Originally Posted by Paace:
“To try to improve what ?”
“To try to improve what ?”
Their dancing I suppose.
It is NOT a "DANCE" competition
2 of 4
I disagree with the thread title as it stands it should read that it's not JUST a dance competition.
If it wasn't why have 4 people with dance expertise to judge and critique the dancers?
If it wasn't why have 4 people with dance expertise to judge and critique the dancers?
The show's whatever you want to take out of it, whether you lean more towards loving the dance aspect, the entertainment aspect or a mixture of both..
I just wish people would stop pouting and throwing themselves about or acting like they are superior when other people enjoy the contestants who entertain them the most, even when those contestants might not be technically that good. If the public vote a contestant back for another week then they entertained a larger number of people than the person who was voted off and deserve to be there, end of story.
I also wish people would stop shouting 'ringer' at every contestant who ever took a few dance classes in their life. As others have pointed out, there have been contestants with prior dance training appearing since the very first series. The mix of prior ability and also the mix of fitness levels (because the sports stars could also be said to have an advantage with their core fitness, stamina, being used to hard training etc) means there's something for everyone to enjoy.
I just wish people would stop pouting and throwing themselves about or acting like they are superior when other people enjoy the contestants who entertain them the most, even when those contestants might not be technically that good. If the public vote a contestant back for another week then they entertained a larger number of people than the person who was voted off and deserve to be there, end of story.
I also wish people would stop shouting 'ringer' at every contestant who ever took a few dance classes in their life. As others have pointed out, there have been contestants with prior dance training appearing since the very first series. The mix of prior ability and also the mix of fitness levels (because the sports stars could also be said to have an advantage with their core fitness, stamina, being used to hard training etc) means there's something for everyone to enjoy.
Good post OP. I really enjoy watching the great performances from the stronger participants, but I always find myself getting behind the contestants who struggle a bit, make their dances memorable, and go on that 'journey'.
It's why I've been voting for Ed, Judge Rinder and Greg each week (and also Lesley before she went out) . They are beginners who are really loving their Strictly experience, and who are really trying hard to improve and giving us some entertaining and memorable performances along the way.
It's why I've been voting for Ed, Judge Rinder and Greg each week (and also Lesley before she went out) . They are beginners who are really loving their Strictly experience, and who are really trying hard to improve and giving us some entertaining and memorable performances along the way.
Originally Posted by Tango Trish:
“I do wish people would Really understand that this is NOT a dance competition if it were then we the Great British public would NOT get our say as the majority of us probably are not dance experts or trained to judge.
This is a prime time Saturday evening family entertainment show, the original format was to take "celebrities" and teach them to dance, alas because more and more "able to dance in the first place" celebs are invited to take part it somehow clouds those with no experience whatsoever who are genuinely trying their best.
Alas as people have got used to the "better abled" celebs those who are REALLY trying their very best are constantly slammed on here - so unfair.. I enjoyed the show much more when it wasn't so blooming predictable - the judges too need to get a grip and stop having obvious favourites.”
“I do wish people would Really understand that this is NOT a dance competition if it were then we the Great British public would NOT get our say as the majority of us probably are not dance experts or trained to judge.
This is a prime time Saturday evening family entertainment show, the original format was to take "celebrities" and teach them to dance, alas because more and more "able to dance in the first place" celebs are invited to take part it somehow clouds those with no experience whatsoever who are genuinely trying their best.
Alas as people have got used to the "better abled" celebs those who are REALLY trying their very best are constantly slammed on here - so unfair.. I enjoyed the show much more when it wasn't so blooming predictable - the judges too need to get a grip and stop having obvious favourites.”
You are correct. A dance competition is one where professional semi-professional dancers compete under very strict conditions and markings..
Originally Posted by Tango Trish:
“I do wish people would Really understand that this is NOT a dance competition if it were then we the Great British public would NOT get our say as the majority of us probably are not dance experts or trained to judge.
