You can't get any better than winning it.PaulTalbot wrote:Channel 4's Child Genius programme starts on Sunday 20th July at 9pm and should feature a young girl, Sharon Daniel, from Wigan Knights Chess Club. Sharon is the current British under 11 girls chess champion. Last year's programme was really interesting and I'm sure this years will be just as good. Sharon is a lovely girl as well as being a really good chess player. Lets hope that she does well.
Yes good result winning it but it was very disspointing for the flim maker to not show more of Sharon chess achivements.No film of her at a chess event unless it was cut out? also not that much film of her at home unless it was cut out.Ian Thompson wrote: You can't get any better than winning it.
Is it really any surprise that two of the children with the most 'extreme' parents couldn't cope with losing? When you tell a child (Tudor) that winning is all that matters, and delude him that it's almost certain that he will win, what do you expect when he doesn't? Compare them with Sophie, who was eliminated during the third week when she got all the spelling questions wrong. She was shown laughing and joking about it afterwards.Peter D Williams wrote:The reviews for child genius where not good
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ml?ns_camp
What we do not know is what was cut out of the film about Tudor.His parents could have said many postive things about bringing up Tudor but this was cut out of the film. Tudor could have been filmed laughing and joking but it was not shown.The film makers look for soundbites to get joe public wanting to watch it.The name child genius was chosen to get the public interested as most people have a view on how they would bring up a child like this.Ian Thompson wrote: Is it really any surprise that two of the children with the most 'extreme' parents couldn't cope with losing? When you tell a child (Tudor) that winning is all that matters, and delude him that it's almost certain that he will win, what do you expect when he doesn't? Compare them with Sophie, who was eliminated during the third week when she got all the spelling questions wrong. She was shown laughing and joking about it afterwards.
Unlike a live sporting event, I'd imagine the producers know the result before they assemble the coverage. As authors, they know the general outline of the story and they look for characters and incidents to flesh out the drama.Peter D Williams wrote:The film makers look for soundbites to get joe public wanting to watch it.
Yes good way of puting it.What is interesting is when the characters do not follow the story line and then it has to be cut out otherwise it would ruin the plot.I remember from the first film the film crew come down to film us and where very disspointed to find that Peter was not playing chess Peter wanted them to film him painting.I remember one of the directors of the film saying when are you going to get the chess board out as that is why we come down to film you.Not today we said we painting.Roger de Coverly wrote:
Unlike a live sporting event, I'd imagine the producers know the result before they assemble the coverage. As authors, they know the general outline of the story and they look for characters and incidents to flesh out the drama.
Not just the TV or course, it is also the newspapers wanting a story for people to read by conveniently leaving out the boring bits and maybe exaggerate a few finer points to somehow 'spice up' the article.Peter D Williams wrote:Yes good way of puting it.What is interesting is when the characters do not follow the story line and then it has to be cut out otherwise it would ruin the plot.I remember from the first film the film crew come down to film us and where very disspointed to find that Peter was not playing chess Peter wanted them to film him painting.I remember one of the directors of the film saying when are you going to get the chess board out as that is why we come down to film you.Not today we said we painting.Roger de Coverly wrote:
Unlike a live sporting event, I'd imagine the producers know the result before they assemble the coverage. As authors, they know the general outline of the story and they look for characters and incidents to flesh out the drama.
As i said before positives come out of taking part in a film you get to see how its made meet various people in the TV world go to channel 4 headquarters etc.
It just amazed me how joe public belives it.
When you are successful many losers bark at you.
But isn't that the idea, to show how eccentric he is? Is it not funny that a manager would do something like that? Anyway, let's not elaborate on this too much, since we're going a bit off topic here!John Moore wrote:Lewis - I am surprised that Van Gaal exposing himself amused you and I doubt it was impossible to find a better way of proving his point before a group of young men than that.
.
I was right film of Sharon playing chess plus interview by team Captain saying nice things cut out of film. This is what happened to us when Scott freeman said some nice remarks about Peter being normal pleasant etc. it was cut out because it did not suit the story linePaulTalbot wrote:They did film us at a chess match, but didn't show any of it (I've never seen so many chess players looking reasonably smart). As Sharon's team captain they interviewed me and tried to lead me into saying that she was a bit pushy, wanting to play on higher boards, none of which is true. I just said that she was a lovely, pleasant girl from a lovely, normal family, which is all absolutely true. As you know the interview wasn't shown
Barry Sandercock wrote:Congratulations to Peter. Very good !