1) Josie... that series became "duvet watch", and her never ending periods drove me nuts.
2) Rachel... yes she was nice, but I think Rex was right in the stark contrast between her audition and the real her... even she knew she was too boring to get on without pretending she was crazy/ fun.
3) Luke A... I hate that it became all about his acceptance, I got so far down the acceptance road that I didn't give a fig about his *journey* anymore and just wanted him to get off the ruddy bench and do something even slightly entertaining.
4) Josie again because she was so awful she deserves 2 spots, one for appearing, and one for not going away. Her stints on the spin offs showed she was still as boring, but now considered herself funny. :mad:
Kudos for giving it to Josie twice Awful bloody housemate. Boring and unlikeable - quite a feat.
I don't agree with Rachel or Luke A. While I was watching their series, I had different responses. I found Rachel a bit too good to be true during her series but, on mature reflection, I think she was just genuinely a lovely person. Her main sticking point for me was her babying of 'happy how'. 'Happy how' drove me slightly nuts at the time; and Rachel kind of fed her behaviour with her never-ending tolerance. I liked Rex in a love to hate him way and sided with Rachel in their conflict, but liked the dynamic between the two of them. That was a good solid series, looking back, with interesting relationships and quite polarised conflicts.
I loved Luke A. I firmly believe that it was the producers of the show who made it all about his acceptance. I remember after the second or third live show thinking that they were somewhat hanging him out to dry. He, on the other hand, really seemed like he just wanted to get it out of the way. If any of us had something that significant that was going to come out one way or another (and it really was - given his scarring, etc.); you'd be walking on broken glass until everyone knew in an enclosed environment like that. Past the first few days, I hardly recall him referring to it at all.
Luke A's series was destroyed by the 'Insiders'; one of the most horrible and inane groups in the history of BB. They were tripping over each other in their race to the Stupid line. The Outsiders were heroes, for me (apart from Lauren who grated a bit). I know that if I had been in the house with Ashleigh, Luke S, Conor, Caroline etc. I'd have gone down in the annals of BB villiany because I would absolutely have gone postal on them. The restraint of the Outsiders was epic.
Because someone won doesn't mean they were hugely popular. It just means they received more votes than the other housemates, from the people who actually bothered to vote.
Only a small minority of viewers actually pick up the phone and vote.
To win the show you only need around 20% of the vote, maybe even less. There's usually about six in the final. It's possible the winner received less than 25% of the total votes made and possibly less than 1% of the total viewership.
In the first seven years of the show PLENTY of people voted during the series and for the winner.
Kudos for giving it to Josie twice Awful bloody housemate. Boring and unlikeable - quite a feat.
I don't agree with Rachel or Luke A. While I was watching their series, I had different responses. I found Rachel a bit too good to be true during her series but, on mature reflection, I think she was just genuinely a lovely person. Her main sticking point for me was her babying of 'happy how'. 'Happy how' drove me slightly nuts at the time; and Rachel kind of fed her behaviour with her never-ending tolerance. I liked Rex in a love to hate him way and sided with Rachel in their conflict, but liked the dynamic between the two of them. That was a good solid series, looking back, with interesting relationships and quite polarised conflicts.
I loved Luke A. I firmly believe that it was the producers of the show who made it all about his acceptance. I remember after the second or third live show thinking that they were somewhat hanging him out to dry. He, on the other hand, really seemed like he just wanted to get it out of the way. If any of us had something that significant that was going to come out one way or another (and it really was - given his scarring, etc.); you'd be walking on broken glass until everyone knew in an enclosed environment like that. Past the first few days, I hardly recall him referring to it at all.
Luke A's series was destroyed by the 'Insiders'; one of the most horrible and inane groups in the history of BB. They were tripping over each other in their race to the Stupid line. The Outsiders were heroes, for me (apart from Lauren who grated a bit). I know that if I had been in the house with Ashleigh, Luke S, Conor, Caroline etc. I'd have gone down in the annals of BB villiany because I would absolutely have gone postal on them. The restraint of the Outsiders was epic.
I actually agree about Luke A, it was edited to portray him that way, but I can only go on what I saw, and I got bored of it. I've no doubt he's a nice guy and he did BB for good reasons. However I strain to find how he was entertaining (for me), but that applies across the board in the series, it was draining to watch the constant drama. By the end I didn't care about either *side*.
I stand by Rachel, she was the ultimate radar dodger, so bland people forgot she was even there to nom.
Didn't John win Celebrity Hijack due to a Scottish bloc vote? I guess so few people were watching the vote was easily to manipulate.
.
I am not sure what answer you are expecting by answering the question. Did he? The 'Scottish bloc vote' has clearly never worked at any other time. Do you have any reason to believe it did that time?
Kudos for giving it to Josie twice Awful bloody housemate. Boring and unlikeable - quite a feat.
