Sunday, 9 June 2013

Top 30: Worst Big Brother Production Decisions or Twists (Part 1)

As a new series of Big Brother dawns on us again on Channel 5 we can come to expect much of the same when it comes to the grandaddy of reality television be it controversy, over the top personalities and more often then not production decisions that quite simply leave us scratching our heads and looking between ourselves with bemusement. For a show that prides itself on it's over-reliance of production twists it's alarming to see just how many of them have ended up being underwhelming or backfiring in the faces of the show's producers with farcical results.

 This ranking is my own personal opinions of the worst twists and production decisions that the show's loyal fan base have had the misfortune of bearing witness to, being split into three parts each counting down part of the list respectively. I want to stress that this my own personal list and there may be elements of this list which you disagree with, but the internet would be a boring place if we all agreed on the same things (just ask China).

With that being said, let us begin:

30) Mario and Steph's fake 'marriage' (Big Brother 9)

On paper this had the potential to be a good twist; the idea of Mario and Steph having to pretend to be a fake couple to decieve the rest of the house had both the potential to be engaging to watch as well as great comedic potential in having poor Steph forced to work with a buffoon like figure like Mario was, but the decision to hold a fake wedding ceremony ended up taking this idea and pushing it in a direction which was tacky and insulting to the viewer's intelligence (as well as the other housemates). Added to this another problem with this twist was the way in which production chose to change the result of the task at the last minute so that Mario and Steph, as well as associates Luke and Lisa, would fail and face the public vote, arguably as a means of attempting to save emerging show villain Alexandra. This in turn was flawed for two reasons, the first being that production were willingly giving up one of the four characters which they had spent nearly the whole week building up and getting the public to care about whilst the other was that Alexandra, the contestant in which they were attempting to save by changing the result, was very obviously a ticking time bomb whose time in the house was going to be short anyway, and simply it was not worth going to such lengths to protect her in the way that production did, particularly at the expense of either Mario or Steph, both of which demonstrated potential to much more mulch-faceted personalities.


29) The £100,000 giveaway (Big Brother 8)

Should I really have an issue with a normal likable guy with a poorly mother being given £100,000? From an ethical point of view certainly not but from the view of interesting television, which is what we watch Big Brother for then certainly yes. This twist is in many ways symbolic of the flaws of Big Brother 8 as a series; a collection of poorly thought out and needless twists solely for shock value with no though given to their repercussions. The twist received little to no buildup and during the actual live show itself lacked any kind of drama and tension that a live show such as this should have done, it was at the end of the day a nice likable man getting £100,000 for doing very little, which you can imagine doesn't sound like particularly interesting television. The fact that the twist also received almost nothing in the way of repercussions and was seldom spoken about by either the housemates or the production team should symbolise just how poorly this twist ended up failing.


28) The cast of Big Brother 12 (Big Brother 12)

When Channel 5 took over running of the Big Brother franchise back in 2011 it was obvious that they would have to attempt to do something different with the show to attempt and regain interest from the British public, their attempt to do so however, something most obviously symbolised with the Big Brother 12 cast, proved to be more detrimental then it would beneficial. Channel 5's motives stemmed from attempting to attract a more youth orientated audience similar to that of scripted reality shows such as Geordie Shore and The Only Way Is Essex, and in the process casted a youthful and more TOWIE derived cast which prided itself on having no housemates over 30. The problem with this was that the youth audience which Channel 5 obsessed itself with simply didn't catch on, and in the process the youthful cast only ended up isolating the older and more hardcore audience that Big Brother had built up for itself during the Channel 4 era. Added to this was that the youthful cast also proved harmful to the show on an entertainment side. Big Brother had been a format which sold itself on bringing extreme personalities from different walks of life together, and instead what the show had was a group from vaguely the same areas of the country of similar age ranges and similar levels of youth and profession, which simply doesn't give us the contrast and diversity the show needs. 


27) The failure to punish Siavash for persistent rule-breaking (Big Brother 10)

This for me is one of many examples of Big Brother's diminsihing lack of authority during the later years of the Channel 4 era and has began to be subsequently seen during the Channel 5 era also. Whilst I understand that Siavash was a major character during Big Brother 10 and particular it's later stages the fact remains that by that point he had mentally taken himself out of the process and was doing everything in his power to disrupt the show's proceedings, and in my eyes if a housemate is blatantly breaking the rules in the way Siavash was during BB10's later stages they should be removed from the process. The fact that production allowed Siavash to get away with this by giving him such weak punishments led to Siavash making his rule breaks more blatant knowing that he would never be truly condemned for it but also it convinced future housemates that they too could abuse and get the upper hand on Big Brother as an entity, which is completely against what Big Brother should be about.


