LL
In light of people saying Hollie is too young for all of this, may I take the opportunity to remind everybody of Connie from the first series? The 6-year-old? Four years younger but not a tear or sign of nerves in sight. I agree with what some are saying, tomorrow will be interesting to watch, but the fact she, at one point, starting crying out "Plee-ee-eeaa-aase," I couldn't help but compare her to a five-year-old who's Mum wouldn't buy them a Creme Egg. Very uncomfortable, but I hope it doesn't all pay off; her nerves and tears shouldn't earn her the special treatment of pre-recorded performances and second chances. Odds are that she'll start crying again anyway when the judges talk to her.
I very much doubt it was pre-recorded. From what I saw, everything Aidan did was in sync with his virtual clones. I'm pretty sure the audience didn't get the same effect as the viewers' as the camera was angled to show Aidan in line with the other Aidans. The long shot of the whole stage only gave us Aidan dancing with misplaced giant versions of him.
On the Aidan background footage, was that prerecorded, or could a similar effect be attained by using a multicamera set up some how?
I very much doubt it was pre-recorded. From what I saw, everything Aidan did was in sync with his virtual clones. I'm pretty sure the audience didn't get the same effect as the viewers' as the camera was angled to show Aidan in line with the other Aidans. The long shot of the whole stage only gave us Aidan dancing with misplaced giant versions of him.
JO
So on the basis that somebody younger than her didn't cry, Hollie definitely shouldn't have cried?
In light of people saying Hollie is too young for all of this, may I take the opportunity to remind everybody of Connie from the first series? The 6-year-old? Four years younger but not a tear or sign of nerves in sight. I agree with what some are saying, tomorrow will be interesting to watch, but the fact she, at one point, starting crying out "Plee-ee-eeaa-aase," I couldn't help but compare her to a five-year-old who's Mum wouldn't buy them a Creme Egg. Very uncomfortable, but I hope it doesn't all pay off; her nerves and tears shouldn't earn her the special treatment of pre-recorded performances and second chances. Odds are that she'll start crying again anyway when the judges talk to her.
So on the basis that somebody younger than her didn't cry, Hollie definitely shouldn't have cried?
BR
Exactly, and BGT has had several kids on the live shows over the last few years without a problem, Aiden Davis being one of them - and it would be a shame for one spoiled kid to ruin it for potential acts in the future.
Thankfully the public didn't put her straight through, and if she'd have stronger competition in the "Judges Choice" I think they'd have taken what happened into account more - but Greg wasn't really a contender IMO.
In light of people saying Hollie is too young for all of this, may I take the opportunity to remind everybody of Connie from the first series? The 6-year-old? Four years younger but not a tear or sign of nerves in sight.
Exactly, and BGT has had several kids on the live shows over the last few years without a problem, Aiden Davis being one of them - and it would be a shame for one spoiled kid to ruin it for potential acts in the future.
Thankfully the public didn't put her straight through, and if she'd have stronger competition in the "Judges Choice" I think they'd have taken what happened into account more - but Greg wasn't really a contender IMO.
SE
News at Ten didn't start till about 5 past. It overran.
Square Eyes
Founding member
Myself, I feel as though it was rehearsed. They comfortably did not run out of time at the end of the show and managed to "find the time from somewhere" quite easily without cutting anything else of the show.
News at Ten didn't start till about 5 past. It overran.
NJ
It is incredibly unfair, many other performances haven't gone to plan this week and they've not broken down in tears and got a second chance as a result. It's just life. If she got a second chance once votes have closed, fair enough, but if not it gives her an advantage surely.
Secondly, it was quite funny watching the show fall to pieces with Ant and Dec looking rather confused on what to do, Amanda running to comfort the little girl, and cutting to plug the competition and go to an extended advert break!
Realistically the show should go on and if you screw it up on live television, you've screwed it up on live television and it'll sit in a TV station tape archive for the rest of time ready for a future Denis Norden to wheel out. You can't undo it. I always say, if you're going to screw something up you may as well screw it up good and proper with the biggest audience going, probably in excess of 13 million. I dare say if Hollie does the same thing again tomorrow night I seriously hope she does not get a second chance. Screwing up the semi-final is one thing but the final is something else. The girl either lacks experience or confidence in front of big audiences and if you can't do it in front of 13 million people on live television then you shouldn't really be doing it.
