DS Forums

 
 

Sir Bruce Forsyth targets Strictly Come Dancing Christmas comeback after major operat


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-09-2016, 22:18
coppertop1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,161
I couldn't stand Bruce in his heyday, and liked him even less as he definitely outstayed his welcome on Strictly. As has been said up thread - whichever show he has presented, he's always hogged the camera and made it all about him, and his pathetic jokes and patter, when in most cases, the shows are all about the contestants (for the game shows) or the artistes in the case of the variety shows - not the link man!

I haven't got a problem with him popping in to visit the show as an audience member - but I don't think he should present again. The launch show which we saw yesterday took many hours to film last week (with young fit and healthy presenters) and he would never have been able to do do it.

In any case, it's the BBC and the production staff who decide who they are going to employ - not the public, or Bruce. Given the state of his health, they must have very grave doubts about employing him again in any capacity
Actually, ultimately it is the public as in viewing figure, who decide. If the public don't want to see him and remember the viewing figures went up after he left, then the producers to accommodate the public will not want him to present. Bruce may want to present all he wants. However if the viewers don't want him there they will vote with their fingers and stop watching. Fewer viewers = equals the possibility of no programme.

It's the same with every programme, if the viewers don't watch the programmes will cease to be made. Several big entertainers have effectively been forcibly retired, Jasper Carrot, Jimmy Tarbuk.
coppertop1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 11-09-2016, 22:27
Monkseal
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,653
Not that I'm attributing it to Brucie (or at last not alone), but the ratings absolutely did not go up after he left - the drop between the average ratings of Series 11 and Series 12 was half a million, which is the biggest drop between series they've ever had.
Monkseal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2016, 09:45
coppertop1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,161
Not that I'm attributing it to Brucie (or at last not alone), but the ratings absolutely did not go up after he left - the drop between the average ratings of Series 11 and Series 12 was half a million, which is the biggest drop between series they've ever had.
My mistake, I had read on here that for the shows in the middle of the series when he was ill numbers went up. I assumed that this was forever. Was series 12 a poor ratings show? You suprise me ( in know you are right, you always are) but I personally enjoyed most of that series.

Damn forever out of step with the majority of the viewing public.
coppertop1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2016, 11:35
lundavra
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 25,455
Damn forever out of step with the majority of the viewing public.
Sounds as if you are ideally qualified to be ITV Controller of Programmes.
lundavra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2016, 15:40
Monkseal
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,653
My mistake, I had read on here that for the shows in the middle of the series when he was ill numbers went up. I assumed that this was forever. Was series 12 a poor ratings show? You suprise me ( in know you are right, you always are) but I personally enjoyed most of that series.

Damn forever out of step with the majority of the viewing public.
Series 7 when he took an episode off for illness the numbers were higher than for the rest of the series, but that wasn't the case in, say, Series 10 when he also took an episode off. There was also a lot of gossip on the day about who might be replacing Bruce for the week, rather than it being planned in advance, so people might have been tuning in to "solve the mystery" (then it turned out to be Ronnie Corbett...).

Series 12 wasn't poorly rated by general standards, it was just a big dip from the series before. Generally the show had lost about 100,000 to 200,000 viewers per year since 2010 (not a surprise given how tv ratings are moving generally for everything other than Bake Off), it was just a lot to lose in one go. Last year they were back up to around Series 10/11 levels again, so if people *were* missing Brucie, they got over it. (And the ratings for the Launch Show suggest we might be in for another climb again this year)
Monkseal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-09-2016, 14:27
Nakatomi
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: The North!
Posts: 2,177
I'll be honest, I've never been a Brucie fan. Even in the 1970s he felt like a pensioner. He was just embarrassing on Strictly with his unfunny jokes and awful autocue work. I accept that, at the start, he was probably a necessary part of it becoming so popular, because he was a well known face. But now, Strictly clearly has survived without him and the Saturday shows are a complete riot that are really fun now.

I always used to dread watching on Saturdays, because Bruce slowed the whole thing down to a halt. It was always interesting to see how fresh and breezy the results show was compared to the Saturday.

