See thats where Davina and co missed a trick, they should have been celebrating the fact that someone like Rachel could go on BB and WIN, someone who was a normal everyday girl, who loved Big Brother and who gave her all in the tasks.Someone who was thrilled to be there, kind, caring,tolerant and determined to be herself and not fall in with the crowd.
She was fun and upbeat, she took a beating verbally from the others for not lowering herself to their level, she was bullied and set upon by a lot of the others, even those she thought of as friends, she was loyal and had her own agenda, which was to be herself no matter what.
She was not seeking fame or fortune from her appearance on there....she simply wanted to live the experience and go back to her life which was full and rewarding, and thats exactly what she did.
Unlike many others before and after who went on there to seek fame, even the Z list kind of fame she shunned the nuts mags etc because she wanted to be able to continue in her chosen career of teaching, which she has done, now to me I think ''people like her are what BB should have been about, not throwing in a mish mash of people who have insecurities and difficult likestyles to showcase, not people who just wanted to get in a showmance and then hang around for years not having any talent except getting pi**ed up in clubs etc.
The reason BB has failed is because of people like Davina, who constantly try to shove showmance down our throats and big up all the fakery and turn it into soap opera style trash, not the taking part and winning of a lovely lass like Rachel who after all thanks to the voting public....stuck it right up the rear of Davina and her crew for trying to fool everyone in their fake scenarios, Davina and production did their upmost to bring her down in the publics eye and we were having none of it, best ever winner of BB and the most satisfying one too imo.
All perfectly fine traits to have, but there's absolutely nothing there that many, many other hm's over the years didn't have, but they did not come anyhwere near winning and also did not deserve to come anywhere near winning. The fact that someone like Rachel won a series says much more about that particular series than it does about Rachel as a hm.
Imho, the reason why Davina was against Rachel is that she could probably sense that the final nail in BB's coffin had been nailed in when someone like her can win BB. EVERYONE knew that game was up after BB9 and Rachel somehow becoming central to that series was a significant factor for it being another disaster for BB.
I can fully understand why Davina held a grude against someone who hepled kill off a show that she had given her heart and soul to for a decade.
Not really. BB9 is considered generally, by people on DS, polls etc... as one of the best series. It had nothing to do with poor series, it was just who the public liked. I mean, people always say "A boring person can't win BB because it's a vote to save/win", but somehow all those people happened to pick Rachel over everyone else. She must have done something correctly.
What I did not like was the way they portrayed her in the HL shows. I remember watching hours of LF (yes, i'm sad) and watching her interact and have a laugh with the HMs, come out with some witty jokes, and she was ENTERTAINING. One bit that always sticks in my mind, was when she was dressed as a cupcake, and she was on the floor for around an hour, no one around her, and she was muttering to herself while trying to get up... screams of "Help!" and what she was saying to herself... instead on the HLs, they showed her talking about grapes...
And you can say whatever you want... but this is when the complete power was stolen of us, no more 24/7 LF red button, do we know why? Yes, because they did not want someone like Rachel to win again, because WE decided, they succeeded in making us "love" their faves (Nadia, Pete, Brian), but when we decided for ourselves and chose our OWN winner, which pissed the producers off and they took away LF. (as that's what us hardcore fans based our votes on)
Rachel was NOT treated as a winner by Davina on the interview or BBBM. Even last year, George Lamb made a joke about how boring she was. Well she won... get over it.
Not really. BB9 is considered generally, by people on DS, polls etc... as one of the best series. It had nothing to do with poor series, it was just who the public liked. I mean, people always say "A boring person can't win BB because it's a vote to save/win", but somehow all those people happened to pick Rachel over everyone else. She must have done something correctly.
What I did not like was the way they portrayed her in the HL shows. I remember watching hours of LF (yes, i'm sad) and watching her interact and have a laugh with the HMs, come out with some witty jokes, and she was ENTERTAINING. One bit that always sticks in my mind, was when she was dressed as a cupcake, and she was on the floor for around an hour, no one around her, and she was muttering to herself while trying to get up... screams of "Help!" and what she was saying to herself... instead on the HLs, they showed her talking about grapes...
