Funny isn't it.
I agree with roughly 90% of things you write on this forum but I have to say BB6 is up there with BB5 as my favourite ever series
I never really like a series where I don't have a favourite at all, and they were a dislikeable lot in BB6. I did quite like Kinga's desperate desire to cram an entire series worth of missed experiences into her short time in the house, but a lot of the time it was just a seething mass of bitching and moaning in there. And I loathed Derek for the way he treated Sam.
Caroline without Conor or infact a solid group of Insiders
I thought she had the potential to be an interesting and unique character, but she seemed so desperate to be a part of the popular group. So she tried her best to be associated with people like Conor and mocked anyone who wasn't in the in-group. It was really quite a sad state of affairs to see that sort of attitude and sure enough she took the fall before the people she aspired to be like.
I think it would have been much better for Caroline as a person, never mind as a housemate, if she had fallen among a nicer group of people. I think Conor, who was inarticulate, visibly got off on her bitching, and she reacted to his admiration by ramping it up in the hope of more. A very toxic friendship. And Scott was far too weak and passive to be good for her. She should have gone forward a year and tried to impress Dan instead - I can imagine it happening. He was vain and silly sometimes, but he wouldn't have encouraged her to new levels of spite, not at all.
David without Lisa. I liked David. I'd have liked him to interact more with everyone else. He started off well but in the end traipsing out behind Lisa to drink tea aand smoke was all he did. Ruined him, she did.
Alex Sibley without Tim. I loved Alex but I felt when Tim came in he sucked all the fun out of Alex. He went on and on about how inferior everyone else was and how Himself and Alex shouldn't associate with the others and Alex became miserable and surly, refusing to do tasks properly etc. I was glad when Tim went.
David without Lisa. I liked David. I'd have liked him to interact more with everyone else. He started off well but in the end traipsing out behind Lisa to drink tea aand smoke was all he did. Ruined him, she did.
I think he was doomed. There was a snobby element in the BB10 house, which is relatively unusual for BB. When Freddie got together with Bea (during the time they were friends) you could see them cackling together at the dreadful commonness of Lisa and David. (To be fair, I don't think Freddie's instincts were naturally snobbish; his head was turned by the pretty young heiress seeming to find him attractive.) And he was very provincial somehow: Charlie, for example, would never have been thrilled by a bus trip to London Town Centre; I think he was always going to look down on David, the council rag-picker, from the moment he walked in. And there was a vice versa element: David homed in onto Lisa like a heat-seeking missile, which I always thought was admirable: he knew, they all did, how unpopular she was , and he wanted to be friends with her because she was the one he related to. What would he talk about with that spoilt, idle young bunch of people?
BB7 without Pete = a series where the winner wasn't obvious right from the start
No Pete = No-one for Nikki to obsess over, no-one for Glyn to up his game up against in an attempt to win, no-one for Aisleyne to get close with and cause the fall-out with Nikki, no-one for Richard to bond with and try to piggyback a pre-supposed popularity with the viewers, no-one for Lea to get possessive over, no-one for Sezer and Grace to be disliked by and representing how the audience felt about them, no-one for Lisa to be all googly-eyed over etc. Basically, Pete was the vital cog of BB7.
Besides, BB2 and BB11 had winners that were obvious for weeks on end, so singling out BB7 for this is slightly unwarranted, seeing as many love that year.
*sharp intake of breath* I want to keep Aisleyne. ...
I refer you to the "without Freddie" part of why you wanted Karly without Freddie. I'm not saying the situation was exactly the same, but it was similar enough.
No Pete = No-one for Nikki to obsess over, no-one for Glyn to up his game up against in an attempt to win, no-one for Aisleyne to get close with and cause the fall-out with Nikki, no-one for Richard to bond with and try to piggyback a pre-supposed popularity with the viewers, no-one for Lea to get possessive over, no-one for Sezer and Grace to be disliked by and representing how the audience felt about them, no-one for Lisa to be all googly-eyed over etc. Basically, Pete was the vital cog of BB7.
Those (to the extent that they're even true) look like reasons to prefer bb7 without Pete to me.
