• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • TV
  • TV Shows: Reality
  • The Apprentice
Just watched series 2-awful
Threepwood5005
20-09-2008
Can anybody tell me anything that could possibly be considered good about this season? The tasks are way too easy and repetive, the candidates are atrocious and are always fighting and being miserable, which gets so depressing to watch. Why does everyone like Ruth Badger so much? She's a one trick pony who was awful on the cruise and ad tasks. She was the best candidate that year but that's not saying much, because she's not nearly as good as Katie, Kristina, raef, lee, James, miriam, tre, lohit, claire, naomi, ben, sebastian, or Karen. Was there anything good about this year?
5340robert
20-09-2008
well michelle was pretty nice other than that not the best series ever tho
Moloko
21-09-2008
Series 2 was still a good series. You thought that it was depressing? Were you watching Series 4?!
Muttley76
21-09-2008
Wasn't aware series 2 was considered the best series?
Threepwood5005
21-09-2008
Originally Posted by Moloko:
“Series 2 was still a good series. You thought that it was depressing? Were you watching Series 4?!”

Perhaps you could say why it was good? Series 4 at least had some teams working very well together like in Marrakech, laundry and wedding tasks. Series 2 had none of that as the miserable team always won and often often continued to fight on the treat.
Moloko
24-09-2008
Originally Posted by Threepwood5005:
“Perhaps you could say why it was good? Series 4 at least had some teams working very well together like in Marrakech, laundry and wedding tasks. Series 2 had none of that as the miserable team always won and often often continued to fight on the treat.”

The main difference was that generally in Series 2, the best were saved till last. Series 4 - very were even good, and they all went.
Threepwood5005
27-09-2008
Lee and Claire were better than anyone in series 2 and got to the end.
Threepwood5005
27-09-2008
Lee and Claire were better then anyone in series 2 and got to the end.
Moloko
28-09-2008
Originally Posted by Threepwood5005:
“Lee and Claire were better than anyone in series 2 and got to the end.”

Lee was thick and bounced off the back of others whereas as Claire was a loudmouth who was edited to be a transformed "new woman" who was a one trick pony. Out of the finalist, she should have won, but I didn't think any of them deserved to win or should have won. Shazia, Sara, Raef and Lucinda were the only good ones, but Shazia, Sara and Lucinda were sticked up by the nasty bullies whereas Raef went because didn't want someone posh going through. Simple as. And Series 4 focused way more on shock decisions and the conflict that any other series. You would have had to have watched Series 2 at the time to felt this way, imo.

In Series 2, you had Ruth, who was determined, clever, cunny and worthy competitor who was robbed, Syed, Ansell, Paul, etc... and the worst ones were all fired first, like Nargis for instance who was just so bad. In Series 4, they kept in crap people like the Keisha sugababe lookalike, for instance, and more fillers.
Threepwood5005
28-09-2008
How was Lee thick? He showed a lot of smarts and ability on several tasks. Claire can present, sell, and didn't make any major mistakes as PM (but wasn't as good as Lee) Syed was atrocious, Ansell was invisible, Ruth was a one-trick pony who should have gone for the ad task, and Paul was very difficult to work with (all his teams turned on themselves). The worst ones first? Karen, Ben, maybe Mani had potential and were fired for no reason. The firing decisions were terrible. They focused on conflict, even on treats and in the house there were huge shouting matches. The fact you call Lee thick and like Syed suggests you like people who have style, instead of substance.
2LO
30-09-2008
deleted
brangdon
06-10-2008
S2 had some great disasters, including Alexa's chicken pizzas. It also had some good characters, including Jo and Syed. I personally think Michelle was a very strong candidate, and a deserving winner, but you have to watch closely to see this and many viewers disagree.

I agree about Ruth being over-rated, but she was another big character.

Several of the candidates went onto forums afterwards, which affected how the series is perceived. For example, Tuan is a great chap when you get to know him, and very intelligent, and his contributions to the show didn't always make the edit. So he's popular with online fans in a way someone just watching the broadcast footage might not get.
pulltheotherone
10-10-2008
I was halfway through watching series 2 on youtube but it has been taken off now for some reason. I was really enjoying it. Anyone know if there is any other way to watch it online?
Kyle123
20-12-2008
Series 2 was better than Series 4 - it's probably the last series before it all became a bit Big Brothery

And not only that, but i'd rather have that cast than Series 4's anyday. Claire aside I thought they all sucked last year. I mean Alex got to the final! Come on!
thenetworkbabe
03-01-2009
4 was very poor. Two of the last 4 in Alex and Helena were useless. Claire was the only competent one there by a long shot and she wasn't as good as Michelle or Ruth at what she was good at. Lee was definitely C stream, inarticulate, rough and essentially thick. He gets the job because Claire frightens SAS and the job is for a minor salesman to sell something silly to the people who manage the underground who will go for one of the lads trying to flog it rather than a Raef or a Claire.
Sidespin Nid
17-01-2009
Series 4 was awful , I felt so underwhelmed at the end plus none of the characters left at the end were likeable.
Kyle123
18-01-2009
Series 4 was absolutely dire, from the first episode to the last. The candidates were either horrid or stupid, and the winner only won because the better candidate wouldnt be able to be pushed over.

Im probably going to watch the next series with a pinch of salt - there's no point picking out the best candidate, because their only going to come second.
spunk_1
01-02-2009
Seriously?
I thought it was pretty good. Syed was a great laugh. It was hilarious to see him thinking he was great when actually he did some very very stupid things. And Ruth was really good! She was very skilled and should've won.
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map