I like how Strictly has the only all female host lineup as well. You wouldn't expect it, but in terms of representation of women, age and minorities, it's better than The X Factor. Is there any other show that has a nearly 75 year old judge, two gay judges, a middle aged balet dancer, two middle aged hosts and a variety of ethnicities and nationalities as professionals?
Nakatomi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-09-2016, 19:38
TerryM22
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 17,987
Not that I'm attributing it to Brucie (or at last not alone), but the ratings absolutely did not go up after he left - the drop between the average ratings of Series 11 and Series 12 was half a million, which is the biggest drop between series they've ever had.
I seem to remember a plummeting nosedive in ratings after Sir Prucie was forced out.
TerryM22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-09-2016, 20:09
Doghouse Riley
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North-West England
Posts: 25,838
I seem to remember a plummeting nosedive in ratings after Sir Prucie was forced out.
Completely wrong, as you know it.

Actually Terry, it made no difference to the ratings after "Prucie" nosedived out. The show still beat the pants off ITV. That was the most important statistic as far as the BBC were concerned.

Even more importantly, it's since been as if he were never in it.
Doghouse Riley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-09-2016, 12:23
Grumpy_Alan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Planet Alan
Posts: 1,632
I seem to remember a plummeting nosedive in ratings after Sir Prucie was forced out.
Wrong! He staggered out because he couldn't cope.

If he had staggered out when he did he, and his over-sized ego, would have been forcibly pushed.
Grumpy_Alan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-09-2016, 02:42
TerryM22
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 17,987
Wrong! He staggered out because he couldn't cope.

If he had staggered out when he did he, and his over-sized ego, would have been forcibly pushed.

Wrong! Sir Bruce was the only one that could cope without the crutch of the auto cue,

Sir Bruce has real talent and can hold an audience in the palm of his hand for as long as he chooses.
TerryM22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-09-2016, 15:02
Grumpy_Alan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Planet Alan
Posts: 1,632
Wrong! Sir Bruce was the only one that could cope without the crutch of the auto cue,

Sir Bruce has real talent and can hold an audience in the palm of his hand for as long as he chooses.

He couldn't cope with or without an autocue.

He had a degree of talent that long ago disappeared, before he got on Strictly.

He couldn't hold an audience of one let alone a national TV audience.

Face it Terry. He was good a long time ago, but sadly, he slowly lost his grip and his audience appeal.
Grumpy_Alan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-09-2016, 17:04
Doghouse Riley
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North-West England
Posts: 25,838
Wrong! Sir Bruce was the only one that could cope without the crutch of the auto cue,

Sir Bruce has real talent and can hold an audience in the palm of his hand for as long as he chooses.
Trouble was he wasn't holding them in his hand, he was actually annoying them with his faffing about and causing delays by going off on a tangent.

He was too short sighted to read-the auto.

The auto-cue isn't a crutch, it's a necessary tool, Tess bless her, was able to "speed read" whatever was on it, to make up the time wasted by the silly old codger trying to draw attention to himself and labouring unfunny jokes. Don't you remember the audience groaning?

As I've said before. He hasn't been missed at all.
Doghouse Riley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-09-2016, 12:39
coppertop1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,161
You pay the wages of the shop worker where you shop, you pay the wages of every entertainer on every channel via advertising , the police officers , the fire fighter, the teacher, in fact you contribute to everyone's wages in one way or another so you think you should say when they all retire or is it just those employed by the BBC ?
And if the shop worker couldn't do their job because they were too old I would ask to be served by someone else, if a firefighter was too old to do his job or teacher then I would hope they had been forcibly retired, if any entertainer on any station were too old to do their job I would hope they would be retired too.

I really don't know what your point is, that people should be allowed to do their job for as long as they want despite their age?

If that's so I would whole hearted disagree , if a very fit 70 year old wanted to continue to be a frontline firefighter I would have to say I would be expecting them to have very regular health checks in order to do so. Quite frankly I am not sure their employer would want to take on that liability, the risk of death to themselves, the other firefighters and those that need rescuing would grow expidentially as their age increased.
Same goes for airline pilots etc etc.

Bruce didn't have a position where he could put others lives at risk because of his age, but he was an entertainer. If he no longer entertains I am not at all sure why anyone would want to employ him.
coppertop1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-09-2016, 15:01
Grumpy_Alan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Planet Alan
Posts: 1,632
And if the shop worker couldn't do their job because they were too old I would ask to be served by someone else, if a firefighter was too old to do his job or teacher then I would hope they had been forcibly retired, if any entertainer on any station were too old to do their job I would hope they would be retired too.