Nicole coming in JUST to do the identification task would have been funny (and served Rex right really, the way he went on and on about My Girlfriend), but Nicole coming in as a housemate was a bad mistake. She just didn't want to be there, and watching her and Rex snipe and bicker was awful entertainment.
Noo, Makosi, Kemal and Derek are my three favourites I forgot Vanessa from my list too, she was great.
How on earth was Vanessa great?
Why is it your least favourite? I watched it not expecting much but I ended up greatly enjoying it and even more so than 5 and 7 I get the nastiness thing, but it's not that nasty at all and nothing is as bad as the Shabaz treatment in 7, Spitgate in 9 or Conor's treatment of Deana in 13.
It was that nasty, and the way Sam was treated for three weeks at least bears comparison to the things you mention. I think it was worse, when all's considered. The only thing that was especially nasty about "Spitgate" was Denis spitting, one brief incident; and Conor's "treatment of Deana" didn't involve doing anything especially nasty to her. The only thing that puts it in the list is the very nasty rant that Deana didn't hear.
...
And Lesley from Big Brother 6 in a different series, she was wasted in her series because of other females over-powering her, prime example, Makosi.
How was Lesley (one of the nastiest HMs ever picked, btw) over-powered by other females? Makosi had little effect on Lesley apart from sometimes encouraging her nastiness.
David without Lisa. I liked David. I'd have liked him to interact more with everyone else. He started off well but in the end traipsing out behind Lisa to drink tea aand smoke was all he did. Ruined him, she did.
I think he was doomed. There was a snobby element in the BB10 house, which is relatively unusual for BB. When Freddie got together with Bea (during the time they were friends) you could see them cackling together at the dreadful commonness of Lisa and David. (To be fair, I don't think Freddie's instincts were naturally snobbish; his head was turned by the pretty young heiress seeming to find him attractive.) And he was very provincial somehow: Charlie, for example, would never have been thrilled by a bus trip to London Town Centre; I think he was always going to look down on David, the council rag-picker, from the moment he walked in. And there was a vice versa element: David homed in onto Lisa like a heat-seeking missile, which I always thought was admirable: he knew, they all did, how unpopular she was , and he wanted to be friends with her because she was the one he related to. What would he talk about with that spoilt, idle young bunch of people?
What would he talk about with anyone?
The way you label everyone but David and Lisa spoilt and idle smacks of reverse snobbery and questionable assumptions. But I notice that the only HMs you actually name are Freddie, Bea, and Charlie. They weren't the only ones there.
She got on well with Lauren quite well in the first week until something happened (can't remember what) and then she nominated her almost every week...
Can anyone remember? It may have been something she could spread to other HMs, since in week 3 a bunch of HMs -- pretty much everyone who tended to spend a lot of time with Caroline -- nominated both Benedict and Lauren, and by then Caroline had clashed with Benedict.
4. Arron without Conor. Arron could be a massive tit, eg when he was hiding Deana's possessions. But it always felt like showing off for Conor. Away from Conor, he could be unexpectedly kind and thoughtful.
Totally agree about this he seemed like he wanted Conor to like him and would do anything to make him happy
The way you label everyone but David and Lisa spoilt and idle smacks of reverse snobbery and questionable assumptions. But I notice that the only HMs you actually name are Freddie, Bea, and Charlie. They weren't the only ones there.
No, but even by Big Brother standards it struck me as an idle house. (Marcus wasn't at all; and it was noticeable that he and Lisa, after fighting fiercely for weeks, seemed to end up at least respecting each other; he said twice after he was evicted that he wanted her to win.) As well as Freddie, who boasted about getting the dole as a bit of pocket money, and Bea, who boasted that she had been sacked from every job she had ever tried, we had Kenneth with his claims to live the life of an international playboy, 'yacht importer' Tom, reality tv contestant Isaac. Karly, whose modelling 'career' appeared to amount almost entirely to amateur work, Siavash, who was described as an 'events organiser', but who appeared to have no job other than going to clubs in fancy dress, and Angel, whose career could best be described as 'dilettante'. None of which would matter - I don't judge people by their jobs - except for the stomach-turning sight of Bea and Freddie cackling together about Lisa's inability to get a job, "because she can't drive! *snigger*" Maybe I shouldn't have lumped people together so much, but honestly it did seem to me that Lisa, Marcus and David were the only housemates ever to have done anything hard in their lives.
