Where in the rules does it say that a dog act can only use one dog. Do similar rules apply to magicians - eg can they only do one trick. What about comedians, can they only tell one joke. Welsh choirs - are they only allowed to sing one song.

You could just as easily ask why the 2nd placed act wasn't called "Jamie Raven & His Magic Lemons featuring David Walliams, Alisha Dixon, Amanda Holden and Simon Cowell" or why the 3rd placed act didn't incorporate the name of each and every member of the welsh choir. It was a stage name applied to identify the act by the producers so that people could know which act they were watching and which act they were voting for.

She wasn't "supposed" to be only performing with one dog at all, otherwise she wouldn't have had two in the semi final. Can't believe some are still banging on about this, it was a whole week ago, surely you can move on to the next thing by now?!

Yes they are acknowledged in the credits at the end of films. Chase was not mentioned at all let alone brought out on stage. Do you see the difference?

When Chase was used in the semi-final, it was obviously him as the act was supposed to have more than one dog. In the final the only other doggie character was Skippy. Chase should at the very least have been mentioned. Jules' big reveal only came after the win. Does that not make you the tiniest bit suspicious?

No. It doesn't make me even the tiniest bit suspicious. Because the dog had a collar on that said Chase. Had she, or anyone else wanted it hidden the dog wouldn't have had a collar on with his name. She wouldn't have mentioned it on TV the next day. And we wouldn't be having this conversation because we'd be non the wiser.

And as I've already pointed out. Had the under 1000 people who have complained about it voted differently it wouldn't have made a single iota of difference to the outcome because Jules won by 90k votes.

Be please, carry on flogging a dead horse.

Do you have issues recognizing the difference between a "report" and an "opinion piece"?

No because I've got the imagination and common sense to see that purposefully pointing out that it was a different dog or bringing Chase out at the end would have spoilt the narrative of the story. There wasn't two dogs helping three legged Skippy's character, it was supposed to be one CHARACTER played by the two dogs, in exactly the same way as other movie dogs work. Common sense also tells me that there was considerable effort made not to dupe anyone, as there were named collars on the dogs and they both looked different enough for people to see they weren't one dog, whilst at the same time looking similar enough to not ruin the story. Why some can't see that I don't know, unless it's just sour grapes that their favourite didn't win.

No. You don't go to the cinema, find out Chris Pratt didn't do a stunt then immediately demand your money back.

I don't know. They probably sit for 40 minutes studying the credits and if there's no 'stunt person #40' then demand their cash back and complain about how they feel utterly deceived.

You seem to be in the minority .
the ITV boss Peter Fincham admitted that Britain's Got Talent should have made it clearer that champion O'Dwyer used a stunt double dog for her winning sketch.

I believe there were 5 and maybe more involved in Jule's final act . Jules, Matisse, Chase, Skippy and two trained assistants in that hidden 'jail' . She had to have a trained assistant, and one Chase was familiar with, to place him on the tight rope and another assistant at the other end to keep Matisse calm and make sure he re-enters the stage on cue .

https://australianclimatemadness.fil...orse_what1.jpg

What's your point? If you're going to use that as an example then Jesse Jane had someone (probably an adult!) choreograph her whole routine! Or do you think she did it herself?

I hardly ever go to the cinema, but I watch plenty of movies at home. I also watch all the special features that come with DVDs and Blu-Rays. Take Lost for example. I am so familiar with some of the directors, stunt performers, writers, producers and some of the crew members from that show that I would recognise them on the street.

I have also looked up some of Chris Pratt's movies on the IMDb and have seen his stunt doubles credited. The fact that they are not listed as uncredited suggests they were credited at the end of the movies.

When it comes to TV shows. Most of them will credit the stunt coordinators, but there wouldn't be enough space or time to display all the stunt performers. There are sometimes exceptions to that and the main star's stunt double will be credited (such as David Boreanaz's double Mike Massa in Angel).


If Jesse had somebody off stage telling her what to do via an earpiece then there would be grounds for people to complain about that person not being revealed.


