Big Brother

'Big Brother' has now run for five seasons with 'real' people (i.e. ordinary Joes and Janes who were not celebrities) and has just begun a third season 'celebrity' version.

The trouble is that what was originally an idea of some originality and promise - shut a few contrasting personalities in a house with no contact with the outside world, intrusive cameras, and unusual tasks, for a few weeks and see what happens - after season 1 had passed future house-mates knew what to expect.

Subsequent seasons have seen the house-mates exploit their new-found 'fame' (for doing what, exactly?) not only after leaving the house, but while they are in there. So the challenges get ever more tedious, the tabloid and gossip mag column inches get longer, and the nation for some reason continues to watch.

Another nail in the coffin of British TV, an indication that poor taste and high ratings go hand in hand (that or the TV-viewing public at large really will watch anything and they get what they deserve).

STAR RATING: ***** Unmissable **** Very Good *** Okay ** You Could Go Out For A Meal Instead * Avoid At All Costs

Every summer, 13 members of the public, who's personalities stand out the best in the eyes of the producers, are selected from a selection of video entries to compete in a live reality TV show in a specially built house, equipped with video cameras and trendy Ikea furnishings, to see who is the last person to be voted out by the public and win the prize money.

When BB was first introduced to the world in the summer of 2000, it seemed like a fresh, original, fun concept in my eyes. A good social experiment, shall we say. I was 16 at the time, on holiday in Cornwall with my family and there was something that was at least partially engaging about watching the antics of 'nasty' Nick the banker and warm-hearted scally Craig the builder (who'd only entered so he could win the money to pay for a heart operation for the little girl of a friend or something!), even if I didn't think it was the greatest thing since sliced bread and I could ultimately give-or-take it. And, looking back on it now, I could see that the house was occupied by 'real' people, genuine, real people who were believable and you could buy were really like that probably if you met them in the street. Which is certainly not what it's come to now.

In my mind, in one way or the other, things rapidly went downhill from there. The first show was so successful that there had to be a follow-up. The emphasis on voyeurism and adult content began around here, and everyone could see this as a really see-through attempt to pander to people's baser instincts and win ratings. But I just found a lot of the contestants on the second series to be really annoying and up their own arses and that put me off. I suppose the same could be said for the third series, even though Jade Goody was entertaining in as much as she was genuinely thick, thinking Cambridge was in London and such, and I don't think she was putting on an act but just genuinely, un-self-consciously that much of a show-boat. I think series four pretty much just came and went (that was the big Asian guy, wasn't it? And Jon Tickle?) but by series five everything had, as I said, just lost perspective. That's not to mention the assault of spin-off shows we've had from it like Celebrity Big Brother or even Teen Big Brother (and we all know what went on there.)

The people entering aren't genuine, honest and 'real' anymore. They're just making as big an exhibition of themselves as they can in order to get on there in the first place and to make a big enough impression on the public that they will come out as the winners. No-one that shallow and super-ficial really deserves any of our time or attention, but it's likely that our 'baser instincts' may take us over again and we'll tune in just to pander to them. I could never have been a contestant myself, but by now it's unlikely I'd even know how to make a big enough show-boat of myself to have come out the winner on there anyway. Besides that, all objectivity in the game has been lost. The winner of the show who gets all the money is superfluous in the eyes of all the other contestants as they know that if they make a big enough impression on the public, they will be famous enough to attend a film premiere or two for a while afterwards and no doubt get paid a fair bit to endorse certain products or services (hence why Jade Goody's name still garners recognition three years after losing!) This show has come out, more than anything, as a huge testament to Andy Warhol's unforgettably famous claim that "in the future, everyone will enjoy their 15 minutes of fame", irrespective of how untalented, vulgar or desperate they are.

Aside from the contestants, there's the presenter, Davina McCall. A no doubt very pleasant, in her day, very attractive lady who just suffers from that very irritating habit of feeling the need to bellow out everything she says. She's served the show well, but she's a woman in her 30s who's a mother to at least one child who's having to try to keep up with the pace of 'youth TV', the majority of which are in their late teens or early 20s and there's been coverage in the media lately of how it may all be taking it's toll on her. I've heard rumours she's planning to retire and become a mid-wife (imagine an already delirious woman about to give birth being calmed by Davina McCall!) and, if that's true, I'm sure, as my mother said, she'll give it her 100% and no doubt be very good at it, because everyone has their day and everyone has to move on in life. But I wonder how much shelf-life the actual show has left and, if it's a lot, just where it'll go to from here. It's not a show showing 'real' people anymore who's personalities you can relate to, it's just a show showing people eager for instant fame and gratification who are prepared to make as much of an exhibition of themselves and even degrade themselves as it takes to get their names and faces in tabloid rags like The News of the World for their outrageous, degrading behaviour. No truly decent person can relate to people like that and, if they're the only type of people who are going to stand a chance of winning from here, one can only wonder what lies ahead for the show and, the future of humanity for that matter. **

