DS Forums

 
 

Is TA one of the most tired shows on TV?


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 28-10-2016, 10:10
hownwbrowncow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Scotland
Posts: 5,892

I started watching The Apprentice during Series 8. The format really hooked me, and honestly the run up to Series 9 was one of the most exciting run-ups to a tv show i recall, and of course Series 9 was incredibly enjoyable - definitely up there with the best series of the show.

However, something's not been right with the last three series - too many candidates may be the issue, but it just seems to have become increasingly stale, repetitive and predictable..

I think the show needs an overhaul if it wants to remain popular - a new board, a new boardroom, between 12 and 14 candidates, turn it back into a job and other things.
hownwbrowncow is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 28-10-2016, 10:15
Lojen
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: London
Posts: 895
In my opinion they have gone down the old big brother route of turning it into a freak show. Nobody in their right mind would call most of the current clowns Britain's brightest business brains. Personally I would like to see more authentic business minded participants and tasks.

It's never going to happen though and the inclusion of ever greater idiots in the name of entertainment will continue.
Lojen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2016, 10:19
Peter Venkman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 1,400
I started watching The Apprentice during Series 8. The format really hooked me, and honestly the run up to Series 9 was one of the most exciting run-ups to a tv show i recall, and of course Series 9 was incredibly enjoyable - definitely up there with the best series of the show.

However, something's not been right with the last three series - too many candidates may be the issue, but it just seems to have become increasingly stale, repetitive and predictable..

I think the show needs an overhaul if it wants to remain popular - a new board, a new boardroom, between 12 and 14 candidates, turn it back into a job and other things.
LOL started watching from series 8 and calling it tired.
Peter Venkman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2016, 10:25
hownwbrowncow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Scotland
Posts: 5,892
LOL started watching from series 8 and calling it tired.
I've seen every series (more than once )
hownwbrowncow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2016, 10:27
KornerKabin
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 13,706
I have loved the Apprentice since the very first series when it was on a quiet graveyard slot on BBC 2 and the lovely Tim won.

This series, however, has been the most difficult to watch and I can't quite put my finger on why. Maybe it's because the tasks are the same every year? Maybe it's because I've lost interest in the business partner stuff? Maybe it's the preposterous candidates that they've managed to dredge up? it's because I'm tired of Karren's stupid faces?

I agree with Lojen's point that it's been 'Big Brothered' and turned into a desperate headline grabbing freak show over the past few years. What stumps me the most and has stumped me this year especially, is why on earth people still apply for the show? The show is, essentially, a funfair sideshow of nutters, clueless imbeciles and people-with-a-God-complex. It hasn't been a serious business show for years.

It's not like Big Brother where the contestants are vacuous, fame-whores. The people who go on the Apprentice at least have some brains (we're led to believe that anyway!) so why do they still go ahead an apply? Or maybe I'm just being naive and it is more like BB than I think ...
KornerKabin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2016, 10:29
The Rhydler
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,220
It's a tired show, I watch out of loyalty now, but the thrill factor has gone since Sugar's natural wit abandoned him and he relies on written quips provided to him by unfunny writers. The triumvirate of Sugar, Nick and Margaret was a winner, and the show had high standards and values of both production and generally, the quality of the candidates, with the odd village idiot for comic value, now its mainly village idiots with the odd sensible one, slapstick music to denote idiocy, BBC choreographed 'ineptitude' - especially in making candidates look like they know nothing about their chosen profession.

Whoever mentioned Big Brother has it right, as its morphing into something resembling it.
The Rhydler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2016, 10:40
KornerKabin
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 13,706
It's a tired show, I watch out of loyalty now, but the thrill factor has gone since Sugar's natural wit abandoned him and he relies on written quips provided to him by unfunny writers. The triumvirate of Sugar, Nick and Margaret was a winner, and the show had high standards and values of both production and generally, the quality of the candidates, with the odd village idiot for comic value, now its mainly village idiots with the odd sensible one, slapstick music to denote idiocy, BBC choreographed 'ineptitude' - especially in making candidates look like they know nothing about their chosen profession.

Whoever mentioned Big Brother has it right, as its morphing into something resembling it.
Nick and Margaret were class individuals and a class act together. I think it's testament to their general nous and business acumen (see what I did there? ) that they both left the show when they did. Margaret especially picked her time to leave perfectly as the show was entering its dumbed down phase.
KornerKabin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2016, 10:49
chrono88
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Dream
Posts: 2,797
I always thought the 10th series was the worst but this has to take the cake.