And you can say whatever you want... but this is when the complete power was stolen of us, no more 24/7 LF red button, do we know why? Yes, because they did not want someone like Rachel to win again, because WE decided, they succeeded in making us "love" their faves (Nadia, Pete, Brian), but when we decided for ourselves and chose our OWN winner, which pissed the producers off and they took away LF. (as that's what us hardcore fans based our votes on)
Rachel was NOT treated as a winner by Davina on the interview or BBBM. Even last year, George Lamb made a joke about how boring she was. Well she won... get over it.
Keep in mind that BB9 was THE last ever series with 24/7 LF. Most viewers watching LF knew for themselves that Rachel was a better HM than how she was seen on the HL show.
See thats where Davina and co missed a trick, they should have been celebrating the fact that someone like Rachel could go on BB and WIN, someone who was a normal everyday girl, who loved Big Brother and who gave her all in the tasks.Someone who was thrilled to be there, kind, caring,tolerant and determined to be herself and not fall in with the crowd.
She was fun and upbeat, she took a beating verbally from the others for not lowering herself to their level, she was bullied and set upon by a lot of the others, even those she thought of as friends, she was loyal and had her own agenda, which was to be herself no matter what.
She was not seeking fame or fortune from her appearance on there....she simply wanted to live the experience and go back to her life which was full and rewarding, and thats exactly what she did.
Unlike many others before and after who went on there to seek fame, even the Z list kind of fame she shunned the nuts mags etc because she wanted to be able to continue in her chosen career of teaching, which she has done, now to me I think ''people like her are what BB should have been about, not throwing in a mish mash of people who have insecurities and difficult likestyles to showcase, not people who just wanted to get in a showmance and then hang around for years not having any talent except getting pi**ed up in clubs etc.
The reason BB has failed is because of people like Davina, who constantly try to shove showmance down our throats and big up all the fakery and turn it into soap opera style trash, not the taking part and winning of a lovely lass like Rachel who after all thanks to the voting public....stuck it right up the rear of Davina and her crew for trying to fool everyone in their fake scenarios, Davina and production did their upmost to bring her down in the publics eye and we were having none of it, best ever winner of BB and the most satisfying one too imo.
BB would have died within a couple of years if the likes of Rachel were central to what went on in a series.
The facts spoke for themselves with BB9 and it's hm's making zero impact beyond a percentage of the remaining hardcore who bothered to watch.
From 'Nasty Nick' onwards, BB became the show it was because it consistently threw up unusual characters the like of which we don't bump into everyday of the week.
You could put tv cameras in millions of homes and get the same or a much higher level of 'entertainmnet' that Rachel managed to give in her 3 months in the house.
When given a 'normal' central figure the show got its lowest ever ratings and sank without trace. It also had the unthinkable sound of the winner booed on finals night and given the most lukewarm reception of any winner before or since.
You Rachel fans totally refuse to look at the hard facts about BB9'S rotten failure. As i said, those facts speak for themselves.
She was a total disaster for BB!!!
Not really. BB9 is considered generally, by people on DS, polls etc... as one of the best series.
Total rubbish!
Every large poll conducted has BB9 down amongst the worst series. Yes, it does beat the likes of 8, 10 and 11, but that's not saying much.
Keep in mind that BB9 was THE last ever series with 24/7 LF. Most viewers watching LF knew for themselves that Rachel was a better HM than how she was seen on the HL show.
Having slagged off BB9 and Rachel [think i need a new years resalution to stop this ] i would like to answer the OP's question.
I loved Steph and was gutted she went so early. As with Anoushka, It was a disaster for that series! Imho, had Steph stayed she might well have gone on to be one of the alltime legends of BB.
Other than her i quiet liked Lisa, but she was a bit too dull and lazy to be a big fav of mine.
Mikey, had a nice, sarcastic sense of humour and didn't like Rex, so another plus in his favour.
The rest were just appalling!
On a more serious note, I think Rachel winning gave them the excuse they needed of taking away the LF for the next few series and then to get rid of the show
I didn't like her winning but she didn't deserve the interviews or the treatment she got afterwards
It's just a shame the producers decided to throw their toys out of the pram and take away the one thing that let the public actually decide the winner instead of being told who should win
BB would have died within a couple of years if the likes of Rachel were central to what went on in a series.
The facts spoke for themselves with BB9 and it's hm's making zero impact beyond a percentage of the remaining hardcore who bothered to watch.
From 'Nasty Nick' onwards, BB became the show it was because it consistently threw up unusual characters the like of which we don't bump into everyday of the week.