Like Kate, Cameron and Aaron she benefited from very weak competition in the final, but still more so. Apart from John James and Sam, everyone with any kind of fan base had gone before the final three weeks of BB11, and John James and Sam both went before the final. Cameron and Jon were the only ones with a fanbase in BB4, and Jon was out early, and Aaron had already beaten Jay (and was a million miles ahead in the polls) so unless he dropped dead before the final he really couldn't lose. I always think Brian B, Rachel and Luke had the toughest finals: Samanda, Rex, Adam and Deana all had big groups of fans fiercely fighting for their loved one.
I don't agree with Rachel or Luke A. While I was watching their series, I had different responses. I found Rachel a bit too good to be true during her series but, on mature reflection, I think she was just genuinely a lovely person. Her main sticking point for me was her babying of 'happy how'. 'Happy how' drove me slightly nuts at the time; and Rachel kind of fed her behaviour with her never-ending tolerance..
Yes, I think that's very true and well put.
I loved Luke A. I firmly believe that it was the producers of the show who made it all about his acceptance. I remember after the second or third live show thinking that they were somewhat hanging him out to dry.
They really did. :mad: It was really damaging for him that they showed his gender disclosure four times in two days, leading people to accuse him of 'hogging the highlights' and 'making the most of his story' as if he had edited the show as well as appearing in it. When challenged to say what he could have done to have attracted less attention, forum members attacking him could never come up with anything approaching a logical answer, from suggesting that 'he should have kept it a secret like Nadia' (because 10 weeks of lying is CLEARLY admirable and not attention seeking at all) or 'he should have called everyone together and made a big announcement' (also obviously not attention seeking at all).
Luke A's series was destroyed by the 'Insiders'; one of the most horrible and inane groups in the history of BB. They were tripping over each other in their race to the Stupid line.
It was an uncomfortable series to watch, but until BB gave Conor half the prize money it was going quite well in a BB9 kind of way. Those who had behaved worst were beginning to go and those who had behaved best were beginning to get a bit of a reward in the sense of surviving. Giving Conor the £50,000 did a lot to destroy the series though.
There seems to be a lot of support for Luke A as dullest ever winner. In some cases it may be because he's still fresh in the memory but there's probably a lot of truth in it as well. He's not someone who will be remembered fondly for years to come. There was no major incidents which stood out during his time in the house. I don't remember a time when he had us rolling about laughing. For the most part he just seemed to sulk and he probably profited from the nastiness of others. It became an us v them mentality and many of the viewers felt the same.
I stand by Rachel, she was the ultimate radar dodger
If she was a radar dodger, then why did she speak out to the HMs she felt were in the wrong, which would make her a sitting target for noms, and why did she make decisions which she knew wouldn't be popular? For example, when she chose Hell's cake, she knew that this would be an unpopular decision, but she stood by it and the following week, she was up for eviction.
so bland people forgot she was even there to nom.
If people forgot she was there to nominate, then how come she received a total of 22 nominations during her whole time in the house and up until Aaron, was the most nominated winner we've had?
Another thread by OL-P designed to have a go at 'last years winner'
Still bitter?
I beg your pardon?
If you read the OP you'll see I put forward a few names, not just last years winner.
Please feel free to add your own. Luke A is being discussed more than most because his name is being put forward more than most. Many feel he was the dullest ever winner. As expected Rachel is in the running as well.
Going against the grain here but my vote goes to Sophie. Whilst the likes of Luke, Rachel or Anthony were less exciting contestants they still had an involvement in the social dynamics and storylines of their respective series (Anthony and Craig, the "Rachel is a fence sitter" saga, Insiders vs Outsiders), something which Sophie cannot lay a claim to. Her only storyline in the series was in an early season showmance which if anything was more of a detriment then it was a benefit, and after that spent the next two months farting and falling off couches.
The best way to look at dullness IMO is to think how the series would change without them, and honestly IMO Sophie could be taken out of BB10 and nothing would change.
Like Kate, Cameron and Aaron she benefited from very weak competition in the final, but still more so.
really, Kate? Jade and Alex were quite big names, and all the finalists would have polled more than the likes of bb7 or 6. Johnny received over 2.5 million voted too. Did you actually watch BB3? You certainly couldn't have been on forums if you think the likes of samanda adam and deana had anything like the following of alex sibley, or even spencer smith.
10 million people watched the final show, think the oppo blows away any other Bb, or even most other reality TV shows. 9 and ten in particular.
Comments
Sophie was a dull winner.
I don't agree with Rachel or Luke A. While I was watching their series, I had different responses. I found Rachel a bit too good to be true during her series but, on mature reflection, I think she was just genuinely a lovely person. Her main sticking point for me was her babying of 'happy how'. 'Happy how' drove me slightly nuts at the time; and Rachel kind of fed her behaviour with her never-ending tolerance. I liked Rex in a love to hate him way and sided with Rachel in their conflict, but liked the dynamic between the two of them. That was a good solid series, looking back, with interesting relationships and quite polarised conflicts.
