About the programs I saw and what I would consider if I was a judge:
Savosin was great, he skated very well and most of all he showed great expressiveness throughout. He was totally committed to the performance, showed acting abilities and great body control. The "negative" side about his program, I'd say, is that, as far as I understood it, it was only an reenactment of film scenes, there was not much novelty he brought in, other than that it now happened on the ice.
Many programs suffered from not using props properly - often there was some kind of decoration or screen images which showed what the program was about and introduced the topic, but that was it. Nothing much was done with it afterwards, which is kind of a classic "sin" in theatrical arts, and also, usually the performance (with the use of props) should speak for itself - it should not be necessary to "explain" it by another, very visual medium.
Of course it's very difficult to make such a program which is understood by everyone if you are not doing such a background screen thing, but I think that's one of the challenges of such a program and I would judge how well it was managed.
I really liked Muravieva's skating here, choreo and skating were one, I also thought Gordeeva was a good idea, but the background and the use of the props was not very well done imo.
Kitsch is never a good idea, and, even if we completely disregard everything else about Semenenko's program, it failed in that regard. It was way too literal in everything, the crane arm costume, the writing of the date, the fotos. His skating was good.
Sinitsina's skating was very good, but she didn't make any use of the background deco apart from sleeping there and the whole take was very Kitsch and not sensitive imo.
Wigs - rarely a good idea. I really like Gogol, but with the wig Ignatov disqualified this program. Skating was good. But in general, just stop using wigs for skating programs except for a very few cases.
Mozalev's program was just too monotonous, it lacked something like a real plot, development, highlights.
Gumennik: It's difficult to transfer abstract art on the ice. He made a decent effort, but I did not find it very convincing. His costume was way too literal and at the same time said nothing. The skating was good, but skating and idea did not really come together for me. Maybe he would have to explain the movements and lighting concept to me, because to me it looked rather random.
Shanaeva/Drozd: It was nothing special, but I found the chemistry between them worked well, and I liked the choreo which emphasized their relationship. As a classic ice dance program it worked for me, nothing was out of place, although the background deco was mostly just background deco.
I really think Yagudin's program last year did almost everything right: there was one simple prop that was not just decoration or explanation but was used throughout and absolutely necessary for the program. There was unity of music, costume, skating, choreo. There was development and a highlight. It was not pretentious or Kitsch. It addressed the feelings of the viewer. Topic and skater together made sense and did not seem random. The skating was on point. Everyone could understand it.
The only negative of that program was that it was not original, but I think if you do a very good classic topic that's better than if the program is cringeworthy or looks random.
So, I was not fond of the programs I saw, but the skating level seemed high. It seems to me that while it is a fun and interesting idea to let people from other arts or non-experts judge the programs by different standards than figure skating judges would do, it's also something that just doesn't work. Vetlugin's program last year also showed that. I think Gordeeva/Grinkov is also a topic that even if you know about on a very superficial level does not at all have the meaning to someone outside of figure skating, so... Muravieva's was clearly one of the strongest programs I saw but if you cannot value her skating or the topic, of course it does not get the recognition. So, programs that refer to skating or skating history itself are not working with such judges.
But also in general, the quality of skating is just important for a more regular figure skating viewer. You cannot pretend it does not matter and that everyone can judge these programs by completely different metrics. Once you know what to look for, or if you are even a higher class skater yourself, you cannot ignore that, just as someone trained in classical music cannot not hear when there's bad piano playing or not appreciate when they hear the best playing.
that Master and Margarita! Is there fanpage here of Vasilisa and Maxim Nekrasov as a couple? I was really impressed by both by the elements and presentation.