You could put tv cameras in millions of homes and get the same or a much higher level of 'entertainmnet' that Rachel managed to give in her 3 months in the house.
When given a 'normal' central figure the show got its lowest ever ratings and sank without trace. It also had the unthinkable sound of the winner booed on finals night and given the most lukewarm reception of any winner before or since.
You Rachel fans totally refuse to look at the hard facts about BB9'S rotten failure. As i said, those facts speak for themselves. She was a total disaster for BB!!!
Dixon, I beg to differ.
The real total disaster for BB was Sharon Powers, the producer responsible for giving us BB9's Alexandra, Dennis, Jennifer, Luke, Rebecca, Dale, & Nicole.
So therefore, you can NOT Rachel for being a far better human being than any of those characters that I mentioned.
The real total disaster for BB was Sharon Powers, the producer responsible for giving us BB9's Alexandra, Dennis, Jennifer, Luke, Rebecca, Dale, & Nicole.
So therefore, you can NOT Rachel for being a far better human being than any of those characters that I mentioned.
I won't argue for second that Rachel wasn't better person than those you mentioned, but imho that doesn't make her any better a hm than them.
Personally, i never watched BB to see a load of nice people being nice. If i find a person interesting/entertaining to watch then as far as i'm concerned they are good hm and several in BB6 fit that catagory for me.
As i said before, BB would never have become the show that it was if it had Rachel types as the central figure in a series, and here's the facts prove this point beyond doubt!
Up until Nasty Nick started to do his dirty tricks BB1 was fairly dull with just a lot of fairly nice people being failry nice to eachother. It was Nick becoming twisted that got people talking.
BB2 was all about the OTT Brian.
It was Jade, not the 'normal' Sophie and Lee that was making front page news during BB3.
Nadia, Michelle and Victor were what made BB5 tick, not Chicken Stu and Shell.
Craig and Makosi were the ones who made BB6, not Vanessa and Roberto.
Shabaz, Nikki, Pete were who people were talking about in BB7, not Mikey and Imogen.
You will notice that the one series i haven't mentioned is BB4. That series was generally seen as the only poor and boring one amongst the first 7 years and as with BB9 it had a nice but dull person central to the series. Too much of a coincidence that outside the hardcore fanbase both series pretty much sank without trace, though obviously BB4 got better ratings than 9 did,
Without the unusual, colourful, OTT characters at the fore a series of BB will always flop!
BB would have died within a couple of years if the likes of Rachel were central to what went on in a series.
The facts spoke for themselves with BB9 and it's hm's making zero impact beyond a percentage of the remaining hardcore who bothered to watch.
From 'Nasty Nick' onwards, BB became the show it was because it consistently threw up unusual characters the like of which we don't bump into everyday of the week.
You could put tv cameras in millions of homes and get the same or a much higher level of 'entertainmnet' that Rachel managed to give in her 3 months in the house.
When given a 'normal' central figure the show got its lowest ever ratings and sank without trace. It also had the unthinkable sound of the winner booed on finals night and given the most lukewarm reception of any winner before or since.
You Rachel fans totally refuse to look at the hard facts about BB9'S rotten failure. As i said, those facts speak for themselves. She was a total disaster for BB!!![/QUOTE]]
Get a life!!!
Rachel was a super hm and the voting public identified with her.
What gets me about muppets who hated her for being the 'downfall of BB' is that they continued to watch (and post) about the 'waste of space' that forced them to tune in!!
I thought that BB11 was a pile of sh!te and as a consequence I could not be bothered to watch much of the hl show. Therefore I guess that what sticks most in the throat of the anti Rachel numpties is the fact that the girl won the show on her terms !!!
I guess that what sticks most in the throat of the anti Rachel numpties is the fact that the girl won the show on her terms !!!
So are you suggesting there were other winners who ddin't win on their own terms? If so name names!
If 'Rachel's terms' were to go through three months without ever daring to say or do a single thing that might just offend a single viewer then she did just that.
Imho, taking zero chances with upsetting viewers is more playing safe to the galleries than doing it on your own terms.
Imho, it's the likes of Brain, Kate, Pete, Anthony and Nadia that won BB on their own terms. They took chances and said and did exactly what they wanted to do regardless of what the public might think of them. You simply can't say that about the ultra conservative Rachel.
Total rubbish!
Every large poll conducted has BB9 down amongst the worst series. Yes, it does beat the likes of 8, 10 and 11, but that's not saying much.