YAWN YAWN YAWN
chrono88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2016, 11:10
hownwbrowncow
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Scotland
Posts: 5,892
The glory days of Series 1-5 are never coming back, I think I just need to accept that. Series 6 didn't really grab my attention: it was quite formulaic in a similar to way it is now. Series 7 was good. Series 8 was dull and tired in hindsight. Series 9 was fantastic - a true return to form, with amazing characters, show firsts and some great candidates. Series 10 was like Series 9, but watered down with too many candidates and also too many annoying ones IMO. Last year was enjoyable, but somewhat dull and extremely gimmicky. This year is the same to be honest except it all just feels so forgettable.
hownwbrowncow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2016, 11:15
The Rhydler
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,220
The glory days of Series 1-5 are never coming back, I think I just need to accept that. Series 6 didn't really grab my attention: it was quite formulaic in a similar to way it is now. Series 7 was good. Series 8 was dull and tired in hindsight. Series 9 was fantastic - a true return to form, with amazing characters, show firsts and some great candidates. Series 10 was like Series 9, but watered down with too many candidates and also too many annoying ones IMO. Last year was enjoyable, but somewhat dull and extremely gimmicky. This year is the same to be honest except it all just feels so forgettable.
Series 6 was a classic for one reason and one reason only - Baggs. Otherwise, yes it wouldn't have been in the class of the first 5 series...but all thats followed has seen a slow decline...but hey, we're all still watching eh?
The Rhydler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2016, 11:16
Super_Furry
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 633
Replace Sugar.
Super_Furry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2016, 11:23
BelfastGuy125
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 4,693
I'm finding it a chore.

I think after reading all those stories by Selina and the like of the amount of scripting and editing (which i know in some senses has always been there of course), has made it more noticeable this year just how set up and railroaded the whole thing is. Sugar isn't even that funny or memorable anymore and most of the candidates are just jokes and not even interesting ones at that.

Like someone said above I really think they need to take a refresh, a re look and strip back the show. Less editing sabotage, show us a more realistic picture of how tasks unfold even if it isn't "action packed" necessarily with mistakes and errors etc.

For example last night, and I maybe completely wrong, but I had the feeling that they were told "don't ask the personal shopper any details about his budget etc", so they could set it up that he only spent £1000. That's the kind of cynical thinking I have with each task now. Just give us transparency, give us actual business minds and business tasks.
BelfastGuy125 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2016, 11:34
Chris1964
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 12,020
I have loved the Apprentice since the very first series when it was on a quiet graveyard slot on BBC 2 and the lovely Tim won.

This series, however, has been the most difficult to watch and I can't quite put my finger on why. Maybe it's because the tasks are the same every year? Maybe it's because I've lost interest in the business partner stuff? Maybe it's the preposterous candidates that they've managed to dredge up? it's because I'm tired of Karren's stupid faces?

I agree with Lojen's point that it's been 'Big Brothered' and turned into a desperate headline grabbing freak show over the past few years. What stumps me the most and has stumped me this year especially, is why on earth people still apply for the show? The show is, essentially, a funfair sideshow of nutters, clueless imbeciles and people-with-a-God-complex. It hasn't been a serious business show for years.

It's not like Big Brother where the contestants are vacuous, fame-whores. The people who go on the Apprentice at least have some brains (we're led to believe that anyway!) so why do they still go ahead an apply? Or maybe I'm just being naive and it is more like BB than I think ...
Not sure I agree with that. I would say there are an endless succession of super inflated ego's, but many of them are already running their own companies or have had varied careers-so they are mostly achievers. We all laugh at the messes they get into, but I would imagine most people would struggle with, in many cases, fish out water tasks with just two days to do things which normally would have months of planning.

As for the show, it is getting samey and arguably bound to be a bit tired by now, but still a brilliantly edited classy watchable production imo. Maybe it could do with a couple of years break perhaps, but Im still watching.
Chris1964 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2016, 11:39
Chris1964
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 12,020
Series 6 was a classic for one reason and one reason only - Baggs. Otherwise, yes it wouldn't have been in the class of the first 5 series...but all thats followed has seen a slow decline...but hey, we're all still watching eh?
Its still hard to believe Stuart Baggs passed away. Personally I thought the dressing down he got from Lord Sugar when he was eventually fired was way over the top.
Chris1964 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2016, 11:58
madetomeasure
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 7,972
The glory days of Series 1-5 are never coming back, I think I just need to accept that. Series 6 didn't really grab my attention: it was quite formulaic in a similar to way it is now. Series 7 was good. Series 8 was dull and tired in hindsight. Series 9 was fantastic - a true return to form, with amazing characters, show firsts and some great candidates. Series 10 was like Series 9, but watered down with too many candidates and also too many annoying ones IMO. Last year was enjoyable, but somewhat dull and extremely gimmicky. This year is the same to be honest except it all just feels so forgettable.
I agree. The Badger WAS a great businesswomen and was there purely for that reason. She must watch now and have a chuckle. It's now full of page 3 types and posers
madetomeasure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2016, 12:01
The Rhydler
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,220
Its still hard to believe Stuart Baggs passed away. Personally I thought the dressing down he got from Lord Sugar when he was eventually fired was way over the top.
Massively. That was probably the moment I began to see the show for what it was, They found the flimsiest thing to level at Baggs (lack of a license?) and made out like he was biggest most fraudulent bastard they've ever had when Sugar gave A JOB to Lee McQueen after an admission to falsifying his CV
The Rhydler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2016, 12:08
madetomeasure
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 7,972
Massively. That was probably the moment I began to see the show for what it was, They found the flimsiest thing to level at Baggs (lack of a license?) and made out like he was biggest most fraudulent bastard they've ever had when Sugar gave A JOB to Lee McQueen after an admission to falsifying his CV
Totally agree. I saw Stuart in a repeat of Come Dine With Me..he came across very different. R.I.P Stuart
madetomeasure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2016, 12:14
KornerKabin
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 13,706
Poor Stuart, such a sad loss
KornerKabin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2016, 12:18
Reserved
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 7,312
The last enjoyable series for me was series seven (Tom and Helen final two), but it's also the reason I think it's become a bit of a farce.

