User Reviews

Wow, I am about halfway through the second show and I can barely watch it, which is a shame because the dancing is rather good - at least what you can see of it. Where to begin? First, while there is plenty of good dancing, since when did Kung Fu become a form of dance? Don't get me wrong, I enjoy watching Shaolin monks perform some of the most complex and difficult martial arts moves on Earth, but on a show that features ballroom dancing?

Which brings me to my second point. What is with the rating system? How the Hell can you compare clogging/tap dancing to traditional South African dance? There is no rhyme or reason to the scoring system other than it being a 1 to 10 scale and the judges are atrocious. They seem to have no concept of multi-cultural dance and can't score anyone lower than a 7 or higher than a 9. The whole concept of this show being a contest to see what country has the best dancers in the World is laughable at best.

Let me indulge you a little further with my third point, the directing/cinematography. When the camera comes around front of the dancers the flood lights on the back of the stage at stage level wave around and shine directly into the camera making it impossible to see parts of the dance. Then they do a sweeping view from in the audience and you are so far from the stage while the camera is moving that you miss even more of the dances. One point that sticks out in my head is on the second show the duet from Australia was performing a lift where the girl was above the guy's head horizontally, or at least I think horizontally but I wasn't really sure because the camera angle was so horrific.

The only reason I rated this show a 5 out of 10 is because the main point of the show is to showcase dance from around the globe. The dancing (from what you can see) is intriguing and captivating, it is such a shame that the show is trivialized by some phony competition when it solely could be about dance. Also, I do have to give props to Michael Flatley as host, he is genuinely a gracious host.

To sum all of this up, good idea, poorly executed. I don't know what is more appalling, the format of the show or the fact that it doesn't surprise me that NBC would put such a show on TV. What is this country coming to?

After two episodes I only saw two actual dances. The rest of the performances can be classified as modern theater or circus acts. The judging is very inadequate and inconsistent. In a show called "Superstars of Dance" the audience and the judges did not get impressed by a tango and a professional ballerina, but gave the highest scores to a kung-fu master, who balanced on the tips of several spears. Aside from contents, which is inconsistent with the topic and title of the show, this production also suffers from bad directing and camera work. Dancers, who are presenting intensive footwork are being filmed from the waist up. The show seems under-rehearsed. My suspicion is that NBC felt like they needed to capitalize on the reality-dance success of their competitors and they rushed this show. People who enjoyed "Dancing With the Stars" and "So you think you can dance" are disappointed with "Superstars of Dance"

This show comes up short...you cannot compare the dancing because it is all so different. I feel sorry for the judges, and I would not even call what the young American guy did "dancing"! (Popping??? What the heck was that???) Sorry, peeps, but give me Dancing With The Stars any day. I am watching it now and the first show is only 1 hour in and I won't likely waste my time watching more episodes. There are far better offerings, but I had to check it out. I rated this show a 1 because there is no Zero! By the way I am not a dancer, just a dance appreciator! It will be very interesting to see how the rest of the world rates this series...

This show is truly awful. How can you judge different styles of dance on the same platform? The judges don't explain how they award scores other than telling us whether they liked it or not. If they're from another country they really wouldn't know the first thing about another country's cultural dance. And do they have to make the judges Russian and Chinese judges sooo stereotypical?! Seriously..I'm sure they would never be caught dead in those garish getups. Ridiculous!!! I can't believe this show was an idea from Nigel Lythgoe. Please stop this nonsense and bring So You Think You Can Dance back sooner! Let's get some dancers we can actually connect to!

This show was awful. I expected so much more, especially after such fantastic dance shows such as Dancing with the Stars/Strictly Come Dancing, and So You Think You Can Dance. There was nothing fantastic about any of these dancers with the exception of Anya and Pasha (sytycd alumni might I add) or the American duo. I hate the fact that there is this stereotype that all Americans can do is Popping (David Murraine is over-rated) and Hip Hop, but of course that is what we have fore our soloist and group dance. Can we not see some modern or contemporary dancing.

Scoring is crap too, half the judge probably don't understand some of the styles of dances that have been shown on this program. That Argentine Judge is a b****, I couldn't stand her and her negative bias toward the American contestants.

Furthermore as awesome as the Shaolin Monks were, it was just a bunch of circus tricks. This had better be the only season of this show or they need to really re-do the production. Finally, the show needs new hosts, Flatley and Miss U.S.A. are too dry and have no chemistry to be decent hosts. All I know is that for now I can't watch this anymore.

