DS Forums

 
 

Why was tonight's show so bad?


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 20-11-2016, 08:00
Sandra Bee
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Staffordshire
Posts: 5,729
I think a lot of the problem as well is the hype we get from Zoe on ITT.

The 'B' word is overused all week and we are told how excited everyone is to be 'going to Blackpool'. Really?

Then we get the nauseating VTs where the celebs are herded into the Tower Ballroom to gaze around in wonderment and breathlessly tell us "they are in the Tower Ballroom"

The Tower Ballroom is beautiful and doesn't need all the extra glitz that the Strictly road crew brings with them. Leave it at Elstree.

To see one couple dancing around that beautiful floor is all we need.

It's always a disappointment but we still get all the silly hype beforehand.
Sandra Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 20-11-2016, 08:14
Grumpy_Alan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Planet Alan
Posts: 1,632
Directors think they're being really 'modern' with their close-ups and zooms etc but actually they're the opposite. The reason TV went for lots of cuts and close ups rather than movie-style long to mid shots in the 50s with dance routines was the fact that the average TV screen then was about 8 inches, so a dance routine looked tiny. But now the average screen is about 32 inches, or more, and there's simply no need to show a dance routine with so much camera movement and so many cuts. And for a dance show to fail to show dances so that you can actually judge the dances is really unforgivable.
This ^^^
Grumpy_Alan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-11-2016, 08:46
jan_butcher1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 110
Me too!!
jan_butcher1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-11-2016, 09:17
fayebeatle
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 871
Not good, the sound was echoing around, the extra dancers were superfluous. Best thing all night was Peter Kay with Judge Rinder. Hysterical.
fayebeatle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-11-2016, 09:38
mad_madge_morri
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 477
NAY NAY and thrice Nay. Get rid of 'em
I thought I was the only one who loathed Blackpool. It might have been better if they had used the Winter-Gardens. After all that is the heart of ballroom dancing.
Much as I dislike Blackpool, it has to be said,that it is better than Wem ber ly
mad_madge_morri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-11-2016, 09:46
J.R
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Midlands
Posts: 1,282
On the whole I enjoyed it but the only dance I have wanted to watch again is Danny and Otis - usually there are at least three or four.

I think it was a mix of things.

The too high marks for Claudia right at the beginning meant the judges left themselves nowhere to go but up. and then down again at the end which was deflating. I love Judge Rinder but imo either Danny and Oti or Louise and Kevin should have closed the show!

Having all the better dancers in the first half seemed odd?! They should have mixed them up more.

I think quite a few of them were overwhelmed by where they were. They go on SO much about Blackpool that it is not surprising. It stops being a treat, a jaunt to look forward to and becomes a bit too much for them.

I also wonder how much rehearsal time they got considering they also took part in the group dance.

We are built up to expect too much as well, when it dosn't come off as being spectacular then we are disappointed.

Oh I have to add the backing dancers which is a personal irritation. Either keep them out of the way or lose them altogether. I havnt a clue what sort of view the judges had but there were a couple of times when I couldn't see Louise at all - that combined with her camouflage dress that blended in with the floor. The same with Judge Rinder, with all the jazzy lighting and costumes there were a few times when I couldn't keep track of where he was.
J.R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-11-2016, 10:51
Tingewick
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 31
I liked the dances but found them difficult to follow because of the camera zooming about, often couldn't see the feet and the other dancers were distracting. In some instance we couldn't even make out the celebrity at all in the melee.
I agree with you. The camera work was dreadful, you couldn't see the dances and lost sight of the celebs. The sound wasn't great either.
Tingewick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-11-2016, 14:02
Bonnie Scotland
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 640
I'm fed up saying about sh1tty camerawork. The esteemed BBC obviously think it 'adds to the viewer experience' to give a sort of fun park waltzer like experience. I can imagine a producer/director whoever's in charge of these things standing behind 2-3 seated assistants and a bank of screens screaming every few secs ...

'SWITCH TO 3!!!'
'SWITCH TO 1!!!'
'SWITCH TO OVERHEAD!!!'
'SWITCH TO WHIRLY WHIRLY CAM!!!'
'STAY WITH WHIRLY WHIRLY CAM!!!'
'SWITCH TO 2!!!'

And that's just within 20 secs of broadcasting

As others say, the end result is we don't get to see the dance properly. So Bruno then says 'oh and your footwork was sublime as you traveled across the floor 1/2 way through' and we're left thinking 'emmm, we didn't see their feet!!'

1 x static camera like we're in 1960? No. But just because the technology exists to 'do' things doesn't mean it has to be over-used ...

