User Reviews

The program itself is fun and I find it watchable..

However, the female judge, Sophie Robinson is so obviously biased from the moment the programme comes on and you can guess from the off who is go into win.

She does not critique fairly and too be honest is just snooty. I am hardly surprised that some contestants cry when they are sent home. Series 3 episode 10 saw a very creative designer go home, over 3 other designers, 2 of which, who to be honest just painted walls!

Sophie says all the snooty stuff for the cameras but when it comes to giving feedback, she leaves that to the male presenter, Daniel.

More helpful would be supportive feedback as you might hear in master chef. Which would also be useful to viewers.

"The Great Interior Design Challenge" (2014-2017) was a popular British television series that captivated audiences with its creative and competitive take on interior design. Here are some reviews and insights into the show:

Inspiring and Educational: "The Great Interior Design Challenge" was not just a competition but also an excellent platform for viewers to learn about various design techniques, styles, and the art of transforming spaces. It inspired many to experiment with their own interiors.

Diverse Contestants: The show featured a diverse group of contestants, each with their unique design aesthetics and backgrounds. This diversity added depth and interest to the competition, showcasing the versatility of interior design.

Judging Panel: The judging panel, including industry experts like Daniel Hopwood and Sophie Robinson, offered valuable critiques and feedback. Their expertise provided viewers with valuable insights into the world of professional interior design.

Creativity Under Pressure: One of the most appealing aspects of the show was watching contestants work under tight deadlines and budget constraints. It demonstrated how creativity often flourishes when faced with challenges, inspiring viewers to think outside the box.

Before-and-After Transformations: The dramatic before-and-after transformations of the spaces were a highlight of each episode. Viewers were often left in awe of the stunning makeovers and the incredible impact that thoughtful design can have on a room.

Emphasis on Sustainability: "The Great Interior Design Challenge" also touched on sustainability and the importance of eco-friendly design practices. This aspect of the show resonated with viewers who are increasingly conscious of environmental issues.

Entertaining Competition: Beyond its educational value, the show was highly entertaining. The competitive element, as contestants raced against the clock, kept viewers engaged and eager to see the final results.

Design Diversity: The show explored a wide range of design styles, from classic to contemporary, and from minimalistic to maximalist. This diversity allowed viewers to discover design aesthetics that resonated with their own tastes.

Cultural and Historical Insights: The show often incorporated elements of local history and culture into the design challenges. This added depth and context to the transformations and showcased the importance of cultural sensitivity in design.

Legacy and Influence: "The Great Interior Design Challenge" left a lasting legacy by inspiring a new generation of interior designers. It encouraged people to pursue their passion for design and offered a glimpse into the potential career opportunities in the field.

I started watching this show on Netflix recently and was really enjoying it; HOWEVER, I have lost all confidence in the judges' ability to objectively judge based on SKILL, and END PRODUCT!!!!! Season 3 episode 3 is a great example...ARE YOU KIDDING ME???? That FRANKENSTEIN, hodge-podge collection of GARISH rubbish that Frankie (sp?) Produced with its shoddy glue gun, last-minute clock part junk wins?? Even in episode 1 Frankie clads the doors of a wardrobe in burlap and it looks HORRENDOUS!!!!! Apparently one must either be a gay man, or likeable (to the judges) to win because I cannot be convinced that design prowess plays the largest part. Tom, Daniel, and Sophie...none of you "move on" in my respect for objective and fair judging.

Season 1 , episode 3, was maddening. Holly nailed what the clients wanted. She delivered a gorgeous room about which the clients were over the moon. Frankie, while beautifully done in episode 2, was not successful in delivering what the client wanted in episode 3. The judges admitted that he failed completely with the lighting. And the style he delivered was not even steam punk. His client was moderately happy with the room. Even the side, creative project the designers made was misjudged, in my opinion. That chair Frankie made was downright ugly. Both of these designers are extremely talented. However, it was clear all the way through Season 1, that the judges favored Frankie. They exaggerated his successes and seemed to discount his failures. Why? Male privilege is the only thing I could think of. Even my husband was upset about this. He also thought Holly was the clear winner for episode 3. We stopped watching the show after this episode, because when there is obvious nepotism, it takes all the fun out of watching.

I would just like to know who Mr. Triangle, Martin, was blowing???? His designs started out incredibly bad, and by the end, he was doing fine work (who was helping him in the final, and semi-final episodes????). That being said, he should never have gotten to the finals - he should never have won the first challenge he was in - the repetitive triangles in his first design were, quite frankly, not interesting, boring, unimaginative, lacking in creativity, etc., etc., etc.. He won the final challenge despite leaving things unfinished, including no handles on an armoire, which the judges even stated was missing shelving which would have been appropriate in a room lacking in sufficient storage. They made excuses for him all through the competitions, which were not awarded to any of the other design competitors. It appears that this reality show was set up to have a winner before the competitions even started. How sad :-(.

Nonetheless, despite the obvious set up for the winner, it was very interesting to see the designers ideas, as well as the great mix of different home styles used in each episode. I just wish this was a true competition, without the obvious ending - yes, I knew before the semi-finals that Martin was going to win, despite not earning it!!!!!!!

I wager if you put the stars of Portlandia in place of the "experts" and "host" and had them do exact same line readings - it would be seen as one of the great hits of parody - ever.

We made it through a couple of episodes of this piece of crud. The poor "designers" were given conflicting feedback. They were admired for doing shoddy work and browbeating their clients.

If I ever have the misfortune of seeing any of the "judges" again I know I'll laugh for half a second and find the remote.

AVOID AT ALL COSTS!!

I mean they need to check on their taste!they have let talie go in place of quirky anne!i mean no offense to her she's creative and all but her taste isnt really what should win a interior design show like this OMG.the judges need to check their eyes clearly

Like most of the designers and appreciate they are amateur. But the judges?!?. Initially much less snarky then all went south in Season 3. Seriously that room in round 2...so cheap looking. The client was nice but not enthusiastic. Meanwhile the competition so classy and brought the owners to tears of happiness but let's go with cheap and dark. Seriously? Although it was obvious The female judge was only going with the Male contestant no matter what. Take a lesson fro Great British Baking Show. People love it because everyone is kind and positive even when critical. Get a clue