Mind you it made for uncomfortable viewing, nobody quite knew what to do. Scenes of Hollie in floods of tears, wailing her head off - they'll be in an Ofcom bulletin near you under the guise of child welfare or conduct of the competition. The only thing you can deduce from the entire charade is that she's spoilt, and spoilt kids throw tantrums, cry until they're blue in the face and generally pester until they get what they want. Now with that being said, the second performance was good, she can sing and it was a great rendition. The public rated it either 2nd or 3rd - whether she'd have beaten Aidan had the first performance not gone terribly wrong, we'll never know.
With regard to the rest of the acts: Dreambears - camper than camp. It wasn't particularly memorable. Good Evans - High School Musical it was not. The parents can't sing, the girls look as if they don't want to be there and the boy sung well in the audition but very bad song choice, shame because he's a great singer on his own. Luke Clements - did nothing different and then blamed it on Health and Safety in the spin-off show. H&S didn't stop Nick Hell. Martin Macham - Robert Palmer would be spinning in his grave if he could hear that awful rendition of 'Addicted to Love'. Aidan Davies - wow! Excellent act, major kudos well deserved, thought he'd fainted when he fell down. DCD Singers - again, 21 members? However one boy and 20 girls - kudos to him, lucky devil
Gregg Pritchard - unlucky to have come up against Hollie on the judge vote, even if it was a strange performance by any stretch of the imagination.
Kind of related to the thread as a whole, here's a YouTube spoof video of Susan Boyle literally kicking Hollie off the stage
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7qXYpc3bDs
Neil Jones
Founding member
At least it proves its totally live
I hope she does ok second time around
I hope she does ok second time around
It is incredibly unfair, many other performances haven't gone to plan this week and they've not broken down in tears and got a second chance as a result. It's just life. If she got a second chance once votes have closed, fair enough, but if not it gives her an advantage surely.
Secondly, it was quite funny watching the show fall to pieces with Ant and Dec looking rather confused on what to do, Amanda running to comfort the little girl, and cutting to plug the competition and go to an extended advert break!
Realistically the show should go on and if you screw it up on live television, you've screwed it up on live television and it'll sit in a TV station tape archive for the rest of time ready for a future Denis Norden to wheel out. You can't undo it. I always say, if you're going to screw something up you may as well screw it up good and proper with the biggest audience going, probably in excess of 13 million. I dare say if Hollie does the same thing again tomorrow night I seriously hope she does not get a second chance. Screwing up the semi-final is one thing but the final is something else. The girl either lacks experience or confidence in front of big audiences and if you can't do it in front of 13 million people on live television then you shouldn't really be doing it.
Mind you it made for uncomfortable viewing, nobody quite knew what to do. Scenes of Hollie in floods of tears, wailing her head off - they'll be in an Ofcom bulletin near you under the guise of child welfare or conduct of the competition. The only thing you can deduce from the entire charade is that she's spoilt, and spoilt kids throw tantrums, cry until they're blue in the face and generally pester until they get what they want. Now with that being said, the second performance was good, she can sing and it was a great rendition. The public rated it either 2nd or 3rd - whether she'd have beaten Aidan had the first performance not gone terribly wrong, we'll never know.
With regard to the rest of the acts: Dreambears - camper than camp. It wasn't particularly memorable. Good Evans - High School Musical it was not. The parents can't sing, the girls look as if they don't want to be there and the boy sung well in the audition but very bad song choice, shame because he's a great singer on his own. Luke Clements - did nothing different and then blamed it on Health and Safety in the spin-off show. H&S didn't stop Nick Hell. Martin Macham - Robert Palmer would be spinning in his grave if he could hear that awful rendition of 'Addicted to Love'. Aidan Davies - wow! Excellent act, major kudos well deserved, thought he'd fainted when he fell down. DCD Singers - again, 21 members? However one boy and 20 girls - kudos to him, lucky devil
Gregg Pritchard - unlucky to have come up against Hollie on the judge vote, even if it was a strange performance by any stretch of the imagination.
