DS Forums

 
 

The Apprentice: Series 1


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-11-2015, 21:38
MrWoodySir
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sunny Doncaster
Posts: 7,883
I fell in love with James Max.
MrWoodySir is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 04-11-2015, 22:05
Cats_Eyes
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 2,546
I've recently watched the earlier series too.

I didn't start watching till around series 7-8 and series one was like watching a different show.

Actual intelligent people performing a tasks to the best if their ability not egotistic idiots flailing from one debacle to the next unable to so much as get themselves dressed without a faff.

Not that I don't enjoy that. It's hysterical to watch. But the first series was about capable adults going after a job and showing how capable they were for that job.

I also left off watching series three because of Katie Hopkins but have started watching it and am utterly amazed. It's incredible how different she is. Proving some people will do anything and everything to cling desperately to their 5 minutes of fame.
But like it or not she has done a lot more than a few 5 minutes of fame - and indeed is still in the spotlight.

None of the others are.
Cats_Eyes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2015, 22:25
The Rhydler
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,221
I'm put off watching it because I literally can't stand the site of her.. But no she's totally different. There's no shouty over opinionated attention grabbing. There's no slating everything and anything. There's no trolling of people. And doing anything and everything to make herself the centre of attention..

When selling she's been perfectly lovely.

I'm only four episodes in so perhaps by the end of the series she'll be the Katie we all know and....well, know. But up to now it's like a totally different woman.
Hmm, well I won't ruin it for you but needless to say, the claws will come out...trust me
The Rhydler is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2015, 22:36
Lyceum
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,123
But like it or not she has done a lot more than a few 5 minutes of fame - and indeed is still in the spotlight.

None of the others are.
Sorry but I'd rather be an utter nobody than grab my five minutes of fame by being a vile nasty troll.

It says a lot about a person that they will go to those lengths to stay in the spot light. And she will attack anyone and upset anyone to continue on receiving that spot light.

She's a 'celebrity' I feel incredibly sorry for. I dread to think of the issues she'll have or levels she'll stoop to when the media do eventually tire of her. As her self esteem is so clearly dependant on being 'famous'.

Sorry but I'd rather be a nobody and happy in my own skin. Not an utterly desperate media whore willing to do anything for the smallest scrap of attention.
Lyceum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2015, 23:00
thenetworkbabe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,226
Indeed, and like this show, the first series of Big Brother was new, fresh and interesting before the freaks invaded and it got silly.



I completely agree with this, they seemed to make so much better use of the hour back then, we hardly ever see the guys winding down in the evenings during tasks, split up into their teams but still bonding, that's all gone now.

Also, I had to note the marked difference in Claude in series 1, shaking hands with people, seeming almost...happy, before he developed his persona.
BB1 was full of exotic characters - more nudity in the first 30 minutes than ever after, a guitar playing ex nun, BB's most successful porn star, and a built in big baddie story waiting for a reveal.

Apprentice 1 is a bit unusual . Its a series where they are working out what an Apprentice is. Not the sales person. Not the most successful on task. Not the smartest and most competent. Its the one whose the right age, shows potential who fits a definition of an Apprentice who won. After that its the one who most fits the job, and doesn't trigger any of Sugar's biases, who wins,. more often than not. Thats until the new format, where the business offer has been decisive.
thenetworkbabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2015, 05:39
carnivalist
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,412
I've recently watched the earlier series too.

I didn't start watching till around series 7-8 and series one was like watching a different show.

Actual intelligent people performing a tasks to the best if their ability not egotistic idiots flailing from one debacle to the next unable to so much as get themselves dressed without a faff.
Series one was great, for reasons that have been covered already,

Not that I don't enjoy that. It's hysterical to watch.
It was. In my opinion its getting old, stale and contrived. It's OK if you get some interesting characters that you care about but I'm increasingly finding that I don't give a monkey's who gets fired or even who wins in the end.

