It's been a very poor series. I'm not even going to go into the casting situation because we all know that this year has been very poor in that regards. Putting in actual celebrities is obviously going to help, but at the same time try not to cast obvious duds because their known and available. (Vicky for example screamed dud!)

I think this series has mostly suffered from a lack of any creativity or originality. I know that after 14 years it must be hard to come up with new tweaks, but IAC hasn't really had any major changes since they started spliting the camps up about 7 years ago. Here's a sneak peak of the 2015 series.

* Ten celebrities will arrive and get split into two groups. One will skydive in, the other will do a *horrific* trek into the jungle.
* A reality show star will get voted to do an early trial and will make a scene s/he will then do most of the trials for most of the first week.
* The tribes will merge and we'll be told it'll be a fiery big collision, but in reality they'll all get on well and after two days forget they started out split.
* Two new celebrities will arrive in the jungle and will have to stay in some kind of shack overnight. They join camp and again nobody really cares.
* At some point, an ever growing secret society is formed to do secret missions.
* Someone will get possessive over the cooking. At some point someone will get full stars but receive a dodgy unusual meat.
* They'll start competing for immunity for a few days. Then get picked off one by one.

It's just all to predictable.

Also, my other main gripe for this year is the complete lack of creativity in the trials. Most of the trials have already been done in past years save for minor cosmetic changes, and far to many have been a variety of "rummage around in creepy-crawlies and find the star before the clock dies".

Even if they are struggling for ideas, just tweaking the trial format could help. Instead of have celebrities look for stars, have their campmates try to predict how they'll do and award meals on how close they get to the actual result. Or if they insist on spliting the tribes at the start, have each group "nominate" a different member each day, then let the public decide who they think did better. It might also help the annual "X does all the early trials" fiasco too, because that seems to be the most common complaint every year.

I bet the TV ratings show it has been a Hit ?

I've enjoyed this series.

But, big caveat, I've not watched that many, the last one was with Haye, the boxer in it.

I tuned in at the start, mainly because of Michael, I'm a big fan of the moral maze and know him from his journalism and views on reality tv and thought I'd have a looksee.

It drew me in, to be honest I don't get hooked up about how big a celeb/star they are. More how they react and behave.

I enjoyed the trials, the squabbles and the things like the Michael/Tinchy friendship.

I would suggest this is now the sort of show not to make 'appointment to view' but to give a chance to and see where it leads.

I think the format is a bit tired with way too many eating trials, but I thought the line up this time was brilliant, I think it's much more entertaining when the celebs actually talk to each other instead of pointless arguing and it's great when they actually have a go at the trials instead of standing about screaming.

More like this please,but maybe some new trials next year.

Less eating/bug trials, no contact with loved ones until the final few days then just once and a rule so whoever does a trial is immune from the next one. Celebrity Cyclone is popular for a reason - I wish they'd look at some fun trials to air next year.

I have to say I enjoyed the 'treasure hunt' task and it's typical it had to be stopped prematurely - for all it's faults I think this series had a voodoo sign over it with Gemma and Craig leaving early, Jimmy being the big character but eliminated first out and then losing Michael and Edwina before their time in my opinion. Really there should have been a massive argument over cooking but they were quite a placate camp overall this year. But despite that it was still entertaining.

I think it's been quite a likeable series, but agree that it was oddly sensible. Apart from Kendra's couple of days of silliness, they all really tried hard at the trials, they all supported each other, rows were quickly smoothed over, and everyone kept saying how much they were enjoying themselves. It all seemed a very long way from Dave Van Day and Nicola McLean.

Yes, I agree with all of that. It was very dispiriting when Kendra kept getting trial after trial: she wasn't even maddeningly funny or ridiculous, like previous serial triallers have been, just screechy and dull. The eating horrible things trials are not good enough for us to want more than one per series. And the 'put your hand/ face in there and retrieve a star' trials just blurred into each other.

The bushtucker trials were better and more fun than the main ones, and the fancy dress costumes were a nice touch. Gemma was never going to be anything but dreadful - the combination of whining and self-aggrandizing was unwatchable - but Craig seemed a real loss. There is always a slice of luck in these things though; I don't think they can ever really predict how a group will get along, or not.

It's been ok, but I think Craig was a big loss to the show. I think I marginally preferred it to last years though.

I did think they started the whole care packages/getting to see family way too early. Some of the trials seem a bit tired and relied on eating/drinking and bugs too much. They used to have some really cool trials done at heights which were good. They should look back and reinvent some of them. Even though I found Jimmy a little annoying he was a big character and I think he deserved a day or two more. I also think Michael went out a bit early which made the final few days a bit boring as I wasn't really rooting for anyone.

I've thoroughly enjoyed this series, it's nice to have a bunch that gets on and has a joke. Not every series needs drama, I see enough if that in bb. Iacgmooh Is refreshing for that. Sad too see it end.

Would've prefered Jimmy winning but really happy for Tarzan foggy

I agree regarding the loved ones, way too ott this series.

I've hardly watched it at all the last 2 weeks. I've still no idea why Jimmy was out 1st when I thought he'd win No BIG names, same old tasks. Only Ant and Dec provided the laughs. I give it 2 more years before its dropped.