Kind of related to the thread as a whole, here's a YouTube spoof video of Susan Boyle literally kicking Hollie off the stage
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7qXYpc3bDs
IS
Although it doesn't really, surely the bit I've highlighted in bold means that none of that applies to BGT?
Well I've had a poke around and the law seems to be as follows as stated under the 1963 Children Performance Regulations (amended 1968) that amends the 1933 Children and Young Persons act:
So that answers my own question - Sampson can stay until 11pm.
Quote:
Earliest and latest times a child may perform
These stipulations cover rehearsals and actual performances. The hours, which a child may work in performances ( other than recorded or broadcast performances, which have different rules ,) are limited.
A child may not take place in a performance if the duration of the entire production, including intervals, exceeds three and half-hours or if his part, or the aggregate of his appearance, exceeds two and half-hours.
1. Children under 14 must leave the place of performance by 10pm or half an hour after the performance whichever is earlier
2. Children aged 14 or over must leave by 10.30pm or half an hour after the performance whichever is earlier.
3. No child will be at the place of performance before 10.00am if the child performed the previous evening.
4. There must be at least 14 hours between the end of one performance and the start of the next.
The regulations also apply to rehearsals in terms of place and time of performance, number of days-performed etc.
Different rules apply to professional child actors aged 9+ who cannot work before 7am or after 7pm.
These stipulations cover rehearsals and actual performances. The hours, which a child may work in performances ( other than recorded or broadcast performances, which have different rules ,) are limited.
A child may not take place in a performance if the duration of the entire production, including intervals, exceeds three and half-hours or if his part, or the aggregate of his appearance, exceeds two and half-hours.
1. Children under 14 must leave the place of performance by 10pm or half an hour after the performance whichever is earlier
2. Children aged 14 or over must leave by 10.30pm or half an hour after the performance whichever is earlier.
3. No child will be at the place of performance before 10.00am if the child performed the previous evening.
4. There must be at least 14 hours between the end of one performance and the start of the next.
The regulations also apply to rehearsals in terms of place and time of performance, number of days-performed etc.
Different rules apply to professional child actors aged 9+ who cannot work before 7am or after 7pm.
So that answers my own question - Sampson can stay until 11pm.
Although it doesn't really, surely the bit I've highlighted in bold means that none of that applies to BGT?
LL
So on the basis that somebody younger than her didn't cry, Hollie definitely shouldn't have cried?
My point being is that people shouldn't let her off just because of her age. Nerves get to her, supposedly, and she gets full VIP treatment from everybody making sure she's okay. Arguably, the show might not be right for her.
However, one could say Jamie Pugh had a severe bout of nerves. I'm a huge fan of his, but it was clear his nerves affected his performance, in a sense, a bit like what happened to Hollie, just not as dramatic. Nevertheless, Jamie gets told that he makes the audience uncomfortable and that he shouldn't follow his dream of singing on stage. Low and behold, he lost, and I wouldn't be surprised if he's too bloody afraid to sing on stage again.
On the other hand, Hollie pretty much collapses into invisible tears (either that or her face is made of the same material used in the BBC2 Steam ident) and starts moaning that she can't get a second chance. In fact, after watching it again, I can clearly see that upon being told she can't get a second chance, it's far from crying, it's a clear temper tantrum, you can tell by the way she's wailing. Low and behold, she gets her own way and gets a place in the final.
Then people start using her age as an excuse saying she's too young for all of this. Then my comparison to Connie comes in, who was 6 at the time and seemed to enjoy every minute of it - all that stopped her was the phone votes. Besides that, her performances were amazing and she came out of it with a record contract. Therefore, it makes no sense if people blame Hollie's age for her breakdown, as somebody four years younger than her clearly succeeded without any on-stage agony - Hollie is simply a pain in the arse who wants to get her own way and has the most annoying wail I've ever heard on prime time television.
