Originally Posted by meglosmurmurs:
“I feel like I'm going to be annoyed no matter who wins, because the edit hasn't done a good job explaining why they do.
I suppose the interviews may do it, but they'll probably just focus on the candidates getting a grilling and the cringeworthy moments like they always do.
Sadly the first thing that comes to my mind about eachother candidate is negative:
Roisin - lacks spark and a backbone.
Bianca - made huge blunders that would have got her fired had she been brought into the boardroom.
Mark - sly, manipulative and not someone I'd want to work with.
Daniel - deluded trainwreck.
Solomon - he's barely made an impact all series.”
Thats true, and there's been no signposting of any emerging dark horse either. Last year they rewrote their edit of Luisa's first task as PM.- to point out what they had ignored - that she had hown talent there. They then had the week 10 trading up task - which showed her doing probably better than anyone has with that task. They also built up Leah's, week 9, boardroom speech, and pushed that- as Leah making a late run. Add in Neil - who they had been pushing since his "motivational" speech, and they had 3 candidates running well by this stage. This year, there's no horses really running, and they haven't even signposted that Roisin shares some of Leah's story.
Its also all unsatisfactory- as the double and triple firings distorted who was going and who stayed. People went, in weeks with multiple firings, who deserved to stay more than people who stayed the previous or next week, and several finalists would have gone now if the multiple firings had been that week. Who-is there is often who stayed - because they fouled up in the right weeks.