This is a prime time Saturday evening family entertainment show, the original format was to take "celebrities" and teach them to dance, alas because more and more "able to dance in the first place" celebs are invited to take part it somehow clouds those with no experience whatsoever who are genuinely trying their best.
Alas as people have got used to the "better abled" celebs those who are REALLY trying their very best are constantly slammed on here - so unfair.. I enjoyed the show much more when it wasn't so blooming predictable - the judges too need to get a grip and stop having obvious favourites.”
“I do wish people would Really understand that this is NOT a dance competition if it were then we the Great British public would NOT get our say as the majority of us probably are not dance experts or trained to judge.
This is a prime time Saturday evening family entertainment show, the original format was to take "celebrities" and teach them to dance, alas because more and more "able to dance in the first place" celebs are invited to take part it somehow clouds those with no experience whatsoever who are genuinely trying their best.
Alas as people have got used to the "better abled" celebs those who are REALLY trying their very best are constantly slammed on here - so unfair.. I enjoyed the show much more when it wasn't so blooming predictable - the judges too need to get a grip and stop having obvious favourites.”
There's a little word called opinion in the dictionary - go and look it up. People are entitled to like the better dancers and dislike the weaker ones if they want to. And to say that the better dancers aren't trying their best is just ridiculous.
The judges are allowed to have favourites - that little thing called opinion again.
The whole show is subjective, people are entitled to like or dislike whoever and whatever they want. If people want to judge it on the dancing, and treat it as a dancing show, then that's up to them, their prerogative, not wrong.
The format has always been celebs learning to dance ballroom and Latin dancing. There has never been and never will be a criterion that the celeb has to never have done any sort of dancing before, because that would probably rule out about 80% of celebs in general. There have always been good and bad dancers - that's how the show works, not how you describe it. It's always been a mixture and it can't be any other way.
What's so hard to understand about that I will never know.
Originally Posted by Sarah777:
“It used to be a dance competition for beginners and the public to enjoy their journey, but now it's a platform for trained dancers to get some exposure and get some good breaks. BBC might as well show the British and World dance championships.”
“It used to be a dance competition for beginners and the public to enjoy their journey, but now it's a platform for trained dancers to get some exposure and get some good breaks. BBC might as well show the British and World dance championships.”
No ... it's never been that ... even the first series had ringers in it ... alongside Chris Parker and Chris is probably the biggest argument ever against complete beginners. A show full of Chris Parkers would be excruciating.
Part of the charm for me is the mix of abilities. It'd be excruciating for me to see 12 Greg and Eds and maybe pretty boring to see 12 Louise and Dannys. Ultimately who I want to win is the couple I look forward to and keep rewatching.
Usually that turns out to be one of the better dancers, but not always.
Usually that turns out to be one of the better dancers, but not always.
Originally Posted by Berysm:
“Part of the charm for me is the mix of abilities. It'd be excruciating for me to see 12 Greg and Eds and maybe pretty boring to see 12 Louise and Dannys. Ultimately who I want to win is the couple I look forward to and keep rewatching.
Usually that turns out to be one of the better dancers, but not always.”
“Part of the charm for me is the mix of abilities. It'd be excruciating for me to see 12 Greg and Eds and maybe pretty boring to see 12 Louise and Dannys. Ultimately who I want to win is the couple I look forward to and keep rewatching.
Usually that turns out to be one of the better dancers, but not always.”
I agree. I also like couples who have good partnerships.
The only couple that I have rewatched loads have been Danny and Oti.
I rewatched a couple of Ed's dances to see if I could enjoy them.
Originally Posted by Mystical123:
“There's a little word called opinion in the dictionary - go and look it up. People are entitled to like the better dancers and dislike the weaker ones if they want to. And to say that the better dancers aren't trying their best is just ridiculous.
The judges are allowed to have favourites - that little thing called opinion again.