I really don't know what your point is, that people should be allowed to do their job for as long as they want despite their age?

If that's so I would whole hearted disagree , if a very fit 70 year old wanted to continue to be a frontline firefighter I would have to say I would be expecting them to have very regular health checks in order to do so. Quite frankly I am not sure their employer would want to take on that liability, the risk of death to themselves, the other firefighters and those that need rescuing would grow expidentially as their age increased.
Same goes for airline pilots etc etc.

Bruce didn't have a position where he could put others lives at risk because of his age, but he was an entertainer. If he no longer entertains I am not at all sure why anyone would want to employ him.

Well said, and especially the BiB
Grumpy_Alan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2016, 20:33
TerryM22
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 17,987
And if the shop worker couldn't do their job because they were too old I would ask to be served by someone else, if a firefighter was too old to do his job or teacher then I would hope they had been forcibly retired, if any entertainer on any station were too old to do their job I would hope they would be retired too.

I really don't know what your point is, that people should be allowed to do their job for as long as they want despite their age?

If that's so I would whole hearted disagree , if a very fit 70 year old wanted to continue to be a frontline firefighter I would have to say I would be expecting them to have very regular health checks in order to do so. Quite frankly I am not sure their employer would want to take on that liability, the risk of death to themselves, the other firefighters and those that need rescuing would grow expidentially as their age increased.
Same goes for airline pilots etc etc.

Bruce didn't have a position where he could put others lives at risk because of his age, but he was an entertainer. If he no longer entertains I am not at all sure why anyone would want to employ him.

No one can ad lib and entertain like Sir Bruce, that is why he is a living legend.
TerryM22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2016, 20:40
Doghouse Riley
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North-West England
Posts: 25,838
No one can ad lib and entertain like Sir Bruce, that is why he is a living legend.
Err..

Terry, but that wasn't his job on Strictly, as well you know. He was just supposed to be a link between the dancing. In the end he wasn't a link he was like a ring in a stone wall. Totally useless in the context of the show.
Doghouse Riley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2016, 12:31
Grumpy_Alan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Planet Alan
Posts: 1,632
No one can ad lib and entertain like Sir Bruce, .
I'll concede that he ad-libbed, basically because he had no idea what to do or say next.Of course without an autocue he was like a ship without a rudder.


Entertain? He used to be mildly amusing but never more than that.

As for SCD, his job was to link each segment, something he failed to do competently time after time after time.
Grumpy_Alan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2016, 13:28
Doghouse Riley
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North-West England
Posts: 25,838
There may be a clip of him during the Christmas show, expressing regrets at not being there and wishing all a happy Christmas.
He'll be heavily made-up just like last time, "sitting in his bath chair with a rug over his knees like ancient character in a Dickens novel."

The old fool doesn't know how much damage his recent behaviour is doing to the perception of the public.
He should be spending his remaining years in his home in Puerto Rico, not trying to re-live past glories.
Doghouse Riley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2016, 21:39
TerryM22
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 17,987
There may be a clip of him during the Christmas show, expressing regrets at not being there and wishing all a happy Christmas.
He'll be heavily made-up just like last time, "sitting in his bath chair with a rug over his knees like ancient character in a Dickens novel."

The old fool doesn't know how much damage his recent behaviour is doing to the perception of the public.
He should be spending his remaining years in his home in Puerto Rico, not trying to re-live past glories.

Please don't under estimate Sir Bruce, he deserves much more credit than you seem prepared to give him.
TerryM22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2016, 22:58
Doghouse Riley
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North-West England
Posts: 25,838
Please don't under estimate Sir Bruce, he deserves much more credit than you seem prepared to give him.
Where's the under estimation?

Face up to reality Terry.

He's nearly ninety, he's had heart surgery and in no way would he be able to host any show again. Particularly a fast-moving show like Strictly. The Christmas Show, with rehearsals would be a whole day job.
The BBC won't take any chances on it. They'll only do what I said they'd do, possibly record a short clip to include in the programme. If anything at all.
Doghouse Riley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2016, 23:15
Nakatomi
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: The North!
Posts: 2,177
No one can ad lib and entertain like Sir Bruce, that is why he is a living legend.
Yeah his scripted ad-libs were really entertaining... not. His jokes weren't even funny, people laughed out of pity. He was a doddery old fool, and I'm glad he's gone. The show is so much more fun without him there. Tess is a bit wooden but she's a better host than Bruce, and Claudia has made the post-dance interview her own. It's nice to have a show hosted by two middle aged women as well, compared to the X Factor which is always trying to chase the youngest demographic.
Nakatomi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-09-2016, 00:14
skp20040
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central London
Posts: 43,666
And if the shop worker couldn't do their job because they were too old I would ask to be served by someone else, if a firefighter was too old to do his job or teacher then I would hope they had been forcibly retired, if any entertainer on any station were too old to do their job I would hope they would be retired too.

