I was in the Strictly live audience and it changed my | UK News

After writing about Strictly Come Dancing for years, I finally bought the likelihood to attend a live show, and it was a revelation. Aside from the fact that the whole lot from the costumes to the lighting to the hosts, Tess Daly and Claudia Winkleman, seemed even more glamorous and attractive in real life—actually, the digital camera does not do full justice to them—the judges had been the real revelation.

I attended the first live show of this season in the BBC‘s Elstree studios on Saturday, September 27. I would love to carry you masses of images of just how fabulous it appears, but all audience members have to give up their telephones before coming into the studio. Which is a good factor because it can be extraordinarily annoying if the individual in entrance of you was making an attempt to take cheeky selfies when the digital camera wasn’t pointing in their direction. This also means you possibly can totally focus on the show and as a end result my opinion of the 4 judges changed immensely.

One of the most frequent complaints about the show from Express readers, on social media and also from me at home watching is what often seems to be erratic or unfair marks from judges Craig Revel Horwood, Motsi Mabuse, Shirley Ballas and Anton du Beke.

My colleagues and I regularly write about followers of the show slamming what they really feel are harsh scores for the celebrities participating. While some of this is down to pure fandom – if your favorite will get a low mark, of course, you’ll be upset – fairly often the factors given don’t appear to equate with what we’ve got just watched on the telly.

However, sitting in the audience, it shortly grew to become obvious that the digital camera does lie, and you do not always see what occurs in the studio.

While you do see the entire dance switching between angles to create an entertaining broadcast, the second a celeb does not use their heel accurately or misses a beat and has to catch back up is not always obvious.

This is not the case in the studio, where you possibly can see every single mistake. While everybody on the first live show was improbable, contemplating most of them had never danced before, there have been a couple of evident errors which made some of the decrease scores comprehensible.

While the audience still will get upset at the low marks (notably Craigs!) when you’ve got seen the dance correctly, their logic when scoring a couple turns into far more obvious.

The notebooks in entrance of them, which you see on screen, aren’t for show. They do take notes and focus on the dance. So their feedback and marks aren’t plucked out of skinny air and are literally correctly grounded in what they’ve just seen.

While I will undoubtedly still get aggravated when my favorite will get a low rating for a dance, I left the studio with a better understanding of where that comes from and a new respect for the judges (even Craig!).