They can be good for acts who don't have a defined style, but can play havoc with acts who have a defined style. I liked them lots earlier, but they need to become more current, and I can't stand Big Band week.
Are y'all familiar with producer tactics (red and black, colour vomit, podiums, blue and white, judges comments etc)? I wanna have someone to discuss these with
I'm vaguely familiar with how the producers can manipulate the results by performance order, judges comments, never heard of the first three you mention.
Oh and I love Big Band week, for the most everyone is out of their element and I just love the music.
Cheryl did amazing with her acts as well and always kept it current from what I remember. She never chose a bad song for Cher and Rebecca.
Judges don't pick the songs, apart from Simon. They can ask but they do t have the final say. Same with Judges Houses and Eliminations (they do at Bootcamp and auditions though).
Quote:
Originally posted by Superbitch
LOl that's what I'm sayign y'all be live y'all dont need to use spoilers at all!! that's what we get for living in the US
I'm vaguely familiar with how the producers can manipulate the results by performance order, judges comments, never heard of the first three you mention.
Oh and I love Big Band week, for the most everyone is out of their element and I just love the music.
If your staging is Red And Black then they're out to get you. Same if they're on a podium or if the staging is excessively colourful (see: Tamera performing WFL or even better, Nick performing Candy ). Blue and White lighting means they want you to win, as does sparks. Going as close to the end of the show is an asset. Excessively good or bad judges comments mean they want you to stay, lukewarm comments mean they want you to go.
There are other things they do, I'll do a week by week analysis :matty2:
Edit: The other big one is fire. Any fire on the stage is like a death sentence.
If your staging is Red And Black then they're out to get you. Same if they're on a podium or if the staging is excessively colourful (see: Tamera performing WFL or even better, Nick performing Candy ). Blue and White lighting means they want you to win, as does sparks. Going as close to the end of the show is an asset. Excessively good or bad judges comments mean they want you to stay, lukewarm comments mean they want you to go.
There are other things they do, I'll do a week by week analysis :matty2:
Edit: The other big one is fire. Any fire on the stage is like a death sentence.
Using this it's pretty easy to guess who will win. They clearly didn't care for Ella that much, they were actually really smart at getting rid of Christopher Maloney, the reason Gary didn't go in on Sam last year in Week 5 was because he knew it would only help him, they wanted Tamera to win but gave up after she forgot the words 'Diamonds Are Forever' whilst singing the song 'Diamonds Are Forever' () and screwed up Impossible, they DESPISED Nick but we all knew that...
Also, always and only believe Daily Star with voting leaks. The producers tell them for their own purposes (for example they said Nick won Week 2 and 6 last year to get people not to vote for him).
Using this it's pretty easy to guess who will win. They clearly didn't care for Ella that much, they were actually really smart at getting rid of Christopher Maloney, the reason Gary didn't go in on Sam last year in Week 5 was because he knew it would only help him, they wanted Tamera to win but gave up after she forgot the words 'Diamonds Are Forever' whilst singing the song 'Diamonds Are Forever' () and screwed up Impossible, they DESPISED Nick but we all knew that...
Also, always and only believe Daily Star with voting leaks. The producers tell them for their own purposes (for example they said Nick won Week 2 and 6 last year to get people not to vote for him).
Yes! I knew the Daily Star tea was accurate! And I've always had a hunch that the mediocre comments meant the producers didn't care for an act.
Wow I'm totally going to watch the lives differently this year, how do you explain people like Sam winning, I mean did they really want her to win???
Yes! I knew the Daily Star tea was accurate! And I've always had a hunch that the mediocre comments meant the producers didn't care for an act.
Wow I'm totally going to watch the lives differently this year, how do you explain people like Sam winning, I mean did they really want her to win???
At first they really wanted Tamera to win with RC as Plan B. By Week 4 I could tell - Luke was better than expected and despite being first and red and blacked it didn't feel like they were attacking him. RC couldn't sing so I knew they couldn't get that far, and Tamera underwhelmed and ended up in the Bottom 2, confirming she wasn't doing as well as people thought.
I realised they wanted Sam to win when they gave her an upbeat song and dressed her in something which didn't look like a curtain - once it became apparent she could pull it off and they realised she was their best chance at beating Nick they ran with her. Note how after Nick did well in Week 6 they made him perform first or second, and had Judges laughing at him when he screwed up on Halo, which they gave him because they knew he couldn't sing it
Seriously, watch Nick's Candy performance, it was so ridiculously colour vomit/overpowering staging
If you wanna learn more look at S8, they were so ruthless that year the VT they gave Sophie Habibis of meeting her fans and there only being 1 40 year old lady in a pub Jessie's crying 'I'm fat' VT
They can be good for acts who don't have a defined style, but can play havoc with acts who have a defined style. I liked them lots earlier, but they need to become more current, and I can't stand Big Band week.
