I mostly agree with lulu g in this. The entertaining ones and the "loud, obnoxious, empty-headed, attention seeking" don't have to be the same, and for me they usually aren't the same.

The fallback position seems to be that even if these HMs aren't entertaining in themselves, they make the show entertaining by making things happen and giving viewers something to talk about.

There's some truth to that, but that argument is brought out when people complain about these HMs. Surely there's something a bit fishy about saying that whatever causes people to complain must be entertaining them or (somehow) making the show better for them.

I actually enjoyed Big Brother 4, and I liked Cameron. A genuine, nice guy. People say he was bitchy behind people's backs, such as him talking about Lisa's breathlessness in the diary room. Everyone in the world loses their temper, and just because he was a Christian, people called him.

People say that Big Brother 5 was the best Big Brother ever, but in truth, out of all the Big Brothers I've seen, I'd probably say that it was my least favourite. Apart from Shell, they were all fame hungry and not very likeable, (Victor - the most detestable person in the history of Big Brother). Critics say that it was the best Big Brother because of the evil twists that Big Brother was giving them. They were messing with the housemates' minds. I'm sorry, but if I was in the house, and Big Brother was being so cruel towards me, I'd probably get depressed. They were all too loud which made me dislike so many of them.

Okay, the housemates in Big Brother 2 were quite loud, but they had personalities which you just had to love, (Brian - the best housemate in the history of Big Brother, and completely hilarious). Big Brother 2 is my favourite series, and you genuinely cared for them.

I've heard that Big Brother 6 will not have the evil theme, (thank goodness), so let's hope that we'll have some people who we'll care about, and that we'll enjoy watching.

Yup. He came on here and was on many people's ignore list within a few posts.
Personally speaking, it wasn't that I didn't get him - I didn't want to .....

Regarding Cameron, he got very, very lucky imo.

A majority of the British public don't even watch BB and a majority of BB viewers never vote. BB4 almost killed the show completely so Cameron, Ray, Scott & Steph have a lot to answer for.

Thank God for the LGBs and JCs for coming to the rescue in BB5. More like that? A certainty.

I love the loud ones. It's boring witout them causing friction

Spot on.

I'm afraid I disagree - they are invariably are the same.

Your excellent point about Jade proves this.

Of course, most housemates are as dull-as-ditch-water & disappear without trace, but the 'worst' housemates will always be the most dreadful: the cowards, moaners, whingers, two-faced idiots, the totally unfunny, etc. - even if they do provoke a public reaction.

when I said worst housemate I mean the 1s who were just boring and aful. I like Jsade because she caused most of the arguments in Big Brother 3 .

I mean who do you rememeber more Jade or Scott (is that his name)?

Why do boring people apply for Big Brother like Scott and Gos

On the other hand, why do thoroughly unlikable people like Jade and Marco enter what is essentially a popularity contest?

id rather watch unlikable than totally dull 1s who don't make me want to react in any way whatsoever.

Plus, Jade and marco werent hated. They bothed got cheered unlike dull Jason and vanessa

I loved Jade and Marco. Only up 4 a laugh and sooo bitchy. GR8!

Jade would most certainly have came out of the house to a lynching if it were not for the shrink and producers giving her a personality makeover resulting in the most remarkable turnabout in BB history.

Any doubts to Jade's total obnoxiousness was verified in Back to Reality...we had the same old Jade and same old script. utterly contemptible and an outright bully.

And both repulsive scum.

Discussion and opinions are the lifeblood of Big Brother forum pages and we are all entitled to our points of view.

Factual inaccuracy causes incorrect speculation which in turn creates an unstable base, unsuitable for the building blocks of relevant discussion.

The line below is an example of factual inaccuracy.




Everyone had gone back to their respective bedrooms that morning, and when Big Brother called somebody to the diary room, everyone was still in the bedrooms (as far as I know) with the exception of Gos, who was in the bathroom brushing his teeth. Nobody from the boys' room appeared to be answering Big Brother's call, so I got up to go in case none of the girls had decided to go either. I was not 'walking past the door'.

It's important to have the facts when discussing issues and forming opinions; it's rarely helpful to operate on speculation alone.

I have to confess, I always thought it was fixed for you to go to Africa, Cameron, they did make it look like they called you just as you were walking past the DR.