In a poll here last year, it was 3rd place behind BB5 and BB3. Same story on The Sun website and TiBB.
BB5 and BB9 were definitely made exciting by the fact there were two major cliques in the house who despised the other group. But in BB5, both cliques managed to get themselves in a strong position at one time or another and it ended up as a battle that went right down to the wire at the final 2. Whereas in BB9, one clique totally wiped out the other one, which did make it deeply satisfying if you supported them, which I think pretty much everybody did as the other group were rather loathsome.
Towards the end, the clique had no real enemies so their 'underdog' status kind of expired, and deeper facets of their characters came out, which kind of proved divisive to some viewers. Though people still felt a certainly loyalty to the clique and I think Rachel secured victory as she, along with Mohamed, were probably the most abused housemates and therefore biggest underdogs throughout the series.
Get a life!!!
Rachel was a super hm and the voting public identified with her.
What gets me about muppets who hated her for being the 'downfall of BB' is that they continued to watch (and post) about the 'waste of space' that forced them to tune in!!
I thought that BB11 was a pile of sh!te and as a consequence I could not be bothered to watch much of the hl show. Therefore I guess that what sticks most in the throat of the anti Rachel numpties is the fact that the girl won the show on her terms !!!
I certainly didn't hate her, I just think her winning was the reason the LF went
Davina didn't have to say Rachel was the worst winner ever, you could see in Davina's eyes how much she hated Rachel winning.
She couldn't wait to stick the knife into Rachel when she won but Sophie was just as bad a winner the following year and yet Davina couldn't stop patting her on the back and telling her what a wonderful winner she was
Conveniently they come up with a flimsy excuse to take away the LF for about 3 series just so they can get the winners they wanted as it really stuck in their craw someone normal-ish could and did win
The baddies of BB9 got exactly what they deserved and only had themselves to blame for them being evicted and in Alexandra's and Dennis's cases ejected
In a poll here last year, it was 3rd place behind BB5 and BB3. Same story on The Sun website and TiBB.
I do remember one poll on here just after BB9 ended in which it did failry well, but that was only one poll. But in all my time here i must have seens dozens of polls [including the last failry large one] which has BB9 amongst the worst series beating only the likes of 4, 8, 10 and 11. It has always been miles behind the likes of, 5, 7 and 3.
I have no idea what TIBB is so can't comment on that, but i have seen countless polls in all the tabloids and mags that suppported BB, and as expected they always show exactly the same results with 5, 3, 7 and sometimes 2 [largely down to Brian] in the top 3. BB7 even topped 5 in the poll conducted by C4 this year, with BB9 nowhere in sight.
It would be ludicrous to find a series and it's hm's that made so little impact during and after it's run to be rated up their amogst the best. It would be the same as seeing a series like BB3 be rated down there amongst the worst. It just wouldn't add up to the impact and popularity that series had.
I will give it that 9 generally rated better than 4, 8, 10 and 11 but any unbiased person would accept that it's always been rated well below series like 2. 3, 5 and 7. And i say that as someone who swicthed off the dire BB2 much sooner than i did with BB9.
I won't argue for second that Rachel wasn't better person than those you mentioned, but imho that doesn't make her any better a hm than them.
Personally, i never watched BB to see a load of nice people being nice. If i find a person interesting/entertaining to watch then as far as i'm concerned they are good hm and several in BB6 fit that catagory for me.
!
A BB series surely needs a mix of nice and nasty. And the great thing about the nasty housemates is watching them go with their tails between their legs. Of course Rachel couldn't have carried a series on her own, but BB9 had plenty of villains. Irrespective of the viewing figures, I loved BB9. It really felt like a medieval morality play, with one obnoxious person after another biting the dust until we were left with the one unequivocally good person at the end.
Steph may have been likeable but the task she got made it hard for her and meant she was evicted early.
She had NO chance. :mad::( No one was ever going to vote Luke or Lisa out, so it was a straight vote between her and Mario. How was that fair, in the first week? Poor Steph didn't have one single day in the house that wasn't overshadowed by the objectionable task. Why on earth didn't they pair Mario up with someone who wouldn't have given a damn? Mario and Sara faking a romance would have been funny; Mario and the very young, repulsed Steph was just gross and awful.
