:clap1: :clap1:

Absolutely!

Right on, Kirk. The producers have turned it into a repulsive, shallow, and boring panto show.

Producers love him and that's why he's always shown. They know he makes headlines and everyone is talking about him. Controversy sells.

You are spot on here, Vanessa, and that sums it up really- good or bad, enjoy it or not, it can't be denied that everyone is talking about him and, when it comes down to it, it is controversy that sells.

:laugh: But fitz - THIS is EXACTLY what point my post was making.

You can only judge on what you are SEEING or being ALLOWED to see, and you MUST ask yourself two questions:

1) Is WHAT I am seeing the result of biased selective editing on the part of the show's producers, who WANT to give Bear the 'Lion's Share' of screentime, and the best plot lines, so he is seen as more ENTERTAINING, whilst depriving the 'others' of screen time, and giving them poor plot lines to show them as less entertaining and rather mundane?

2) In addition to the above; has the behaviour/performances of the 'other' HM's during the reduced screen time which they do have, been adversely affected and their REAL personalities suppressed BECAUSE of the dominating antics of Bear?

Are ANY of the other HM's personalities REALLY as boring and mundane as this show might suggest?

I KNOW that James Whale was a very intelligent and opinionated person who was an avid conversationalist and raconteur who loved to express himself on all manner of interesting topics back in 'the day', and he is but a pale shadow of his former self on here.

I have seen Sam Fox on various other shows and programmes, and she has been far more animated and bubbly and upbeat than she has been on here.

I did not know Frankie, or Aubrey, or anyone else prior to them coming into the house, but I have read the positive things which other members on here have had to say about them, and THAT, in addition to the research which I have done on the internet about them all, CONVINCES me that EVERYONE of them are NOT showing their 'normal' personalities on CBB.

I can only deduce what I have, and maintain that biased editing AND the suppressive, oppressive nature of psycho Bears toxic and draining personality, is responsible.

Sam Fox - and I'm not a fan - could sit silently in a room and still be more interesting than Bear. Unless I was some kind of head doctor. Then Bear would be really interesting.

Tbh i don't think one housemates behaviour can excuse the lack of character from a crap cast.If Bear never went in there then most people would be switching off by now through boredom.He was obviously the best they could find for this series.
Hopefully next series we actually get some celebrities in there.

:laugh::laugh::laugh:: So true. He is as BORING as they come with his shallow, infantile, repetitive behaviour.

Thanks Puzzled.

:clap1::clap1::clap1: Well said Sam. It is now at a 'Jeremy Kyle' level.

You're absolutely right Kirk. And I think your point is highlighted even more by having a direct comparison coming off the back of BB17.
We had Marco who was an overbearing focus in the beginning, and a lot of people said he was making the show, but his eviction proved that wasn't the case. Look at Laura for example; her only purpose during Marco's stay in the house was as a pawn to his airtime and it was only once he left that the producers allowed us to see her actual personality, and a lot of us (including myself) went from disliking her to absolutely loving her. I don't personally believe that it was simply a case that she didn't show her personality before then. Many of us were shocked that she wasn't nominated in the first week because of the edit we saw of her, but her not being nominated shows that the HM's were seeing something different.
And then Natalie was 'making the show' because she had lots of arguments, but personally I found her one-note, and her arguments dull, and again once she left it opened the show up further and we got to see other housemates flourish. My series favourite was Emma and I doubt that would have been the case had Marco and Natalie stayed because the little moments that made me love her simply wouldn't have been shown. And a show like Big Brother, for me, is more about the little moments and getting to see what makes people tick, rather than it being about watching obnoxious idiots causing faux drama for the sake of it.

A lot of us tend to moan about contrived storylines and producer manipulation, but by buying into the producer driven hype of a single housemate, by making claims that someone like Bear is 'making the show' simply because that's what they're feeding us, we're rewarding the producers and encouraging more of it, so it shouldn't come as a surprise when they bring in other types of manipulation too. The problem I have with situations like this though, is that it's a situation where, like Cherie so shrewdly pointed out in another thread, the producers are manipulating us.

Of course had Bear left early, like you said there's no guarantee that this series would be entertaining. But for me at least, and for what I like to watch in a BB series, it isn't entertaining in the slightest with him in there so I'd have been happy with that risk.

I absolutely agree with you so well spoken Kirk & Garfie.

Thank you Jamie. You are so intelligent and eloquent, I'm proud. :laugh:

Thanks Hijax - I miss you on the old word games.

Love him or hate him at least he's doing f something in there. Take out Bear, Rene and a few others and the rest is just coasting along. No one can deny he's the one who has had the most impact in this series. Everyone is talking about him.

Ahh, sorry. This is simply no absolute. Without this horrible bastard, at least ONE of the others may rise to prominence.

Shirley McLaine became a Mega Star in the 1954 production of 'Pyjama Game' when she stepped out of the shadows as an understudy when 'STAR' Carol Haney broke her ankle. WTF knows who Carol Haney is now? But they ALL know Shirley McLaine.

Anthony Hopkins stepped out of the shadows and became a Mega Star in the 1965 production of 'Dance of Death', when he understudied the incomparable Laurence Olivier who went down with appendicitis.

Your post PRESUMES that NONE of the other HM's have the charisma, personality, intellect, or ability to be a 'Star' celebrity, when the truth is - that much like 'understudies' - they are being 'FORCED' into the shadows because the producers have cast twat Bear as the 'Star'.

Also, as with the 'understudies', ONCE Bear the 'Star' is GONE, at least ONE of the other HM's WILL seize the opportunity to step up to the mark, and become the new 'Star'.

Do you REALLY and TRULY believe that from Day One, if these same HM's went into the CBB house and Bear was NEVER an HM, that we would NOW have certain members on here crying that the entire show is 'boring'? Or would we now all be enjoying a good series were there was a mixture of the HM's interacting, Game Playing, Back Stabbing, Show-mancing - ALL the ingredients atypical of CBB AND BB, but WITHOUT the overpowering, disruptive, vexatious and cruel bullying tactics of show-off Bear.

:clap1:

To all the Bear "supporters", would you live with him????

No, but as a housemate I think he's fantastic!

Some of them don't have personalities to suppress :omgno: ruthless....:hehe:

None of us have to?

:nono: I want your SWEET side back.

:laugh:

Yeah Paul, but we have to live with the 'orrible twat one hour per day if we still want to watch our favourite show. :laugh:

I think you might have misunderstand my point, and missed some of the previous discussion maybe....? You are right that everyone is talking about him, and he has had most impact, but to many people on this thread, that has been manipulated by the editing and is a negative, rather than positive thing.

Ive not seen anyone else with a personality in there for him to suppress