The whole show is subjective, people are entitled to like or dislike whoever and whatever they want. If people want to judge it on the dancing, and treat it as a dancing show, then that's up to them, their prerogative, not wrong.
The format has always been celebs learning to dance ballroom and Latin dancing. There has never been and never will be a criterion that the celeb has to never have done any sort of dancing before, because that would probably rule out about 80% of celebs in general. There have always been good and bad dancers - that's how the show works, not how you describe it. It's always been a mixture and it can't be any other way.
What's so hard to understand about that I will never know.”
“There's a little word called opinion in the dictionary - go and look it up. People are entitled to like the better dancers and dislike the weaker ones if they want to. And to say that the better dancers aren't trying their best is just ridiculous.
The judges are allowed to have favourites - that little thing called opinion again.
The whole show is subjective, people are entitled to like or dislike whoever and whatever they want. If people want to judge it on the dancing, and treat it as a dancing show, then that's up to them, their prerogative, not wrong.
The format has always been celebs learning to dance ballroom and Latin dancing. There has never been and never will be a criterion that the celeb has to never have done any sort of dancing before, because that would probably rule out about 80% of celebs in general. There have always been good and bad dancers - that's how the show works, not how you describe it. It's always been a mixture and it can't be any other way.
What's so hard to understand about that I will never know.
”
There is a difference though between saying "I prefer seeing the best dancers get further / I choose to vote for the celebs I think are the best dancers" or similar (opinion - fine) and "this is a DANCING competition, people who vote for the weakest dancers are ruining the show" (paraphrasing but I've seen that sort of post every year as soon as a so-called weaker dancer stays in when a "better" dancer goes home) as though it were a fact.
The only fact is that the BBC perceived and conceived Strictly as an entertainment show first and foremost. If you're entertained by Ed doing Gangnam Style salsa or mad scientist Cha Cha Cha more than you are by Louise's AT or Danny's Charleston and vote accordingly, that's just as valid as someone being entertained by and voting for the latter.
Originally Posted by Tango Trish:
“I do wish people would Really understand that this is NOT a dance competition..”
“I do wish people would Really understand that this is NOT a dance competition..”
Okay.
Quote:
“This is a prime time Saturday evening family entertainment show, the original format was to take "celebrities" and teach them to dance,”
“This is a prime time Saturday evening family entertainment show, the original format was to take "celebrities" and teach them to dance,”
But you just said it wasn't dance competition. So which is it?
Quote:
“alas because more and more "able to dance in the first place" celebs are invited to take part it somehow clouds those with no experience whatsoever who are genuinely trying their best.”
“alas because more and more "able to dance in the first place" celebs are invited to take part it somehow clouds those with no experience whatsoever who are genuinely trying their best.”
None of the entrants in this, or any other year's competition have any ballroom or latin dance experience. And no, 'stage school' many years ago and 'pop star dancing' is not the same thing.
Quote:
“Alas as people have got used to the "better abled" celebs those who are REALLY trying their very best are constantly slammed on here - so unfair.. I enjoyed the show much more when it wasn't so blooming predictable - the judges too need to get a grip and stop having obvious favourites.”
“Alas as people have got used to the "better abled" celebs those who are REALLY trying their very best are constantly slammed on here - so unfair.. I enjoyed the show much more when it wasn't so blooming predictable - the judges too need to get a grip and stop having obvious favourites.”
They're only 'favouring' the ones who can actually dance. How many times in this season have we heard one or more of them say "I really don't know why you're in the dance-off".
Originally Posted by Domestos:
“To try to improve. That's part of the entertainment.”
“To try to improve. That's part of the entertainment.”
Well one of them hasn't and yet he's still in it; at the expense of another good dancer. And that is not fair.
Originally Posted by daziechain:
“No ... it's never been that ... even the first series had ringers in it ...”
“No ... it's never been that ... even the first series had ringers in it ...”
No season has ever had "ringers" in it. What a load of rubbish.
