| FAQ |
| Members List |
| Calendar |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
| BB11 Channel 4's last Big Brother series started June 2010. Josie Gibson was the winner. All the gossip about the Big Brother 11 house, series and housemates here! |
| Register to reply Log in to reply |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
|
#2 | |||
|
||||
|
Senior Member
|
Quote:
that is of course if your story is true
__________________
![]() RIP Pyramid, Andyman ,Kerry and Lex xx https://www.facebook.com/JamesBulgerMT/?fref=photo "If slaughterhouses had glass walls, most people would be vegetarian" |
|||
|
|
|
|
#3 | ||
|
|||
|
oh fack off
|
Quote:
![]() Out of the entire cast, these were the best housemates: Sam, John James, Corin, Shabby, Govan, Ben, Rachael. The rest, bar a few 'average' HM's, were out and out bores. Last edited by Jack_; 14-09-2010 at 03:56 PM. |
||
|
|
|
|
#4 | |||
|
||||
|
Senior Member
|
Quote:
![]() ![]()
__________________
![]() RIP Pyramid, Andyman ,Kerry and Lex xx https://www.facebook.com/JamesBulgerMT/?fref=photo "If slaughterhouses had glass walls, most people would be vegetarian" |
|||
|
|
|
|
#5 | ||
|
|||
|
oh fack off
|
Quote:
I said at the beginning of BB11 that if Rachael, Govan, Shabby and even Sunshine left the series would seriously start to fall apart...and what happened? It practically did, only being held up by John James and later Sam, and to a lesser extent Corin. Ben had his parts too. If it had not have been for them the whole thing would've fallen apart - and no, that is not an opinion. It is fact. Please don't even try to deny that BB11 had arguably one of the worst casts ever - because it did. Had it not been for a select few people, that I have named, it would've been practically unwatchable. Govan and John James gave us all something to watch, something to talk about. Housemates like Steve and Laura and in the past Hira and Rachel Rice do not. And this show thrives of discussion and debate. And all TV shows thrive off of something to watch...obviously. Because TV is about entertainment. And the likes of Andrew, do not offer entertainment. It's that simple. Think of it this way: What would a soap/drama be without it's main characters? What would a football team be without it's manager/coach? It's the same thing with BB. The show is nothing without big characters. And who the 'big' characters are is not debatable. It is fairly common sense too, if people just thought about it for a second... It is this kind of mentality, of voting out the people you 'hate', i.e voting with hatred, rather than with logic, that has been a contributing factor as to why, currently, and as far as we are aware, we are no longer going to be watching Big Brother anymore. And I hope you all realise that, because you call yourself Big Brother fans, but let's be honest, you're not really... |
||
|
|
|
|
#6 | |||
|
||||
|
Senior Member
|
Quote:
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() G et a grip it's a TV show,NOT the end of the world,You obviously think 'nasty' people should be rewarded,I don't so tough titty.
__________________
![]() RIP Pyramid, Andyman ,Kerry and Lex xx https://www.facebook.com/JamesBulgerMT/?fref=photo "If slaughterhouses had glass walls, most people would be vegetarian" |
|||
|
|
|
|
#7 | ||
|
|||
|
oh fack off
|
Yes...because they were the best housemates of BB11. Are you seriously suggesting John James wasn't one of the best housemates this year? He gave everyone something to talk about and watch, was a big character, and thus was one of the best housemates of BB11. Shabby was the same up until she left - and she created drama. Govan would've been the same had he left, a sh!t stirrer is always good. Rachael didn't last long enough unfortunately but her storyline with John James was just beginning to develop and would've been ****ing brilliant to watch.
Other than that...they were all pretty much bores. Quote:
Just shows the massive flaws in your argument, really. Because I challenge every point you make and you return with ' '. Doesn't really justify your argument, does it? It just exposes it as being very weak...which of course we already knew. You could at least try, my darling.And indeed it is a TV show. Correct. And so therefore it is not 'rewarding' anything. It is purely entertainment. It doesn't matter who wins, or who stays in. Because it's a gameshow. An entertainment show. And thus, the big characters should stay until the end, regardless of whether they are nice or not. As you have said, it's a TV show, and thus it is not 'rewarding' anything. Can't you see that? |
||
|
|
|
|
#8 | |||
|
||||
|
Hands off my Brick!
|
Quote:
__________________
Spoiler: |
|||
|
|
|
|
#9 | |||
|
||||
|
oh fack off
|
Quote:
I mean, really? Is that the best you can do? Are you not going to at least even attempt to challenge my points? Or is it just all 'this is my opinion, but I'm not willing to justify it or back it up or challenge the points you make' with you? Is your argument really that weak? Deary me... Quote:
Quote:
I'm not 'busting a blood vessel' when 'nice' people win. Again, why to miss my entire point. I have no problem with 'nice' people winning. I was quite happy with Brian Dowling winning UBB, as he was one of my favourites. And he was nice. But why was I happy with that? Because he was entertaining. And a big character. So long as a big character, who is entertaining, and has given everyone something to watch and talk about...wins, then it does not matter whether they are 'nasty' or 'nice'. That's irrelevant. It's about how good they are as a housemate, not a person. If there was a nasty person, who added **** all to the show...then I would not want them to win. If there was a nice person, who added lots to the show...then I'd want them to win. What is so difficult for you to understand? It is pretty much common sense... Wrong again. It bares no relevance whether a housemate is nasty or nice. They are a big character if they give people lots of things to talk about, spark lots of discussion and debate, give us something to watch, are entertaining, have added to the show/house, etc etc. Housemates like Steve, Andrew and Laura are not big characters...and to pass them off as big characters is just plain stupid. Big characters are not debatable, they are not people's individual 'favourites'...they cannot be changed. The big characters are the big characters, regardless of whether they are your favourite or not. Wrong again. That is a 'favourite'. You know...like the Bookie's favourite to win. It is rarely the real big characters...they are usually the favourites to be evicted. Favourites are individual chocies [that, if people had any sense, would be the big characters]. Big characters are not choices, they are set in stone, and cannot be changed. Fact. That pretty much proves how weak your argument is. And how weak your debating skills are. Theoretically, I should be the one acting like you, considering I am [supposedly] younger. Says a lot really, doesn't it? Thanks. At least someone agrees. It's like trying to get through a brick wall with some of these people though, I could say it a million times and I would never get through to them
|
|||
|
|
|
|
#10 | |||
|
||||
|
Senior Member
|
Quote:
__________________
Last edited by calyman; 14-09-2010 at 09:09 PM. |
|||
|
|
| Register to reply Log in to reply |
|
|