Does "well at least she drove the story" matter if...
 

if the story was ****?

This series was an abomination. The cast was awful, production was awful, etc etc. I think enough has been said about this season, and most people agree that 12 and 15 are the two worst ever. But somehow in spite of this, Aaron, and there's at least a vocal support group for Helen, are two of the most popular winners on this forum, mainly for reasons such as "well at least they were entertaining!" and "they provided talking points!" and "they drove the story! Aaron/Helen was BB12/BB15!"

I just don't understand the dichotomy of "12 and 15 were the two worst series ever, BUT they had the best winners ever :3" Like, yes BB12 was All About Aaron and BB15 was All About Helen but they were both awful series as a result of that. Why is it a good thing for someone to "drive the narrative" if it's a **** narrative that many people have stated they aren't enjoying?

I think the fact that a series can single-handedly be awarded to one person, is the reason the series is so bad, if that makes sense. Helen and Aaron were both fantastic winners - but it's because every other housemate (practically) around them were awful that made them look even better than they were.

I just don't get it, especially considering that you were one of the biggest detractors of this series from the start. Yet somehow Helen's a great winner when this series was all about her. Like... perhaps that's why it was so awful? idk idk

Except that the BB15 cast were much better than the BB12 cast - several of the BB15 finalists would have made worthy winners, whilst Aaron was the only possible winner in BB12.

Yes the story was mostly sh*t but what were the alternatives? More Steven and Kim?

90% of the housemates this year were abominations and the winner never means anything to me anyway.

I don't think this series is that bad, it had a good cast but the power theme messed it all up, I wanted Ashleigh to win but if not then Helen so I'm not that bothered

Just hope from all the negativity this series they improve next year

Right, the winner really mean much in the grand scheme of things. I just don't get the logic of "this season was awful BUT Helen was amazing I'm so glad she won" when the season was literally Helen's story so that's why it was so bad.

Like, I know quite a few people say Chris "didn't do enough" to warrant him winning, but I don't think being detached from the story is bad when, again, the story was awful. Similarly, I wouldn't have minded an Alex win in BB12 at all because she didn't have any part in why I hated that series.

IDK I really can't pretend that I thought the cast was well below average when it included Ash, Biannca, Helen, Mark, Matthew, Pauline, Steven, Tamara, Toya, Winston, and Zoe :3

I don't think the series was all about Helen though.... there was many storylines going on unlike BB12.

I agree, this series had an amazing cast but an unfortunate eviction order.

Very unfortunate, I still feel really bad for jale and that killer nom :( pauline was horrible, a million % worse than helen imo.

Yes, I quite agree. The series would have been better if Toya and Matthew had stayed to the end. But the finals pass thing was just stupid and (even though I won't be watching it) I do hope it improves next year.

You liked Aaron? :umm2:

No, I just think he and Helen serve a very similar function. BB12 and BB15 are both awful series, Aaron and Helen drove the stories so to speak, and quite a few people love the individuals but hate the series, and I'm trying to wrap my head around that (lack of) logic.

I think if helen was not present that cast of housemates would have better than the last civ bb 2013, helen ruined it.

Simple as that.:wavey:

oh I see