In light of people saying Hollie is too young for all of this, may I take the opportunity to remind everybody of Connie from the first series? The 6-year-old? Four years younger but not a tear or sign of nerves in sight. I agree with what some are saying, tomorrow will be interesting to watch, but the fact she, at one point, starting crying out "Plee-ee-eeaa-aase," I couldn't help but compare her to a five-year-old who's Mum wouldn't buy them a Creme Egg. Very uncomfortable, but I hope it doesn't all pay off; her nerves and tears shouldn't earn her the special treatment of pre-recorded performances and second chances. Odds are that she'll start crying again anyway when the judges talk to her.
So on the basis that somebody younger than her didn't cry, Hollie definitely shouldn't have cried?
My point being is that people shouldn't let her off just because of her age. Nerves get to her, supposedly, and she gets full VIP treatment from everybody making sure she's okay. Arguably, the show might not be right for her.
However, one could say Jamie Pugh had a severe bout of nerves. I'm a huge fan of his, but it was clear his nerves affected his performance, in a sense, a bit like what happened to Hollie, just not as dramatic. Nevertheless, Jamie gets told that he makes the audience uncomfortable and that he shouldn't follow his dream of singing on stage. Low and behold, he lost, and I wouldn't be surprised if he's too bloody afraid to sing on stage again.
On the other hand, Hollie pretty much collapses into invisible tears (either that or her face is made of the same material used in the BBC2 Steam ident) and starts moaning that she can't get a second chance. In fact, after watching it again, I can clearly see that upon being told she can't get a second chance, it's far from crying, it's a clear temper tantrum, you can tell by the way she's wailing. Low and behold, she gets her own way and gets a place in the final.
Then people start using her age as an excuse saying she's too young for all of this. Then my comparison to Connie comes in, who was 6 at the time and seemed to enjoy every minute of it - all that stopped her was the phone votes. Besides that, her performances were amazing and she came out of it with a record contract. Therefore, it makes no sense if people blame Hollie's age for her breakdown, as somebody four years younger than her clearly succeeded without any on-stage agony - Hollie is simply a pain in the arse who wants to get her own way and has the most annoying wail I've ever heard on prime time television.
ST
I think the reason ITV played out an extended commercial break, plus a Brighter Side promo, was so they could pre-record Holly in the ad break so it wasn't as nerve-wracking for her. She's only young, and just folded when the show went live. I think the problem was was when Simon said to Amanda, "It's not great", which set Holly off.
It would make sense pre-recording the Holly performance with her Mum just off stage though. Poor Amanda though trying to climb on the stage in that dress! Hehe!
If you're on Twitter and want a giggle at some comments from somebody, follow @jennifalconer as she's usually on form!
Well, I'm off to Wembley today - enjoy it all guys! Oh and those who have my mobile number, please text me the BGT result as I will miss it! Grrrr!
It would make sense pre-recording the Holly performance with her Mum just off stage though. Poor Amanda though trying to climb on the stage in that dress! Hehe!
If you're on Twitter and want a giggle at some comments from somebody, follow @jennifalconer as she's usually on form!
Well, I'm off to Wembley today - enjoy it all guys! Oh and those who have my mobile number, please text me the BGT result as I will miss it! Grrrr!
IM
It is all fixed, all of it. That girl (it is not worth giving it the attention by saying it's name) clearly made it up as Simon was about to press the buzzer (just like in her audition) when she started wailing. It cannot even sing anyway. Many singers on The X Factor have fallen apart from 'nerves' but they did not get a 'second chance'. This 'episode' was broadcast around the world and she has shown Britain up. She is a little brat and deserves to be locked up in a cage and fed like a monkey. I laughed at her when she started crying crocodile tears over her supposedly silk face. The presenters and judges were useless in the situation, they should have stopped the lighting and music and carried straight on with an 'interview' or to the next 'act'.
Conclusion: With this hassle and stupid Susan making a fool out of herself, there is no point watching this programmes final today and I have realised I have wasted several weeks of my life watching Britain's Got [No] Talent.
Conclusion: With this hassle and stupid Susan making a fool out of herself, there is no point watching this programmes final today and I have realised I have wasted several weeks of my life watching Britain's Got [No] Talent.
LL
It was pre-recorded?
I think the reason ITV played out an extended commercial break, plus a Brighter Side promo, was so they could pre-record Holly in the ad break so it wasn't as nerve-wracking for her.
It was pre-recorded?