Originally Posted by seellee:
“I always think the winner should be the person who has played the game the best and is the most entertaining. I like Cheggers and Pricey but do they deserve it? No not really.
For me it should be between Hopkins and Hilton just because they've played the game and created the most talking points and I'm saying that as somebody who can't stand Perez.”
I haven't watched this series so I can't comment on the current housemates, but I don't think this logic of choosing a winner is 'right' (for me, at least). Fair enough in the Celebrity version, but imagine in the civilian version? People going in and just saying and doing the most outrageous things because that will get them the votes for being "entertaining".
Jade was by far the most discussed housemate of series three, but that doesn't mean Kate didn't contribute to her series and give us many talking points, and whilst Rachel of series nine wasn't my favourite, it was actually enjoyable to see someone so 'normal' on live feed, not trying to desperately grab some airtime for the highlights.
"Most entertaining" and "most talking points" screams "most desperate" and/or "most unlikeable", to me.
Imagine the line up of winners? Jade, Charley, John James, Sallie and Helen? No thanks. Unfortunately, the last one is actually a winner, but throw the rest in the mix and I would've turned off way before Helen won.