Motorsport Subjects that would make Awesome Films: Alex Zanardi

As I write this article in the middle of February we are right in the middle of awards season for the film industry, with the Oscars themselves taking place on the 22nd of February, the same day of course as the Daytona 500, making it somewhat apt for this motoring and television based blog. Whilst I am somebody who does have more time for the Academy then the some more skeptical and invertedly snobbish peers of mine I am the first to recognise a particular character type that comes to the forefront in the best actor and actress category, for the males it comes in the form of an actor portraying an eccentric, pioneering and/ or heroic figure who had to face extreme adversary to succeed in his field against the odds, often with a tragic underside he has to balance. Whereas for the women it is essentially any role played by Meryl Streep.Baring this in mind it made me think of the sort of figures that would prove ideal for this kind of Oscar bait role, and arguably anybody who chooses to risk their lives at 200 miles an hour would have to be considered a hero, but a story like that needs for the adversity a driver to face to be unlike anything the sport has seen, and in my eyes the story of Alex Zanardi is one that would be incredibly difficult to top.

Prior to 2001 the perception of Alex Zanardi as a racing driver was heavily divided depending on which side of the Atlantic you were on. To most Europeans Zanardi was seen largely as an underwhelming journeyman who failed to showcase his potential across two disappointing spells in Formula One, whereas in America Zanardi was lauded as one of the best in the business, a driver who walked the fine tightrope between bravery and recklessness and with a Latin charisma that was wholeheartedly embraced by the showbiz conscious American media and fan base.Zanardi was one of the CART series' biggest fan favourites, which made his crash at the 2001 German 500 at the Lausitzring all the more shocking to view, leading the race with 13 laps to go Zanardi spun whilst exiting the pit lane following his final pit stop of the race, spinning up onto the track itself and straight into the path of an oncoming Alex Tagliani. The horrifying impact saw Zanardi lose both of his legs and if not for the quick work of the track's medics very nearly his life.

Such an incident would prove difficult to overcome for any person, but for a racing driver whose entire lifestyle is based around high adrenaline and physical performance the impact would be even more profound, and would surely end any kind of further career in the sport. That was the thinking however until Alex Zanardi came along, showcasing a drive, desire and willingness to overcome adversary which has seen him emerge as one of the sport's most beloved figures. In a third of the time it took a normal amputee patient Zanardi had learned to walk again, and just two years later against the wishes of doctors and industry experts returned to competitive motor sport in the European Touring Car Championship, defying critics by not only competing but regularly challenging for victories before retiring in 2006. His greatest achievements however would be yet to come, where still feeling the competitive bug Zanardi turned his attention to hand-cycling where at the age of 45, well above the average for most competitive cyclists he won a gold medal at the London 2012 games, the ceremony taking place aptly at the Brands Hatch Circuit he graced so wonderfully as a driver.

Alex Zanardi's story is one of inspiration, drive, desire and an unwillingness to give in regardless of the obstacles in your way, and in the hands of a strong actor would prove to be the awe-inspiring role which would showcase to the casual fan just why racing drivers are such heroic figures.

Motorsport Subjects that would make Awesome Films: The 2007 F1 Season

 In my most recent blog post I made the suggestion that after years of trying Hollywood had finally been able to get their heads around the concept of the motorsport movie, and part of me would like to think that the blog has played a part in inspiring Hollywood in some way, as just days after I posted the article news spread that the actor Patrick Dempsey, himself a keen petrol head and racer, expressed an interest in adapting the Michael Cannell book The Limit into a potential TV series or film, the book in question focusing on Phil Hill's rise from Californian mechanic to 1961 Formula One Champion. And it got me thinking about many of the other great motorsport moments, personalities or races that too would be perfect adaptations for Hollywood films. This is a purely subjective list and I understand there will be disagreements, but it's more to showcase the great depth of intrigue that this sport that I personally love has in droves.

1) The 2007 Formula One Season
On paper 2007 doesn't seem like a season which is particularly that interesting, certainly I think a lot of casual viewers would struggle to remember many great races during the season, but where the sport maybe lacked in terms of on-track activity it made up for off track, helping to create one of the most controversial and divisive season's in the sport's history in a tale of espionage, paranoia and at it's core a team divided.

