c4countdown

Posted: **Mon Mar 23, 2009 12:06 am**

Series 5 of The Apprentice starts on Wednesday and the candidates have been revealed (incase people haven't seem them yet).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00jj4zj wrote:In their first boardroom meeting, Sir Alan leaves the fresh-faced candidates under no illusions about how tough the next 12 weeks will be, with a no-holds-barred introduction to the job interview from hell.

With no time for respite, the hard work starts immediately, as the immaculately dressed candidates are given a bucket and sponge and told to make as much money as possible by starting up a cleaning company. With just eight hours to turn a profit, both teams have to roll up their tailored sleeves and get stuck in.

Under the watchful eyes of Sir Alan's aides, Nick Hewer and Margaret Mountford, the teams must decide where to go, what to clean and how much to charge. With highly competitive candidates all desperate to prove their worth, it is not long before tensions rise and tempers flare. Chaos ensues as the boys and girls compete against the clock to avoid a showdown with the boss, Sir Alan Sugar.

The winning team gets to check out their new home, a luxury penthouse suite with more than 10,000 square feet of modern living space, while the losers are left to battle it out in the boardroom. In the end, someone will be in the firing line. Who will be the first to hear the infamous words 'You're fired'?

I can't wait

.

Posted: **Mon Mar 23, 2009 7:11 am**

Bring it on! This programme is a big fave in our household. Looking forward to it

Posted: **Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:07 am**

Thanks for the link Joseph.

Also compulsive viewing in the Harmer household.

I don't think the best of last lot of contestants were as bright as their predecessors on previous series' so I hope there are a few bright sparks amongst the new intake.

Posted: **Mon Mar 23, 2009 3:42 pm**

Allan Harmer wrote:Thanks for the link Joseph.

Also compulsive viewing in the Harmer household.

I don't think the best of last lot of contestants were as bright as their predecessors on previous series' so I hope there are a few bright sparks amongst the new intake.

That Michael Sophocles (sp?) from the last series was brilliant IMO. Also Simon Ambrose from another series when he was screwing the legs on/off on the trampoline was funny

Posted: **Mon Mar 23, 2009 8:22 pm**

I can't like this programme. I'm sad enough to watch Big Brother but at least that is not trying to be anything more than it is - a reality show where the winner is simply the one the public votes for. It begins and ends there. But this is pretending to be some sort of respectable programme by getting some smug millionaire cunt to use it as a job interview for a real job.

Posted: **Mon Mar 23, 2009 10:11 pm**

Gavin Chipper wrote:I can't like this programme. I'm sad enough to watch Big Brother but at least that is not trying to be anything more than it is - a reality show where the winner is simply the one the public votes for. It begins and ends there. But this is pretending to be some sort of respectable programme by getting some smug millionaire cunt to use it as a job interview for a real job.

Celebrity Big Brother is okay IMO, but I don't like the original BB.

Posted: **Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:05 pm**

Joseph Bolas wrote:
Gavin Chipper wrote:I can't like this programme. I'm sad enough to watch Big Brother but at least that is not trying to be anything more than it is - a reality show where the winner is simply the one the public votes for. It begins and ends there. But this is pretending to be some sort of respectable programme by getting some smug millionaire cunt to use it as a job interview for a real job.
Celebrity Big Brother is okay IMO, but I don't like the original BB.

I'm the opposite.

Posted: **Mon Mar 30, 2009 1:06 pm**

Joseph Bolas wrote:That Michael Sophocles (sp?) from the last series was brilliant IMO.

I hope you mean brilliant as in brilliantly retarded...the guy was pathetically awful.

Posted: **Tue Mar 31, 2009 6:03 pm**

For me, The Apprentice is probably number 2 on the list of programmes which I make a point of watching.

There's a slightly added interest for me this year. At a family meal the weekend before last, one person mentioned that a few months ago he was asked to complete a reference for a neighbour who was applying for a new job. He thought nothing further about it until seeing last week's Radio Times, in which there was a piece about the lad concerned; he's one of this year's would-be apprentices. Only slightly added interest, I should say, as I've never met the lad, though I have met his parents. It turns out that he was the project manager of the boys' team in the first programme.

