The X Factor

I dont think we've seen him on screen long enough to judge.

I think from what we've seen he's done a good job - as good, if not better, than Kate. Let's not pretend that Thornton was this amazing talent - she was pretty wooden on most occasions and often seemed overwhelmed by the pressure of the live shows. I have a feeling Dermot may be more comfortable - he's certainly fitted in well so far.

I wonder what the studio will be like, wasn't there reports it was going to be bigger than last years? I thought last years was very nice.

Considering they spent a fortune revamping it last year I'm not expecting major changes to the studio - probably basically the same set with a slightly different arrangement of screens.


Re: Rhydian - horrible feeling he'll stick around far longer than he should!


What's going on with The Xtra Factor considering Fearne is now doing a Radio 1 show from 4-7pm on Saturdays, plus presumably will be doing Children in Need one week too on the Friday.

Its mainly voice over work for the auditions and boot camp shows, so In my opinion I cannot judge properly if he is better than Thornton until the live shows start.

You don't have to highlight "in my opinion" - I was just adding my own opinion, not trying to say you were wrong. I won't quote your post next time.

Well He has done live telly six days a week over the summer on BBLB so a bit of continuity between acts, saying the judges names and callin out names on a card should be a doddle for him.

Anyone know anyone who works on the show? Is it true that the auditions we see are in fact pre-empted by a number of preliminary auditions, presumably used to guarantee that some freak or excellence appear before the judges ?

If these pre-auditions do take place, then I feel it is highly misleading that the viewers are given the impression that the 'public' auditions are the first time that the auditionees are seen.
If true, I don't know how Simon's company and ITV can get away with such a portrayal.

----------
Articles referring to rigging, off screen activities, etc :-
http://howgoodisthis.wordpress.com/2007/09/08/x-factor-fix-up/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/showbiz/showbiznews.html?in_article_id=484597&in_page_id=1773

Charlie Brooker seems to believe so...
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Zl0eBeelRPw
...see about 2min 40s into the clip.

I know a few people who have attended the Manchester auditions over the years and yes, there is at least 1 round of auditions (probably more) before the contestants get to perform in front of the TV judges.

For last year's series, even the venue for the first round of auditions was different to where they filmed the TV auditions.

It is a bit misleading but surely nobody really thinks that the TV judges get to see all 10,000 or however many entries there are?!

Completely unconnected to that, one thing that REALLY irritates me about the X Factor editing is when they show clips of people singing when there's some pop song in the background - how can you properly listen to one person singing when there's another person singing underneath them?! Given that it's a show about music they should really get more musical editors to put the shows together.

And I have to agree about the bootcamp "results" show - fortunately I had taped it and fast-forwaded through everything other than the actual reveals. And even those were pretty sickly.

Thanks for the Brooker clip; I have thought for ages that they contrive the 'reactions' editing, even using clips from unrelated auditions. Good for him to have found some apparently strong proof that this portrayal is indeed contrived.
I had also thought that Simon's 'statement' was carefully and ambiguously worded; ie 'we show what happened' does not in any way rule out reconstructing, editing or re-shooting scenes along the lines of what actually happened earlier.

Nurse, yes, I have always strongly doubted that the judges see anywhere near all of the thousands of people, but the point is we as viewers are strongly led to believe that is the case. There is never anything which tries to suggest the judges are not the first to see the contestants perform.
Sure, maybe _some_ are hauled in 'raw' because otherwise the portrayal of the auditions would be a _complete_ sham!

I wonder how many of the televised auditions have to be edited to remove phrases like 'If I'm that bad how come I got through 2 previous auditions with your production team?'
?

Purely on a technical and creative level, I actually think the editing (including music and emotive editing) is excellent. The tears get me every time, I have to admit, even though I can see it is heavily contrived.

Just to add whilst I'm here;
I thought Kate and Ben were fine as presenters.
Ferne is ok when her personality comes through, but I have always found Dermot a mixture of smug and annoying. It would be nice, for example, if he could read a piece to camera without jerking his head around in an unnatural way. I think he is over-rated.