Are y'all familiar with producer tactics (red and black, colour vomit, podiums, blue and white, judges comments etc)? I wanna have someone to discuss these with
Yeah, but I hate those boring ass themes like beatles week, 60's week, 80's week or old **** like that As long as they keep them current I wouldnt mind them.
Hmm that sounds like some interesting tea is that a sign for the judges?
Quote:
Originally posted by hello_world
Judges don't pick the songs, apart from Simon. They can ask but they do t have the final say. Same with Judges Houses and Eliminations (they do at Bootcamp and auditions though).
Oh, ok.
They don't I thought they did sis , you seem to know some freshly brewed tea
At first they really wanted Tamera to win with RC as Plan B. By Week 4 I could tell - Luke was better than expected and despite being first and red and blacked it didn't feel like they were attacking him. RC couldn't sing so I knew they couldn't get that far, and Tamera underwhelmed and ended up in the Bottom 2, confirming she wasn't doing as well as people thought.
I realised they wanted Sam to win when they gave her an upbeat song and dressed her in something which didn't look like a curtain - once it became apparent she could pull it off and they realised she was their best chance at beating Nick they ran with her. Note how after Nick did well in Week 6 they made him perform first or second, and had Judges laughing at him when he screwed up on Halo, which they gave him because they knew he couldn't sing it
Seriously, watch Nick's Candy performance, it was so ridiculously colour vomit/overpowering staging
If you wanna learn more look at S8, they were so ruthless that year the VT they gave Sophie Habibis of meeting her fans and there only being 1 40 year old lady in a pub Jessie's crying 'I'm fat' VT
Maybe you were right about last season. However the season after the epic 2010 season was a mess. Sophie over Amelia, its hard for me to look past that X factor elimination
Maybe you were right about last season. However the season after the epic 2010 season was a mess. Sophie over Amelia, its hard for me to look past that X factor elimination
I never got that either tbh. The only reason Little Mix win that year was that they attacked everyone else. James won because he got the 'talent' and anti-Christopher vote after Ella left (Jahmene couldn't count because of his demographics), Matt won because Cher was unlikeable back then, Rebecca had no narrative, 1D were so clearly favoured that it pissed people off and he could deliver great performances when need be.
I didn't think Joe would win though weak year I guess
Apart from Auditions/Bootcamp it's a scripted mess
They never actually fix the public voting though, if they got caught it'd be too bad.
OMG sis!!! I'll never see it the same way anymore!! it'll be funny if once we see that now on TV and if it ends up going the way we think it''ll go based on this tea.
So they try to manipulate the viewers by telling the judges what to do/say from a performance(that way they influence the viewers) but never manipulate the actual votes because that can get exposed. May I ask how do u know all this?
Maybe you were right about last season. However the season after the epic 2010 season was a mess. Sophie over Amelia, its hard for me to look past that X factor elimination
Sophie always got the worst treatment IMO it was so obvious they didnt want there Her voice was so haunting and good
OMG sis!!! I'll never see it the same way anymore!! it'll be funny if once we see that now on TV and if it ends up going the way we think it''ll go based on this tea.
So they try to manipulate the viewers by telling the judges what to do/say from a performance(that way they influence the viewers) but never manipulate the actual votes because that can get exposed. May I ask how do u know all this?
They don't give them a script of what to say, they'll say be overly nice ('talent' votes), overly harsh (sympathy votes), lukewarm (forgettable and doesn't prompt votes) or fight between themselves (distract from the contestants and suppress votes). Sometimes judges go off-script (Tulisa ruining Misha by calling her a bully, Gary refusing to attack Sam C, Sharon deliberately messing up the eliminations, Louis being a mess with Rylan vs Carolynne ) but it's obvious when that happens.
Yeah, they couldn't risk fixing the vote because that's illegal and if they got found it it would be REALLY bad, so they manipulate people instead.
And my parents know someone who works on the show. They won't say who they want to win/lose each year but they go into detail over how they manipulate the vote so it's pretty obvious.
Sophie always got the worst treatment IMO it was so obvious they didnt want there Her voice was so haunting and good
#JusticeForSophieHabibis tbh
This was flawless!
And yeah people always talking about X Factor being blatantly fixed, that's not true, they heavily control every aspect during lives to try and manipulate the voters to vote a certain way and it mostly works. Doesn't make the show any less enjoyable imo.
I mean look at how they styled Sophie, it was so blatant another major victim that year was James Michael
). Blue and White lighting means they want you to win, as does sparks. Going as close to the end of the show is an asset. Excessively good or bad judges comments mean they want you to stay, lukewarm comments mean they want you to go.
the VT they gave Sophie Habibis of meeting her fans and there only being 1 40 year old lady in a pub 
As long as they keep them current I wouldnt mind them.
it'll be funny if once we see that now on TV and if it ends up going the way we think it''ll go based on this tea. 
