DS Forums

 
 

Even the Sun front page attacking Jules and Matisse now


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-06-2015, 14:15
Dalekbuster523
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
Why did she not come clean when And and Dec asked her about Matisses training for the tightrope?
It wouldn't have 'spoilt the narrative' after the event
I believe it would. The narrative is that Matisse walked the tightrope, not Chase. The stunt double in a movie isn't revealed after the film has finished.
Dalekbuster523 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 02-06-2015, 14:16
SegaGamer
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 19,579
I actually think it's wrong that she used the other dog to do the MAIN part of the act. To get that other dog to do the main trick and not tell us until now is deceitful.

The act is called Jules and Matisse, i expect Matisse to do the most important parts of the act. If she was going to use other dogs then the act should be call Jules and her dogs.

I think this act winning when the main dog isn't even performing the tricks is wrong to be honest.
SegaGamer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2015, 14:17
Dalekbuster523
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
If you'd ever seen the form you have to fill in when you get to that stage, you'd actually see that YOU are asked to fill in the name of your act. Nothing to do with being told what to do.

Do you remember the year the woman went on with two dogs? Her act was called Donellda Guy (I think that's her name). No mention of the dogs. Why didn't Jules just use HER name as it was really her show anyway?
We thought about calling the act Jules and Mattise and friends, but got dubbed Jules and Matisse.
Got dubbed by who?

The producers of course.
Dalekbuster523 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2015, 14:18
Kromm
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,038
Got dubbed by who?

The producers of course.
Exactly. But people here always seem to want to excuse Simon & Syco for everything and slam contestants. Who have little to no decision-making power, and on top of the fear of not being advanced if they don't do what they are told, are also typically bound by legal agreements to not say anything about the show they aren't authorised to.
Kromm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2015, 14:20
Dalekbuster523
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
I actually think it's wrong that she used the other dog to do the MAIN part of the act. To get that other dog to do the main trick and not tell us until now is deceitful.

The act is called Jules and Matisse, i expect the Matisse to do the most important parts of the act. If she was going to use other dogs then the act should be call Jules and her dogs.

I think this act winning when the main dog isn't even performing the tricks is wrong to be honest.
Then you expect wrong.

And besides, she's said she wanted to call it Jules & Mattise And Friends but was called Jules & Matisse instead.
Dalekbuster523 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2015, 14:24
dottzie38
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Southampton
Posts: 1,036
No they voted for Matisse not the stunt dog. Why did they not come clean about it instead of being deceitful?
I didn't I voted for the act as a whole including chase and skippy. I voted on the basis all 3 of there performances were good which included all 3 dogs
I wouldn't call chase a stunt dog either he was just obviously better suited for that part of the act
It's a shame the act wasn't called jules Matisse and friends and had all 3 dogs on stage during the placements as she has trained them all and they were all brilliant
dottzie38 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2015, 14:25
spkx
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 14,185
How did you know, the act was called Jules and Matisse, and he was the only one used in the first round, so why should we believe he was not the only one used again. If both dogs had been in all the rounds that have been different.
And Chloe Crawford's act was called Chloe Crawford yet there were about 5 people on stage at her audition (including a double) and another guy for her semi-final performance.

Same with the act called Michael Late which also involved a load of other people, and again a double, as well as his 'half sister'.

The act name is not a full run down of who's involved, it's usually just the key people/leads
spkx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2015, 14:26
spkx
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 14,185
I actually think it's wrong that she used the other dog to do the MAIN part of the act. To get that other dog to do the main trick and not tell us until now is deceitful.

The act is called Jules and Matisse, i expect the Matisse to do the most important parts of the act. If she was going to use other dogs then the act should be call Jules and her dogs.

I think this act winning when the main dog isn't even performing the tricks is wrong to be honest.
Would you expect a magician who uses a double or hands to name them in their act name?
spkx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2015, 14:32
myscimitar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In your house, guy's Butts
Posts: 3,194
Would you expect a magician who uses a double or hands to name them in their act name?
Maybe not, but she tricked us but bringing on the other dog in the semi, but not in the final and gave the impression it was only a 'one trick' dog,
myscimitar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2015, 14:33
spkx
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 14,185
Maybe not, but she tricked us but bringing on the other dog in the semi, but not in the final and gave the impression it was only a 'one trick' dog,
They were two completely different routines

All of what she does are tricks anyway, the act is (IMO) very similar to a magician. It's all about deception and illusion.

I mean, Matisse wasn't really stealing sausages for a three legged dog, she wasn't really hiding in a bin or puling clothes off things, etc.
spkx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2015, 14:42
valkay
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 15,280
Good hopefully she will have to give her prize money back or donate it to an animal charity.
I hope so too, I didn't like the woman and the dog's tricks in the audition, I wonder if they are completely trained with love and affection or with a bit of fear as well. I would like to see the RSPCA conduct an investigation into her training methods.
valkay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2015, 14:43
SegaGamer
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 19,579
Would you expect a magician who uses a double or hands to name them in their act name?
A magician's job is to trick the audience, that is the whole point of the act. Comparing them is just stupid.

What makes this even more dodgy is that there was no sign of a third dog at the end of the act. We saw 2 dogs, there was no sign of the third dog, why hide the other dog if this is all innocent ? The only reason why the dog was hidden is because she intended to deceive the audience.