Posted: **Tue Mar 31, 2009 7:12 pm**

I also love "The Apprentice" and enjoy watching the contestants completing their challenges. Unlike Big Brother the participants are mostly well educated high-achievers and, therefore, are more interesting to watch and listen to. I'm also a great admirer or Sir Alan Sugar who has become a multi-millionaire through his own efforts. Great television, for me at least!

Posted: **Sat Apr 04, 2009 9:59 pm**

Junaid Mubeen wrote:I hope you mean brilliant as in brilliantly retarded...the guy was pathetically awful.

Because of that he was funny, I thought, as well as being cute. (Just not kosher!)

I think The Apprentice, like BB and their ilk, has slipped in quality as it aims for more outrageous cringeworthy, "car crash TV" moments. Whipping expired equines is cheaper than original thinking. Or to put it another way, no wonder the country is in such a mess if this lot is representative of the best and brightest. Will the bookies offer odds on the winner of this series lasting longer than six months?

And don't you think some of the guys could have a proper shave before such an important "job interview"? George Michael they ain't!!

Posted: **Sat Apr 04, 2009 10:28 pm**

kevin manthorpe wrote:
Junaid Mubeen wrote:I hope you mean brilliant as in brilliantly retarded...the guy was pathetically awful.
Because of that he was funny, I thought, as well as being cute.

I agree with one of these more than the other. What really annoyed me was when Raef got sacked instead of him. Raef had the rare quality of being both the above. Absolute legend, who was taken away from us too soon because of that prick.

Posted: **Sat Apr 04, 2009 11:22 pm**

Junaid Mubeen wrote:
kevin manthorpe wrote:
Junaid Mubeen wrote:I hope you mean brilliant as in brilliantly retarded...the guy was pathetically awful.
Because of that he was funny, I thought, as well as being cute.
I agree with one of these more than the other. What really annoyed me was when Raef got sacked instead of him. Raef had the rare quality of being both the above. Absolute legend, who was taken away from us too soon because of that prick.

God I remember that boardroom encounter, Michael and his 'everything good about the advert was a result of my doing'. I believe Adrian Chiles called him an 'odious little twat'. Me, I'd rather have called him an odious little twat with a concave face.

Posted: **Tue Apr 07, 2009 3:00 pm**

Ben Wilson wrote:God I remember that boardroom encounter, Michael and his 'everything good about the advert was a result of my doing'. I believe Adrian Chiles called him an 'odious little twat'. Me, I'd rather have called him an odious little twat with a concave face.

The Kosher incident was brilliant as well

Posted: **Thu Apr 09, 2009 12:00 pm**

Anyone catch the apprentice last night? Was it just me or was that the most unjust firing ever?! I cant ever remember willing someone to go as much as I did for James to last night!!

Posted: **Thu Apr 09, 2009 12:27 pm**

Barry Evans wrote:Anyone catch the apprentice last night? Was it just me or was that the most unjust firing ever?! I cant ever remember willing someone to go as much as I did for James to last night!!

I thought he was spot on - James didn't do much wrong really.

Posted: **Thu Apr 09, 2009 12:30 pm**

Maj is very likeable but brought nothing to the table. Absolutely the right call in my opinion.

Posted: **Thu Apr 09, 2009 2:48 pm**

Junaid Mubeen wrote:Maj is very likeable but brought nothing to the table. Absolutely the right call in my opinion.

I agree - Maj is very likable - I think that tactically though he was trying to get under the radar for the first couple of weeks which is fair game! Whereas he could have worked harder and proved himself in later weeks - I think its going to be hard for James to be more likeable! The fact that he seemed so underhand and untrustworthy made me think he should go. We will see if he stays much longer in the series!

Posted: **Thu Apr 09, 2009 3:18 pm**

However ruthless he claims to be, I think Sugar often keeps contestants in longer than he should because he realises they make the show more entertaining. This is the only logic he could have used to keep the idiotic Sophocles in for so long last year. Maybe he's doing the same with James, who really is quite amusing to watch. He certainly won't be there at the interviews stage though.