I really don't know what your point is, that people should be allowed to do their job for as long as they want despite their age?

If that's so I would whole hearted disagree , if a very fit 70 year old wanted to continue to be a frontline firefighter I would have to say I would be expecting them to have very regular health checks in order to do so. Quite frankly I am not sure their employer would want to take on that liability, the risk of death to themselves, the other firefighters and those that need rescuing would grow expidentially as their age increased.
Same goes for airline pilots etc etc.

Bruce didn't have a position where he could put others lives at risk because of his age, but he was an entertainer. If he no longer entertains I am not at all sure why anyone would want to employ him.
In yours and some other peoples opinion he does not entertain, there are plenty who feel he does so should he not be hired because some people don't like him and some never have ? If it worked like that the screens would be blank in general.

My point about age is forced retirement is no longer legal other than certain jobs and retirement age has never existed with onscreen actors/entertainers. You feel Bruce cannot do his job there is evidence to the contrary by his popularity.
skp20040 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 22-09-2016, 10:19
Doghouse Riley
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North-West England
Posts: 25,838
In yours and some other peoples opinion he does not entertain, there are plenty who feel he does so should he not be hired because some people don't like him and some never have ? If it worked like that the screens would be blank in general.

My point about age is forced retirement is no longer legal other than certain jobs and retirement age has never existed with onscreen actors/entertainers. You feel Bruce cannot do his job there is evidence to the contrary by his popularity.
That makes no sense at all. It's the show that's popular despite him, (even more so now).
If you want "entertainment." Then watch one of his thirty year-old shows on one of the digital channels.

If you want a competent presenter who can ensure that a fast paced show keeps to time, you don't need a near ninety year old who has proved himself less than able to do it any more.

By the way, he is so "popular," he had to finance his last theatre tour.
Doghouse Riley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-09-2016, 13:46
skp20040
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central London
Posts: 43,666
That makes no sense at all. It's the show that's popular despite him, (even more so now).
If you want "entertainment." Then watch one of his thirty year-old shows on one of the digital channels.

If you want a competent presenter who can ensure that a fast paced show keeps to time, you don't need a near ninety year old who has proved himself less than able to do it any more.

By the way, he is so "popular," he had to finance his last theatre tour .
You are aware are you that many acts choose to fund (initial layout and guarantees to theatres ) and run their own tours , that way they do what they want and retain a bigger share of the profits rather than handing it over to an agency who take a lot of the profits and call the shots. And in Bruce's case it is done though Bruce Forsyth Enterprises Ltd which is his company and the same one that has done this stuff before, you get to keep more of the money which makes sense. Do you think the London Palladium just lets anyone book it for a performance ?
skp20040 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 22-09-2016, 14:00
Doghouse Riley
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North-West England
Posts: 25,838
You are aware are you that many acts choose to fund (initial layout and guarantees to theatres ) and run their own tours , that way they do what they want and retain a bigger share of the profits rather than handing it over to an agency who take a lot of the profits and call the shots. And in Bruce's case it is done though Bruce Forsyth Enterprises Ltd which is his company and the same one that has done this stuff before, you get to keep more of the money which makes sense. Do you think the London Palladium just lets anyone book it for a performance ?
"You are aware aren't you," that promoters would be jumping at the chance of a sure fire hit tour, but in this case they weren't.

They do all the donkey work, find the finance, make all the arrangements, technicians, transport, ticket booking, publicity, etc., etc., the list is endless. All the artist has to do is turn up and cash the cheque at the end of the tour.

In his case he had to do it, putting up the money, that's the biggest risk, I'm sure he was jumping at the chance of going it alone.
Just the sort of stress you need at his age.

By the way, "if the money's right" the Palladium would let you book a performance, reciting "your greatest posts."
Doghouse Riley is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:10.