COURTESY OF NETFLIX
COURTESY OF NETFLIX
Industry News CONTESTANTS SHARE BEHIND-THE-SCENES LOOK AT NETFLIX SHOW
> In May, Netflix launched “The Big Flower Fight,” an international com- petition that highlighted the artistry, ingenuity and labor that goes into large- scale floral design. Two of the show’s contestants, Sarah Campbell and Jordan Marx of Intrigue Designs in Annapolis, Maryland, spoke with Floral Management editors about their experience — and how the show could influence what consum- ers look for in future floral designs.
FM: What were your toughest and proudest moments on the show?
Sarah Campbell: For me, the answer to both was the lemur (“Huge Hairy Beasts,” Episode 3). I thought I was going to come into this competition and make center- pieces and bouquets. This challenge was all about grasses. We had no idea what to do with it! Nonetheless, it came out beau- tifully. I love seeing its photo splashed ev- erywhere. That challenge was much more rewarding for me than, say, the burlesque dress (“Fabulous Floral Fashion,” Episode 2), which is what most people compli- ment us on. But that was in my wheel- house. When I heard that challenge, I knew I could rock that design. The lemur pushed me outside my comfort zone and gave me new confidence.
Jordan Marx: Emotionally, I thought the lemur was the most challenging expe- rience on the show. Sarah’s this floral genius, so to see her struggle was tough.
Physically though, the gnome (“Green Giants,” Episode 7) was so hard. We were running up and down a hill. It was raining. We had such a big surface area to cover. It was grueling! My proudest design was Eye of the Storm (“Magnificent Mobiles,” Episode 5), which won Best in Bloom. We were exhausted, but when we were done, I just took it all in and was amazed we did that with our own two hands! I was so tickled that my idea to have flying birds worked out.
FM: How would you describe the ‘Flower Fight’ atmosphere?
Campbell: It’s definitely a frustrating environment. It’s hot in the dome. Voices are echoing. And there’s a lot of pres- sure. It was very different from our typi- cal events, where we’re mostly directing and producing.
Marx: It’s extremely labor intensive when you only have two people. And while there’s plenty of product to work with, you don’t get to choose what’s at your disposal.
Campbell: It’s tough not being able to plan ahead. I’m hyper organized. I have this binder with very detailed directions for any project — what flowers you need, the mechanics to put it together, etc. On the show, all this info was just stored in my brain. I had to keep reminding myself to communicate with Jordan what to do
NEW EXPERIENCES The competition forced Sarah Campbell and Jordan Marx to work with all sorts of natural elements, as well as metals. (Learn more, p. 20).
next because there were no instructions for her to follow.
FM: What effects do you think the show will have on the floral industry?
Campbell: I think we will see an influx of people who’ve seen things that are out of the ordinary who want something new and bold for their weddings. And the flower world will embrace that with open arms.
Marx: Totally. We’ve seen much creativ- ity with wedding cakes over the years. What if floral sculptures are the next thing to take off? That could be an amaz- ing way for couples to add a personal touch to their big day.
Campbell: I think the show has really thrown open the door for the floral com- munity. I’m loving how much attention Netflix is giving plants and flowers. It’s definitely sparking interest in what we do. This is a great opportunity for us to show people how challenging, yet won- derful and financially rewarding a floral career can be.
UNDER PRESSURE Contestants Jordan Marx (left) and Sarah Campbell described each of the show’s challenges as “the equivalent of working a weekend with seven or eight weddings.”
Katie Hendrick Vincent is the senior contributing writer and editor of Floral Management and Mary Westbrook is the editor in chief.
The magazine of the Society of American Florists (SAF) 39
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52