It also has at it's heart three ambiguous characters within a hard-fought title campaign, neither of which taking an outright protaganistic role which makes the story all the more intriguing to the viewer. In Fernando Alonso we have arguably the best figure in the sport making a move to at the time the best team in the sport in what on paper appears to be a dream partnership almost certain to guarantee the Spaniard a third straight championship, but the cold corporate attitude of the McLaren is a distinct contrast to Fernando's Latin temperament, and when rookie teammate Lewis Hamilton begins to match and surpass the performances of the Spaniard Alonso begins to grow increasingly paranoid at what he sees as preferencial treatment to Hamilton, very much in the corporate mold McLaren look for, leading Fernando's behaviour on and off the track to grow increasingly desperate to top his rookie rival. Hamilton however is not devoid of blame himself, hired as a blatant number 2 driver to a double champion Lewis takes matters into his own hands seeing himself on an equal footing with his more established rival with a brash and cocky demeanor that leaves him as a divisive figure for the Formula one community, and as the prospect of becoming the sports only true rookie champion beckons the tension soon begins to take it's toll, add to this the season also sees an espionage storyline involving the McLaren team with Alonso instigated in the controversy, further adding to the scandal and paranoia surrounding the team, all I stress whilst the team is trying to earn itself a driver's championship away from Kimi Raikkonen and the Ferrari team. The story for me would work incredibly well in Hollywood largely because of the multiple ways in which the actions of the two teammates can be interpreted, is Fernando in the wrong for calling out behaviour largely out of paranoia, or is Lewis in the wrong for breaking team orders due to his own brashness? It would divide a film audience in the same way it divided the F1 community, and add in the espionage scandal I honestly don't feel it can be topped.

Whiplash Review

 JK Simmons and Miles Teller impress in the film that’s more Full Metal Jacket than Fame

Nearly two hours of drumming, screaming and homophobic insults; on paper not the most appealing concept format for a feature length Hollywood film, and yet in the space of 12 months Whiplash has seen itself transform from a short story into one of the surprise packages of the festival and awards season, and certainly from my own viewing of the film it is easy to see why, a pulsating, tight and at times disarming drama which will grip you to your seat and keep you there through every clashing symbol.

The film’s plot revolves around 19 year old Andrew (Miles Teller), a drumming prodigy at a New York music school desperately looking to attract the attention of the fiercely competitive music teacher Trevor Fletcher (JK Simmons), a tyrannical figure who considers the two most damaging words in the English language to be ‘good job’. Under Fletcher’s drill sergeant thumb, Andrew finds himself pushed to his physical and mental limit, succumbing to thrown chairs, aggressive taunting and playing for so long and so hard that his hands begin to bleed. Much more Full Metal Jacket then Fame you can certainly say.

JK Simmons has always been known throughout his career for some great scene stealing performances, yet for Whiplash he pulls off the proverbial Great Train Robbery. His Fletcher character oozes a sinister and masochistic streak, the perfect antagonist channelling every kind of authoritarian schoolyard figure, but yet with a charisma and aura about him that leaves you enamoured by his presence every time that he is on screen without ever crossing the strict line into anti-hero territory. Almost akin to a R. Lee Ermey figure, he is domineering with an appeal largely in how cold and masochistic the character can get at times. Simmons’ performance has rightfully earned strong kudos from Hollywood and of the five Oscar nominations that the film has earned it is Simmons’ best supporting actor award that would be most deserved.

That is not to say however that the rest of the film suffers from any kind of short-comings, far from it in fact. This is a pulsating film that at times wanders from that of the traditional protégé and master setup more akin to that of a sports movie but with the psychological trauma and tension comparative to that of Black Swan, another film which, like Whiplash, managed to take the traditionally sedate world of the art house and turn it into a physically and mentally draining bloodshed. The tension is reflected brilliantly also through the direction of sophomore director Damien Chazelle. Himself a part time drummer, Chazelle has managed to encapsulate this brilliantly on screen with clever cinematography and a real feeling of physical anguish that manages to completely change the view of a musical figure in the drummer often seen quite derogatorily within the music industry.

 That isn’t to say, however, that the film is without flaws. Whilst Miles Teller’s Andrew is impressive enough in the battle between pupil and master I was left feeling at times that the sympathy we as an audience felt for his ordeal was less through his own merits and more through his role as a plot device, and that the moments of personification that the character did have either fell flat or were within the context of the film relatively pointless, the subplot revolving around a one-dimensional love interest played by the underused Melissa Benoist being the most prominent example of this.

Whiplash certainly doesn’t match up in terms of stature and star power against some of it’s more established rivals come the awards season, but what the film lacks in those fields it shows what can be done with originality, tension and intelligent film-making, and for that reason alone it is a must watch for any aspiring film-maker. Much like the drum solos throughout this is one that going to stay in your head for a long time to come.

