Dragons' Den
- Fernsehserie
- 2005–
- 1 Std.
IMDb-BEWERTUNG
6,8/10
2669
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Füge eine Handlung in deiner Sprache hinzuBudding entrepreneurs, inventors, and small businessmen pitch their ideas to five "dragons"--real-life business leaders and millionaires.Budding entrepreneurs, inventors, and small businessmen pitch their ideas to five "dragons"--real-life business leaders and millionaires.Budding entrepreneurs, inventors, and small businessmen pitch their ideas to five "dragons"--real-life business leaders and millionaires.
- Nominiert für 5 BAFTA Awards
- 2 Gewinne & 6 Nominierungen insgesamt
Folgen durchsuchen
Empfohlene Bewertungen
The idea is simple: entrepreneurs pitch ideas to a group of 5 multimillionaire business investors. The investors ask questions of presenters to clarify, expose pitfalls and negotiate the percentages and dollar amounts offered. The presenters state in advance how much they want to raise and if they don't raise the full amount between all the investors, they leave empty handed.
If you have ever tried to raise money, this is one of the best shows to watch. You WILL learn what a good, tight pitch sounds like (as well as what terrible ones are like). Regardless of whether you agree with the decisions made by the investors, it's worth watching for that alone. You'll also learn what kinds of questions you should expect and what you need to know going into such a meeting.
The questions asked are often insightful and penetrating. It's fascinating to watch how good/bad ideas coupled with good/bad presentations play out.
Faults: The narration is somewhat annoying. The narrator generally spills the beans on what an investor is about to say, so the element of surprise is lost. Also, the investors frequently sound derogatory. It's unfortunate, but there's not much one can do about it - these are real people with their own money and not actors. If you're asking for money here, you better have a thick skin.
If you enjoy thinking out new businesses and how to create or expand a company, this show will likely be fun to watch.
If you have ever tried to raise money, this is one of the best shows to watch. You WILL learn what a good, tight pitch sounds like (as well as what terrible ones are like). Regardless of whether you agree with the decisions made by the investors, it's worth watching for that alone. You'll also learn what kinds of questions you should expect and what you need to know going into such a meeting.
The questions asked are often insightful and penetrating. It's fascinating to watch how good/bad ideas coupled with good/bad presentations play out.
Faults: The narration is somewhat annoying. The narrator generally spills the beans on what an investor is about to say, so the element of surprise is lost. Also, the investors frequently sound derogatory. It's unfortunate, but there's not much one can do about it - these are real people with their own money and not actors. If you're asking for money here, you better have a thick skin.
If you enjoy thinking out new businesses and how to create or expand a company, this show will likely be fun to watch.
Thoroughly enjoyed it. I've just started watching from season 19 onwards. Was into shark tank for a couple of months saw a DD clip on YT; Peter jones was on a whole other level compared to the sharks; switched to DD after that. Peter Jones, Deborah Meadon, Duncan Bannatyne are truly dragons on the show. Like the 3 dragons from GOT.
Totally savage and ruthless. The entrepreneurs get a thorough roasting from the dragons though some escape with a light grilling and some get the dream investor/s they were hoping for. Brilliant in terms of entertainment plus you get insight into the business world. Very interesting to watch. British dry humour at its best 👍💯
There is drastic change from season 1 to 19 in the setting, dragons attitude and demeanor, humour and of course the dragons themselves (with the exception of den legends Deborah Meadon and Peter Jones). The dragon savagery has gone down sadly but there's a nice vibe on the den.
Season 19 has a great lineup of dragons. There's 2 younger dragons Sara davies and Steven Bartlett who bring a fresh perspective to the show. Theres the older more experienced dragons like Deborah Meadon, Touker Suleiman, Peter Jones all who are well established in the business world with diverse portfolios and rolling in cash. Experience of decades combined with new perspective and ideas.... The perfect combination for a good business.
A word of advice if you're just watching clips on YT know that each pitch takes nearly 1.5 hours to film, so many parts are edited out.
Totally savage and ruthless. The entrepreneurs get a thorough roasting from the dragons though some escape with a light grilling and some get the dream investor/s they were hoping for. Brilliant in terms of entertainment plus you get insight into the business world. Very interesting to watch. British dry humour at its best 👍💯
There is drastic change from season 1 to 19 in the setting, dragons attitude and demeanor, humour and of course the dragons themselves (with the exception of den legends Deborah Meadon and Peter Jones). The dragon savagery has gone down sadly but there's a nice vibe on the den.
Season 19 has a great lineup of dragons. There's 2 younger dragons Sara davies and Steven Bartlett who bring a fresh perspective to the show. Theres the older more experienced dragons like Deborah Meadon, Touker Suleiman, Peter Jones all who are well established in the business world with diverse portfolios and rolling in cash. Experience of decades combined with new perspective and ideas.... The perfect combination for a good business.
A word of advice if you're just watching clips on YT know that each pitch takes nearly 1.5 hours to film, so many parts are edited out.
Used to like this but it's unwatchable now thanks to the totally unnecessary and constantly repetitious voiceover from Evan Davis.
Evan: Peter is going to ask about the financials
Peter: Tell me about the financials...
Evan: Peter has asked about the financials.
Hugely padded, over and over and over the same thing.
This is another BBC show that started good but is now made by people who have lost all interest in making it worth watching.
Evan: Peter is going to ask about the financials
Peter: Tell me about the financials...
Evan: Peter has asked about the financials.