Why do you say he knew how unpopular Lisa was?
I don't see how he could not know. When Tom said that 'we all know Freddie is the most popular" (talking about the newcomers), it surely meant that they had watched the show and seen the responses on BBBM or the forums; indeed, it would be very odd not to imo if you were waiting to see if you were getting onto the show.
I liked her, I don't believe she was boring at all, especially in a series that included Orlaith and Eugene. I would much rather watch her than the likes of Maxwell, Saskia and Anthony..
It was that nasty, and the way Sam was treated for three weeks at least bears comparison to the things you mention. I think it was worse, when all's considered. The only thing that was especially nasty about "Spitgate" was Denis spitting, one brief incident; and Conor's "treatment of Deana" didn't involve doing anything especially nasty to her. The only thing that puts it in the list is the very nasty rant that Deana didn't hear.
There were only two things that stick out about the Sam incident - the make up bag and the threat in the garden. Both were bad and I felt sorry for her (certainly preferred here to Lesley) but it didn't seem as bad as the incidents I mentioned above. Often it seemed like two girls having an argument, similar to the Charley/Channelle or Gina/Hazel type of childish insults. As for the rest of the series, there was nastiness, but it seemed more even eg. the group divide, Science vs Derek, Makosi, Orlaith and Kemal turning on each other but it was entertaining because no one was being victimised.
I would like to say though, my first live series was BB9 and I only watched 5, 6 and 7 last year (as well as 8) hearing they were the best, so I didn't see any of the live feed.
No, but even by Big Brother standards it struck me as an idle house. (Marcus wasn't at all; and it was noticeable that he and Lisa, after fighting fiercely for weeks, seemed to end up at least respecting each other; he said twice after he was evicted that he wanted her to win.) As well as Freddie, who boasted about getting the dole as a bit of pocket money, and Bea, who boasted that she had been sacked from every job she had ever tried, we had Kenneth with his claims to live the life of an international playboy, 'yacht importer' Tom, reality tv contestant Isaac. Karly, whose modelling 'career' appeared to amount almost entirely to amateur work, Siavash, who was described as an 'events organiser', but who appeared to have no job other than going to clubs in fancy dress, and Angel, whose career could best be described as 'dilettante'. None of which would matter - I don't judge people by their jobs - except for the stomach-turning sight of Bea and Freddie cackling together about Lisa's inability to get a job, "because she can't drive! *snigger*" Maybe I shouldn't have lumped people together so much, but honestly it did seem to me that Lisa, Marcus and David were the only housemates ever to have done anything hard in their lives.
I notice that you leave Hira, Sophie, and Noirin out of the catalogue of idleness and assume without any good evidence that Angel, for instance, has never done anything hard in her life. If what you mean is that they haven't had working class jobs, perhaps you should say that instead.
In any case, why would any of that mean there wouldn't be anything for him to talk about with them? One of the things that people often think is good about BB is that it puts people with different interests and backgrounds together. If someone can't even talk with HMs across such differences, perhaps they shouldn't be picked as a HM.
Also, think of what HMs talk about. They often -- too often, imo -- talk about Big Brother, in one way or another, about things in the house, or auditions, or whatever. Presumably this is, in part, because it's something they have in common. Well, David would have it in common too.
There is the usual problem that many of them are from London, while he was from Yorkshire. But Rodrigo was from Manchester, Charlie from Newcastle, Sophie from Cheshire -- and in any case being from different places can give people things to talk about.
I don't know whether Siavash would be interested in Vivienne Westwood or not, but it certainly seems possible.
So to me, the idea that David wouldn't have anything to talk about with the other HMs seems rather odd.
Besides, what did he talk about with Lisa?
I don't see how he could not know. When Tom said that 'we all know Freddie is the most popular" (talking about the newcomers), it surely meant that they had watched the show and seen the responses on BBBM or the forums; indeed, it would be very odd not to imo if you were waiting to see if you were getting onto the show.
"We all know Freddie is the most popular" doesn't say anything about Lisa.
I'm not saying it was impossible for David to know, but for all we know, he didn't watch BBBM or he understood it differently; and is there any reason to think he read forums?