Last fall I got a job outside of London and all I ever heard people talking about was the newest episode of "Big Brother." I was already familiar with the US series, but in America they broadcast an hour time slot, edited, and don't print what's going on in the newspapers.

I couldn't believe it when the last season's series managed to break front headlines news. I know the Daily Mail is tabloid, but even then, you'd think maybe real stuff going on would be featured - not the lives of people living in a house being exposed to television.

The show is a pain, mainly because everyone in England loves it, even older people, and you can't really go anywhere without hearing about it. Countless films I wanted to see were canceled only to display this message: "Big Brother is running over schedule, our film tonight will be rescheduled." The show broadcasts from about 12 at night to 6 in the morning sometimes, which is insane. I once stumbled across it while flipping channels late at night, only to see people sitting on chairs talking nonsense, the audio occasionally shutting off by error.

I just don't get it. WHAT'S THE POINT?! I'm one of those people who enjoys watching people when I'm out and about - just seeing how people interact, go about their lives, etc. (I get it from my mother's side) - but this is plain voyeurism, and BORING voyeurism. Who cares what some loser thinks about some guy living in a house? GET A LIFE! And I thought my social life wasn't the best! At least I don't revolve my conversations around the conversations of random people occupying a house together! Good grief! A few years ago I didn't like "The Truman Show" because it was too far fetched. I watched it again a few nights ago and it's not looking so far away anymore.

We are talking about a show which was once introduced with the words "Day 21 - Derek is eating a sandwich". What sort of person carries on watching anything after that.

You'll see the phrase "like watching paint dry" through thousands of user comments across this website, on despised shows & films.

Never a truer word spoken here though & FOR TWO REASONS.

One because it is that dull - although that maybe a tad unfair on paint.

But secondly - the day British TV fell to it's knees (and went largely unnoticed). A few years back the housemates (there's better names for them than that - but wouldn't make it through the firewall) had to each paint a bench in a colour that reflected themselves. (I expected 12 grey benches). Anyway - after they finished painting them & went inside the camera remained outside, for several minutes - while the viewer did indeed "watch paint dry".

And still the public watched.

There is possibly one thing worse than Big Brother. The host. I won't give her the satisfaction of publicising her name (+or benal facial expressions) but we're talking about a woman who once introduced 3 OF THE 6 FEMALE ENTRANTS one year by their name & breast size. Never mind, name & job title, name & achievements, name and ambitions maybe. Nope, name & size of Charlies are all that counts nowadays.

Plot

A group of contestants move into the Big Brother house, where they nominate each other to be evicted by public vote. The last person remaining will take home a large cash prize, while the others take home nothing.

Cast

A bunch of sad sacks desperate for fame.

Verdict

I remember when this came out, I thought it was a fascinating social experiment and an interesting premise for a television show especially since this was before the days where reality television was a big thing (Those were the days).

Throw a bunch of people into a shared property, throw challenges at them and have them voted off one by one until one is left and give that people a wad of money. Inevitably people play the camera, scheme against the others and in theory it makes for great television.

In reality? They scrape the barrel finding the most fame hungry desperate people they can, a combination of vile and just pathetic. And oh boy they do play to the camera, leaving not one single person you can relate to or even remotely like. And the scheming, it shows how scummy the majority are, just like in real life.

And then if you haven't had your fix of watching people sitting around, had your dose of drama and childishness then you can tune in live to watch them sleep in night vision! Yeeeah!

I despise reality television for a host of reasons, Big Brother embodies them all.

Rants

You know Big Brother has given us one good thing, ONE! And that's Dead Set (2008). Remember that? The zombie mini-series about the zombie apocalypse starting and those in the Big Brother house being unaware! Despite all the Big Brother alumni doing their best to ruin it just by existing I have to say that was good stuff. I'd rather watch one episode of that than all 1.4k of this offensively stupid tripe.

The Good

Davina McCall is oddly likable

The Bad

Literally everything else, across the board, just stop it.