It seems that there is some form of Singing standard on the Voice. Someone who could sing didn't get taken on, because the judges thought there wasn't emotion. They'd have won the X-Factor by now...
I've been watching it and I still can't get past the gimmick... but why is the footage of the room with the contestant's families/Holly Willoughby during the auditions filmised but the auditions aren't? It looks pretty bad when they keep cutting quickly between the two.
I'm actually quite impressed. There was an actual rivalry between the judges, and overall, seemed quite good.
It's also the top trending topic on Twitter (try saying that when drunk), above BGT.
I was hoping it would be a little less like X-Factor then it was, but thought it was a good show. Interesting that some of the singers who would get through instantly in X-Factor, are left behind!
I like it so far. Look forward to seeing the rest of the series so I can get a better judgement.
I still fail to see the point of the BBC showing The Voice - it's not a very BBC-ish production.
Thank god - it's about the only international hit in recent years which the BBC haven't managed to screw up. Quite an enjoyable debut, even if it did have more sob stories than an entire series of X Factor.
As this is a TV presentation forum, I feel the need to point out HOW MUCH I HATE THE ASTONS. They're ugly and animate awfully as if they were done as a draft last minute and they forgot to replace them. Just a red box in an ugly font animating in with Powerpoint's blinds transition
Thank god - it's about the only international hit in recent years which the BBC haven't managed to screw up.
Examples please? I genuinley have no idea what you're referring to. The Apprentice is leagues ahead of the US version, Strictly sets the template for all Dancing with the Stars versions - and if you mean Wipeout, I think the British one is probably better than the American one.
Quote:
Quite an enjoyable debut, even if it did have more sob stories than an entire series of X Factor.
Doesn't it have the same amount of contestant (sob) stories as every other version? The premise of the show is that people wouldn't probably be picked by more, er, "shallow" productions. So that might mean they're fat or have hair loss illness.
Thank god - it's about the only international hit in recent years which the BBC haven't managed to screw up.
Examples please? I genuinley have no idea what you're referring to. The Apprentice is leagues ahead of the US version, Strictly sets the template for all Dancing with the Stars versions - and if you mean Wipeout, I think the British one is probably better than the American one.
The Apprentice is probably the exception. Total Wipeout was a rather poor adaptation of the original US Wipeout - toned down with slow and repetitive obstacles, although it has now settled into it's style and I do think the recent Winter Wipeout is the best UK series to date. So You Think You Can Dance obviously flopped, but then again outside the US it does seem to get limited runs, while Strictly actually showed the BBC can stuff up their own formats - it's only in the last couple of series it's loosened up a bit and made itself more accessible to a wider audience.
Of course though all that is just in my opinion - but I really do think the money spent on The Voice really shined through on screen tonight and unlike other formats it didn't feel like they were doing it on the cheap. However unlike the other shows I haven't seen enough of foreign versions of The Voice to have a pre-formed idea of how it should be produced, so was very much viewing it as a completely new show rather than a UK version of a show I've seen from abroad.
I've avoided singing/talent/dancing shows like the plague for several years, but I'd heard the hype surrounding The Voice so thought I'd give it a go. I have to say I was pleasantly surprised and became completely hooked. It's so refreshing to see a show judging people on their actual natural talent rather than what they look like. I really did think it was a very good premise for a show and I look forward to watching it next weekend. It's certainly better than all the ITV tripe that's past its prime.
I've been watching it and I still can't get past the gimmick... but why is the footage of the room with the contestant's families/Holly Willoughby during the auditions filmised but the auditions aren't? It looks pretty bad when they keep cutting quickly between the two.
The backstage stuff is shot 25p progressive (HD material isn't 'filmised' - that was a technique used on SD interlaced content shot on cameras that couldn't shoot 25p, but HD cameras can shoot 25p native - so don't need to be converted in post)
Personally I think it works pretty well - the 25p stuff backstage has a 'fly on the wall' documentary feel, whereas the performance stuff has a 50i 'entertainment' feel.
They do the same on Top Gear - shoot the studio and 'star in a reasonably priced car' stuff interlaced, but shoot the main films progressive.