It seems to me that you describe it from very much your point of view. You think Lisa was unreasonably disliked, you've often defended her, and so a HM being friendly with her even though she was unpopular would seem admirable -- but for that to work, he'd have to know she was unpopular. So that comes in as an unquestioned assumption, "he knew, they all did, how unpopular she was."
Also, you attach a lot of significance to how "relatable" HMs are, as a reason for liking them, so when "David homed in onto Lisa" you see that as because "he wanted to be friends with her because she was the one he related to". For that to work, he has to not be able to relate to the others, hence the characterisation of them as spoilt, idle, etc. and "What would he talk about with that spoilt, idle young bunch of people?"
(Even if the were spoilt, etc, that's not all there is to them, so it has to be explained by you used those characteristics in particular.)
I liked her, I don't believe she was boring at all, especially in a series that included Orlaith and Eugene. I would much rather watch her than the likes of Maxwell, Saskia and Anthony..
There's plenty of room to be boring even if it's not as boring as Orlaith or Eugene; and preferring to watch her than likes of Maxwell, Saskia and Anthony isn't very strong praise either. But if you liked her a s HM, fair enough.
It would have been interesting to see what she'd have been like without Lesley. Sam tried to be friendly with Vanessa (and after the show, they met a few times at events, and Vanessa said she'd misjudged Sam). But during the show, when she seemed friendly back to Sam, Lesley took her to task, Vanessa replied that she did not like Sam and would be nominating her that week, BB took that as an opportunity to put everyone up, and so we got rid of Lesley. I have to like Vanessa a bit for that.
I also wonder whether Craig would have been so nasty without Lesley.
There were only two things that stick out about the Sam incident - the make up bag and the threat in the garden. Both were bad and I felt sorry for her (certainly preferred here to Lesley) but it didn't seem as bad as the incidents I mentioned above.
It may have seemed that way, especially since you didn't watch live, but there was a lot more to it than that, and I don't think it makes sense only to compare the peak nastiness of the worst incidents. It was never just "two girls". It was always a group against Sam. And I think it's quite wrong to see it as "two girls having an argument" as if both were equally at fault.
Often it seemed like two girls having an argument, similar to the Charley/Channelle or Gina/Hazel type of childish insults. As for the rest of the series, there was nastiness, but it seemed more even eg. the group divide, Science vs Derek, Makosi, Orlaith and Kemal turning on each other but it was entertaining because no one was being victimised.
Science was being targeted. Even Eugene made a very nasty suggestion.
But also, it was a house with seemingly endless bitching. Some of the HMs would spend hours at it most days. And it was the Makosi / Kemal / Lesley / Craig / Vanessa side that was by far the worst there. (Of course, Craig moved to the other side when Lesley left, but he was still pretty unpleasant.)
I would like to say though, my first live series was BB9 and I only watched 5, 6 and 7 last year (as well as 8) hearing they were the best, so I didn't see any of the live feed.
There's plenty of room to be boring even if it's not as boring as Orlaith or Eugene; and preferring to watch her than likes of Maxwell, Saskia and Anthony isn't very strong praise either. But if you liked her a s HM, fair enough.
It would have been interesting to see what she'd have been like without Lesley. Sam tried to be friendly with Vanessa (and after the show, they met a few times at events, and Vanessa said she'd misjudged Sam). But during the show, when she seemed friendly back to Sam, Lesley took her to task, Vanessa replied that she did not like Sam and would be nominating her that week, BB took that as an opportunity to put everyone up, and so we got rid of Lesley. I have to like Vanessa a bit for that.
I also wonder whether Craig would have been so nasty without Lesley.
It may have seemed that way, especially since you didn't watch live, but there was a lot more to it than that, and I don't think it makes sense only to compare the peak nastiness of the worst incidents. It was never just "two girls". It was always a group against Sam. And I think it's quite wrong to see it as "two girls having an argument" as if both were equally at fault.
Science was being targeted. Even Eugene made a very nasty suggestion.
But also, it was a house with seemingly endless bitching. Some of the HMs would spend hours at it most days. And it was the Makosi / Kemal / Lesley / Craig / Vanessa side that was by far the worst there. (Of course, Craig moved to the other side when Lesley left, but he was still pretty unpleasant.)