Hugely padded, over and over and over the same thing.
This is another BBC show that started good but is now made by people who have lost all interest in making it worth watching.
A group of self-made millionaires sit on a panel with individual stacks of their own money at their disposal. One by one, inventors, small businesses, entrepreneurs and the occasional nut come to the panel to pitch an investment opportunity to them. As the Dragons get their teeth into the potential and the detail of the offer, some are rejected, some are talked down to a compromise deal and some have the dragons fighting over them.
I watched this the other week because the Guardian often has pieces that refer to it, saying how much fun it is. OK so it is another form of reality show but the business element offered the potential that it would be not just another show where a panel tears a strip out of happy-go-lucky members of the public. After watching one or two episodes though I found it vaguely interesting but a lot less entertaining and engaging than I had hoped. In a way it is interesting to see the ideas (good and bad) paraded in front of the panel and occasionally I find the debate and questioning enjoyable. However too often it is tiresome and obvious with the panellists milking their "tough edge" too much and saying more than needs to be said without actually adding much value to the show. It isn't all their fault though because the show also feels very, very padded to try and make it to the hour running time.
So we get recaps of stuff we only saw a few minutes ago and lots of reaction shots from the "Dragons" that clearly are inserted out of context to try and up the drama. Having Evan Davis wittering on doesn't help either; regularly we have a section where one of the Dragons reject a project because the maths don't stand up, only for it to be followed by Davis narrating "the Dragons' have rejected the project because the maths don't stand up" as if somehow the audience zoned out for a second there. I didn't like the way he had to keep calling them "Dragons" either, maybe you get used to it but it just sounded funny to me. The "contestants" are mostly worthy but perhaps not worthy enough to get the cash, some are idiots and these are scattered across the show to keep things lively for the audience who want blood as much as triumph. The panellists are so-so but are too tempted to play to caricature and not be "people". I watched some of the most recent series and it seemed to have be happening more and more with some of them.
Overall then a reasonably interesting reality show but one that is padded and a bit too forced on regular occasions. I can see why some viewers like it but for me it was too little of interest spread thinly over too long a running time.
I watched this the other week because the Guardian often has pieces that refer to it, saying how much fun it is. OK so it is another form of reality show but the business element offered the potential that it would be not just another show where a panel tears a strip out of happy-go-lucky members of the public. After watching one or two episodes though I found it vaguely interesting but a lot less entertaining and engaging than I had hoped. In a way it is interesting to see the ideas (good and bad) paraded in front of the panel and occasionally I find the debate and questioning enjoyable. However too often it is tiresome and obvious with the panellists milking their "tough edge" too much and saying more than needs to be said without actually adding much value to the show. It isn't all their fault though because the show also feels very, very padded to try and make it to the hour running time.
So we get recaps of stuff we only saw a few minutes ago and lots of reaction shots from the "Dragons" that clearly are inserted out of context to try and up the drama. Having Evan Davis wittering on doesn't help either; regularly we have a section where one of the Dragons reject a project because the maths don't stand up, only for it to be followed by Davis narrating "the Dragons' have rejected the project because the maths don't stand up" as if somehow the audience zoned out for a second there. I didn't like the way he had to keep calling them "Dragons" either, maybe you get used to it but it just sounded funny to me. The "contestants" are mostly worthy but perhaps not worthy enough to get the cash, some are idiots and these are scattered across the show to keep things lively for the audience who want blood as much as triumph. The panellists are so-so but are too tempted to play to caricature and not be "people". I watched some of the most recent series and it seemed to have be happening more and more with some of them.
Overall then a reasonably interesting reality show but one that is padded and a bit too forced on regular occasions. I can see why some viewers like it but for me it was too little of interest spread thinly over too long a running time.
I am not a fan of reality TV, but I do really enjoy Dragons' Den. I concept of the show is simple, budding entrepreneurs pitch there business ideas to the Dragons, all of them leading business people, and offer a percentage of there company in exchange for investment. Some of the people who go onto the show have poor idea or just do not think things thought and it is entertaining watching the Dragons rip them to pieces. However, there are some people who do have good ideas and get the investment there need, such as the man who created Reggae Reggae sauce and the Watford goalkeeper Richard Lee for his shop Dr. Cap. There are also people who have good ideas but do not get the investment they want, normally because the Dragons make them an offer that is unacceptable or there is a hole in the pitch. People who do the best in the show are ones who have a good safety invention or show that there company is already profitable.
The reason why I summarise this program as X Factor for the Middle Classes because people watch it to see people get humiliated, especially the arrogant people and want to see conflict. But there are clever people who come up with very good ideas and Dragons' Den is an interesting program and does show an aspect to how the business world works.
The reason why I summarise this program as X Factor for the Middle Classes because people watch it to see people get humiliated, especially the arrogant people and want to see conflict. But there are clever people who come up with very good ideas and Dragons' Den is an interesting program and does show an aspect to how the business world works.
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesThe show is based upon the Japanese series "Money no Tora" (Money Tiger). There are also Canadian and Australian versions of Dragons' Den.
- Zitate
Peter Jones - Dragon: And what are you gonna call it?
Rachel Fiddes: "Blow".
Evan Davis - Presenter: [voiceover] At least she has a brand name which should turn a few heads.
- VerbindungenEdited into Time Trumpet: Folge #1.2 (2006)
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
- How many seasons does Dragons' Den have?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Laufzeit1 Stunde
- Farbe
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen