The Great Interior Design Challenge watch online HD

This is a wonderful design show! I love all of the design shows, but what is great about this is the competitive aspect and the designers are amateurs. They are learning with u and yet bringing things to the table that are worthy of much more experience. It is also fun Bc the settings alone are its own character! The narrator is an architecture Historian and he teaches u about these gorgeous areas, full of charm and history, that these designers are competing in! Each episode starts off with amateur designers who are competing with each other to make it to the semifinals and then the finals, and win. The designers get a brief from the client, create a presentation board for the owners to approve, and then have three days and £1000 to make it work! As they are completing the rooms, they are given random challenges, give interviews, and talk about the process. The format of the show is light, fun, and very informative! The two hosts are great! They offer wonderful insight, keep the pace going, and aren't there just to complain or add stress to the designers! It's a great watch!

The real star of this show is the diversity and peculiarity of British architecture plus the contestants. You see presumably amateur designers use only 3 days to transform some very interesting looking spaces. I was also blown away by the various types of houses in Britain. It's a small country but clearly with a rich history and culture.

With that said the judges are awful. Their critique is overly pretentious and non sensical. Sometimes they appear to find fault with the design for the sake of finding a fault. Listening to their comments is painful because they nitpick and make fun of the smallest of things.

Overall good show but the judges really need to work on providing constructive criticism.

British interior designers are so much different than American ones it seems. I like the quirky design from some of the contestants. However, the hosts are terrible at times. Their opinion changes so easily and I am not sure what parameters they judge by. Has anyone noticed how the hosts never change their clothes even though the timelines stretches across 3 days? Weird.

First off, I really do enjoy this show. There are a lot of talented and creative designers, and of course some...uh...questionable ones too. Seeing the processes in which they create these spaces from start to finish is intriguing, and inspirational at times.

My issue, however, is with the hosts Sophie Robinson and Daniel Hopwood. One minute they're praising a designer for bullying their client and having a wacky brief, then they're lecturing about the importance of pleasing said clients and working with their concerns. The best looking spaces end up being criticized as being "too safe," when the clients specifically stated they wanted something traditional. Numerous times, they'll give a designer conflicting feedback that they're obviously annoyed by. It just feels like they have no real guidelines in how they judge things, other than personal opinion. Also, they come across as being hilariously pretentious. As another reviewer stated: they'd be perfect templates for Portlandia characters.

If you like interior design shows this is still very entertaining, if you can get past the hosts.

Great show but the background music is so loud, you cannot hear what the presenter is saying

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.

Season 2 designers brought, for the most part, a higher standard of product and ability. Season 3 has been disappointing to say the least. The workmanship and materials have been disappointing. I would not want the inferior workmanship or materials in my home.

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 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.

My review is based on one episode (School Conversion, Season 2) but for me that was enough. The worst designs I've seen. It feels like a joke when judges talk how everything is great. It's not immaturity, it's very bad design.

I watched four seasons and was loving it, especially the smart architecture history. But Season 4was a huge disappointment. I knew who the winner would be from the start, and I was right, damn it. Too bad, because 2 better designers lost out to the judges' pet.