Phillip seems a decent bet for the whole thing right now, although many have yet to really show us what they're about.

Posted: **Thu Apr 09, 2009 3:35 pm**

Junaid Mubeen wrote:However ruthless he claims to be, I think Sugar often keeps contestants in longer than he should because he realises they make the show more entertaining. This is the only logic he could have used to keep the idiotic Sophocles in for so long last year.

IAWTP. He booted Raef, the only man in the known universe who looks immaculate after getting about of bed at 6am, at pretty much his first failure but allowed Sophocles to blunder through the entire series.

James has shown himself to be a raving simpleton and should have gone just for his calamitous boardroom performances. This week he was supposed to be project manager but just stood by as his team ballsed it up. The lads who went didn't exactly distinguish themselves on the tasks but at least had something about them.

Posted: **Thu Apr 09, 2009 3:45 pm**

Paul Howe wrote:
Junaid Mubeen wrote:However ruthless he claims to be, I think Sugar often keeps contestants in longer than he should because he realises they make the show more entertaining. This is the only logic he could have used to keep the idiotic Sophocles in for so long last year.
IAWTP. He booted Raef, the only man in the known universe who looks immaculate after getting about of bed at 6am, at pretty much his first failure but allowed Sophocles to blunder through the entire series.

James has shown himself to be a raving simpleton and should have gone just for his calamitous boardroom performances. This week he was supposed to be project manager but just stood by as his team ballsed it up. The lads who went didn't exactly distinguish themselves on the tasks but at least had something about them.

Yeah - James didn't fulfil his role and was a nightmare in the boardroom. I agree with what Junaid says about Sir Alan/The production team keeping people in for entertainment. I know I will look forward to James getting fired though and that will keep me watching!! Then again people can be horrific earlier on and really come into their own right - remember Lucinda last season? So useless inititally -but proved herself as a manager and made it to the interviews. I guess nice guys like Madj don't make good tv and I think that is the reason why it went far in above over his performance in the task.

Posted: **Wed Apr 22, 2009 9:29 pm**

So the right person went tonight I think! Anyone has any feelings on a winner? I think Kate's got a lot going for her so far. Definitely most professional on the programme so far!

Posted: **Wed Apr 22, 2009 11:31 pm**

Barry Evans wrote:I think Kate's got a lot going for her so far. Definitely most professional on the programme so far!

And I suppose its a coincidence that she's by far the hottest girl on the programme eh?

My favourite (and has been from the start) is James.

Posted: **Fri Apr 24, 2009 3:29 pm**

Pure co-incidence! Even if James very occasionally makes some sense - I still think hes too unlikable to win the program! Kate will win I think unless she does something stupid out of the blue one week! Definitely a final three girl though!

Posted: **Mon Apr 27, 2009 4:47 pm**

Kate was quite awful at times in the catering task (week 2 I think)...Ben was the chief architect of their team's success this week. Still, it was never gonna take much to beat Pantsman. James is becoming more competent each week, but remains an idiot.

Posted: **Mon Apr 27, 2009 10:23 pm**

Junaid Mubeen wrote:Kate was quite awful at times in the catering task (week 2 I think)...Ben was the chief architect of their team's success this week. Still, it was never gonna take much to beat Pantsman. James is becoming more competent each week, but remains an idiot.

The idiot IMO would have to be Philip, especially after his idea of doing a character called Pantsman, plus his song was just terrible. I didn't like his attitude either when he said he only had to do one take, so I really hope he goes soon.

I'm starting to like James and I wouldn't really mind if he won.

EDIT: For people who may not know, there is someone on YouTube called BolegBros, who does a lego-based video of the firing each week and its hilarious

.

Posted: **Wed Apr 29, 2009 8:27 pm**

They just keep getting even more useless each week, it's amazing.

Posted: **Wed Apr 29, 2009 9:35 pm**

It was fantastic tonight! The show was almost surreal tonight. Very sad, even though he was useless, that nurul got fired tonight. He was one of my favourite characters! After tonight's episode I'm coming round a bit to James (though I still think he lacks the likeability factor to win!) but the highlight had to be Margaret's fantastic expressions when following them around with the rug!! Pure gold.