Originally Posted by DeltaBlues:
“There is a difference though between saying "I prefer seeing the best dancers get further / I choose to vote for the celebs I think are the best dancers" or similar (opinion - fine) and "this is a DANCING competition, people who vote for the weakest dancers are ruining the show" (paraphrasing but I've seen that sort of post every year as soon as a so-called weaker dancer stays in when a "better" dancer goes home) as though it were a fact.”
“There is a difference though between saying "I prefer seeing the best dancers get further / I choose to vote for the celebs I think are the best dancers" or similar (opinion - fine) and "this is a DANCING competition, people who vote for the weakest dancers are ruining the show" (paraphrasing but I've seen that sort of post every year as soon as a so-called weaker dancer stays in when a "better" dancer goes home) as though it were a fact.”
If that's their opinion then I don't see the problem with saying it at all - I'm perfectly happy to say that the weaker dancers staying in over the good ones ruins the show for me and I can't fathom why anyone would vote for Ed Balls, because for me the dancing is paramount. I hate the gimmicks, I hate the props, I hate the lack of content in some of the routines. That's my opinion, my perspective on what does and doesn't make the show enjoyable for me. For me it is and should be more a dancing competition than anything else, and so whenever a weaker dancers gets much further in the competition than they should, then I'm not happy about it.
It's not fact any more than people saying a dance by a less able dancer is more entertaining. They might find it more entertaining, but that's their opinion, and not everyone will agree with that, so that's no more right than anyone else's view. People who say it's an entertainment show need to respect that people view entertainment in different ways, and for some people dancing is entertainment and they're entitled to judge the show accordingly if they wish to do so. It's not a rule that one has to agree with how the BBC defines the show!
What's the point of spending hours to train if you don't need to be a good dancer?
This is actually an insulting thread.
This is actually an insulting thread.
Originally Posted by Scorpio2:
“What's the point of spending hours to train if you don't need to be a good dancing?
This is actually an insulting thread.”
“What's the point of spending hours to train if you don't need to be a good dancing?
This is actually an insulting thread.”
That's a good point.
Originally Posted by Mystical123:
“If that's their opinion then I don't see the problem with saying it at all - I'm perfectly happy to say that the weaker dancers staying in over the good ones ruins the show for me and I can't fathom why anyone would vote for Ed Balls, because for me the dancing is paramount. I hate the gimmicks, I hate the props, I hate the lack of content in some of the routines. That's my opinion, my perspective on what does and doesn't make the show enjoyable for me. For me it is and should be more a dancing competition than anything else, and so whenever a weaker dancers gets much further in the competition than they should, then I'm not happy about it.
It's not fact any more than people saying a dance by a less able dancer is more entertaining. They might find it more entertaining, but that's their opinion, and not everyone will agree with that, so that's no more right than anyone else's view. People who say it's an entertainment show need to respect that people view entertainment in different ways, and for some people dancing is entertainment and they're entitled to judge the show accordingly if they wish to do so. It's not a rule that one has to agree with how the BBC defines the show!”
“If that's their opinion then I don't see the problem with saying it at all - I'm perfectly happy to say that the weaker dancers staying in over the good ones ruins the show for me and I can't fathom why anyone would vote for Ed Balls, because for me the dancing is paramount. I hate the gimmicks, I hate the props, I hate the lack of content in some of the routines. That's my opinion, my perspective on what does and doesn't make the show enjoyable for me. For me it is and should be more a dancing competition than anything else, and so whenever a weaker dancers gets much further in the competition than they should, then I'm not happy about it.
It's not fact any more than people saying a dance by a less able dancer is more entertaining. They might find it more entertaining, but that's their opinion, and not everyone will agree with that, so that's no more right than anyone else's view. People who say it's an entertainment show need to respect that people view entertainment in different ways, and for some people dancing is entertainment and they're entitled to judge the show accordingly if they wish to do so. It's not a rule that one has to agree with how the BBC defines the show!”
