Most mainstream telly reviewers can barely contain themselves about the new incarnation of the Apprentice, deciding that precociousness is a welcome addition to the raft of criticisms they have in the armoury for Lord Sugar’s candidates.
Like its dislike for the arrival of Tories in Number 10, The Mirror judged the arrival of the Junior Apprentice similarly distastefully:
“…it featured ten teenage entrepreneurs who made you long for a gang of feckless hoodies necking cider and listening to grime.”
Benji Wilson on the Telegraph found the candidates pleasingly typecast:
“Adam was the barrow boy armed with a tie-knot the size of a plump samosa and a job on a market stall; Arjun was the bespectacled mathlete with more A stars than fingers and thumbs. Zoe was the glamorous, self-confident girl the other girls didn’t like, largely on account of her glamour and her self-confidence.”
Watching Lord Sugar trying to be funny is as uncomfortable as watching Gordon Brown trying to smile, quips John Grace on the Guardian.
Like other critics he notes Zoe’s “delightfully” false embrace with team captain Hibah. The Daily Mail goes further, describing Zoe as a hot favourite to win the show.
All the papers appeared to agree that Zoe, while pushy and domineering, had what it takes to become a boardroom star, while Jordan, our first candidate to be shown the door, deserved his lot.
Andrew Billen in Times, in a review comparing Junior Apprentice with junior Masterchef, concluded with a masterful swipe at Jordan’s “CEO” job title: