About Us ThisisBigBrother.com

Headie · 13-04-2016, 01:05 AM

If Channel 5 were to narrow the applicants down to about 20/30/40 and us viewers got to choose 16 HMs, would you support that idea?

Survivor did it for Season 31 but they did it with about 30 previous contestants and then the viewers chose 20.

I know most of us would be against it since the GBP often make terrible decisions, but it's something that's never been done before and would be interesting to see, especially since we'd only have their appearance/bios/short VTs to go off.

It would also allow them to "reveal the cast" before Launch but we wouldn't actually know who the 16 finalists were until launch night, so there'd still be a reason to watch.

Might as well take a risk since the show is dying on it's arse anyway

Shaun · 13-04-2016, 01:08 AM

I don't know if I'd mind... I'd probably stan about 10 of those that don't make it, knowing my luck

As long as it didn't result in like 16 men are picked (maybe have like the 8 males with the most votes & the 8 women as well?) (or however many HM slots there are).

Marsh. · 13-04-2016, 01:08 AM

No. Completely pointless tbh.

Jack_ · 13-04-2016, 01:11 AM

Absolutely no way in hell - they already destroy series after series through their complete incompetence regarding who leaves, so I definitely don't trust them enough to decide who actually goes in, it would be the people with the most inoffensive, quiet VT's and bios

That said, a vote amongst a pool of ex-housemates for an All Stars style season a la Survivor Second Chance could potentially work a bit better?

Rob! · 13-04-2016, 01:13 AM

was the result of the last time this happened so no.

Shaun · 13-04-2016, 01:14 AM

idk if that'd necessarily happen, Jack - maybe if it were a flashvote it'd give the fans less time to "write off" the trashier/messier/more loud candidates, and they'd just soar straight through?

I mean the only time something like this has happened, in my memory, was BB13 - Becky, as awful as she became, was by far the loudest and craziest candidate (I did like Bhavesh and Anthony as well) and she quite comfortably won IIRC.

Headie · 13-04-2016, 01:14 AM

Poll added, btw!

Headie · 13-04-2016, 01:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaun

I mean the only time something like this has happened, in my memory, was BB13 - Becky, as awful as she became, was by far the loudest and craziest candidate (I did like Bhavesh and Anthony as well) and she quite comfortably won IIRC.

They did it in BB2 as well with Josh getting voted in over Anne (a retired old lady who used to be fat) and Natasha (a black model and self-confessed bitch), which is starting to make me think this is not such a good idea anymore since in both incidents the worst one was chosen

Tbf Becky did seem promising during the wildcard promotional stuff

Jack_ · 13-04-2016, 01:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaun

idk if that'd necessarily happen, Jack - maybe if it were a flashvote it'd give the fans less time to "write off" the trashier/messier/more loud candidates, and they'd just soar straight through?

I mean the only time something like this has happened, in my memory, was BB13 - Becky, as awful as she became, was by far the loudest and craziest candidate (I did like Bhavesh and Anthony as well) and she quite comfortably won IIRC.

I suppose that's a fair point, and it is in effect a vote to save - perhaps if it was a strict online only vote that they didn't really publicise, the forums and superfans would be able to control the outcome and put together a decent cast

The problem is the casuals, once they're encouraged to join in standards start slipping and it's 'oooh isn't he cute xx' or 'he seems really nice!' that become the reasons people are voted in. I don't know, I think I'd rather just leave the casting team who are employed to do this to their own devices (even if the casts aren't always on-point)

Lush · 13-04-2016, 01:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob!

was the result of the last time this happened so no.

This was the first thing I thought of as well.

*shivers*

Headie · 13-04-2016, 01:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack_

I suppose that's a fair point, and it is in effect a vote to save - perhaps if it was a strict online only vote that they didn't really publicise, the forums and superfans would be able to control the outcome and put together a decent cast

The problem is the casuals, once they're encouraged to join in standards start slipping and it's 'oooh isn't he cute xx' or 'he seems really nice!' that become the reasons people are voted in. I don't know, I think I'd rather just leave the casting team who are employed to do this to their own devices (even if the casts aren't always on-point)

But the casting team would still be heavily involved, they'd just be responsible for selecting more people i.e. choosing 30 rather than 16 so that the public have a roster to choose from.

Jack_ · 13-04-2016, 01:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hayden

But the casting team would still be heavily involved, they'd just be responsible for selecting more people i.e. choosing 30 rather than 16 so that the public have a roster to choose from.

Another fair point, and I guess if they're 30 great potential housemates it doesn't really matter who gets picked - but really, the likelihood is there are going to be some duds (not all of them are always initially obvious, granted), and I'd be worried they'd be voted in by the casuals

zakman440 · 13-04-2016, 01:43 AM

I'd be open to it tbh - but it'd depend on how they pull it off. I actually thought of a similar idea a couple of months ago (it'd involve the split launch returning and live feed);

- In launch night 1, 16 housemates move into the Big Brother house.

- At the end of launch night 1, Emma announces that 16 more housemates will move in tomorrow. The public will have to decide which housemates sleep inside and which sleep outside in sleeping bags via the website/app (the first launch housemates get to sleep inside for the first night).

- In launch night 2, the next 16 housemates move into the house, with the results of the previous night's poll revealed. Emma then announces that it's in the public's hands to decide which housemates get to remain in the Big Brother house (via the phone lines/website/app).

- The 32 housemates will be split into four voting groups via random draw - Set A, Set B, Set C & Set D.

- Precisely one week later, Emma fronts a 90 minute programme revealing the results of the public vote. Rylan then fronts a special BOTS interviewing the evicted housemates.

Firewire · 13-04-2016, 01:50 AM

Have they even received 33 applications?

Marsh. · 13-04-2016, 01:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack_

Another fair point, and I guess if they're 30 great potential housemates it doesn't really matter who gets picked - but really, the likelihood is there are going to be some duds (not all of them are always initially obvious, granted), and I'd be worried they'd be voted in by the casuals

Of course there'll be duds in some form.

A good cast is diverse and so each and every one will be a "dud" to some viewers depending on who/what they enjoy to watch.

Mokka · 13-04-2016, 02:05 AM

I'm a no considering when the public vote people on and off I generally disagree with them

Tom4784 · 13-04-2016, 02:19 AM

No, more often than not the public have disgusting taste.

VanessaFeltz. · 13-04-2016, 04:32 AM

ım sick of casual viewers are so no.

every season they want inoffensive somehow attractive guy or boring useless girls sometimes (to not be called sexist i suppose)

Mystic Mock · 13-04-2016, 07:12 AM

No the public should not choose as they'll just pick all of the Stuart Wilson and Rachel Rice types.

MB. · 13-04-2016, 07:28 AM

I'd support the idea of me choosing the housemates, yes

(yeah, why not. The viewing figures nowadays are so minute that we'd probably have a considerable say in it, which I'd be pleased and slightly horrified about in equal measure)