But the first series was about capable adults going after a job and showing how capable they were for that job.
I guess the problem is that all these shows tend to eat themselves in the end, for reasons others have already explained. The contestants become more self-aware, less naive (in terms of knowing what to expect) more cynical about their reasons for entering and in the way they come across and many people who would have been interesting candidates eschew the sensationalism and stop applying. Add to that the way new production teams sometimes take over and try too hard to make their mark.

Big Brother is the prime example of how this process can destroy a show - once huge fun and appointment to view among a wide range of people, now a sensationalist. lurid embarrassment that almost no-one I know would be seen dead watching.

Personally, I'm getting really bored with this series. I don't know if its a bad cast this year (none of them really get me worked up either way) or the repetitiveness.

Oh - and I can't stand the nauseatingly obsequious fake laughter at Sugar's cringeworthy attempts at humour too much longer.
carnivalist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2015, 14:00
muzungu
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 327
Oh - and I can't stand the nauseatingly obsequious fake laughter at Sugar's cringeworthy attempts at humour too much longer.
Scripted more like..., but cringeorthy nevertheless...

This weak series shows how good series 1 actually was. Or rather the first 3.
The series with Tre Azam (was that the third) was the highlight for me and Tre my favourite candidate; it all went downhill after that.

I still watch the show, still enjoy it, but it has become a bit of a caracature of itself.
muzungu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2015, 15:18
hownwbrowncow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Scotland
Posts: 5,892
I actually think this series is quite good - less gimmicky than last year. However, what is disappointing me as Lord Sugar as I've said. In Series 1, he very much made the show, now he's beginning to break it.

The tired sense of humour, the lacklustre boardrooms, the lack of passion he displays, and if he ever mentions Piers Morgan again in the boardroom, I may kick the screen. I never thought I'd say this, but I find myself hoping he's replaced before long.
hownwbrowncow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2015, 16:24
nattoyaki
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 5,709
I can only make my way through some episodes (like this last story book one) with any enjoyment when inebriated these days, I wonder why I bother...
nattoyaki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2015, 17:23
The Rhydler
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,221
BB1 was full of exotic characters - more nudity in the first 30 minutes than ever after, a guitar playing ex nun, BB's most successful porn star, and a built in big baddie story waiting for a reveal.

Apprentice 1 is a bit unusual . Its a series where they are working out what an Apprentice is. Not the sales person. Not the most successful on task. Not the smartest and most competent. Its the one whose the right age, shows potential who fits a definition of an Apprentice who won. After that its the one who most fits the job, and doesn't trigger any of Sugar's biases, who wins,. more often than not. Thats until the new format, where the business offer has been decisive.
Was there masses of nudity in the first episode of big brother then? II only remember the time they were pressing each other against the wall and that was about it
The Rhydler is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2015, 18:32
stupidityno1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: England
Posts: 1,856
Scripted more like..., but cringeorthy nevertheless...

This weak series shows how good series 1 actually was. Or rather the first 3.
The series with Tre Azam (was that the third) was the highlight for me and Tre my favourite candidate; it all went downhill after that.

I still watch the show, still enjoy it, but it has become a bit of a caracature of itself.
Definitely agree that series 4 wasn't a patch on the ones that came before it. But I do think there was a return to form with series 5 - having recently revisited all the series, this was one of the ones I enjoyed the most. Beyond series five, I struggle to even remember the names of the majority of candidates.
stupidityno1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2015, 18:38
russellelly
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Scotland
Posts: 10,719
I think the biggest difference is that they're all credible candidates. On the very first episode, the ability to sell of Saira, Paul and James, among others, is a million miles from the efforts in the food task or pet expo on the current series. They can negotiate, present, come up with actual strategy.

I like the extra bits of footage from the house, the sense of relationship between candidates (the boys bringing the girls back a bottle of champagne from their treat on week 1!). Of course it's still very produced and polished, but there's something more innocent about the whole thing.