A BB series surely needs a mix of nice and nasty. And the great thing about the nasty housemates is watching them go with their tails between their legs. Of course Rachel couldn't have carried a series on her own, but BB9 had plenty of villains. Irrespective of the viewing figures, I loved BB9. It really felt like a medieval morality play, with one obnoxious person after another biting the dust until we were left with the one unequivocally good person at the end.
The problem for me with BB9 was that i found the so-called villians of BB9 just plain tedious to watch and the so-called goodies even more staggeringly dull and boring.
There's also a bit of hypocrisy in that series with the likes of Darnell and Rex being seen as part of the good guys, yet both were bullies. We also had one of the good guys [Mo] carry out the most disgusting, desperate, pathetic, degrading act ever seen in BB when he ate a bogey for a tin of beer. So he hardly holds any moral highground either.
Imo, it was an atrociously cast series filled with people with absolutely zero charisma. Lazy dullards who spent half their time in the bedroom whinging about how boring it was and how happy they would be to be evicted:( The option was to watch to grown women [Kat and Rachle] act like children singing pathetic songs and have interesting chats about grapes and chickpeas. Listen to Darnell, the most nausiating, self-pitying bore to have ever been in the house, and watch Mo, who was nothing better than BB9's answer to Gos.:yawn::yawn::yawn:
After a very good first week [imo, a much better first week than 3 or 5 ] i sat there night after night for the next four weeks bored out of mind watching the most miserable, tedious, and horrible BB i'd ever seen.
It could not possibly have been further away from the kind of BB that i liked to watch.:(
BB6 had classic hm's - Makosi, Craig, Derek.
It had really great villains in Saskia and Maxwell.
It had Maxwell go from early series hero and cert to win to being booed to high heaven upon his memorable eviction.
All it lacked was Kinga not being in there from the start.
She alone gave that series a water cooler moment the likes of which the entire BB9 cast couldn't muster between them in 3 months..
I think BB9 had some of the most vile characters in ANY reality show ever, let alone just Big Brother. Davina was incredibly irritating and biased in that series too. Ugh, makes me mad just thinking about it :mad: Thankfully, one of the few nice people in there won.
There's also a bit of hypocrisy in that series with the likes of Darnell and Rex being seen as part of the good guys, yet both were bullies.
I don't really like one-word labels. Both Rex and Darnell were a mixture of good and bad. I thought Rex carried the series actually. He was a strange cookie, but charismatic.
We also had one of the good guys [Mo] carry out the most disgusting, desperate, pathetic, degrading act ever seen in BB when he ate a bogey for a tin of beer. So he hardly holds any moral highground either.
Oh dear. I liked Mo. And honestly, that was the sort of juvenile dare that happens in any student bar, any day. I never understood why people acted as if it was fantastically awful. There are a million worse things on you tube, and I am old enough to remember 'The Word' and people queuing up to drink glasses of vomit etc.
Comments
Well said.
Not really. BB9 is considered generally, by people on DS, polls etc... as one of the best series. It had nothing to do with poor series, it was just who the public liked. I mean, people always say "A boring person can't win BB because it's a vote to save/win", but somehow all those people happened to pick Rachel over everyone else. She must have done something correctly.
What I did not like was the way they portrayed her in the HL shows. I remember watching hours of LF (yes, i'm sad) and watching her interact and have a laugh with the HMs, come out with some witty jokes, and she was ENTERTAINING. One bit that always sticks in my mind, was when she was dressed as a cupcake, and she was on the floor for around an hour, no one around her, and she was muttering to herself while trying to get up... screams of "Help!" and what she was saying to herself... instead on the HLs, they showed her talking about grapes...
And you can say whatever you want... but this is when the complete power was stolen of us, no more 24/7 LF red button, do we know why? Yes, because they did not want someone like Rachel to win again, because WE decided, they succeeded in making us "love" their faves (Nadia, Pete, Brian), but when we decided for ourselves and chose our OWN winner, which pissed the producers off and they took away LF. (as that's what us hardcore fans based our votes on)
Rachel was NOT treated as a winner by Davina on the interview or BBBM. Even last year, George Lamb made a joke about how boring she was. Well she won... get over it.
Keep in mind that BB9 was THE last ever series with 24/7 LF. Most viewers watching LF knew for themselves that Rachel was a better HM than how she was seen on the HL show.
BB would have died within a couple of years if the likes of Rachel were central to what went on in a series.