How Hollywood Cracked the Motorsport Movie

How Hollywood Cracked the Motorsport Movie

Along with television and film one of the biggest loves that I have in my life has always been motorsport, from catching my first Formula One race on television as a wide eyed six year old I was hooked from an early age, and from Formula One came Touring Cars, then Indycar, Nascar, Moto GP you name it, basically in this day and age if it has an engine in it then more likely then not I am going to watch it race. With it's extremely competitive industry of colourful characters, politics and scandal all set upon a backdrop of glamour, wealth and danger you would think that the sport would be the perfect focus of attention for any Hollywood production, yet for 30 years Hollywood often struggled to successfully be able to translate the appeal of motorsport through a cinematic context, some of this coming from the natural difficulties of translating the excitement of sport on 35mm but most of the time coming from a complete inability of those involve to truly capture what it is that makes us motorsport so enthralled by our sport, an opinion that has only changed following the breakout success of 2009's Senna.

Prior to Senna however motorsport films found themselves split into two key types, each divided primarily through different generations which in some ways cam also be used as a means of defining the changing interpretation of cinema. The first wave came about in the 1960's and 70's where motorsport films included the likes of Steve McQueen's Le Mans as well as the 1969 Paul Newman flick Winning, both were moderate successes in the box office but earned more of a following through a cult status achieved with the rise of video and DVD. Both of these films in many ways could be seen as arguable pet projects of their respective stars, with both Newman and McQueen being keen petrol-heads both in their leisure time as well as both having keen involvements in motorsport itself, Newman would become part owner of an Indycar team during the 1980's whilst McQueen took part in a number of race meetings including a second place finish in the 12 hours of Sebring, and this interest in the sport shines through with their respective films, both Le Mans and Winning are beautifully shot and with a keen eye on the technical side of the sport, letting the imagery and atmosphere of motorsport, rather then dialogue and story-arcs be the catalyst for drawing you into the project, hell, for the first 30 minutes of Le Mans the only meaningful dialogue is a conversation about brake calipers such is the level of technical interest in the film. However in making the film so fixated around the technical side of the sport that it is deterring from a filmic viewpoint, Le Mans has almost no story whatsoever whilst Winning is flimsy to see the least, rendering the whole purpose of the two films as beautifully made but ultimately pointless pet projects. John Frankenheimer's 1966 release Grand Prix manages however to strike the right chords a bit better, whilst still not perfect by any means it's storyline feels a bit more in depth and with characters fleshed out and easy to see based on the real drivers of the day and with camera work and cinematography well ahead of it's time, but still locked away in the realms of the niche to ever truly be welcomed by a modern audience.

Unfortunately though by the 1980's it was the modern audiences which took priority, and the motor racing film entered phase 2; where technicality and aura in the sport was pushed aside to make way for the sport being nothing more then a glorified set-piece for another film genre, and in the process making films that went a long way to hurting the reputation of the sport. In 1990 producers Don Simpson and Jerry Bruckheimer attempted to recreate the success of their previous work Top Gun by replacing the world of Aerial warfare with that of Nascar for their follow-up Days Of Thunder. But whilst Top Gun was able to do wonders for the outside world's interpretation of the military the same couldn't be said about Days of Thunder with Nascar; as the film is rife with bland characterisation and a very generic attitude to the (literal) nuts and bolts of motorsport's off-track activity, added to that comes the action on track also suffers, blandly shot and with a almost demeaning attitude to racing in general. Nascar doesn't have a large fan-base here in the UK so for a lot of people their view of Nascar is that of reckless nonprofessionals who believe that putting another man's life in danger by deliberately wrecking them is fair game, all because of this film. Honestly I would probably go as far as to consider Will Ferrell's Talladega Nights as a more realistic portrayal of Nascar.

Days of Thunder failed because it failed to understand what it is that motorsport fans look for in following the industry, and it was the same mistake that befell Sylvester Stallone's big money 2001 flop Driven. Whist Days of Thunder came under the impression at times that motorsport aficionados were rather simplistic and uninterested in the backyard workings of the sport Driven seemed to believe that all motorsport fans were 13 year old boys, and what should have been a character driven battle of wills was instead turned into a mess of techno music, lazy character archetypes and some of the worst action set-pieces seen in cinema, the belief being that every bit of contact in the sport must result in a Michael Bay-esque explosion of somersaulting cars. For it's credit Driven does get some of the off-track pressures of the sport right, certainly more-so then Days of Thunder, but the rest of the film feels and acts like a Playstation One game, and whilst Days of Thunder only harmed British perceptions of their sport Driven's failure helped to play a part in the CART series on which it's based going bankrupt and eventually out of business, now that is what you call getting it wrong.


All of the preceding films seemed to have this belief of what it is that we as motorsport fans look for in seeing our sport portrayed, it isn't about catering to the masses, action set-pieces or even the technical side of the sport; it is for me all about the people behind the cars;the drivers, the enigmatic, charismatic figures who elevate themselves to the level of heroes through putting their bodies and lives on the line for the sake of success, and in the process create something of an aura surrounding them and bring into context for the audience the scale of their achievements, and that is more then anything else what Senna managed to do so well. Ayrton Senna was always one of the most charismatic drivers in the sport, and through his tragic passing in 1994 almost seemed to develop something of a mystique surrounding him subsequently for Formula One fans , and in the movie Senna director Asif Kapadia was able to capture that aura and transcribe the Senna myth to both the sport's fans and the wider public. This was done not just through the showcasing of Senna's skills inside the car but also by his personality away from it, the self-belief of the man and at times the enigmatic and competitive side that made him more then just a generic hero who drove around for a living. Furthermore to this the film does well to capture the sport's inner workings, the gritty political side which drives what it is that we as fans see on track, sure Days of Thunder had a generic big bad authority figure briefly in the film but certainly nothing like Jean Marie-Balestre's aggression and arrogance, which played off against the free-spirited nature of Senna and made for a great arc through the film's story, similarly done with Alain Prost who I do feel at times however gets a bit of a bad rap in the film.


Senna surpassed all expectations at the box office, from being a largely niche film limited to art-houses word of mouth spread to the extent that it was awarded a nationwide release, and in the process opened up the gates to other films about motorsport being made, thanks to Senna Hollywood had finally come to understand the appeal of the sport, the people-driven approach that turned ordinary men into extra-ordinary figures, the figureheads of a well oiled and at times controversial system. Senna was followed up by the similarly brilliant films 1 as well as TT: Closer To The Edge which helped to play a part in helping to revive popularity in the Isle Of Man TT Race, showcasing the danger of the sport in it's truest form, but never glorifying that spectacle in the way that films such as Driven did. All of those films however had one thing in common however which helped to propel it I feel was that the films were all classified as documentaries, and the use of archive footage I felt truly helped manage to get over to mainstream audiences a realism in both those involved in the sport as well as truly showcasing the skill, danger and pressures of those in the sport, certainly the Cole Trickle's of Hollywood were a long way from the real world Guy Martin's of TT. What the motorsport movie needed however was for the energy and captured essence of the documentary film to be realised in Hollywood form, and with 2013's Rush we finally got that. Rush did have a lot of benefits coming it's way even before the start of production, the 1976 F1 season ranks up there as one of the very best and in characters such as James Hunt and Niki Lauda two almost polar opposite figures but still with their own unique charisma that both carry, as well as this Ron Howard has always had a knack of bringing these ambiguous real life figures to the big screen and although there were some niggling issues which would harm the Formula One obsessive Howard was able to truly combine the character driven narrative necessary for a modern film audience in the way that Day's of Thunder attempted to do but still have the care and natural interest in the sport to appeal to the true motoring diehards such as the late sixties McQueen and Newman efforts. The film was also particularly smart in not making the same mistakes as those of the past by not making the actual racing side of the film too overtly important, reports said that originally Howard wanted to shoot the film without any racing scenes in the film at all, and to be honest I feel that if he had done that we would have had a film of just a good a quality such is the strength of the rest of the film.

With the release of Rush I would like to believe that Hollywood has finally been able to master the motorsport film, and in the process truly translate to viewers just what it is that draws us to the sport and keeps people like myself viewing for so long. The characters, the men behind the machines, not the technicals, crashes or simplicity but the heart and daring of those involved and the lengths they will go to in an attempt to achieve their goals. It will still be a long way before I ever see a motor racing film getting reward accolades, but if boxing has managed to make that breakthrough then there is nothing to say motor racing can't do the same someday, especially now that Hollywood seems to have finally got it right.

Big Brother 15- Week 9 Assessment.

  Big Brother- Week 9 Assessment: Did that just happen?

 

We are into injury time in this year’s season of Big Brother, the players on the pitch are drained, the fans in the stadium are growing tiresome but things are beginning to build towards what could be an exciting climax.