Oh yeah, and as for audience clapping, all the time, and often at inappropriate moments ... didn't you know we're in an era where it's evidently a sin to have even 10 secs of normality on these shows?!? The producers probably look on non clapping periods the same way radio producers look on silence as being dead air or whatever it's called.
Bonnie Scotland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-11-2016, 14:08
aggs
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 13,160
I'm fed up saying about sh1tty camerawork. The esteemed BBC obviously think it 'adds to the viewer experience' to give a sort of fun park waltzer like experience. I can imagine a producer/director whoever's in charge of these things standing behind 2-3 seated assistants and a bank of screens screaming every few secs ...

'SWITCH TO 3!!!'
'SWITCH TO 1!!!'
'SWITCH TO OVERHEAD!!!'
'SWITCH TO WHIRLY WHIRLY CAM!!!'
'STAY WITH WHIRLY WHIRLY CAM!!!'
'SWITCH TO 2!!!'

And that's just within 20 secs of broadcasting

As others say, the end result is we don't get to see the dance properly. So Bruno then says 'oh and your footwork was sublime as you traveled across the floor 1/2 way through' and we're left thinking 'emmm, we didn't see their feet!!'

1 x static camera like we're in 1960? No. But just because the technology exists to 'do' things doesn't mean it has to be over-used ...

Oh yeah, and as for audience clapping, all the time, and often at inappropriate moments ... didn't you know we're in an era where it's evidently a sin to have even 10 secs of normality on these shows?!? The producers probably look on non clapping periods the same way radio producers look on silence as being dead air or whatever it's called.
It's like the Top of the Pops of the 70's where someone had found the SFX button, so every act was either in a box bopping round the screen, in some sort of fluorescent negative effect or had a guitar that gave coloured wibbly wobbly shadows. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
aggs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-11-2016, 14:34
erin_p
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 24,531
The additional dancers were almost if not more prominent than the contestants, very off putting .
erin_p is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-11-2016, 14:35
bornfree
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 13,434
Additional dancers were very distracting.
bornfree is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-11-2016, 14:58
rebecca87
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,383
I figure they didn't want to bring the mood down at the start but praising Claudia's jive to high heaven as if the audience didn't just watch it too soured me on the rest of the show because it wasn't fair on the other dancers- either they had to be overmarked in comparison or be unlucky enough to receive an accurate score on a night when no one else was being marked sanely.
rebecca87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-11-2016, 16:21
Grumpy_Alan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Planet Alan
Posts: 1,632
I figure they didn't want to bring the mood down at the start but praising Claudia's jive to high heaven as if the audience didn't just watch it too soured me on the rest of the show because it wasn't fair on the other dancers- either they had to be overmarked in comparison or be unlucky enough to receive an accurate score on a night when no one else was being marked sanely.



The Judge's scores seem to becoming increasingly irrelevant tbh.

Dancers in a high position end up in the dance-off and vice versa.

It would make some sort of sense if, say, the general trend from the public was to vote for dancers in the top half or two thirds of the leader board. At least then we would be seeing some sort of elimination based on "talent".

As it is though, to give the show a title such as Strictly Come Dancing is not relevant any more as it is no longer strictly about dancing, (or not at least when the public vote is taken into account). Indeed, it seems to be solely about public appeal and not related in any way to dancing talent.

Or, simply, do away with the Judges and invite the public to vote for their favourites and just eliminate the least favourite every week.

What's the chances that the least talented, according to the Judges, get through to another week tonight?
Grumpy_Alan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-11-2016, 16:36
lightonmyfeet
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,672
I figure they didn't want to bring the mood down at the start but praising Claudia's jive to high heaven as if the audience didn't just watch it too soured me on the rest of the show because it wasn't fair on the other dancers- either they had to be overmarked in comparison or be unlucky enough to receive an accurate score on a night when no one else was being marked sanely.
^^^ This is what happened to me too. I like Claudia but I just thought it very unfair. Her dance had many faults and yet nothing was said. Then all 4 (including Craig) gave it a 9. Really not right and made me think that there was a "judges' plan" afoot.
lightonmyfeet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-11-2016, 16:38
MACTOWIN
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Broughty Ferry
Posts: 30,532
Ed Balls was there.
MACTOWIN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-11-2016, 17:10
Polly-T
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,500
The issues with the show last night IMO were the following:

1. Overmarking and questionable praise of Claudias Jive set the (favouritism) tone at the beginning. At times I felt I had watched a different dance when I heard their critique.

2. Huge effort and improvement by Greg dismissed & unrecognised by the judges - IMO Greg and Judge Rinder were both better than Claudia last night

3. Backing dancers were very distracting and if they have to be there would be in the background and not interfering with the dance performance of the competing couple.

4. The lighting and colours made watching the actual competing couples a bit more difficult to see and appreciate properly.

I quite enjoyed the show but there was only one stand-out dance, for me, and only one deserving of 10s on the night and that was Danny and Otis Charleston
Polly-T is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:29.