I have no idea why she would reveal this though, she can't be very bright.
SegaGamer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2015, 14:46
johnythefox
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 975
There's a very nasty tone here, and some very unsavoury reactions to those who feel that this act, whilst not earth shattrering or important news in the big scheme of things, mislead the public. How dare someone be called 'stupid' because they have a genuine and understandable gripe. There's also some very odd, and totally unrelated anologies used to suggest why this is all ok and above board. I for one, think that there was a fair amount of missleading going on, wether or not it would have made the overall voting I'm not sure, but there should be no room for error given ITV's track record here.

Also it seems, many think that we should all have known that this was stand-in dog, as apparently it was seen and name-checked in an earlier round. However, there are many like myself who are not as obsessed with watching every minute of this show and only tuned in for the final. I wonder how many votes were cast by those that thought there would be no stand-in dogs used and they were voting for the talent of not only the trainer but the dog that was specifically named in the act. This would all have been no problem if the act was called 'Jules & her dogs' or something equally ambiguous.
johnythefox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2015, 14:54
myscimitar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In your house, guy's Butts
Posts: 3,194
There's a very nasty tone here, and some very unsavoury reactions to those who feel that this act, whilst not earth shattrering or important news in the big scheme of things, mislead the public. How dare someone be called 'stupid' because they have a genuine and understandable gripe. There's also some very odd, and totally unrelated anologies used to suggest why this is all ok and above board. I for one, think that there was a fair amount of missleading going on, wether or not it would have made the overall voting I'm not sure, but there should be no room for error given ITV's track record here.

Also it seems, many think that we should all have known that this was stand-in dog, as apparently it was seen and name-checked in an earlier round. However, there are many like myself who are not as obsessed with watching every minute of this show and only tuned in for the final. I wonder how many votes were cast by those that thought there would be no stand-in dogs used and they were voting for the talent of not only the trainer but the dog that was specifically named in the act. This would all have been no problem if the act was called 'Jules & her dogs' or something equally ambiguous.
Well said
myscimitar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2015, 15:33
Kromm
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,038
This would all have been no problem if the act was called 'Jules & her dogs' or something equally ambiguous.
Yes, but there's a really nasty insistence here that Jules is solely (or even MOSTLY) responsible for how the act was labeled.

I mean it's like people suddenly have lost all knowledge of how Simon Cowell and his co-producers operate.
Kromm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2015, 15:35
Dalekbuster523
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
There's a very nasty tone here, and some very unsavoury reactions to those who feel that this act, whilst not earth shattrering or important news in the big scheme of things, mislead the public. How dare someone be called 'stupid' because they have a genuine and understandable gripe. There's also some very odd, and totally unrelated anologies used to suggest why this is all ok and above board. I for one, think that there was a fair amount of missleading going on, wether or not it would have made the overall voting I'm not sure, but there should be no room for error given ITV's track record here.

Also it seems, many think that we should all have known that this was stand-in dog, as apparently it was seen and name-checked in an earlier round. However, there are many like myself who are not as obsessed with watching every minute of this show and only tuned in for the final. I wonder how many votes were cast by those that thought there would be no stand-in dogs used and they were voting for the talent of not only the trainer but the dog that was specifically named in the act. This would all have been no problem if the act was called 'Jules & her dogs' or something equally ambiguous.
That's your fault then for not being loyal to the show.
Dalekbuster523 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2015, 15:38
Kromm
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,038
That's your fault then for not being loyal to the show.
So being loyal to the show means always turning things around so that the contestants are to blame and never the producers?
Kromm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2015, 15:39
Dalekbuster523
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
So being loyal to the show means always turning things around so that the contestants are to blame and never the producers?
I'm not sure how my comment suggested that.
Dalekbuster523 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2015, 15:52
johnythefox
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 975
That's your fault then for not being loyal to the show.
you've made some strange comments on this thread, but this is priceless
johnythefox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2015, 16:37
spkx
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 14,185
I hope so too, I didn't like the woman and the dog's tricks in the audition, I wonder if they are completely trained with love and affection or with a bit of fear as well. I would like to see the RSPCA conduct an investigation into her training methods.
She actually worked/works for the RSPCA herself and trains guidedogs
spkx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2015, 16:42
spkx
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 14,185
you've made some strange comments on this thread, but this is priceless
They have a point. If you only tune in for the last episode of a series it's hard to complain that you've been misled and haven't got the full picture. It'd be a ridiculous show if they had to explain in detail everything that's happened every episode previously.
spkx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2015, 16:45
Alrightmate
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,736
Surely circus acts or music hall acts like this are old hat and if not banned should have been long ago...
Well there is an argument to made for this point of view.
There's a reason why we don't normally see animal acts in circuses any more.
Alrightmate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2015, 17:19
Stuart25
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 11,806
How did you know, the act was called Jules and Matisse, and he was the only one used in the first round, so why should we believe he was not the only one used again. If both dogs had been in all the rounds that have been different.
Chase performed in the semi final and was acknowledged at the end of the performance in the semi final.
Stuart25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2015, 17:21
Stuart25
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 11,806
If someone can show me a clip of Jules saying anything like "when Matisse walked the tightrope", showing that she blatantly lied, then I might feel differently. But as far as I'm concerned, no deliberate misleading went on and I still would've voted for them if she had said that Chase was the one who performed on the tightrope.
Stuart25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2015, 17:52
valkay
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 15,280
She actually worked/works for the RSPCA herself and trains guidedogs
I thought she was based in Belgium.
valkay is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 14:39.