|
|
|
|
PLEASE NOTE: The Reality TV World Message Boards are filled with desperate
attention-seekers pretending to be one big happy PG/PG13-rated family. Don't
be fooled. Trying to get everyone to agree with you is like herding cats,
but intolerance for other viewpoints is NOT welcome and respect for other
posters IS required at all times. Jump in and play, and you'll soon find out
how easy it is to fit in, but save your drama for your mama. All members are
encouraged to read the
complete guidelines.
As entertainment critic Roger
Ebert once said, "If you disagree with something I write, tell me so, argue
with me, correct me--but don't tell me to shut up. That's not the American way."
|
|
|
"Another word on editing, directing and image manipulation"
singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"
|
12-21-05, 06:38 PM (EST)
 
  |
|
"Another word on editing, directing and image manipulation" |
Some people believe that Mark Burnett manipulates the images of the players on the Apprentice, that the actions of the players are scripted, and that the winners are pre-determined. (Admittedly, I fall in that group.)If this premise is true, does it follow that Burnett and Trump instructed Marshawn NOT to give her presentation so that Rebecca could get credit for Marshawn's hard work? Were they clearing the way for Rebecca to make it to the finals, even though her performance was not stellar? Did they force Randal to let her be project manager in the final task against Alla and Felicia, so that she could claim at least one win before being given a place in the finals? Did Trump and Burnett get rid of Alla to ensure that Rebecca would have a place in the finals? I am asking these questions, because it makes no sense to me that Marshawn would suddenly refuse to give a presentation unless she was instructed by the producers to do so. That behaviour does not comport with what we saw of her personality and work ethic to that point. She must have been an excellent player until this bad decision, because she got an exemption after a win as project manager. Most of her team members acknowledged her leadership ability and organisational smarts. Marshawn had a scowl on her face throughout the boardroom for that task. She was clearly upset about something, and it could be that contractually, she had to follow the directions of the producers, rather than to give the presentation herself. She may have known that she would be made the scapegoat for the loss. Also, given Randal's excellent record, it makes no sense that he would risk things by letting a previously poorly-performing Rebecca become project manager in the task against Alla and Felicia. It was clear that he assisted Rebecca greatly in the win, and had he not intervened, they may have lost. It is also interesting that The Donald got rid of Alla for being cut-throat in the boardroom. Her performance record suggests that she would certainly have done well had he allowed her to take her rightful place in the finals against Randal. If it is true that at least parts of the show are scripted, could it be that The Donald wanted to avoid a lawsuit from Rebecca, since she broke her ankle during the taping of the show? Perhaps these developments prompted Trump and Burnett to create a story arc that ensured that Rebecca would become The Apprentice. And as others have suggested on these boards, those developments, rather than other social issues that we have already addressed, may be the factors behind The Donald's obvious desire to hire Rebecca. Regardless of these theories, merit and performance did not drive The Donald's desire to hire Rebecca. I am truly interested in what people think about these ideas. --Singer
|
|
|
Top |
| |
lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator"
|
12-21-05, 07:44 PM (EST)
|
|
1. "RE: Another word on editing, directing and image manipulation" |
>If this premise is true, does
>it follow that Burnett and
>Trump instructed Marshawn NOT to
>give her presentation so that
>Rebecca could get credit for
>Marshawn's hard work? Were
>they clearing the way for
>Rebecca to make it to
>the finals, even though her
>performance was not stellar? >it makes no sense to
>me that Marshawn would suddenly
>refuse to give a presentation
>unless she was instructed by
>the producers to do so.
> That behaviour does not
>comport with what we saw
>of her personality and work
>ethic to that point.
>She must have been an
>excellent player until this bad
>decision, because she got an
>exemption after a win as
>project manager. Most of
>her team members acknowledged her
>leadership ability and organisational smarts.
>
>
>Marshawn had a scowl on her
>face throughout the boardroom for
>that task. She was
>clearly upset about something, and
>it could be that contractually,
>she had to follow the
>directions of the producers, rather
>than to give the presentation
>herself. She may have
>known that she would be
>made the scapegoat for the
>loss.
I'll take the first part of your concerns about Marshawn. IMO, the answer is a resounding NO!
Marshawn was her own woman from Day 1. Marshawn IMO refused to do the presentation precisely because she had been doing a bang-up job as a team member and leader. Yet, after every win, after every stellar performance, Marshawn was either ignored or dissed by DT and/or a team member. 1. Marshawn won as project manager. In the boardroom, Kristi, the Negative, who had problems with authority and each of her PMs, volunteered to DT that Marshawn had 'done nothing' on the task when he asked if they felt she deserved an exemption. Before the Negative One could continue with her rant, Marshawn's team members overrode her, each chiming in with a smiling "Yes" she should get an exemption. 2. In the boardroom where DT fired 4 wannabes, the suck-up PM of Marshawn's team, along with a beaming DT, praised Rebecca for her salesmanship during the task. The camera showed Marshawn looking stunned and disbelieving at DT who then, leaning over the table toward her with a weak grin and an apologetic air, said, "And you did a great job, too, Marshawn." (This mitigated his praise of Rebecca's salesmanship as he had said Rebecca was just 'good'. This indicated to me that Marshawn's sale had outpaced Rebecca's by a mile). The point is that in every case (these are the instances we saw), where Marshawn obviously did a fantastic job, someone threw dirt on it. This, I believe, is the crux of why she at the last moment, refused to do the presentation for the Star Wars challenge. I think she was probably feeling put upon, unappreciated, disrespected (check out her bio - this is a woman accustomed to being recognized as a Star.. even among Stars!), and looking at the mess the PM was making of the project, decided to withhold her AWESOME presentation power and rather than try to make a 'Save', let the thing fall flat on its face. No one would give her credit if she pulled it off, and from past experience, she knew that DT would find a way to heap praise on Rebecca for the win (Look! She's got a broken ankle!) It was a petulant, cutting-off-my-nose-to-spite-my-face thing to do, and ultimately self-defeating. In a later confessional, to her credit, Marshawn did not whine, she did not protest her firing based on fantastic past performance; she agreed that she had made a tactical error and should have done the presentation. This is MY take on what went down with Marshawn. MY speculation. From what I saw of her Class Act on TV, no one made Marshawn do anything. And, since Marshawn is a lawyer who has passed the bar, I am sure she would never sign any contract that stipulated that she must 'take a fall' for the favorite if the producers so ordered. I think you give this brilliant woman too little credit to even suggest such a thing. P.S. In the boardroom where she looked so uncomfortable when questioned about why she did not do the presentation, it was because she could not say what she said in the confessional - I didn't do it because I thought they were going to try to scapegoat me if the project failed. Not only would DT have fired her, he would have done so with contempt. And if she had said what I feel was her true motivation - I feel unappreciated - think DT would not have fired her for that, as well? It was a lose/lose situation that she, and only she, had boxed herself into.
|
|
|
Top |
| |
 |
|
|
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
|
|
Email this topic to a friend
Printer-friendly version of this topic
Bookmark this topic (Registered users only)
