BB FANS

well scotslass said I would get back to you with my views on the BB USA

In some aspects its very good and in others its lacking would not like to see our bb copy it in its all its formats but definietely the producers of BBUK could learn from it

The tasks are far superior to ours more thought out more watchable and a bit harder

I like the idea of a house leader with separate quarters think it could stir things up also like the idea of a veto whre house mates compete to get it every week and when the nominations are announced can activate it and select a different housemate would be fun also think as others have said that they should call them contestants and not mates

Cant stand Jun or Dana but know they make good tv

Oh dear this isn't good Bren... we agree on this one I think that our BB should be made more of a game, like the USA one. The tasks in the US are FAR superior to ours and I love the veto idea. I don't really have any strong feelings on any of the HG's yet cos I'm trying to adjust to new hours at work (have to get up at 6.30 instead of 7.30 ) The impression's I have so far are that Scott was off his head Dana is playing a good game (playing off both sides), Nathan is drop dead gorgeous , Jun is completely up herself, Dave is a laugh and ever so slightly mad, Robert seems nicer than his ex (can't remember her name), except he cheated on her so may have to revise that... Michelle was very sweet.... and I can't remember any of the others off the top of my head.

hmmmmm is looking bad isnt it well dont agree on fame academy so we have something to debate had a laugh this morning when I saw that it was run by endemol hmmmmmmmm

Isn't everything run by Endemol these days?

The government too!!! ?????

Are you sure about that Ally?

Not sure about anything at the moment

snap CC

we had public involvement in BB1 here, but there was a bar (pub) that sponsored a vote campaign for one HM, and although i doubt it had major impact, the pubicity was bad for the show, so they ended that

Another reason public involvent ceased was that Endemol was 'let go' after season one.

Season one had 'real' people in the house. Average Americans from all walks of life, of all ages, and all occupations.

The ratings were dismal, particularly given that it was compared directly to Survivor I.

Thus, Arnold Shapiro Productions was brought in to 'revamp' the show.

AS determined that the public vote tended to mean that the most 'trouble making' or 'aggressive' house mate would be voted off every week, and by mid-game, only the 'nice' people would remain, making the house boring.

In addition, AS determined that HMs would not express their true feelings - particularly in the Diary Room (the private room when HMs speak to the camera) if they knew they were still being judged by the voters. It made for a lot of faux-niceties.

As a result, Anrold Shapiro 'sexed up' the show by bringing in 2 soap-opera writers (who still work on the show), recruiting wanna-be actors with nice faces and hard-bodies, and focussing on upping the 'crazy' quotient by always casting a few nut-bars with various manias, mountainous egos or social dysfunction.

Unfortunately AS also made the game easier on the HMs. This was done b/c the HMs of year one bonded against BB, when BB would make them do week-long challenges, mess with their heads or otherwise exert control over the game.

Now, HMs are pampered, treated deferentially by BB and altogether laze about with impunity to all but their own stupidity/anger management issues.

I much prefered the European model of BB, although it may be true that it can never work in the US, for a number of reasons. What we have now seems too much like celebrity-wanna-be camp for spoiled pretty children.