|
||||||||
Channel 4 accused of being "supplied" with contestants from Agency [fake contestants] |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#26 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 75
|
Everyone keeps harping back to Jonny and Allison owning equity cards as if that suddenly makes them acting superstars.
If you do any work for TV and film, however small, it's required you register with Equity, as far as I know. It's not like a professional club for actors to be actors, it's actually a union, just like you would join a union for most trades. The fact that Jonny is registered with an agency doesn't mean he regularly acts, but that if a suitable part or a local shoot needs extras they could contact him on the offchance he may be interested in earning a few quid. I'm sure I also read that Alison actually wasn't contracted to an agent organisation during the show, she actually checked with them that she was no longeron their books before coming in. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#27 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 539
|
Quote:
Originally posted by mynameischris This years show was supposed to be shying away from the wannabe attitude of the last year, this should have included equity-card holders.. regardless how accomplished an actor they really are.
The fact that Jonny is registered with an agency doesn't mean he regularly acts, |
|
|
|
|
|
#28 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 75
|
I expect a fairly large percentage of the applicants could be classed as wannabes. You don't tend to get many shy and retiring people applying for Big Brother.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#29 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,752
|
But they still lied, didn't they?
The point is though, that the programme screened before the start of BB3 called, "How not to get on Big Brother", made one main point throughout it's entire duration.
"This year we do NOT want wannabes applying". Then look at who we got? Now they were either lying, or they were completely stupid in their selection. We have a population in the U.K. of about 64 million, look who got into the house, how does that lot represent the average man/woman off the street. Nobody is saying that Alison and Jonny are great actors. But you've got to ask yourself if you think it's okay for equity card holders to get on BB. Don't forget, that if BB3 think that either Jonny or Alison have "legs", they could use them post-big brother. The Pop Idol phenomenon proves that if you can get somebody into the limelight, you can use that persona in the future to rake in more money. Brian's success from CITV, shows that at the very least it is a tempting prospect. From what I've seen this year, both Alison and Jonny seem to me that they could do well in a television career. I can see either of them fronting kids tv. Is it a coincidence that they have acting experience and equity cards? Not saying that I believe that news story or not, but there's been too many coincidences this year. Conspiracy theory? Yes of course it is. But if these are questions that don't get answered properly, then they only add weight to the rumours. Conspiracy theory does NOT mean BS. It is exactly what it says it is. And if it produces interesting questions, then I'm listening and wating for the answers. Anyway, I love a good old conspiracy theory, it keeps people on their toes. |
|
|
|
|
|
#30 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 5,445
|
Why hasn't C4 come out and simply said it ain't true? Why wasn't a spokesperson saying anything? Because they have already been criticised by Endemol for failing to do proper background checks on this years selection maybe? Is this a case of smoke without fire, Jonny?!
I'm prepared fully to believe it's true, as true as the fakes on the tv agony progs turned out to be, after denials. |
|
|
|
|
|
#31 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 383
|
...
I can kinda believe this as the only ones who have been organising those annoying and infantile games in the house are Alison and Johnny...
|
|
|
|
|
|
#32 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 336
|
I could believe this, not at its most extreme "inventing a whole background and persona for Jonny" conspiracy. But it's quite possible they were having trouble finding suitable housemates so discreetly asked an agency for assistance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#33 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: A galaxy, far, far away..
Posts: 285
|
Without doubt the biggest pile of bull spun from the Elysium 'I hate Jonny stable' for quite some time. Funny all the same.
I suppose the fire station Jonny is based at is a hologram and his fireman mates are also actors who along with Jonny starred alongside Kurt Russell in 'Backdraft'. Come to think of it didn't Jonny co-star with Steve McQueen in that Hollywood epic the Towering Inferno? Hmmmm now let me see..
|
|
|
|
|
|
#34 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 52
|
You know not everything has to be a conspiracy. I highly doubt that it is true mainly for the reasons Jonny is dull dull dull (and his family/ friends have been on BBLB and the eviction shows) and Alison was evicted so early on (which was also a conspiracy according to many). Maybe the whole of BB is a conspiracy to make us give C4 money, duh. Who cares if they have been extras in TV shows or whatever, I have but I have no aspiration to be famous or anything like that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 539
|
No smoke without fire...!