I don't think it would have spoiled the routine. I would have loved to have seen Chase getting the credit for the stunt at the end of the act. With magicians your eyes are going to be looking all over the place for clues as to how the tricks are pulled off. When it comes to an act like Jules' you are going to become so immersed in the story that your eyes probably won't be looking at every little detail. When 'Matisse' came out on the tightrope and walked across it I was too busy marvelling at the fact that 'he' was doing that to be paying attention to anything else. I never even noticed the collar when watching it live and have watched the act again several times (with the last time being a few minutes ago on YouTube at the highest quality HD setting) looking at the neck area and I certainly wouldn't say that Chase's name can be seen clearly. It is only upon very close inspection that you can make out a couple of letters and that's it. Additionally, there is just one longer shot where the collar is visible and even then you can only see it for a couple of seconds. If there had been a lingering close-up of the dog's head and neck with the collar on full display then my opinion would have changed.

I stated on another thread that I still think that Jules is a wonderful trainer and that I love seeing the bond between her and her dogs. I also said that I still think she and her dogs deserved the win. However, I just wish there had been greater clarity on which dog performed the hero stunt.

So what if she did? Every act will have had other people involved than just those named! The magician will have had assistants, as will the ninja girl to help with their act, nobody says anything about that. Any dancers will have had too. When have you ever seen a production, be it tv, movie, film, stage or even a concert that consists solely of the people it's about?! They've all got a crew behind the scenes that help to organise and assist with the running of things. Their not named or viewable either yet nobody complains that they haven't seen the assistants or helpers of a show! Their interested in the main actors/ characters not the support staff!

Hahaha

The thing is at this point they really have to do something about it due to the fuss.

If she shows up at the Royal Variety performance she'll probably be booed off at this point.

Rerunning the final, with her still in it is probably the best thing to do, only this time they're clear how many dogs she uses. If the public still want her to win they'll vote.

What fuss?

Less than 1000 out of 4.5 million have complained. So why should the rest of the 4.5 million who voted and have not complained be disregarded because under 1000 people have complained?

If hundreds or even tens of thousands of people had complained then maybe it should be considered. But the fact is less than 0.022% of the people that voted have complained.

So for what reason should anything at all be done?

Oh there's no doubt she's a talented trainer.

It's just the deception people don't like. The Three Legged dog was fine, but the tightrope dog should have been treated as a separate dog, not as a secret double for the main one because he couldn't to the tightrope trick (And arguably the best part of the act).

If it wasn't designed to deceive, she'd have stood out with the three dogs during the comments, not two.

If it was designed to deceive the dog wouldn't have had a collar with his name on. She wouldn't have told anyone on TV next day and we'd not be having the conversation because we'd be non the wiser.

We can go around this circle for months.

No they don't.

Worst case they just won't have her show at the Royal Variety but let her keep her money.

More realistic case, since Royal Variety has a more controlled audience than the savagery of a board like this, or ugly tabloids, they'll politely clap then forget who she is a few minutes after the performance. No harm, no foul.

Exactly. Imagine had one of the 1000 that complained somehow gotten a ticket and heckled any performer they'd be thrown out quicker than you could blink.

They'll do what they do every year with the BGT winner. Politely clap and as you said forget about it two minutes later.

All these 'this needs to be done ' and 'that needs to be done' posts are nothing but sheer ridiculousness. Less than 0.022% of those who voted have expressed displeasure. In the grand scheme of things that means entirely nothing.

See the thing is the "public" now need a sacrifice/victim.

The public is like the terminator. It won't stop.

I think Cowell will have to get rid of Amanda. That might placate the mob.

It's not the public keeping this going, it's the media who are to blame.

It wasn't designed to do anything other than for her to perform her act with her three dogs. We all saw in the semi final that Chase would have been perfectly capable of doing all the tricks that Matisse did so she could perfectly easily have done the whole routine including the tight rope walk with Chase rather than Matisse.

It really doesn't make the slightest bit of difference how many dogs she used in her act. It is her act and it is for her to decide what she wants to do and how she wants to do it. We voted for the act. There was no deception.