26) Noirin's boyfriend Isaac enters the house (Big Brother 10)

This is the first of many 'relative/ boyfriend of a housemate enters' type of twists that makes the list, and personally this one I consider the most pointless and least relevant of all of them. My first gripe with Isaac's entry stemmed from Isaac's attitude towards the show, he had never seen Big Brother before in his life time (let alone auditioned) and had no interest in engaging himself within the process aside from reaquainting himself with Noirin (demonstrating by him leaving almost immediately after her eviction) and took a potential housemate place away from somebody who would have cared about the show much more. The other grievance stemmed from the way that Isaac's entrance helped spoil what could have been the best eviction of the series, that week's Noirin vs Marcus eviction had looked set to be a closely fought eviction between two of BB10's biggest characters and instead as a result of Isaac it led instead to an all but guaranteed Noirin eviction. Whilst I do appreciate that Isaac's entry did lead to a symbolic ending to Noirin's man-eater storyline and admit Isaac had some fun moments I just found the whole thing to be needless tinkering and pointless, especially considering Isaac left anyway after three days.


25) Big Brother 10's launch night (Big Brother 10)

Now I'll admit I do have a soft spot for BB10 as a series, considering it one of the most overlooked and underrated series of them all, however if you want a reason why it was overlooked look no further then at the weak launch night that opened the series. Launch night is always considered as the most important episode of any Big Brother series, and a combination of a controversial cast for that series and the inability to give a full house tour due to the 'No-Housemates' twist led to the entire show feeling weak, devoid of personality and incredibly lackluster, and no matterhow good the rest of the show may be it will only help to lose those casual fans that are much needed for ratings. The 'no-housemates' twist as well must also be given some criticism as well, as the entire process, which could have been made quite interesting, was reduced to nothing more then parlour games, games of chances and dunking biscuits, not exactly the 'free for all' fight for housemate status that had been promoted to us on launch night.


24) The guru twist (Big Brother 8)

This was just sloppy and amateurish from production in my opinion, as well as demonstrating blatant favouritism towards housemates in a way in which the show really shouldn't have done. Firstly there was the issue with the way in which the gurus in the task were chosen, the contests were incredibly flawed in design and subjective (especially the lie detector task) which only helped to give the impression that the contestants being given guru status were favourites of production as opposed to those who had truly earned the result. The second major grievance with the guru task stemmed from the decision to allow the gurus to decide between the two vote earners that week on which one would go, this too exposed favouritism as it helped Carole, a contestant who was single-handedly helping to stifle the fun in the house, to stay in the process despite a large majority of the public wanting her out. Even had Gerry not have fallen on his sword and asked the gurus to vote him out the likely hood is that they would have done so anyways simply because the format, as well as the gurus chosen, were designed to favour Carole. This was a poorly done twist and another example of how poor BB8 was.


23) The crypt (Big Brother 12)

This task didn't have many repercussions in the house in the long term, but is on this list mainly because of how amateurishly it was produced. Whilst I do understand that the crypt was just a replication of the brilliant bedsit task of BB5, but lacked any kind of tension compared to the original and the poor quality of the crypt's design meant that the housemates in the main house knew that Jay and Anton had not left the process, which rendered the whole task pointless. The twist that came with the crypt however was also a major grievance with the task, as the implication of Jay and Anton's 'ability to change nominations' was chopped and changed so much that gave across a strong perception of incompetence from production as well as favouritism towards Anton and Jay that they were being given a second reprieve within the show despite their poor behaviour making themselves house targets.


22) The treatment of Rachel Rice (Big Brother 9)

This one is entirely personal and the one I'm expecting the most grief about from readers about but I'll try to explain. Whilst I do agree with most people when I say that I don't think that Rachel Rice was the most exciting television in the world I have to admit that I felt particularly uncomfortable with the way in which production looked to victimise Rachel over her lack of entertainment value as a character. Production having biases for or against housemates is bad enough on a show like Big Brother, but what made this worse in my eyes was the fact that producers appeared to have a bias against Rachel simply for being a nice girl, and what kind of message does that send out to viewers as well as potential applicants? The way in which production later condemned Rachel following her victory also showed petulance and immaturity on behalf of production which makes the perception of the production team look even worse.


21) The producers begin bending over backwards to keep John James happy (Big Brother 11)

This entry could in many ways be considered as the evolution of the Siavash entry earlier in the update, but one which I consider worse mainly because it began much earlier in the series and was seen as being much more in favour of John James then in Siavash's case. As with Siavash John James was a housemate whose stubbornness helped to spoil his Big Brother series, namely in his refusal to do tasks and embrace house affairs unless they were catered to his demands, which included him threatening to quit unless his demands were met. Unfortunately production decided to meet all of these and bend over backwards and break their own rules in the process of doing so, including allowing John James to make a phonecall to Nathan from inside the house itself. It, like Siavash, once again showed up Big Brother to be a weak entity with little authority and one which could be manipulated should the right cards be played, and whilst I understand John Jame's importance to BB11 as a series he was in now way bigger then the show, and should have been treated accordingly.

What do you think of the entries so far? Agree or disagree with any? Then don't be afraid to comment.

Entries 20-11 will be posted in due course.

No comments:

Post a Comment