I'm not disputing that people finding the better dancers personally more entertaining isn't a valid opinion - of course it is. But saying "it's a dance competition" to try to back up that opinion is pointless, deluded and patently untrue. It's not, by the BBC's own definition, a true dance competition and to insist it is won't change that. It might be what some viewers think it should be but it isn't and never has been, and all that tends to happen when people go down that line is they are the ones who get frustrated and start angry "X should quit, it's a dance competition" threads or witter on about "justice" and "fairness" when actually, there is no rule, written or otherwise, that says the best dancer should, must or will win. The celebrity that the biggest proportion of the voting viewers find entertaining for whatever reason will win, and regardless of whether that's Danny because of his superior dance skills or Ed despite his inferior ones is equally valid.
To completely disregard what the show sets out to be because you (generic you) think it should be something else is like watching Eastenders every week and complaining that yet again it failed to make you laugh and why don't those actors leave so they can get some better comedians on. You might still watch it, you might get the odd scene that fulfils your personal brief but you're never going to be satisfied because your expectations for what you want the show to be are at odds to what it actually is.
Its not a dance competition, its a light entertainment show based on dancing. You are asked to vote for your favourite and not actually the best dancer. If it was a dance competition, the public would not be voting, the judges would decide the winner.
As we have seen many times, the person that wins is just the most popular and not necessarily the best dancer.
No celeb is actually taught to dance, they are taught choreographed steps to a set piece of music. The Pro will teach them some technique which will improve the LOOK of the dance, but that falls way short of learning to dance. Without the set choreography in place, without the "song" that they are familiar with, the celeb would be lost if any other track was played in its place
As we have seen many times, the person that wins is just the most popular and not necessarily the best dancer.
No celeb is actually taught to dance, they are taught choreographed steps to a set piece of music. The Pro will teach them some technique which will improve the LOOK of the dance, but that falls way short of learning to dance. Without the set choreography in place, without the "song" that they are familiar with, the celeb would be lost if any other track was played in its place
Originally Posted by Camis:
“Funny, I thought it was called Strictly Come Dancing, not Strictly Come Entertaining.”
“Funny, I thought it was called Strictly Come Dancing, not Strictly Come Entertaining.”
Me too!
Originally Posted by nyannie:
“Me too!”
“Me too!”
It is not a dance competition for many reasons. Public would not be voting it is was. Competitions have competitors dancing against each other, same dance, same music on the floor at the same time so you can compare.
Authentic music is played at comps in strict tempo, not any old random song ( hate vocals to dance to) made to fit, comps do not have props, dancers wear authentic costuming rather than something to fit a theme, there are no themes in competitions.
What they do at Strictly is to entertain us on a Saturday night, loosely based around dancing. Put ANY of these celebs on a proper comp floor, when the music starts, they would not have a clue.
Originally Posted by Jennifer_F:
“It is not a dance competition for many reasons. Public would not be voting it is was. Competitions have competitors dancing against each other, same dance, same music on the floor at the same time so you can compare.
Authentic music is played at comps in strict tempo, not any old random song ( hate vocals to dance to) made to fit, comps do not have props, dancers wear authentic costuming rather than something to fit a theme, there are no themes in competitions.
What they do at Strictly is to entertain us on a Saturday night, loosely based around dancing. Put ANY of these celebs on a proper comp floor, when the music starts, they would not have a clue.”
“It is not a dance competition for many reasons. Public would not be voting it is was. Competitions have competitors dancing against each other, same dance, same music on the floor at the same time so you can compare.
Authentic music is played at comps in strict tempo, not any old random song ( hate vocals to dance to) made to fit, comps do not have props, dancers wear authentic costuming rather than something to fit a theme, there are no themes in competitions.
What they do at Strictly is to entertain us on a Saturday night, loosely based around dancing. Put ANY of these celebs on a proper comp floor, when the music starts, they would not have a clue.”