I guess it was weakened by losing a couple early on, although that ghastly reality panda would have been a nightmare had she stayed. But the show was very flat, and even this forum was very flat this year. The best series manage, more by luck than design, to balance two different elements - one, which appeals to me, basically makes minor celebs and inflated egos look silly, and the other makes some minor celebs build or rebuild a fan base. In recent years the balance has gone and it's become more of the latter dominating, so it becomes more of a Big Brother-style 'I hate that one because I love this one'. I'd say the show started the slide in the series when Gest went out early and the painfully bland Willis won it. The final was really flat, and most have gone the same way since. You only need to think of Joe Swash to view the winner as a potential pest for years to come. The producers meddle too much with the editing, trying to manipulate the vote and usually getting it wrong, and the power of the phone voters also makes the show much less appealing in terms of a broad audience. It's ironic that the producers go to great pains to get a range of contestants that will appeal to the very young through to the quite old, and then the predominantly young audience are left to make all of that pointless by controlling the phone vote. I think the only way to stop the slide is to drop all of the immunity opportunities (it's nearly always the certs to go who stay as a result of that), and find a way to keep those who don't want to waste money on voting involved in the process. The latter is obviously unlikely, so the show will soon be more suited to ITV2 than ITV1.

I really enjoyed it. Thought it was great fun with a brilliant winner.

Not the best but not the worst either.

Putting in the likes of Jake was an instant turn off for many I knew. The day that tv producers stop pandering to the depressing yet growing celeb culture of thick reality desperate for fame types and you don't get any more desperate than Jake (I'll include Gemma and TOWIE types too) the better these shows will be imo.

It's probably been one of my favourites.

Totally agree, thoroughly enjoyed this year and Ant & Dec were excellent!

It was unfortunate that they lost two big characters so early in the series (Craig and Gemma Collins). It's the mix of different personality types that makes it an interesting show.

I had it on this year, but hardly watched it. The people just weren't interesting enough to hold my attention. The trials are the worst part of the show for me and it's got very groundhog day in that department. so no, unlesss they get some characters in like David Gest, Janice Dickinson, Carole Thatcher, Stacey Solomon, then it's not worth tuning in for me.

Pretty boring series. It started to get good then just went extra boring. I thought I was disappointed with last years but I guess I was wrong.

Gemma,craig and jimmy were big characters which would have made the final week much more interesting.

Add in michael and nadia going early, the two out of the less big characters I found interesting then it made a dull final week for me.

Not the worst series though, just some unfortunate departures and strange public voting

I think Gemma was already making it unwatchable. If she had stayed and started getting all the trials I would have walked away, and I bet I'm not the only one. I know some people like the really annoying contestants, but I am not one of them.



I thought this year's was better than last year's. Social media was far nastier last year, which spoilt it a bit. Amy Willerton was just tiresome, refusing to hand over her forbidden goods even when everyone was punished for it, and it led to one of those really distasteful battles where she was either a monster or a heroine. And people were pretty cruel about Rebecca Adlington, both here and on twitter. She was a sweet girl. But in the end it was David Emanuel who made last year's worth watching imo; I would have liked to see him with Michael Buerk.

They need to simplify the trials. They over-complicate them so that, while they may be taxing for the contestant, they're not that interesting to watch. The best ones are ingeniously simple but funny, such as Burrell having to stick his hand in some holes. You need to concentrate on the reactions of the contestants, and just sending them on intricate challenges with bugs being dropped on their heads at regular intervals gets more and more boring.

They should think much more carefully about immunities - time and again they set up these options, thinking they're being really clever, then realise they've protected the dull ones while exposing the most promising to the prospect of an early exit.

They might also limit contestants in the first week to a maximum of two trials each, so that we don't get twits voting again and again for the same contestant wrecking the trials by whining and crying.

And they really need to push the boat out next year and get four or five really well-known contestants. There are too many z-listers these days, and unless you're aged under about 25 and don't watch ITV2 all the time you spend the first few days every year saying 'Who the heck ARE these people?'

The show really needs a shake up. It's gone tired and over-familiar.

I actually thought this year was okay. I think that series 2 was the worst ever, nearly all of them were as dull as dishwater and I can't frigging stand Linda Barker. That said, I rather like Tuffers and was pleased he won.

I thought that last years was the second worst. Lucy Pargeter was utterly vile and Kian was such a predictable choice of winner.

So why did you bother coming back to watch it? Still felt it was so dull but you couldn't keep away out of desperate interest?

Ah the old 'watch something else' DS chestnut. This only works if you believe in the myth that we live in a Golden Age of wonderful multi channels that all show brilliant stuff. The reality is that on most nights there's not much to really engage people but repeats and the odd one-off programme. What else do you think is on - The Ascent of Man? So shows like I'm a Celeb thrive on the fact that many people just watch because there's nothing else they fancy and they'd rather have that on that nothing at all. It's on - mostly -every night, so it's the line of least resistance. So a large part of the audience watches out of habit, whilst moaning about it. Watching it isn't a sign of great approbation, believe me. Many people just watch at peak times out of habit, and it's often a case of watching this rubbish rather than some other rubbish.

Or perhaps they could go and do something more constructive with their time if they hate it so much?

Oh no, silly me, as you say it's the path of least resistance. For these people to actually do something constructive they would have to (a) move themselves and (b) engage their brains.

It's much easier just to sit on their BFAs and complain...

I agree with this ^. I didn't even watch the final. Never did understand what the Jimmy business was about.

However I saw the final 5 mins of the show with Joe Swash and Foggy seemed a thoroughly nice chap so well done to him.

You're right in that there are better things to do but paying a tv licence fee isn't just a donation, as in, " Have my money but just broadcast any old tripe", is it.