Posted: 19 December 2010 at 5:30pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by debayon
Hey guys, I have been watching JDJ from the time it started, and slowly I have seen it degrading. Season 1 & 2 were the best, the third one was alright(sorta rigged), but this season's the limit.
Firstly of all, a lot of dancers are already established and it's just not fair. Take Sushant Rajput, for example(his fans, please don't kill me
) He is a wonderful dancer, full of grace and all. But then we should consider the fact that he's already taken part in a dance competition and what more, won it! No wonder he got a 30 on his performance...he deserves it! But the million dollar question is: is his presence in a show that takes people who are proficient in their respective fields and nurtures it really justified, especially since he is already experienced in this sphere? If the answer's yes, then going by your logic, even someone like Mona Singh should be allowed to take part in this competition a second time. It also affects the competition: How will other participants, like Daya, Chang etc, participants who have never tried their hand in dancing before,fare against such dancers?
Secondly, what is this rubbish about the judges discussing before giving scores, that too in front of everybody. Whatever happened to individual opinions? If a judge feels like a particular participant didn't perform well, fine, don't give him/her good marks. But at least don't influence the decisions of the other judges.
Now I don't have a complaint, but rather a query: Many of the people here thought Shekhar Suman and Renuka Sahane gave bad performances. I just saw their performances, and I did not think that they were bad at all, it is obvious they would have certain problems in learning to excel in dance because they have never danced before and because of their physical restrictions, but they were pretty good for their first attempt, so I would like to ask why people thought that they were bad?
On that note, I'd like to end my rant, comments, critcisms are appreciated
JDJ 4 has disappointed me.
1. The inclusion of experienced dancers
Yes, there are a few experienced dancers, which is inevitable given the number of reality TV shows out there - there has to be some recycling eventually.
But I always thought that Jhalak was immune to this inequality because it isn't a show where people can do just any dance. It's a show where people have to learn various well-defined dance forms like salsa, rumba, waltz etc. So doing a couple of item songs or being good at thumkas wasn't an advantage in any case, because the show was not about performing 'Bollywood' dance.
For example, in season 2 there was an ex- Bharatnatyam dancer called Sudha Chandran who was actually disadvantaged by her dancing experience because she had to unlearn all her Bharatnatyam habits and take on ballroom techniques. Similarly, I'm sure Mika would have been great doing bhangra, with all that concert experience, but he was made to perform salsa and tango.
But in season 4, there are people with a lot of experience doing 'Bollywood' dancing and even in Jhalak, they're sticking to what they already know! They're letting great ballroom, latin and folk dance forms be mixed with much more Bollywood. I believe this is creating inequality.
2. Judges conferring before scoring
Judges are supposed to be independent. That's why each one of them gets to give a score instead of one collective 'judge mark'.
3. Ugly set
The set is ugly. It seems like Sony borrowed it from Zee TV. Now that's sad.
4. Not enough choreographer judges
A more informed, authoritative and interesting panel would include at least one more choreographer. DID fans might know Remo but he isn't as well recognised as other famous choreographers who I would have liked to have seen as well, such as Shiamak Davar, Vaibhavi Merchant and Saroj Khan. Not Farah Khan though - she's best suited to judgin comedy shows.
Edited by xobile - 19 December 2010 at 6:11pm