Posted: **Wed Apr 29, 2009 10:00 pm**

Barry Evans wrote:After tonight's episode I'm coming round a bit to James (though I still think he lacks the likeability factor to win!) but the highlight had to be Margaret's fantastic expressions when following them around with the rug!! Pure gold.

James's reaction to when Ben said that he was going to bring him back into the board room was just brilliant

Posted: **Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:03 am**

I thought last night's episode was a bit bizarre. Neither team seemed clear on the exact objective (ie 'most turnover' vs 'most profit above true value') and it wasn't made clear to us as the viewers whether this was down to them not reading/understanding the rules or simply not being told. It seemed stupid that either team could have actually just pissed off to the pub for the day instead of bothering to try and sell, and won the task. Sir Alan even summed up at the end saying "what you should have done was identify the 'gems' (the rug and the shoes I believe) and concentrated on them", whereas in fact that would appear to be the most risky strategy as they were the only ones you could make a huge loss on. Queer.

Posted: **Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:00 am**

Jon Corby wrote:I thought last night's episode was a bit bizarre. Neither team seemed clear on the exact objective (ie 'most turnover' vs 'most profit above true value') and it wasn't made clear to us as the viewers whether this was down to them not reading/understanding the rules or simply not being told. It seemed stupid that either team could have actually just pissed off to the pub for the day instead of bothering to try and sell, and won the task. Sir Alan even summed up at the end saying "what you should have done was identify the 'gems' (the rug and the shoes I believe) and concentrated on them", whereas in fact that would appear to be the most risky strategy as they were the only ones you could make a huge loss on. Queer.

I go along with that entirely. Zero profit and zero loss would have been a winning strategy, so long as the other team performed as they did. And it certainly wasn't made clear to us, the viewers, what the scoring rules were. In previous selling episodes, the teams got slated even if they had just one item remaining; selling it for just £1 would have been better than holding on to it. I wonder too if the teams were aware that this was different.

Posted: **Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:06 am**

Precisely Howard. Scoring them off against some arbitrary valuation was utterly pointless, unless you were penalised for items you didn't sell. You needed to know, for definite, the valuation you were being scored against otherwise you couldn't decide whether to make the sale or not. Valuations will vary from place to place. If you get the rug valued at £150 and sell it for £199.99 you obviously think you've done well, but if Sir Alan's valuation was £200 you'd have been better off not making the sale. Crazy.

They should have either been provided the exact valuations and told to try and achieve profit on them, or not been told the valuations but just been instructed to try and raise the most money. Worst task ever.

Posted: **Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:54 am**

Howard Somerset wrote:In previous selling episodes, the teams got slated even if they had just one item remaining; selling it for just £1 would have been better than holding on to it. I wonder too if the teams were aware that this was different.

Also in previous series episodes, exclusivity deals were a bad thing, and caused Alan "How many" Sugar's temper to rise, whereas in one episode this series they were congratulated for doing just that.

Makes me wonder what the whole show is actually about, and even whether Sugar actually knows his own mind or not.

Posted: **Wed May 06, 2009 8:54 pm**

<Philip rambling on about how great he is>

Nick "Tell us about Pantsman"

Best bit of the series.

Anyway as I said they just keep getting more useless...

Posted: **Wed May 06, 2009 9:08 pm**

You're right Craig, that was a laugh out loud moment.

Posted: **Wed May 06, 2009 9:42 pm**

Before today I would've said that Kate was a certainity for the final but I'm not too sure now, the sub-team of her, Phil and Ben were so astonishingly useless it's a wonder Seralan didn't just fire all 3 of them then and there. Mona- who in the past has seemed drippy- turned into a machine in that one and basically beat the other team single-handedly. What Craig says about them all being crap is true but it does at least make for unpredictable viewing.

Posted: **Thu May 07, 2009 2:58 am**

I was hoping Phillip would get fired as he's basically an arrogant bully but I thought he might stay on just for the TV value. Glad he got the boot!

Posted: **Thu May 14, 2009 10:10 am**

Kind of a boring task last night, no real arguments or moments of hilarious stupidity. It's good that they're trying to freshen it up with different styles of task, but the two main "new" tasks (guess the value and last night's rebranding) haven't really come off for me.