Re. Vanessa and Craig without Lesley - we did see them both for a good while without her in the house and I preferred them both without her - I started liking Vanessa more when she was with Makosi and Kemal and I never liked Craig much - although he was more entertaining with his love for Anthony than he was when with Lesley.
Re Lesley and Sam - I only have the HL show to go off but it seemed just Lesley with the attacks - Craig and Vanessa would often bitch too but never seemingly nasty to her face. Of course there was the make up bag night - in which I', happy to admit I was let down by my favourite, Makosi by just laying there and let it happen but then the next week Makosi and Kemal were including her and treating her really well. Who was the group that was "always against Sam"?
Re Science - he was awful in his last week imho, starting arguments with Orlaith, touching Derek in the dog task even when he asked Science to stop and running Kemal round the garden seemingly trying to irritate him. I'm not saying he deserved to be victimised - it's just not what I saw happen.
As for the bitching house, well I can't comment as I didn't watch live but they were a far better group than the awful Team Saskia imo who were as nasty as they were uninteresting. I don't include Lesley in that team btw as she never seemed that friendly with Makosi (she nominated her in week 1) and was gone by the time of the main division. I'm talking about Makosi, Kemal, Vanessa with Derek and Science sometimes - they made for more interesting housemates imo.
The way you label everyone but David and Lisa spoilt and idle smacks of reverse snobbery and questionable assumptions. But I notice that the only HMs you actually name are Freddie, Bea, and Charlie. They weren't the only ones there.
Why do you say he knew how unpopular Lisa was?
I wouldn't. Without them, Noirin might have been even more popular. (I did not like her as a housemate at all.)
I liked that he was a little older, didn't obsess about how he looked 24/7 and unlike the younger ones wasn't going on about his sex life and who fancies who all day and night. He was an ordinary person imo and its normal/ordinary people I want to see on BB. He also shared one thing with me, a love of Vivienne Westwood. I loved how he talked about her and got to meet her. I'd have liked him to have been more involved in the house in the latter stages. He seemed to just give up trying and the smoking became a real bore.
No Pete = No-one for Nikki to obsess over, no-one for Glyn to up his game up against in an attempt to win, no-one for Aisleyne to get close with and cause the fall-out with Nikki, no-one for Richard to bond with and try to piggyback a pre-supposed popularity with the viewers, no-one for Lea to get possessive over, no-one for Sezer and Grace to be disliked by and representing how the audience felt about them, no-one for Lisa to be all googly-eyed over etc. Basically, Pete was the vital cog of BB7.
Besides, BB2 and BB11 had winners that were obvious for weeks on end, so singling out BB7 for this is slightly unwarranted, seeing as many love that year.
I don't think he was particularly forthright in regards to Grace. I can think of two occasions when he didn't like what she did - one was when the girls were hating on Susie but Grace had to practically drag that opinion out of him when she asked him what was wrong and he still felt bad for criticizing them. The other was when Grace returned to the house when Pete hid in the bathroom until she was gone.
A fairly weak and spineless way of going about it.
Gos without Cameron/Steph.
I think Gos was able to be a lad with Ray/Scott/Federico, but he gradually gravitated towards a more adult group with Cameron/Steph and ended up a bit too withdrawn and serious for my liking. It's more Cameron than Steph, because like Gos, when the time for fun was there Steph knew how to let loose and have some fun (she probably got more hammered than anyone).
Victor without Jason.
They could both get pretty would up when it came to the game but I think the difference between them was that Victor could actually separate personal feelings from the game (tactically nominating Dan/Vanessa while Jason was gleefully waiting for Marco and Nadia to be up). Victor was able to drop his guard down and have fun with the group but Jason didn't have the social skills for that and gradually brought Victor down as the weeks went by. Although in the end, Jason was smart just to sit back and allowed Victor to talk himself out of the house.
Karly without Lisa.
I wasn't really that impressed with Karly, I just think she was sour and liked a good moan. However, sitting with Lisa was probably not a good idea as it gave her too much time to observe and think when she could have been with much livelier housemates and not constantly venting.
BB11 without John James
I've never seen a housemate so in-control of a series and what made it worse is that he didn't even seem to enjoy it half the time. It was very draining to watch.