Quote:
Originally posted by johnno From the public standpoint all housemates are taken at face value as being fairly genuine people whose only crime is that they have a penchant for fame. The problem we have with Channel 4 at the moment is that they appear to have selected at least two housemates with acting backgrounds, both of which belong to a registered agency.. now, the argument will rage on whether or not they have somehow flaunted the guidelines (once again) that govern reality tv programmes, in terms of giving one impression to the public as being “fairly average joes” but are in actual fact ‘trained’ actors selected to provide larger-than-life entertainment.. and more importantly, *expected* to be the life and soul of the house on demand.Why hasn't C4 come out and simply said it ain't true? Why wasn't a spokesperson saying anything? Because they have already been criticised by Endemol for failing to do proper background checks on this years selection maybe? Is this a case of smoke without fire, Jonny?! I'm prepared fully to believe it's true, as true as the fakes on the tv agony progs turned out to be, after denials. It has been mentioned by other posters that it seems as though both Jonny, and indeed Alison to a certain extent, had been ‘prompted’ by Big Brother throughout the show to “perform to order” .. If this is true then we can presume that not everything we are being led to believe about the programme is actually true, and that the public has been manipulated throughout. I think most open minded people will agree that Jonny has also been getting extremely favourable editorial slants from all Big Brother related media; be that BBLB, BB Late Night and indeed the official-website.. He has been almost single handily championed by Big Brother as the only worthwhile choice to win the show. Conspiracy theory or not .. there is certainly something sinister going on at Channel 4 house.. and it might not be too long before the ITC get involved unless Endemol / Channel 4 produce an official statement regarding the true nature of Jonny and Alison. |
|
|
|
|
|
#36 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 1,186
|
Re: But they still lied, didn't they?
[quote]Originally posted by Alrightmate
[b]The point is though, that the programme screened before the start of BB3 called, "How not to get on Big Brother", made one main point throughout it's entire duration. "This year we do NOT want wannabes applying". Then look at who we got? They also said we don't want people singing songs to us -Adele did on her video. And we don't want people stripping off - which Lee did on his video and by God wasn't he interesting to watch!! I can't quite believe that Jonnie is on their as a 'paid' pro but I don't think they should of let people with equity cards on the programme |
|
|
|
|
|
#37 |
|
Posts: n/a
|
Re: No smoke without fire...!
Quote:
Originally posted by Elysium I am sure it goes higher than that - the government are probably involved as well. I will be writing to my MP to have questions asked in parliment about this. We have the right to know...Conspiracy theory or not .. there is certainly something sinister going on at Channel 4 house.. and it might not be too long before the ITC get involved unless Endemol / Channel 4 produce an official statement regarding the true nature of Jonny and Alison. |
|
|
|
#38 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 539
|
Quote:
Originally posted by spankysinnocent I don’t think anyone is suggesting that Jonny is not a fireman in some capacity or has the family that you may have seen on TV … the premise is that he was selected because he had the both acting experience and held a job that the public could emphasise with.. the ingredients that combined would be perfect for Channel 4 and perfect for the viewers.
I suppose the fire station Jonny is based at is a hologram and his fireman mates are also actors who along with Jonny starred alongside Kurt Russell in 'Backdraft'. |
|
|
|
|
|
#39 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 744
|
Re: Re: No smoke without fire...!
Quote:
Originally posted by spoon It's a damn shame the cancelled the X-Files. Where are Scully and Mulder when you need them?
I am sure it goes higher than that - the government are probably involved as well. I will be writing to my MP to have questions asked in parliment about this. We have the right to know... |
|
|
|
|
|
#40 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,752
|
That's exactly what I mean.
