Just watched this evenings BGT show, not my usual taste to be honest, but little else on. I watched it all with some amateurish magicians and some cheesy kids dancing - but buried in all this was a lad called Charlie with a truly fantastic voice and a lad who was a seriously talented dancer. When the votes came in the dancer won - seems reasonable, but what they do then is pick the next two top acts and the judges vote one of those through to join the winner in the final. The lad Charlie was one and two guys who are into martial arts who had performed a pretty good dance / movement routine were next. They weren't bad but the boy was miles ahead in the talent stakes and potential for progressing to the final. Thejudges voted the singing lad off? I don't get it, am I missing something or is the show meant to be controversial? Any views? PS . a dancing dog got through apparently the other evening!
I have to admit to not liking the format of the show or the fact it is orchestrated and contrived, but I do think that a great deal of the acts have shown talent (unlike X Factor).
I would actually rather sit down and watch all the acts on Britains Got Talent than have to watch the Royal Variety Show!!!