Louise without Jay
Initially she seemed very smart and switched on, but then it's like she wanted to jump on the 'showmance' bandwagon. I felt like she dulled her shine to be a good fit for Jay and became more and more clueless and simple.
Caroline without Conor or infact a solid group of Insiders
I thought she had the potential to be an interesting and unique character, but she seemed so desperate to be a part of the popular group. So she tried her best to be associated with people like Conor and mocked anyone who wasn't in the in-group. It was really quite a sad state of affairs to see that sort of attitude and sure enough she took the fall before the people she aspired to be like.
In a way, despite the tightness between the two, the Jungle cats kind of played each other.
As for Caroline, that should be a lesson to her not to be a sheep in life, she should have her own mind and not be a weak individual.
Comments
Or alternatively...
BB7 without Pete = a series where the winner wasn't obvious right from the start
Yep, my feelings exactly.
I think it would have been much better for Caroline as a person, never mind as a housemate, if she had fallen among a nicer group of people. I think Conor, who was inarticulate, visibly got off on her bitching, and she reacted to his admiration by ramping it up in the hope of more. A very toxic friendship. And Scott was far too weak and passive to be good for her. She should have gone forward a year and tried to impress Dan instead - I can imagine it happening. He was vain and silly sometimes, but he wouldn't have encouraged her to new levels of spite, not at all.
Alex Sibley without Tim. I loved Alex but I felt when Tim came in he sucked all the fun out of Alex. He went on and on about how inferior everyone else was and how Himself and Alex shouldn't associate with the others and Alex became miserable and surly, refusing to do tasks properly etc. I was glad when Tim went.
I think he was doomed. There was a snobby element in the BB10 house, which is relatively unusual for BB. When Freddie got together with Bea (during the time they were friends) you could see them cackling together at the dreadful commonness of Lisa and David. (To be fair, I don't think Freddie's instincts were naturally snobbish; his head was turned by the pretty young heiress seeming to find him attractive.) And he was very provincial somehow: Charlie, for example, would never have been thrilled by a bus trip to London Town Centre; I think he was always going to look down on David, the council rag-picker, from the moment he walked in. And there was a vice versa element: David homed in onto Lisa like a heat-seeking missile, which I always thought was admirable: he knew, they all did, how unpopular she was , and he wanted to be friends with her because she was the one he related to. What would he talk about with that spoilt, idle young bunch of people?
Rex without Nicole
Rachael without JJ
No Pete = No-one for Nikki to obsess over, no-one for Glyn to up his game up against in an attempt to win, no-one for Aisleyne to get close with and cause the fall-out with Nikki, no-one for Richard to bond with and try to piggyback a pre-supposed popularity with the viewers, no-one for Lea to get possessive over, no-one for Sezer and Grace to be disliked by and representing how the audience felt about them, no-one for Lisa to be all googly-eyed over etc. Basically, Pete was the vital cog of BB7.
Besides, BB2 and BB11 had winners that were obvious for weeks on end, so singling out BB7 for this is slightly unwarranted, seeing as many love that year.
I refer you to the "without Freddie" part of why you wanted Karly without Freddie. I'm not saying the situation was exactly the same, but it was similar enough.
Those (to the extent that they're even true) look like reasons to prefer bb7 without Pete to me.
Nicole coming in JUST to do the identification task would have been funny (and served Rex right really, the way he went on and on about My Girlfriend), but Nicole coming in as a housemate was a bad mistake. She just didn't want to be there, and watching her and Rex snipe and bicker was awful entertainment.
How on earth was Vanessa great?
It was that nasty, and the way Sam was treated for three weeks at least bears comparison to the things you mention. I think it was worse, when all's considered. The only thing that was especially nasty about "Spitgate" was Denis spitting, one brief incident; and Conor's "treatment of Deana" didn't involve doing anything especially nasty to her. The only thing that puts it in the list is the very nasty rant that Deana didn't hear.
How was Lesley (one of the nastiest HMs ever picked, btw) over-powered by other females? Makosi had little effect on Lesley apart from sometimes encouraging her nastiness.
Why did you like him?
What would he talk about with anyone?