The facts spoke for themselves with BB9 and it's hm's making zero impact beyond a percentage of the remaining hardcore who bothered to watch.
From 'Nasty Nick' onwards, BB became the show it was because it consistently threw up unusual characters the like of which we don't bump into everyday of the week.
You could put tv cameras in millions of homes and get the same or a much higher level of 'entertainmnet' that Rachel managed to give in her 3 months in the house.
When given a 'normal' central figure the show got its lowest ever ratings and sank without trace. It also had the unthinkable sound of the winner booed on finals night and given the most lukewarm reception of any winner before or since.
You Rachel fans totally refuse to look at the hard facts about BB9'S rotten failure. As i said, those facts speak for themselves.
She was a total disaster for BB!!!
Total rubbish!
Every large poll conducted has BB9 down amongst the worst series. Yes, it does beat the likes of 8, 10 and 11, but that's not saying much.
The rest - no thanks. Great to watch them all being kicked out or voted out. Steph was the only one who I felt went before her time.
A sub-par series with a few classic moments.
OOPS no it wasn't -
actually BB11/UBB had 24/7 LF too
I loved Steph and was gutted she went so early. As with Anoushka, It was a disaster for that series! Imho, had Steph stayed she might well have gone on to be one of the alltime legends of BB.
Other than her i quiet liked Lisa, but she was a bit too dull and lazy to be a big fav of mine.
Mikey, had a nice, sarcastic sense of humour and didn't like Rex, so another plus in his favour.
The rest were just appalling!
Never gets old
On a more serious note, I think Rachel winning gave them the excuse they needed of taking away the LF for the next few series and then to get rid of the show
I didn't like her winning but she didn't deserve the interviews or the treatment she got afterwards
It's just a shame the producers decided to throw their toys out of the pram and take away the one thing that let the public actually decide the winner instead of being told who should win
oops....sorry that's what happens when I'm rushing and tired.
I knew about UBB (I watched it!), but not about BB11. And of course, I boycotted the 24/7 LF-less BB10.
Dixon, I beg to differ.
The real total disaster for BB was Sharon Powers, the producer responsible for giving us BB9's Alexandra, Dennis, Jennifer, Luke, Rebecca, Dale, & Nicole.
So therefore, you can NOT Rachel for being a far better human being than any of those characters that I mentioned.
I won't argue for second that Rachel wasn't better person than those you mentioned, but imho that doesn't make her any better a hm than them.
Personally, i never watched BB to see a load of nice people being nice. If i find a person interesting/entertaining to watch then as far as i'm concerned they are good hm and several in BB6 fit that catagory for me.
As i said before, BB would never have become the show that it was if it had Rachel types as the central figure in a series, and here's the facts prove this point beyond doubt!
Up until Nasty Nick started to do his dirty tricks BB1 was fairly dull with just a lot of fairly nice people being failry nice to eachother. It was Nick becoming twisted that got people talking.
BB2 was all about the OTT Brian.
It was Jade, not the 'normal' Sophie and Lee that was making front page news during BB3.
Nadia, Michelle and Victor were what made BB5 tick, not Chicken Stu and Shell.
Craig and Makosi were the ones who made BB6, not Vanessa and Roberto.
Shabaz, Nikki, Pete were who people were talking about in BB7, not Mikey and Imogen.
You will notice that the one series i haven't mentioned is BB4. That series was generally seen as the only poor and boring one amongst the first 7 years and as with BB9 it had a nice but dull person central to the series. Too much of a coincidence that outside the hardcore fanbase both series pretty much sank without trace, though obviously BB4 got better ratings than 9 did,
Without the unusual, colourful, OTT characters at the fore a series of BB will always flop!
So are you suggesting there were other winners who ddin't win on their own terms? If so name names!
If 'Rachel's terms' were to go through three months without ever daring to say or do a single thing that might just offend a single viewer then she did just that.
Imho, taking zero chances with upsetting viewers is more playing safe to the galleries than doing it on your own terms.
Imho, it's the likes of Brain, Kate, Pete, Anthony and Nadia that won BB on their own terms. They took chances and said and did exactly what they wanted to do regardless of what the public might think of them. You simply can't say that about the ultra conservative Rachel.
In a poll here last year, it was 3rd place behind BB5 and BB3. Same story on The Sun website and TiBB.