Why am I bringing up all of the football connotations? Well aside from Big Brother one of my other big passions is football, and in many ways I cam make comparisons between Big Brother as a franchise and a football team; they will frustrate you, more often then not squander potential and on many an occasion leave you questioning why you put yourself through supporting them day after day, yet once in a blue moon they manage to pull out a result so amazing it makes all of that suffering as a fan worthwhile, and in this week’s eviction the show managed to pull off it’s own version of a 3-0 drumming of Manchester United at Old Trafford, a double eviction which proved incredibly rewarding on both a personal level and a show level and has helped to make the series all the more unpredictable as we reach the final minutes.

The first part of the double however wasn’t where the magic lay, even though it was one which I was satisfied with on a personal level. I always had my worries about Mark as a housemate even from the early stages of the show expecting him to be a horrible contrived irritant which would stay in the show well past his sell-by date, and to a large extent I feel like this came into fruition, a horribly obnoxious camera who gave me Charlie Drummond vibes in the way in which he would use  his lovable fun-guy persona to hid a dark and nasty side to his personality, the only difference however being that Mark’s focus was based on airtime whereas Charlie’s was through trying to win the show. On the plus side however with Mark I found it refreshing for a their to be a relationship in Big Brother between two gay contestants which didn’t have any kind of stigma associated with it or any kind of audience hysteria, but even in that case Mark came across very poorly in the relationship, more often then not treating Christopher like dirt and blaming him for Mark being perceived so poorly. It was very egotistical of him and I’m glad we managed to get a week without him in the show barring some sort of task twist, which based on this series I am wholeheartedly expecting.

Where the real joy with this eviction lay however was in the eviction of Winston, a result which I would probably put up there with the likes of Kirk and Natalie, Kathreya and Maxwell in terms of great Big Brother evictions, not so much because of Winston as a person but more down to the way in which it has helped to blow the show’s endgame wide open. To be honest I don’t have that much issue with Winston as a housemate, he seemed pleasant enough and I would put him up in the higher echelons of contestants cast to fill the ‘Essex lad’ archetype that the show thrives on these days, the issues for me stems from what he represents as a potential winner of the show, we have seen housemates similar to Winston end up being strong contenders for the win simply on the back of being inoffensive and attractive, and with a group demonstrating as many individual flaws as they do the likelihood is that Winston’s Brian Belo meets Sam Evans persona would have been an easy default vote to win, and would in the process be the cherry atop of this poor series.

The thing that surprised me most of all though was the way in which the Winston eviction came about, I remembered posting on the BBUK Facebook page after the Thursday highlights show a casual comment along the lines of ‘wouldn’t it be great if Winston went this week’ not expecting any psotive responses or any kind of serious take-up of this suggestion, and yet found more and more people as the day went on sharing this same opinion and snowballing into the serious campaign that ultimately proved successful. It has also proven to be the symbolic benchmark for one of the big themes of this years series; tactical voting. More so then any other year in Big Brother history we have the voting audience become much more overtly cynical about the voting process and have begun to abuse the system to bring about results and consequences which they may not have done so in the Channel 4 era of the show, Tamara and Matthew’s boots were attempts to send a negative message to Helen and Ashleigh respectively, Jale and Zoe’s boots designed to save Ashleigh and Chris and even through to saving Pav in the Armageddon week to make sure that Bianca went at his expense. This could be held as a sign of a maturity in the voting audience, but in my opinion it is an indicator of the fact that the swing of power between the tweens and the housewives has begun to be swung back towards the latter demographic. For all that people try and imply that Reality Television is something aimed at the tween audience and those with an impulsive mobile phone finger it is in my opinion the housewives which hold a large sway with phone voting then many like to give them credit for, you only need to look at Christopher Maloney’s success on The X Factor as evidence of that.

The question then becomes who the housewives will look to favour when they and the tweens make their votes on Friday night. Most of the bookies will be looking towards Ashleigh as the winner, but part of me feels that the voters may be a bit hesistant to give her the win when push comes to shove, Big Brother in the Channel 5 has had many issues with the voter’s relationships with women and I feel that Ashleigh may go the same way as Deana and fall short come the end in spite of internet polls and bookies odds saying otherwise. If Ashleigh is to be this years Deana then in my opinion it will be Christopher which will prove to be the Luke. A genuinely nice person, prominent without ever being too overbearing and not carrying as much of the personality baggage which Ashleigh has had during this series, it’s not the result that would be most ideal of the potential choices personally, but it is one that I would happily accept and one which I am quietly confident of happening. I also have a sneaky suspicion that Ash may surprise many coming into the final vote, he survived two evictions where he was a dead cert to leave and has since the vote to win lines opened shown more of a jovial side which will endear him to the audience, have a look at him to take fourth, and maybe even third depending on how the week unfolds.