The way you label everyone but David and Lisa spoilt and idle smacks of reverse snobbery and questionable assumptions. But I notice that the only HMs you actually name are Freddie, Bea, and Charlie. They weren't the only ones there.
Why do you say he knew how unpopular Lisa was?
I wouldn't. Without them, Noirin might have been even more popular. (I did not like her as a housemate at all.)
Can anyone remember? It may have been something she could spread to other HMs, since in week 3 a bunch of HMs -- pretty much everyone who tended to spend a lot of time with Caroline -- nominated both Benedict and Lauren, and by then Caroline had clashed with Benedict.
Totally agree about this he seemed like he wanted Conor to like him and would do anything to make him happy
No, but even by Big Brother standards it struck me as an idle house. (Marcus wasn't at all; and it was noticeable that he and Lisa, after fighting fiercely for weeks, seemed to end up at least respecting each other; he said twice after he was evicted that he wanted her to win.) As well as Freddie, who boasted about getting the dole as a bit of pocket money, and Bea, who boasted that she had been sacked from every job she had ever tried, we had Kenneth with his claims to live the life of an international playboy, 'yacht importer' Tom, reality tv contestant Isaac. Karly, whose modelling 'career' appeared to amount almost entirely to amateur work, Siavash, who was described as an 'events organiser', but who appeared to have no job other than going to clubs in fancy dress, and Angel, whose career could best be described as 'dilettante'. None of which would matter - I don't judge people by their jobs - except for the stomach-turning sight of Bea and Freddie cackling together about Lisa's inability to get a job, "because she can't drive! *snigger*" Maybe I shouldn't have lumped people together so much, but honestly it did seem to me that Lisa, Marcus and David were the only housemates ever to have done anything hard in their lives.
I don't see how he could not know. When Tom said that 'we all know Freddie is the most popular" (talking about the newcomers), it surely meant that they had watched the show and seen the responses on BBBM or the forums; indeed, it would be very odd not to imo if you were waiting to see if you were getting onto the show.
I liked her, I don't believe she was boring at all, especially in a series that included Orlaith and Eugene. I would much rather watch her than the likes of Maxwell, Saskia and Anthony..
There were only two things that stick out about the Sam incident - the make up bag and the threat in the garden. Both were bad and I felt sorry for her (certainly preferred here to Lesley) but it didn't seem as bad as the incidents I mentioned above. Often it seemed like two girls having an argument, similar to the Charley/Channelle or Gina/Hazel type of childish insults. As for the rest of the series, there was nastiness, but it seemed more even eg. the group divide, Science vs Derek, Makosi, Orlaith and Kemal turning on each other but it was entertaining because no one was being victimised.
I would like to say though, my first live series was BB9 and I only watched 5, 6 and 7 last year (as well as 8) hearing they were the best, so I didn't see any of the live feed.
I notice that you leave Hira, Sophie, and Noirin out of the catalogue of idleness and assume without any good evidence that Angel, for instance, has never done anything hard in her life. If what you mean is that they haven't had working class jobs, perhaps you should say that instead.
In any case, why would any of that mean there wouldn't be anything for him to talk about with them? One of the things that people often think is good about BB is that it puts people with different interests and backgrounds together. If someone can't even talk with HMs across such differences, perhaps they shouldn't be picked as a HM.
Also, think of what HMs talk about. They often -- too often, imo -- talk about Big Brother, in one way or another, about things in the house, or auditions, or whatever. Presumably this is, in part, because it's something they have in common. Well, David would have it in common too.
There is the usual problem that many of them are from London, while he was from Yorkshire. But Rodrigo was from Manchester, Charlie from Newcastle, Sophie from Cheshire -- and in any case being from different places can give people things to talk about.
I don't know whether Siavash would be interested in Vivienne Westwood or not, but it certainly seems possible.
So to me, the idea that David wouldn't have anything to talk about with the other HMs seems rather odd.
Besides, what did he talk about with Lisa?
"We all know Freddie is the most popular" doesn't say anything about Lisa.
I'm not saying it was impossible for David to know, but for all we know, he didn't watch BBBM or he understood it differently; and is there any reason to think he read forums?
It seems to me that you describe it from very much your point of view. You think Lisa was unreasonably disliked, you've often defended her, and so a HM being friendly with her even though she was unpopular would seem admirable -- but for that to work, he'd have to know she was unpopular. So that comes in as an unquestioned assumption, "he knew, they all did, how unpopular she was."