Scary that I remember watching this first time round during high school, I'm not far off 30 now
russellelly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2015, 21:49
carnivalist
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,412
I actually think this series is quite good - less gimmicky than last year. However, what is disappointing me as Lord Sugar as I've said. In Series 1, he very much made the show, now he's beginning to break it.

The tired sense of humour, the lacklustre boardrooms, the lack of passion he displays, and if he ever mentions Piers Morgan again in the boardroom, I may kick the screen. I never thought I'd say this, but I find myself hoping he's replaced before long.
But don't you think " lacklustre" could be applied to this year's cast? Who out of them would you really remember fondly in say, two series time, like you would some of the memorable characters of the past? People are trying to get worked up about Richard for Christ's sake, who although appearing to be egotistical deep down, is actually pretty bland and inoffensive compared to some of the big characters of the past. I hate to sound sexist but even some Luisa/Liz/Paloma/Leah-style eye candy would at least be something worth watching. As it is I very much doubt I'll carry on with this series for much longer - my mum, niece and nephew have already ditched it as "boring".
carnivalist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2015, 22:13
roger_50
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,411
The first few series, you could genuinely see yourself working with the majority of candidates - or at the very least you could see them fulfilling a role in a professional and competent manner, even if they weren't the most likeable people.

But as the years have gone by the number of candidates who could be viewed like that has decreased pretty much each series.

We're now at the point where individuals are seemingly being randomly plucked and thrown in, with the cameras ready to see them predictably fail at basic tasks (like speaking properly and understanding simple maths).

It feels like it's gone from being a heavyweight show to a lightweight show. That's not to say there isn't still some entertainment value buried in there, but it's sad how rudimentary & simplistic the program is these days.
roger_50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2015, 22:38
hownwbrowncow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Scotland
Posts: 5,892
But don't you think " lacklustre" could be applied to this year's cast? Who out of them would you really remember fondly in say, two series time, like you would some of the memorable characters of the past? People are trying to get worked up about Richard for Christ's sake, who although appearing to be egotistical deep down, is actually pretty bland and inoffensive compared to some of the big characters of the past. I hate to sound sexist but even some Luisa/Liz/Paloma/Leah-style eye candy would at least be something worth watching. As it is I very much doubt I'll carry on with this series for much longer - my mum, niece and nephew have already ditched it as "boring".
I don't think they're boring this year. I prefer this year's candidates to last year's. There are plenty of interesting characters IMO.
hownwbrowncow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2015, 22:46
carnivalist
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,412
I don't think they're boring this year. I prefer this year's candidates to last year's. There are plenty of interesting characters IMO.
But last year's cast was dismal. Being better than them is faint praise.

Who do you think is interesting this year - forget their back stories, I mean interesting in the way they come across, or their on-screen personality? I'm baffled.
carnivalist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2015, 22:55
carnivalist
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,412
BB1 was full of exotic characters - more nudity in the first 30 minutes than ever after, a guitar playing ex nun, BB's most successful porn star, and a built in big baddie story waiting for a reveal.
But that's exactly the problem - the first series had characters. I binned BB after about series 7 or 8 when instead of characters it was infested with knowing, cynically manufactured, one-dimensional, technicolour freaks, with the production team going out of their way to produce contrived conflict and egregiously clumsy "twists". Ironically all the sound and fury signifying nothing actually made the show one of the most boring things I've ever seen.

As someone said, the Apprentice seems to have been treading a similarly dangerous path, with the production team often engaging in cack-handed attempts at misdirection over the true identities of the winners each week.
carnivalist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2015, 23:09
MissMonkeyMoo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,413
Series 1 is an absolute gem! Although he was clearly sexist, I loved Paul and thought the way he sold flowers on the first task was genius! Never understood why miriam got so far though, apart from the shopping channel task I thought she was quite ineffectual. Saira was awesome, Tim was lovely and James is one of my favourite ever candidates. I think my most favourite apprentice scene is when saira is showing james what she had selected for him to sell on the shopping channel and they end up in fits of laughter at the Wolf jacket!