But I suppose editing does that. Nice to know the truth.

When all's said and done I only think Cameron became popular AFTER his little sojourn to the other BB house.

Btw, I've seen Cameron on another FAN site, hope DS doesn't get a sudden influx of his loyal followers now (eek!). I was actually banned after having a go about Cameron defending two of his fellow housemates who insulted a long standing member on there. But hey, water under the bridge now.

We know what we saw and we know the rest too ..... not all of us sleep at night ..... and not all of us believe in "coincidence" or "happenstance" .....

You're right up to the last part. Most people don't watch, and most viewers probably don't vote. Then I wonder. Why do you think BB4 "almost killed the show completely"?

The audience figures weren't that low.

The press was against BB that year even before it was clear whether it would be "dull" or not. There were three reasons:
[list][*]There was a general backlash against reality tv at that time.[*]The viewing figures hadn't gone up as much as in previous years.[*]It was thought that the show was attracting a more mainstream BBC1 / ITV audience instead of the young, hip C4 audience it had had before.[/list]
By the time BB5 came around, the whole climate of opinion was different, and I think BB4 played an important part in bringing that about. BB3 had made many people think BB was a nasty (the media vilification of Jade) and gimmick-ridden (the rich-poor divide) show that was desperately hoping for sex (the BJ under the divet).

BB4 countered those negative opinions, even providing something slightly "educational" in the Arfica swap, and got people wanting something more extreme again.

Still, I agree that "Cameron, Ray, Scott & Steph have a lot to answer for"; and so do the voters for giving us that final 4.

In my opinion BB1 was THE best series NOT just because of the personalities (how dull they seem now compared to the contestants in BB5 & even BB3) but because it was so fresh and the housemates hadn't seen anything else like it so weren't media savvy enough to try and manipulate the audience.

BB4 was terribly dull and I think we have to lay the majority of the blame at the door of the boring participants & Cameron was (with all due respect) THE most boring.

I also have a sneaky suspicion that they'll be NO Scottish hm's this year

BB4 for me was the most uninsprirational and boring series that there ever was, I felt thet the producers were making itup as they went along, things didnt seem thought through and the personalities in the house (bar ray) didnt make entertaining telivision in the slightst.

I will say to your face cameron that i felt you were perhaps the most undeserving winner that there has been so far.

Cameron, what do you think when people call you and your fellow BB4 HM's boring?

If it is any help to reassure you, I'm not sure if you already knew but Fed came on here thinking he was above the other FMs and found himself banned for being insulting (among other things). The ex HMs are only ordinary members like you and I and don't get to flaunt the T&C's of this site.

It seems to be an artilce of faith in this forum that BB4 was boring, but all BBs have been boring much of the time.

The big event in BB1 was the confrontation with Nick, which seemed dull to me even at the time. What was supposed to be the big deal about writing names on paper anyway? There was nothing exciting about the guy who won either.

A case can be made for BB2, but it also had some boring and/or pointlessly irritating HMs. And the big "romance"? Was it Paul? Can he generate any interest at all? Helen was entertainingly air-headed, but we paid for that with the horror of the producers' attempt to find a new Helen: Jade. Brian was a poor man's Graham Norton.

I've mentioned this before but ... a short while back, I ran across a tape I'd made near the start of BB3, and it was mind-numbingly dull. And did anyone really find PJ and Spenser at all interesting? Add the show-ruining irritants Jonny and Jade, and you get a show that was often unwatchable.

BB5? They all went to bed early, leaving us with Jason and Victor talking about Big Brother (with ventures into other topics that were so occasional and brief that anyone who didn't watch steadily would miss them) or else just Jason and the garden or mirror.

BB4 was low-key but relatively watchable. The Africa swap is dismissed as a gimmick, but produced stuff that was as interesting as all but the best of BB5 (a show gimmicked from one end to the other).

Hey Elderflower (we know each other btw). I know Fed came here with his attention seeking antics, but I think Cameron is just here to defend himself which I'm OK with. Plus we're only accusing him of being the MOST BORING HOUSEMATE EVER it won't kill him

So what is it you actually like about BB and what keeps you watching?

I'm not here to defend myself - I've said as much in another thread. All I can do is shed some light on certain topics where speculation is (or more likely was) rife an attempt to make the facts known and help eliminate any misunderstandings.