The final whistle is about to be blown on this series and maybe on the whole what we have seen hasn’t been worth it, but when you nail your flag to the mast you have to keep it up there.

Big Brother 15: Week 8 Review- Every Little Helps

Big Brother 15: Week 8 Review

Firstly I want to start off this week’s assessment by apologising for my failure to post a review of week 7, I had a lot on my plate over the course of the week and unfortunately didn’t have the time to publish my feelings about the week’s proceedings. To be fair though if there was a week to miss writing about however then that was the perfect choice, as the premise of having to write positively about Steven Goode is one to scare off even the most passionate blogger. One of the things is highlighted to me though is the way in which the opinions of those that watch the show can change so quickly over the course of the week, and this week’s proceedings helped t highlight two very notable examples of that, both of which I have plenty of grievances about.

I will begin by speaking about one of those changes of opinion, that being our most recent evictee Zoe, of all of the three intruders that entered during week 6 Zoe was the one who I had as a lock to make it the furthest, even possibly to the final, she was a bubbly character whose presence would make a welcome change in a house defined by negativity and she had a pre-show fan base that put her in a good standing, as demonstrated by being saved first in both a vote to save and vote to evict scenario in her first two weeks, then of course came the Tesco comment, and the opening of the floodgates towards what would ultimately orchestrate her departure. I do understand the grievances that a lot of people had with Zoe’s Tesco comments, as somebody who had worked in a supermarket for a short time I can tell you that it is an incredibly strenuous and highly demanding role which doesn’t give the payment to it’s employees that they ultimately deserve, employees which are more often then not in that position through necessity rather then through an indication of their skill abilities, and it does annoy me that there are people like Zoe who look down on those types of people and considers them as lesser standard of human because of their profession. At the same time however I do feel slightly aggrieved that this comment was blown up in the way that it was by the audience, and that in the eyes of the audience Zoe was targeted and subsequently evicted on the back of one throwaway comment, in my opinion though I think the comment was more then anything the key to unlock the door as it were to targeting Zoe, prior to the comment there had been murmurings surrounding Zoe’s behaviour and the feeling from some in the fanbase that she was getting annoying with her overly peppy Vera Lynn-meets-Sonia routine, and what the Tesco comment did more then anything was allow those which had issues with Sonia to justify venting them in a public forum, in the same way that I feel that I feel people were scared to speak up about Chris until the label of creepy Chris was assigned to him by production.

And speaking of which we come to Chris and his downfall both within the house dynamics and with the audience itself, going from someone with a realistic chance of winning the game to all but certainly being evicted before the finale, Chris has by a long way had a terrible week within the show, but at the same time I do feel that a lot of his behaviour has been exaggerated by production and made to be a lot worse for the sake of attempting to create the next chapter of their show’s story-arc. Firstly there was the grievances that Chris had with Pav, and I will wholeheartedly agree with the majority that Chris has not looked good in his treatment of the Sikh housemate, but at the same time I feel that there is something in the show that we as an audience are not seeing so that they can push the Chris and Pav feud as the lead storyline of this week. Firstly as we know from the previous weeks Chris has been very accurate in his readings of the housemates and that his diary room commentaries about those housemates have been some of the best elements of a weak series, and I find it difficult at times to think that someone who has had such a good read on house proceedings can get this one suddenly so wrong, and the other aspect of this is the fact that Chris’ grievances with Pav feels as if it is shared by the rest of the house, some of the tweets designed to try and substitute for a live feed (yeah right!) have point to the housemates having problems with him, added to that is the fact that all the housemates aside from Zoe voted for him this week, and yet within the confines of the highlights show this has been portrayed as solely being Chris’ problem when I don’t feel this is the case. On a side note I have found the sympathy vote that Pav has generated this week slightly annoying as well, I understand based on past experiences that the British public do love to support an underdog, and I admit that I have been a victim of that as well, but this is the same person that people were clamouring to be evicted last week due to being dull, and the fact that he on some forums the second favourite doesn’t sit right with me. I do like Pav as a person and he seems pleasant enough, but he has up until now not been exciting television.