Despite calling James a raving simpleton, I'm really starting to warm to him (probably since Jono pointed out his resemblance to God), and he did come up with the Treasure Flakes theme tune which is the single greatest thing anyone has ever done on the Apprentice. Kate, Howard and Yasmina have also done pretty well and I think one of those three will end up winning.

Posted: **Thu May 14, 2009 11:23 am**

Lorraine and Debra the Komodo Dragon really have to go before I lose all faith in humanity.

Posted: **Thu May 14, 2009 12:03 pm**

Paul Howe wrote: Kate, Howard and Yasmina have also done pretty well and I think one of those three will end up winning.

I think you're on the right track with Kate and Yasmina, but Howard has only really excelled in the one task so I reckon it will be Ben in the final with the two girls. Kate will definitely win though.

Posted: **Thu May 14, 2009 2:33 pm**

The guy who was doing the pitch for the MarGAYte team is clearly a gayer.

Posted: **Thu May 14, 2009 2:34 pm**

Michael Wallace wrote:The guy who was doing the pitch for the MarGAYte team is clearly a gayer.

As was clearly stated on the Adrian Chiles BBC2 show after yesterday's episode.

Posted: **Thu May 14, 2009 2:35 pm**

Ben Wilson wrote:
Michael Wallace wrote:The guy who was doing the pitch for the MarGAYte team is clearly a gayer.
As was clearly stated on the Adrian Chiles BBC2 show after yesterday's episode.

O rly? I didn't see that - who confirmed it?

Posted: **Thu May 14, 2009 2:38 pm**

Michael Wallace wrote:
Ben Wilson wrote:
Michael Wallace wrote:The guy who was doing the pitch for the MarGAYte team is clearly a gayer.
As was clearly stated on the Adrian Chiles BBC2 show after yesterday's episode.
O rly? I didn't see that - who confirmed it?

One of the guests, in a sort-of off-hand matter-of-fact way that Kate Richardson would've disapproved of.

Posted: **Thu May 14, 2009 2:44 pm**

Ben Wilson wrote:One of the guests, in a sort-of off-hand matter-of-fact way that Kate Richardson would've disapproved of.

Haha, excellent. Glad it's not just me who thinks it, then.

Posted: **Thu May 14, 2009 2:57 pm**

Michael Wallace wrote:Haha, excellent. Glad it's not just me who thinks it, then.

But would he have been your choice if you could have chosen any of the contestants to be gay?

Posted: **Thu May 14, 2009 3:01 pm**

Derek Hazell wrote:
Michael Wallace wrote:Haha, excellent. Glad it's not just me who thinks it, then.
But would he have been your choice if you could have chosen any of the contestants to be gay?

I haven't been paying enough attention for that sort of thing (although none spring to mind).

Posted: **Thu May 14, 2009 3:10 pm**

Michael Wallace wrote:
Derek Hazell wrote:
Michael Wallace wrote:Haha, excellent. Glad it's not just me who thinks it, then.
But would he have been your choice if you could have chosen any of the contestants to be gay?
I haven't been paying enough attention for that sort of thing (although none spring to mind).

Ah okay, so neither of the macho men's appeals went right across the sexual barrier then, interesting.

Also, I agree that last night's episode was weaker, although it is nice to see British seaside towns brought back to all their glory.

Posted: **Thu May 14, 2009 5:17 pm**

Michael Wallace wrote:
Derek Hazell wrote:
Michael Wallace wrote:Haha, excellent. Glad it's not just me who thinks it, then.
But would he have been your choice if you could have chosen any of the contestants to be gay?
I haven't been paying enough attention for that sort of thing (although none spring to mind).

I've known he was gay for a few episodes now. Does that make me one?

Posted: **Thu May 14, 2009 5:25 pm**

Jon O'Neill wrote:I've known he was gay for a few episodes now. Does that make me one?

Yeah. Although you probably caught that off me in the car on the way to the finals. Sorry.

c4countdown

The Apprentice - Series 5

The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5

Re: The Apprentice - Series 5