Dear Ms. Place,Why are the bloggers who panned Top Design falling all over Sheer Genius? Frankly, I don’t get it. The Assistant, Top Design Stooge
Dear Assistant,
Out of all the bloggers in the universe, why are you asking fabulous me? Ms. Place
Dear Ms. Place,
Because you only called me a dork. Compared to the names the other bloggers gave me, you showed some respect. The Assistant.
Dear Assistant,
My mistake! To answer your question, however, here are some of the reasons why Shear Genius is, well, Marty Scorsesean in scope compared to the Ed Woodian dregs that was Top Design.
1) The short cut challenges (similar to Top Chef’s quickfire challenges) judge the stylists on technical know how and pit them individually against each other. Bravo should have offered Top Design’s talented designers a similar Design Whirl challenge that measured their technical know how, showcased their individual personalities, and provided us with two challenges per show.
2) Because we see less of the Shear Genius judges, their quirks aren’t so readily apparent. I suspect they won’t grate on us nearly as much as Jonathan, Margaret, and Kelly did.
3) When Paul Jean was eliminated, we were able to judge him on two individual challenges. Top Design started out with a thud. We never got to see Lisa or Heather compete individually and they were eliminated before we got to know them. Big mistake.
4) Few can beat Tabatha or Dr. Boogie in the “Over the Top Character” department. (Dr. Boogie’s not gay? Is my gaydar scope off or what?) However, I must admit that Top Design's Mikey (Adams) was in a stratosphere all his own, and few reality t.v. spats can beat the deliciously watchable John/Mikey and Mikey/Carisa feuds.
5) About 3.2 viewers could relate to the Pacific Design Center. I like to stroll through Harrod’s when I’m in London, but I KNOW their furniture is not designed for my budget. Same with Pacific Design Center. Plus the designers were not given enough time to scour its showrooms for furniture. The challenges were prohibitively difficult.
6) Paul Jean sighing like a spoiled teen over the lack of closet space sealed my delight in Episode One. Even though he lasted only one show, he was memorable.
8 comments:
Great post, Ms. Place. I would add these:
1. Unabashed eye-rolling! And not just between the contestants. Some of the challenges are pretty preposterous (the hair art and Edward Scissorhands challenges, anyone?). It’s nice to see the contestants think they’re as goofy as we do.
2. Much better editing. I’m not talking about how the editors may skew our perceptions of the contestants. Compared to the TD judges’ clomping through the echoing halls of the PDC (which did not deserve air time), the pacing on SG reminds me of PR especially its first season — much faster and more energetic, plus the music is less annoying and more effectively worked into the editing.
3. Straightforward judging criteria, clearly communicated. Instead of TD’s umpteen (sometimes mutually exclusive) criteria, usually not presented on screen until the designers’ work was completed and the judges were ready to reveal their picks, SG keeps it to two or three understandable benchmarks. And Jaclyn Smith delivers them crisply, professionally, and without sounding wooden or like her mouth is full of marbles (a la Padma and Billy Joel’s wife).
4. They’re not simply auffing the oldsters first. (OK, a pet peeve of mine.) Frodo Theodore was a lot of fun to watch, but if they had booted Tabatha before him, it would have been obvious age bias.
5. TD just wasn’t much fun, and it didn’t have enough take-away value to offset the lack of entertainment. Despite having a cast of extremely talented designers, the production company on TD just didn’t know what to do with them. The challenge restrictions didn’t give them opportunity to adequately show what they could do, or give viewers enough insight into their creative process or the judges’ analyses of their work.
Bottom line, SG doesn’t take itself too seriously. It’s silly and campy, and a great guilty pleasure. (Oh, yeah, and it doesn’t have the sanctimonious, self-important, off-topic Assistant blogging about it.)
In Top Design, you never got to really see the designers DO anything. It's just not much fun watching someone shop ("memoing out") or sketch, or even supervise. There was too little real....DOING...on that show.
the booths were a hideous, hideous concept.
Way too much time spent with the judges, you're right on. That awful Kelly, and Margaret - who is awesome, but also (as my mom says) "has a stick up her ass."
The design was really inaccessible in an exclusionary sense - no one is going to have a PDC designer room, if they even have a designer room at all. But EVERYONE gets a haircut, and the over-the-top "hair art" and Edward Scissorhands challenges are just flat-out FUN.
there was nothing Over the Top about Top Design (except Michael, who I really do love). And Carisa should never have made it to the finals. never. good designs, but not a finalist.
Kbryna said...
In Top Design, you never got to really see the designers DO anything. It's just not much fun watching someone shop ("memoing out") or sketch, or even supervise. There was too little real....DOING...on that show.
The thing is, that's the job - sketching, shopping, supervising. It's not by it's nature telegenic. The producers didn't really understand this and underestimated the audiences reaction to this. They suffered from a lack of imagination on how to translate the process of interior design to a tv audience. I think it was important for the judges to be shown walking through the rooms - it was the only time we saw them finished. But, I think they should have been doing their commentaries while walking through the rooms - "look at this, what do you think of that" kind of thing. Removing them to the white room added too much time to the process.
Excellent post! Not missing the "assistant" emphasis on the first syllable.
Did he really contact you to ask that? He's such a tool!
That would have been something, anon! But no, sadly, this all comes from my brain.
But he did come across as one, didn't he? Great term.
haha, ms. place -- too funny :) i would n't nave been surprised. also, good points about the show. keep up the good work!
-Anon 1:48
Love Todd but Jaclyn is definitely more pleasant to listen to.
Only quibble I have? Todd's voice less soothing? No, no, never!
And no one ever did explain why no chairs from his line weren't ever able to be chosen on the show.
"And Jaclyn Smith delivers them crisply, professionally, and without sounding wooden or like her mouth is full of marbles (a la Padma and Billy Joel’s wife)."
Because she is an actual actress.
Post a Comment