Exactly.
SCD is getting to be a bit of a Farce, you can't take it seriously while you have a comic presenter, a comic judge and comic choreography created for dad dancers. Imho it shouldn't be called SCD.
If it's just a bit of fluff on a Saturday evening to entertain us why do some people get so angry about 'ringers'? Why take it so seriously if it's just prime time telly and definitely NOT a dance competition?
When I watch Strictly I want to see great dancing. I want to see performances that look like the dance they're meant to be. Watching people like Balls/ Sargeant / Widdicombe grates on me and I don't find it entertaining.
Watching fantastic dancing does entertain me. Why is there this insistence that good dancing and entertainment are separate things?
When I watch Strictly I want to see great dancing. I want to see performances that look like the dance they're meant to be. Watching people like Balls/ Sargeant / Widdicombe grates on me and I don't find it entertaining.
Watching fantastic dancing does entertain me. Why is there this insistence that good dancing and entertainment are separate things?
Originally Posted by biscuitfactory:
“If it's just a bit of fluff on a Saturday evening to entertain us why do some people get so angry about 'ringers'? Why take it so seriously if it's just prime time telly and definitely NOT a dance competition?
When I watch Strictly I want to see great dancing. I want to see performances that look like the dance they're meant to be. Watching people like Balls/ Sargeant / Widdicombe grates on me and I don't find it entertaining.
Watching fantastic dancing does entertain me. Why is there this insistence that good dancing and entertainment are separate things?”
“If it's just a bit of fluff on a Saturday evening to entertain us why do some people get so angry about 'ringers'? Why take it so seriously if it's just prime time telly and definitely NOT a dance competition?
When I watch Strictly I want to see great dancing. I want to see performances that look like the dance they're meant to be. Watching people like Balls/ Sargeant / Widdicombe grates on me and I don't find it entertaining.
Watching fantastic dancing does entertain me. Why is there this insistence that good dancing and entertainment are separate things?”
Exactly! I'm not saying it's a proper dance competition in the professional sense - of course it's not, everyone knows that and I don't think anyone's ever claimed that.
But that doesn't mean it isn't or can't be a dance competition - the celebrities are competing to get the best scores from the judges and the most support from the public. They're doing so by spending a lot of time learning dance routines and performing them on a Saturday night. For the vast majority of them the actual dancing and getting the steps right with as much correct technique as possible is a huge part of that, so to that extent it absolutely is a dance competition and I don't see how anyone can say otherwise. No-one said it was solely a dance competition, or a professional standard dance competition, but that doesn't mean it's not a competition!
Originally Posted by biscuitfactory:
“If it's just a bit of fluff on a Saturday evening to entertain us why do some people get so angry about 'ringers'? Why take it so seriously if it's just prime time telly and definitely NOT a dance competition?
When I watch Strictly I want to see great dancing. I want to see performances that look like the dance they're meant to be. Watching people like Balls/ Sargeant / Widdicombe grates on me and I don't find it entertaining.
Watching fantastic dancing does entertain me. Why is there this insistence that good dancing and entertainment are separate things?”
“If it's just a bit of fluff on a Saturday evening to entertain us why do some people get so angry about 'ringers'? Why take it so seriously if it's just prime time telly and definitely NOT a dance competition?
When I watch Strictly I want to see great dancing. I want to see performances that look like the dance they're meant to be. Watching people like Balls/ Sargeant / Widdicombe grates on me and I don't find it entertaining.
Watching fantastic dancing does entertain me. Why is there this insistence that good dancing and entertainment are separate things?”
BIB: I think you'll find in general that the people who completely get that it's a bit of Saturday night fluff are not the same people as those who get angry about ringers.
I'm not sure anyone has said good dancing can't be entertaining. The point being made is that it's not the only thing that people can find entertaining about the show. Which is exactly how the Beeb have always wanted it.
2 of 4