I loved Luke A. I firmly believe that it was the producers of the show who made it all about his acceptance. I remember after the second or third live show thinking that they were somewhat hanging him out to dry. He, on the other hand, really seemed like he just wanted to get it out of the way. If any of us had something that significant that was going to come out one way or another (and it really was - given his scarring, etc.); you'd be walking on broken glass until everyone knew in an enclosed environment like that. Past the first few days, I hardly recall him referring to it at all.
Luke A's series was destroyed by the 'Insiders'; one of the most horrible and inane groups in the history of BB. They were tripping over each other in their race to the Stupid line. The Outsiders were heroes, for me (apart from Lauren who grated a bit). I know that if I had been in the house with Ashleigh, Luke S, Conor, Caroline etc. I'd have gone down in the annals of BB villiany because I would absolutely have gone postal on them. The restraint of the Outsiders was epic.
In the first seven years of the show PLENTY of people voted during the series and for the winner.
I actually agree about Luke A, it was edited to portray him that way, but I can only go on what I saw, and I got bored of it. I've no doubt he's a nice guy and he did BB for good reasons. However I strain to find how he was entertaining (for me), but that applies across the board in the series, it was draining to watch the constant drama. By the end I didn't care about either *side*.
I stand by Rachel, she was the ultimate radar dodger, so bland people forgot she was even there to nom.
Like Kate, Cameron and Aaron she benefited from very weak competition in the final, but still more so. Apart from John James and Sam, everyone with any kind of fan base had gone before the final three weeks of BB11, and John James and Sam both went before the final. Cameron and Jon were the only ones with a fanbase in BB4, and Jon was out early, and Aaron had already beaten Jay (and was a million miles ahead in the polls) so unless he dropped dead before the final he really couldn't lose. I always think Brian B, Rachel and Luke had the toughest finals: Samanda, Rex, Adam and Deana all had big groups of fans fiercely fighting for their loved one.
Yes, I think that's very true and well put.
They really did. :mad: It was really damaging for him that they showed his gender disclosure four times in two days, leading people to accuse him of 'hogging the highlights' and 'making the most of his story' as if he had edited the show as well as appearing in it. When challenged to say what he could have done to have attracted less attention, forum members attacking him could never come up with anything approaching a logical answer, from suggesting that 'he should have kept it a secret like Nadia' (because 10 weeks of lying is CLEARLY admirable and not attention seeking at all) or 'he should have called everyone together and made a big announcement' (also obviously not attention seeking at all). It was an uncomfortable series to watch, but until BB gave Conor half the prize money it was going quite well in a BB9 kind of way. Those who had behaved worst were beginning to go and those who had behaved best were beginning to get a bit of a reward in the sense of surviving. Giving Conor the £50,000 did a lot to destroy the series though.
CBB: Bez
Cameron
Antony
Cameron
Aaron
The most memorable housemates are never the winners.
There is too much flying under the radar and people pleasing to do to be a winner so the winners end up being a compromise most of the time.
For me the dullest and most boring was Sophie from BB10 a real compromise winner and the least offensive from a real gang of horrors that year..
If he was in 9 out of the other 12 series he wouldn't have come close to winning
If she was a radar dodger, then why did she speak out to the HMs she felt were in the wrong, which would make her a sitting target for noms, and why did she make decisions which she knew wouldn't be popular? For example, when she chose Hell's cake, she knew that this would be an unpopular decision, but she stood by it and the following week, she was up for eviction.
If people forgot she was there to nominate, then how come she received a total of 22 nominations during her whole time in the house and up until Aaron, was the most nominated winner we've had?
Luke A was far too involved in his story lines to be dull with regards to
Still bitter?
I beg your pardon?
If you read the OP you'll see I put forward a few names, not just last years winner.
Please feel free to add your own. Luke A is being discussed more than most because his name is being put forward more than most. Many feel he was the dullest ever winner. As expected Rachel is in the running as well.
The best way to look at dullness IMO is to think how the series would change without them, and honestly IMO Sophie could be taken out of BB10 and nothing would change.
really, Kate? Jade and Alex were quite big names, and all the finalists would have polled more than the likes of bb7 or 6. Johnny received over 2.5 million voted too. Did you actually watch BB3? You certainly couldn't have been on forums if you think the likes of samanda adam and deana had anything like the following of alex sibley, or even spencer smith.
10 million people watched the final show, think the oppo blows away any other Bb, or even most other reality TV shows. 9 and ten in particular.
Sophie BB10
My thoughts exactly!:D
LOL - and all the others he reincarnates himself as
Dullest and worst winner in Big Brother history.
You're judgement has often proven suspect.