Mention the words conspiracy theory, and people automatically think it means "too far fetched to be believable". I wonder who coined the term "conspiracy theory" in the first place? And why is the term usually used as a form of defence? Using those words automatically, excuses the person to back up their aruement. Safer to discedit the accuser, by making him/her look ridiculous. The truth is that conspiracy theories are usually about events that occur every day. And in the case of television these events have happened many times in the past. Ask Vanessa. A "conspiracy theory" uncovered that the production team behind her morning show had been deceiving the viewers. As a result Vanessa's television career is not as healthy as it once was. If when you hear the words conspiracy theory, you only think of the far-fetched and supernatural. Then that way of thinking makes you VERY easy to deceive. |
|
|
|
|
|
#41 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Hartlepool
Posts: 704
|
I doubt whether Elysium would have posted this if Jonny's name hadnt been mentioned. Keep up the good work Elysium!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#42 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 744
|
Nope. Tend to believe in the cock-up theory myself. The Vanessa incident had more to do with lazy junior researchers making their lives easier than any great desire to con the public. When 150,000 apply to be on BB, and 10,000 send in tapes why on earth try and fix things. Alison had a load of games on hand because she used to be a holiday rep. Jonny knew a lot of games because he likes that sort of package holiday. They were probably picked so that they would act up in the first couple of weeks and help the group bond together. Why look deeper than that? Unatributable news stories prove nothing other than the bias of the poster.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#43 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,752
|
accidie
I'm not necessarily going along with the collusion(spelling?)
Idea, but I'm open to see if anything comes from it. I think your idea of researcher's incompetance could be closer to the truth. Why look deeper? Well it adds another element of interest.. It adds the possibility of another twist. I think it's fair enough for valid questions to be asked. In fact it'd be entertaintment in itself, if there actually was a bit of dodgy dealings going on, and we could see the producers squirm a bit. I think there's enough reasonable doubt there, going by what we do know, for people to at least make suggestions and ask questions. |
|
|
|
|
|
#44 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: london
Posts: 4,890
|
this is simply another johnny bashing thread.
nothing more nothing less. if it was true and alex was mentioned it would never have been posted. |
|
|
|
|
|
#45 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 638
|
Re: No smoke without fire...!
Quote:
Originally posted by Elysium And there was you saying this afternoon that the C4 official website had Jonny sussed.I think most open minded people will agree that Jonny has also been getting extremely favourable editorial slants from all Big Brother related media; be that BBLB, BB Late Night and indeed the official-website.. He has been almost single handily championed by Big Brother as the only worthwhile choice to win the show. Or was that just bollocks too? |
|
|
|
|
|
#46 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 539
|
Your pain is our pain ..
Quote:
Originally posted by homer911 I understand that the last thing you would wish to do is accept that Jonny has been pulling the wool over your eyes, especially for this long [lets be honest, it would make you look rather foolish after all].. I can imagine how devoted Jonny supporters such as yourself must be feeling, your pain ( to a certain extent ) is our pain .. but you’ll feel better once you get over the initial admission and see him for what he really is .. a bit part actor in a reality tv programme who is on the verge of pulling off one of his greatest acting roles of all time; .. just think how proud his “poor mam and dad” must be feeling at this moment in time! .. He's nearly there..
this is simply another johnny bashing thread. |
|
|
|
|
|
#47 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,295
|
Quote:
Originally posted by spoon I agree with Spoon. Occam's Razor states that "All chances being equal, the simplest explanation is usually the right one"The bottom line comes down to Occams Razor - why bother faking it when they get all the controvesy etc. when they don't. As for trying to cheat the public and not pay the 70k - do the sums - they could lose 70k down the back of the sofa and still have made shit loads of money The simplest explanation in this case is that there's no point in faking it. |
|
|
|
|
|
#48 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 539
|
Re: Re: No smoke without fire...!
Quote:
Originally posted by Dr Mick There has been a change in the editorial stance and it is not as pro-Jonny as it once was.. If this continues it will almost certainly help change the outcome of the show .. but is it too little too late?
And there was you saying this afternoon that the C4 official website had Jonny sussed. Or was that just bollocks too? |
|
|
|
|
|
#49 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Berwick upon Tweed
Posts: 1,343
|
I don't know about Jonny but after watching tonights BB on C4 I'mm 100% convinced that Tim is a plant. Did anyone see his interview in the diary room, no-one but no-one could be that arrogent!! It's humanly impossible. The man is repulsive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#50 |
|
Posts: n/a
|
Quote:
Originally posted by kmac I've met lots of people like Tim (through work related things not socially I might add) there are loads of them out there
no-one but no-one could be that arrogent!! It's humanly impossible. The man is repulsive. |
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:51.