Changing the prize to an investment rather than a job has ruined it.

I'm too cynical to believe that the businesses the candidates put forward haven't been looked at by Alan, his team, the producers etc. making the tasks entirely pointless.

Before, if you performed poorly, you were fired. It was straight forward because the prize was a job so there was nothing for Alan to lose. Now, if they have a decent business but perform crap, he's reluctant to get rid of them; so other candidates who maybe have weaker business plans but are performing well lose out.

See Tom, for example. He was weak in so many tasks and his time should have been up by halfway, but Alan kept giving him a 'second chance' because he was always going to win regardless of his performance on the tasks.
Helen was far superior than Tom; even Alan acknowledged this, but she lost because her business plan was weaker than Tom's - making the entire process pointless for her. Alan was never going to allow her to win / invest in her even if she single-handedly won every task. It was pointless her even competing.

And that's why the show is just a mockery that I haven't taken seriously since the change in prize.
Reserved is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2016, 12:20
sausagesandwich
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,504
There is no logic whatsoever in setting these ludicrously difficult and pressured tasks as part of a "search for a business partner". Nobody in business does such a thing, and certainly Sugar never did when creating Amstrad. It is what it is has always been, a game show and I watch it to be entertained. Yes the format is tired because it is so familiar but it still fascinates me to watch the candidates jump through the hoops even though the odds are so high against them.
sausagesandwich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2016, 12:21
KornerKabin
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 13,706
The last enjoyable series for me was series seven (Tom and Helen final two), but it's also the reason I think it's become a bit of a farce.

Changing the prize to an investment rather than a job has ruined it.

I'm too cynical to believe that the businesses the candidates put forward haven't been looked at by Alan, his team, the producers etc. making the tasks entirely pointless.

Before, if you performed poorly, you were fired. It was straight forward because the prize was a job so there was nothing for Alan to lose. Now, if they have a decent business but perform crap, he's reluctant to get rid of them; so other candidates who maybe have weaker business plans but are performing well lose out.

Helen was far superior than Tom; even Alan acknowledged this, but she lost because her business plan was weaker than Tom's - making the entire process pointless for her. Alan was never going to invest in her even if she single-handedly won every task. It was pointless her even turning up.

And that's why the show is just a mockery that I haven't taken seriously since the change in prize.
I agree that the link between the tasks and the outcome has been rendered pointless by the business investment. It's basically down to the last two shows and whether Shugs likes the business idea or not - whether he has any interest in the individual is almost irrelevant. We've seen him favour people who, on paper have been weaker candidates simply because Shugs feels like their business proposition is a 'goer'.
KornerKabin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2016, 12:22
Heavenly
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 30,890
Used to love TA but when they started to pick people who wanted the publicity more than the job and then the tasks followed suit, that was it for me.
Heavenly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2016, 12:22
madetomeasure
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 7,972
There is no logic whatsoever in setting these ludicrously difficult and pressured tasks as part of a "search for a business partner". Nobody in business does such a thing, and certainly Sugar never did when creating Amstrad. It is what it is has always been, a game show and I watch it to be entertained. Yes the format is tired because it is so familiar but it still fascinates me to watch the candidates jump through the hoops even though the odds are so high against them.
A spot on post Sausage!
madetomeasure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2016, 12:24
madetomeasure
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 7,972
Used to love TA but when they started to pick people who wanted the publicity more than the job and then the tasks followed suit, that was it for me.
....yes and two of them going into CBB House was embarrassing to the Apprentice and showed the programme for the joke and gimmick it's become.
madetomeasure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2016, 12:27
Reserved
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 7,312
I agree that the link between the tasks and the outcome has been rendered pointless by the business investment. It's basically down to the last two shows and whether Shugs likes the business idea or not - whether he has any interest in the individual is almost irrelevant. We've seen him favour people who, on paper have been weaker candidates simply because Shugs feels like their business proposition is a 'goer'.
Yep.

Then there's the whole inconsistency thing with people being fired, too. One week he's firing people because they're not doing anything / hiding, the next he's letting people off who have zero sales in a sales task, whilst someone who's clearly contributed gets the boot.

I understand there needs to be a balance between those doing nothing and those doing too much / messing up, but there's absolutely no balance - it's all over the place.

It all seems too contrived now, it's just a case of letting the 'interesting' personalities remain regardless of their performance.
Reserved is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:12.