned and applied CORRECTLY that is the difference between a dance looking good and not.”
When teaching Lindy Hop, one of my stock phrases is 'what appears to be great STYLE is actually proper TECHNIQUE'.
Originally Posted by henrywilliams58:
“The post to which I replied referred to "technique". This may or may not be obvious to people in the live or TV audience or even to the judges.
Just because most people cannot see it does not mean there is no technique.
Technique is not tricks and flicks. It is not trashy flashy. It is soul.”
“The post to which I replied referred to "technique". This may or may not be obvious to people in the live or TV audience or even to the judges.
Just because most people cannot see it does not mean there is no technique.
Technique is not tricks and flicks. It is not trashy flashy. It is soul.”
Well it is debatable in the context of SCD, when each dance bears little resemblance to its actual roots: however with no technique at all it would just be random movement to music.
Believe me if it were just that and being lost in the soul of the music I would have won many medals,all at the topmost level.
It has to be a bit of both and the celebs have to SHOW with broad brush strokes a bit of both, but not too broad or it becomes showy and flashy.
It is a very difficult to judge, for example Rachel Stevens, Kara and Pixie were all said to be all technique initially and were told to show more personality and enjoy the dancing.
Where as Chelsee was so lost in the enjoyment she was too wild and had to tone it down.
It has to be both and both have to show
Actually this goes for social dancing too, all technique and you are not a pleasant person to dance with,, the yawns would be prolific, and all soul and you are also not a pleasant person to dance with , the damaged toes would be epic
Originally Posted by coppertop1:
“Yes, it is no longer on the television.
I can't find any reference to its demise but being a viewer till the bitter end IIRC , before Strictly its audience share had dropped dramatically and they tried out several new hosts, Terry Wogan and Angela Rippon to try to rejeuvante it, but audience share still dropped like a stone, it's lost it's prime time slot ,was allocated a death slot and then was no longer produced.
A story of its failure I believe.”
“Yes, it is no longer on the television.
I can't find any reference to its demise but being a viewer till the bitter end IIRC , before Strictly its audience share had dropped dramatically and they tried out several new hosts, Terry Wogan and Angela Rippon to try to rejeuvante it, but audience share still dropped like a stone, it's lost it's prime time slot ,was allocated a death slot and then was no longer produced.
A story of its failure I believe.”
BIB were part of the reason for Come Dancing's "failure"! They certainly didn't try and rejuvenate the show, they simply sneered and poked fun - especially TW. Having said that, all shows - whether TV, films, West End, Broadway, all have a certain life scan; eventually people look for something different. However a show that ran on and off for 40+ years can hardly be considered a failure.
2 of 4