Michael Flatley is a refreshing host. Direct, to the point, passionate but not arrogant. He is not a camera hog and he is not prone to Hollywood star diatribes as other TV hosts. He came off as genuine and sincere which, for me, equals easy to watch.

The other good thing is having a TV show showcasing dancing traditions from other countries. Something not seen much on network TV.

The biggest problem with SUPERSTARS OF DANCE is that it is a competition. The idea that a Punjabi bhangra can be measured against an Irish step dance -- what? -- is like asking what tastes better: a hot fudge sundae or southern fried chicken. Yes, some people will like one, and not like the other. But, for people who like both... how to measure if one is better than the other? OK, what is better: a dance of male strength, or a dance of female grace? Which is better: an orange cake, or a lemon cake? Even that is impossible!

Because a direct competition between wildly different international dance styles makes no sense, the scores given by the judges seem to be more personal or political rather than objective.

A smaller problem is having Miss USA as a co-host. She does not have the same credentials as Michael Flatley, and sad to say, does not add much to the show.

Last, I can't put my finger exactly on it, but somehow this show is not capturing the magic of these dances. Perhaps after seeing these dances in person, a lot seems missing when seen on TV. Still, I wish this show all the best.

I was so looking forward to seeing this show - but I have to agree with previous comments especially Kevin Smart's - It really should be called: Superstars of Circus.

Three of the judges need to be replaced - Argentina, Australia and South Africa. They are so prejudiced - it is shameful.

I don't want to repeat everything from the previous comment - because he said it so correctly.

The judging is awful as is everything about the show. It has really been a disappointment.

I would love to hear what goes on in the executive producers offices - Nigel Lythgoe and Simon Fuller - they can't be happy.

While watching all of the dance shows available on television today, I have gotten excited about the many forms and styles of dance that they show, especially those with an international flavor. I've been hoping for a television show to highlight the diversity and excitement of the world's dance. Superstars of Dance tries to do that, but is hobbled by its concept and execution.

The first problem is the theme of a global dance competition. Due to understandable resource limitations, only a handful of countries and dancers can participate. The selection of the countries and dancers is unexplained and seems very haphazard. Some dancers seem chosen for their professional accomplishments, and others for their entertainment value. Neither are bad qualifications, but the diversity borders on complete randomness. This is a big problem for an audience hoping to view this show as a serious international competition. The mystery behind the choices of judges, countries, and dancers makes the competition seem unfair at the very least.

Because of the demands of modern network television, this show has a competition format. I don't think this is an inherent problem, but it is handled poorly. For starters, the judges seem to have no guidelines on how they give their scores, giving them without consistent reasons. This makes the scoring incredibly variable and makes it seem unfair, more so than can be attributed to the subjective nature of judging. The judges make comments talking about dance content, difficulty, and performance without applying those standards evenly to all the contestants. Also, the contestants were obviously given no clue as to what the judges were going to be looking at. I'm sure if several groups knew they were going to be judged so harshly for not having enough "dance content," they would have given different performances. I believe that the participants were given such a vague outline of what the show was going to be, they aimed to please the crowds and then were penalized by the judges for that. That strikes me as disingenuous.

One last problem is the filming of the show itself. On So You Think You Can Dance, for example, it is obvious that the dancers have practiced with the cameras and the choreography takes the cameras into account. This improves both the dancing and the filming, making even a lackluster performance at least coherent. Superstars of Dance lacks that professional polish, and it shows glaringly. If the dance cannot be conveyed well to the television audience, then it doesn't make a very good TV show.

Superstars of Dance has shown improvement between its first and second episodes. The judges have become more consistent, and the unscripted banter with the judges and the contestants is slightly better. Unfortunately, the deep flaws in the setup of the show will last the whole season, and I don't think this show will get another season for it to improve.

I, for one, will keep watching. I find world dance interesting enough that I can grit my teeth through the flaws and enjoy seeing dances that are new to me. Sadly, I cannot whole- heartedly recommend this show to others, especially if they have access to other dance shows, either live or on television.

I agree with Pro Jury in that this show does not capture the magic of the dances and I think I know why - the absolutely atrocious camera-work. Even though I believe I would truly enjoy the show, I can't bear to watch it due to constant frustration with being unable to witness what I'm sure the dancers and choreographers want us to see. Additionally I agree that it seems difficult to judge such disparate dance styles. I'm no professional, but I couldn't understand most of the judge's opinions – they seemed completely arbitrary. One thing I can't agree with is that Michael Flatley is a good host – he is too rigid and everything he says seems forced and unnatural to me.