Over the years bb1 to bb4.

What do you think was the worst move by the producers?

Whether it be the inclusion of a particular housemate or new aspect to the show?

Personally, I have always wondered what they were thinking when they picked Gos to be on the show? Nice enough guy, but what was interesting about him. Was never that keen on Cameron, but I think that they reckoned having an over thirty christian virgin from orkney might coz a few interesting dilemmas .. but with Gos?? I don't really get it!

What about you?

that bloody divide in the house, big bro 3 i think it was, but couldn't say for sure!

bringing back an evicted contestant

(nothing against Jon Tickle personally, it's the principle)

At the time I thought it sounded like a good idea, but that was only because the show was so dull that they had to do something to make it more interesting. But sadly Jon didn't live up to expectations. If they had to sent someone in it should have been Federico or even Lisa.

I agree Aye Caramba. Jon is one of my favourites from all four series but that just stank of desperation.

I think this will be the last series - the idea has just run it's course.

It went wrong when they reacted to criticism of BB3 by only picking people who would not end up like Adele, Tim or Jade. BB4 was meant to be about subtle differences becoming significant and they then invented a n African story for the oddest one they had in there so someone would win. They forgot that nice people doing nothing - not to mention nice people who had obvious flaws like sleepinggossickness, jealousy, dullness, tickleness or nushness which made them less popular - wasn't going to excite anyone. They couldn't go back to BB1 or BB2 and they didn't have the wit to devise a less dangerous version of BB3.

This was the worst idea for me too, it showed just how little they thought of the public's choice to vote a HM out.

All of BB4 seemed to be just one desperate move after another, expect the unexpected idea is one thing but there were so many changes of direction, the double eviction, the housemate swap etc., it just looked like they were making it up as they went along to try and keep viewers.

Your probably right there they probably were making it up as they went along!

I also felt the "bring back a housemate" idea was wrong plus the divide in BB3

A number of things from BB4 seemed to point to the fact the producers were getting desperate.

1. Picking Cameron as a housemate and giving him favoured editing, I am still not totally convinced he knew he had won before he went in.

2. Gos as a contestant - why??

3. The African swap. It made no sense at all and was obvious it was fixed for Cameron to go.

4. Steph as a contestant - why??

5. The bomb scare and the lack of information given to viewers, it was very frustrating to follow BB live for six weeks non-stop (virtually) the suddenly all you are left with on the live feed is a picture of the outside of the house and absolutely no information given out by Channel 4 until an hour after the eviction show was due to start. Gos's eviction without an audience was a joke. It has been suggested the bomb scare was fabricated by BB to boost ratings, but I don't belive that as it would have been handled better on screen.

I could go on and on, but I am only winding myself up again!!!!

I think the whole Big Brother Four housemate selection in general is more than adequate for the 'worst producer decision ever' 'award' .. just look at each housemate individually, and you'll find yourself asking why they were included out of 100,000 plus applicatants .. much like others have asked themselves in this very thread ..

Sean.

Like others I'd like to know what on earth they were thinking when they chose the BB4 HMs.

The worst thing - most ill advised from their own point of view - was being vile to their greatest hms. They'll never find another Alex, or even Tim, because they put the boot in on every occasion and gave them no support whatsoever once they were outside of the house. As a result, the sort of hms they attract are increasingly PJ clones and other nonetities who have nothing to lose by going into the house - indeed they actually have something to gain. That's also why we're reduced to the tiresome question of whether or not anyone will have sex in the house - nothing else will make them interesting.

Of course, that won't make them interesting either...... :sleep:

You can attract 100,000, but if they're 100,000 uninteresting bores with not an iota of originality amongst them then there's no chance whatsoever of an interesting show.

I didn't think Alex got a hard time outside of the house?.............Did he?

I think in some ways I understand why they chose the BB4 housemates in terms of potential arguements (which of course never occured). I think that they thought that...

Tania and Cameron would clash and hence argue
Steph would be in competition with Tania (2 ends of the spectrum)
Sissy and Jon would be the housemates who would annoy everyone
Nush and Anouska in competition because both good looking
Justine and Scott were the floaters who could cause divisions
Federico and Ray were the ladish type - clash with Cameron
And Gos?? The peacemaker. He certainly was that! :sleep:

Just my theory. Of course it didnt turn out like this and they all left the house all holding hands walking into the sunset together. [Someone pass me the bucket]

I think you are right. After BB3 they wanted to avoid schemers or extremes like Tim and Jade because of what happened to Adele, Tim and Jade. BB4 housemates to me all were nice but slightly annoying in a minor way. Gos was lazy, Ray got angry, Fed was a slacker
. Anushka was an attention seeker, Nush was too sweet, Scott was mogodon man, Cameron was a bible basher, Steph was divorced and jealous, Tickle was both odd and annoying, Sissy was emotional, Justine ws Justine. We saw some of those clashes work themselves out - Steph v Nush, Sissy v Nush, Ray v Steph Justine v Jon, Fed v the tasks and almost Ray - but everyone held back and nothing much came of it. Cameron was an obvious focus of argument but no one was non-PC enough to argue with him and so, in a competition-less house without an outstanding winner or winners, they invented Cameron the missionary as their story.

One point from that is that BB4 had a story built into the selection of the housemates ( friends disunited ) its just that it was a dull story. The problem with audience selection of housemates (who they won't even have seen together in the same house) is that potentially there is no story there at all - the monkeys probably have as much chance of writing Shakespeare as a few hundred thousand voters have of coming up with 12 people who develop an interesting story together.
+