The show is more predictable now and the candidates seem less capable for some weird reason, although I would say I though the series in 2013 was excellent as they had some great characters in that one - Alex and his eyebrows, Neil clough who was guaranteed the winner until he refused to change his business plan and Jason who was just too nice for any of it!
MissMonkeyMoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2015, 07:25
hownwbrowncow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Scotland
Posts: 5,892
But last year's cast was dismal. Being better than them is faint praise.

Who do you think is interesting this year - forget their back stories, I mean interesting in the way they come across, or their on-screen personality? I'm baffled.
Sam, David, Richard, Brett, and all the girls are interesting characters IMHO.
hownwbrowncow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2015, 09:33
russellelly
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Scotland
Posts: 10,719
As someone said, the Apprentice seems to have been treading a similarly dangerous path, with the production team often engaging in cack-handed attempts at misdirection over the true identities of the winners each week.
Which undermines the whole show - it makes it look like they are all incompetent! The idea that these are some of Britain's brightest business prospects couldn't be much further from reality.
russellelly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2015, 09:49
stupidityno1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: England
Posts: 1,856
The first few series, you could genuinely see yourself working with the majority of candidates - or at the very least you could see them fulfilling a role in a professional and competent manner, even if they weren't the most likeable people.

But as the years have gone by the number of candidates who could be viewed like that has decreased pretty much each series.

We're now at the point where individuals are seemingly being randomly plucked and thrown in, with the cameras ready to see them predictably fail at basic tasks (like speaking properly and understanding simple maths).

It feels like it's gone from being a heavyweight show to a lightweight show. That's not to say there isn't still some entertainment value buried in there, but it's sad how rudimentary & simplistic the program is these days.
I wouldn't necessarily say it's lightweight these days. In terms of reality TV, I think it remains far better and more entertaining than most of the dross that goes out in that category. For the most part, it has avoided stupid, unnecessary twists; the basic format remains identical despite the switch from apprentice to business partner. The change has been more in how the action is presented to us and candidate selection - and we probably have audience panel research to blame for that. What we have now are edits that magnify and over-focus on the most enjoyable elements of the earlier series. Sadly that means we lose a lot of the background and every episode appears as though half of each team did nothing whatsoever.

Also, as it's now about finding a business partner, it's naturally going to have candidates who are far more headstrong and sure of themselves.
stupidityno1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2015, 17:39
carnivalist
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,412
Sam, David, Richard, Brett, and all the girls are interesting characters IMHO.
I can't fathom the attraction of any of those. I can't even match two of those men's names with their faces.
carnivalist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2015, 18:08
Belligerence
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ghosts Forge
Posts: 38,995
Paul's selling technique on the first task was great. As a user mentioned above, the candidates were more creditable; now it's showy.
Belligerence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2015, 21:19
thenetworkbabe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,226
Was there masses of nudity in the first episode of big brother then? II only remember the time they were pressing each other against the wall and that was about it
That was 30 minutes in though. It took weeks to get there in BB2, masses of alcohol in BB3 and an accidental drop of the towel in BB4...... My point was that they picked some strong characters for BB1 to provide everything from fights to naked painting. It was always set up even before the producers intervened to set most things up 1, 3, and 5 have much in common. .

BB1 I think saw him literally pick an Apprentice, and work out that was someone rounded who would benefit from the experience of working for him..Therafter its a mix of filling the job on offer, not being someone else, and deliberately, or not, avoiding people who would do better anyway.
thenetworkbabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2015, 22:35
hownwbrowncow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Scotland
Posts: 5,892
I can't fathom the attraction of any of those. I can't even match two of those men's names with their faces.
Well it's all subjective isn't it? Different people find different qualities interesting.
hownwbrowncow is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 00:42.