Also, you attach a lot of significance to how "relatable" HMs are, as a reason for liking them, so when "David homed in onto Lisa" you see that as because "he wanted to be friends with her because she was the one he related to". For that to work, he has to not be able to relate to the others, hence the characterisation of them as spoilt, idle, etc. and "What would he talk about with that spoilt, idle young bunch of people?"
(Even if the were spoilt, etc, that's not all there is to them, so it has to be explained by you used those characteristics in particular.)
There's plenty of room to be boring even if it's not as boring as Orlaith or Eugene; and preferring to watch her than likes of Maxwell, Saskia and Anthony isn't very strong praise either. But if you liked her a s HM, fair enough.
It would have been interesting to see what she'd have been like without Lesley. Sam tried to be friendly with Vanessa (and after the show, they met a few times at events, and Vanessa said she'd misjudged Sam). But during the show, when she seemed friendly back to Sam, Lesley took her to task, Vanessa replied that she did not like Sam and would be nominating her that week, BB took that as an opportunity to put everyone up, and so we got rid of Lesley. I have to like Vanessa a bit for that.
I also wonder whether Craig would have been so nasty without Lesley.
It may have seemed that way, especially since you didn't watch live, but there was a lot more to it than that, and I don't think it makes sense only to compare the peak nastiness of the worst incidents. It was never just "two girls". It was always a group against Sam. And I think it's quite wrong to see it as "two girls having an argument" as if both were equally at fault.
Science was being targeted. Even Eugene made a very nasty suggestion.
But also, it was a house with seemingly endless bitching. Some of the HMs would spend hours at it most days. And it was the Makosi / Kemal / Lesley / Craig / Vanessa side that was by far the worst there. (Of course, Craig moved to the other side when Lesley left, but he was still pretty unpleasant.)
Re. Vanessa and Craig without Lesley - we did see them both for a good while without her in the house and I preferred them both without her - I started liking Vanessa more when she was with Makosi and Kemal and I never liked Craig much - although he was more entertaining with his love for Anthony than he was when with Lesley.
Re Lesley and Sam - I only have the HL show to go off but it seemed just Lesley with the attacks - Craig and Vanessa would often bitch too but never seemingly nasty to her face. Of course there was the make up bag night - in which I', happy to admit I was let down by my favourite, Makosi by just laying there and let it happen but then the next week Makosi and Kemal were including her and treating her really well. Who was the group that was "always against Sam"?
Re Science - he was awful in his last week imho, starting arguments with Orlaith, touching Derek in the dog task even when he asked Science to stop and running Kemal round the garden seemingly trying to irritate him. I'm not saying he deserved to be victimised - it's just not what I saw happen.
As for the bitching house, well I can't comment as I didn't watch live but they were a far better group than the awful Team Saskia imo who were as nasty as they were uninteresting. I don't include Lesley in that team btw as she never seemed that friendly with Makosi (she nominated her in week 1) and was gone by the time of the main division. I'm talking about Makosi, Kemal, Vanessa with Derek and Science sometimes - they made for more interesting housemates imo.
I liked that he was a little older, didn't obsess about how he looked 24/7 and unlike the younger ones wasn't going on about his sex life and who fancies who all day and night. He was an ordinary person imo and its normal/ordinary people I want to see on BB. He also shared one thing with me, a love of Vivienne Westwood. I loved how he talked about her and got to meet her. I'd have liked him to have been more involved in the house in the latter stages. He seemed to just give up trying and the smoking became a real bore.
For the many who enjoyed BB7, thankfully he was there.
I don't think he was particularly forthright in regards to Grace. I can think of two occasions when he didn't like what she did - one was when the girls were hating on Susie but Grace had to practically drag that opinion out of him when she asked him what was wrong and he still felt bad for criticizing them. The other was when Grace returned to the house when Pete hid in the bathroom until she was gone.
A fairly weak and spineless way of going about it.
In a way, despite the tightness between the two, the Jungle cats kind of played each other.
As for Caroline, that should be a lesson to her not to be a sheep in life, she should have her own mind and not be a weak individual.