Getting back to Chris however the other big attack that has been thrown at him this week is the question of his behaviour around Ashleigh being creepy, and this is one that really annoys me in regards to the producers of the show. Up until this week I have never seen anything about Chris and Ashleigh’s friendship that has been interpreted as being uncomfortable, just two friends that appear to be on the same wavelength as each other and need each other to get through the process, and yet thanks to the mechanisms of the production team and the awful labelling of Chris through Bit on the Side this friendship has had so many awful connotations and innuendos thrown towards it which are hurtful and unjustified, and a guy like Chris who has in my opinion been perfectly pleasant throughout the series has been painted by the show and his detractors as, for all extensive purposes, a sick pervert. The sad thing is though is that part of me feels that a lot of the catalyst for these accusations to be thrown at Chris stems from his appearance, being someone who is older and not particularly attractive he attracts negativity from an increasingly shallow audience for behaviour which may be interpreted as romantically motivated, yet I have the feeling that had someone like Ash and Winston behaved in the way that Chris has this week non of these accusations would have been thrown in my opinion. I know that the show needs to thrive on painting villains of the week for entertainment purposes and that I can’t imagine Chris being somebody who production had lined up as being part of their endgame, but no man deserves to have those kind of accusations thrown at him, especially from a supposedly credible production company as Channel 5, and whilst I was happy that Zoe went this week it was more down to wanting to have Chris stay and send a message to production that their behaviour was uncalled for, even if I do admit Chris would have filled the ‘big character in week 8 boot’ rather well.

Two weeks to go now before the inevitable Winston win, lets just hope these are a lot more enjoyable then the past eight.

Big Brother 15: Week 6- Armageddon Off My Screen

Big Brother 15: Week 6 Assessment- Armageddon Off My Screen

Are you still watching everyone? Can’t blame you if you aren’t.

We have survived Armageddon week in Big Brother 15 this week, and by the rate things have been going I could have done with sending most of the house and the production team up on a rocket to try and blow up an asteroid, as a combination of their own behaviours had led to more frustration and annoyance then anyone watching a television show should be victim to. This week in many ways can be considered symbolic of Big Brother 15 on a whole; the drama and the scandal certainly has been plentiful, you can’t exactly call a week where four contestants have gone as being dull after all, but the whole scenario has been tainted with such a degree of disappointment, contrivance and arrogance from the production team that the entire situation has left a very sour taste in my mouth and left me at times questioning the value of watching the show, a sad thing for a long-term fan such as myself to say, but an opinion which has begun to be uttered more vocally by many die-hard fans within the community.

I will begin by addressing the key factor which links a lot of the reasons for this downturn in series perception, namely the Armageddon twist. We have become used to the fact that Channel 5 are some of the masters of advertising hyperbole, often making ridiculous exaggerations over house twists and casting decisions which ultimately just leave the viewer greatly under whelmed, and in my view it is the Armageddon twist which symbolises this more so then anything, turning what was hyped to us as one of the most explosive weeks in Big Brother history into nothing more then a glorified advertising campaign for the new Planet of the Apes film, something which can only be redeemed by the fact that the ‘Apes together strong’ motif continually uttered during the adverts is a perfect anecdote for Helen’s side of the house. Everything about the setup seemed not only underwhelming compared to the speculation which the show had created for itself but at the same time it also led to a degree of desperation and contrivance from the producers to make up for the fact that their hysteria failed to live up to expectations, the casting promises of boyfriends and enemies of housemates for example was replaced instead by three of the most tedious contestants that the show has had, not so much in them being particularly dull people but in that they all represented character types which have by now just become stale in the channel 5 era.

This is most clearly represented in my view by Bianca’s short stay in the house this week, from the view of production I do understand the reasons why Bianca was cast on paper, she was confrontational, obnoxious and was certainly going to ruffle some feathers in the show, but everything about her was done with such an air of desperation and contrivance on her part that any sort of benefit she did bring to the show was automatically nullified, I see her eviction this week, notably in a vote to save designed specifically to save characters such as herself, as an representation of the publics tiredness of the increasing desperation of Big Brother housemates as much as a protest against Bianca herself as a person, although that in itself is something that would require a completely separate article to itself. In terms of the other new housemates however there is a similar air of been there, done that with the characters chosen. Pav seems pleasant enough, and it is refreshing to have another Sikh housemate represented in the show (joining Siavash in that regard) but there is very little else about him which stands out as interesting and original, we’ve seen so many other male housemates obnoxiously state their intelligence and how they will be able to manipulate the house only to slip into a sea of dreariness and fail to live up to their expectations, and Pav is no different in this regard, he certainly talked the talk with alluding to the prospect of nominating Stephen this week, but when push came to shove he bottled out and settled for people-pleasing, a role which is all he’ll succeed in as a housemate. Meanwhile the casting of Zoe is just plain bizarre for me on so many levels, yes she is bubbly enough and a refreshing change from the innate negativity from the rest of the house, but I can’t honestly fathom the reasons why she is there in the first place, I know that the line between Celebrity and Civilian versions of Big Brother has become increasingly blurred since Channel 5 took over, but in my view Zoe is justified enough to lock herself into any celebrity version, and added to that I also perplexed because I don’t on paper see much way which she is going to progress the show’s storyline forward, even with Bianca as much as I disliked her I knew she would serve a purpose for the show in a way which right now I’m struggling to see with Zoe, I certainly think she will do well, maybe even win if the cards fall into place, but it is certainly a strange call her casting.