Towards the end, the clique had no real enemies so their 'underdog' status kind of expired, and deeper facets of their characters came out, which kind of proved divisive to some viewers. Though people still felt a certainly loyalty to the clique and I think Rachel secured victory as she, along with Mohamed, were probably the most abused housemates and therefore biggest underdogs throughout the series.
I certainly didn't hate her, I just think her winning was the reason the LF went
Davina didn't have to say Rachel was the worst winner ever, you could see in Davina's eyes how much she hated Rachel winning.
She couldn't wait to stick the knife into Rachel when she won but Sophie was just as bad a winner the following year and yet Davina couldn't stop patting her on the back and telling her what a wonderful winner she was
Conveniently they come up with a flimsy excuse to take away the LF for about 3 series just so they can get the winners they wanted as it really stuck in their craw someone normal-ish could and did win
The baddies of BB9 got exactly what they deserved and only had themselves to blame for them being evicted and in Alexandra's and Dennis's cases ejected
I do remember one poll on here just after BB9 ended in which it did failry well, but that was only one poll. But in all my time here i must have seens dozens of polls [including the last failry large one] which has BB9 amongst the worst series beating only the likes of 4, 8, 10 and 11. It has always been miles behind the likes of, 5, 7 and 3.
I have no idea what TIBB is so can't comment on that, but i have seen countless polls in all the tabloids and mags that suppported BB, and as expected they always show exactly the same results with 5, 3, 7 and sometimes 2 [largely down to Brian] in the top 3. BB7 even topped 5 in the poll conducted by C4 this year, with BB9 nowhere in sight.
It would be ludicrous to find a series and it's hm's that made so little impact during and after it's run to be rated up their amogst the best. It would be the same as seeing a series like BB3 be rated down there amongst the worst. It just wouldn't add up to the impact and popularity that series had.
I will give it that 9 generally rated better than 4, 8, 10 and 11 but any unbiased person would accept that it's always been rated well below series like 2. 3, 5 and 7. And i say that as someone who swicthed off the dire BB2 much sooner than i did with BB9.
A BB series surely needs a mix of nice and nasty. And the great thing about the nasty housemates is watching them go with their tails between their legs. Of course Rachel couldn't have carried a series on her own, but BB9 had plenty of villains. Irrespective of the viewing figures, I loved BB9. It really felt like a medieval morality play, with one obnoxious person after another biting the dust until we were left with the one unequivocally good person at the end.
She had NO chance. :mad::( No one was ever going to vote Luke or Lisa out, so it was a straight vote between her and Mario. How was that fair, in the first week? Poor Steph didn't have one single day in the house that wasn't overshadowed by the objectionable task. Why on earth didn't they pair Mario up with someone who wouldn't have given a damn? Mario and Sara faking a romance would have been funny; Mario and the very young, repulsed Steph was just gross and awful.
The problem for me with BB9 was that i found the so-called villians of BB9 just plain tedious to watch and the so-called goodies even more staggeringly dull and boring.
There's also a bit of hypocrisy in that series with the likes of Darnell and Rex being seen as part of the good guys, yet both were bullies. We also had one of the good guys [Mo] carry out the most disgusting, desperate, pathetic, degrading act ever seen in BB when he ate a bogey for a tin of beer. So he hardly holds any moral highground either.
Imo, it was an atrociously cast series filled with people with absolutely zero charisma. Lazy dullards who spent half their time in the bedroom whinging about how boring it was and how happy they would be to be evicted:( The option was to watch to grown women [Kat and Rachle] act like children singing pathetic songs and have interesting chats about grapes and chickpeas. Listen to Darnell, the most nausiating, self-pitying bore to have ever been in the house, and watch Mo, who was nothing better than BB9's answer to Gos.:yawn::yawn::yawn:
After a very good first week [imo, a much better first week than 3 or 5 ] i sat there night after night for the next four weeks bored out of mind watching the most miserable, tedious, and horrible BB i'd ever seen.
It could not possibly have been further away from the kind of BB that i liked to watch.:(
BB6 had classic hm's - Makosi, Craig, Derek.
It had really great villains in Saskia and Maxwell.
It had Maxwell go from early series hero and cert to win to being booed to high heaven upon his memorable eviction.
All it lacked was Kinga not being in there from the start.
She alone gave that series a water cooler moment the likes of which the entire BB9 cast couldn't muster between them in 3 months..
Still, each to their own.:)