But now we get to the stuff which had everyone wound up this week, and I mean really wound up. I know Big Brother fans on the whole have a tendency to go over-the-top with many of their grievances with the show, but in this situation I will whole-heartedly agree with them about everything. This week has been a mess of twists and obnoxious production behaviour all designed to orchestrate and demean Danielle and to orchestrate her departure from the show, the desperation from production to do so being one of petulance and immaturity which should be well below a supposedly responsible broadcaster such as Channel 5. I understand that Danielle did have a lot of baggage coming into the show that the production team would have disliked, especially in her presentation of herself as a prudish figure in complete contrast with that, but her treatment in the show drifted into victimisation, and I felt the way that the show went so gung-ho on her was very unsettling. But the thing was though as a viewer I liked her a housemate, yes she was contrived and as false as they come but at the same time she was so bad at attempting to keep up her good catholic girl charade that I found her entertaining with it, she served her purpose in the show as comedy value and to be honest I found it disappointing that she went, especially in such a contrived manner at the hands of the production team.

The worst thing about the whole situation for me however wasn’t so much the twist itself, although I agree it was bad, it was what the twist represented in terms of the relationship between the production in the show and the viewer. Making this a week which has all but exclusively been chosen by the housemates (allegedly) is symbolic to me of the contempt that the Big Brother production team has for its audience. We all know that there is a need in reality television in recent years for there to be a need for storylines in the show, and when done right I agree that they can help improve a series on the whole, but at the same time the viewer should always be the one who has the final say in which direction the storyline goes in through their eviction votes, and that say this week was thrown out of our hands in my opinion because production frankly did not trust the viewer to make the decision that production would want for it’s storyline to progress. This for me is a cardinal sin in the television industry, especially on a show so reliant on a strong relationship with the public to generate voting revenue and to keep the show going in the first place, don’t get me wrong I am one of the first to disagree with the public and their choices of winners, but at the same time I also accept that this was the decision of the majority of the voting public and in my eyes the show should act in the same manner rather then having a tantrum over it and taking away the voter’s right as a punishment, in the television industry the aim should always be to give the viewer what they want, not to have a tantrum when what the public want isn’t the same as what you the producers want. The whole situation stunk of production’s contempt for the audience, and the show should find itself very relieved that there are a lot of fans sticking by the show through brand loyalty only, and even those die-hards are left questioning their loyalty to the show.

What makes the whole thing worse though in my eyes is the direction that production wants to show to go down if they had their way, something which has been demonstrated further this week though their twists and tasks designed to ostracise particular housemates at the expense of others, namely by helping to enable Helen’s harem in the house whilst condemning the group outsiders, culminating in the orchestrated boot of Danielle by the end of the week. There has been a definite aim from Channel 5 to try and push the show towards more of a scripted Reality audience, and Helen’s group in my view is representative of the direction that show ultimately wants to favour, but the fact of the matter is that the audience don’t want this from their show, they have spoken vocally on social media and internet forums about their dislike for Helen, the tedium of Stephen and Kimberly’s relationship whilst at the same time been very supportive of the outsiders of the group, demonstrated by the fact that the likes of Chris, Ashleigh and Christopher are polling so highly online. Production should be going out of their way to appease the viewer for their choices, understand the reasons why the public feel this way about their favourites and learn from this to help improve the show in the future, but as mentioned before there is this head-in-the-sand thought pattern from production which refuses to let them see the show in this way and instead persist with their aim for The Only Way Is Elstree. It’s almost akin to George Lucas learning of how hated Jar Jar Binks was in Star Wars and deciding that the viewer was wrong for thinking this way and giving him more airtime for the sequel. It’s a flawed approach which demonstrates contempt for the viewer, and will eventually come back to haunt Channel 5 if they keep it up, because trust me, once the old school viewers leave they will not be replaced.

Oh, and Marlon went this week as well.