Skip to main content

Final 3 Confirmed. Open for spoiler.

the Theorist said:
I’ll probably elaborate on this in the future, but I actually believe having the HMs vote each other out all season and then suddenly leaving the final evictions up to the public is a contradictory move that actually makes little to no sense.

I feel like Endemol agreed on having the public vote for the winner to keep some semblance of the original format, but it actually works against the new format and ultimately can make or break a HM’s gameplay. The new format encourages this idea of “playing the game” and, as the US and CAN seasons prove, often this must rely on deceit and lies to get you there. But the public are usually going to have a different opinion (case in point with what’s currently happening in regards to Dan and Mat), so having the public’s involvement at the last minute actually makes an entire season’s worth of game playing (or even lack of game playing) completely redundant if it means absolutely nothing in the end anyway.

I just don’t think melding the two voting systems makes much sense at all. I think this Wednesday’s finale is going to make this point even more evident.
Click to expand...

I don’t think completely taking out the public influence is a good idea though. Then it really would be just Survivor 2.0.
 
the Theorist said:
I’ll probably elaborate on this in the future, but I actually believe having the HMs vote each other out all season and then suddenly leaving the final evictions up to the public is a contradictory move that actually makes little to no sense.

I just don’t think melding the two voting systems makes much sense at all. I think this Wednesday’s finale is going to make this point even more evident.
Click to expand...

Endemol are trying to merge the fans want for the old eviction format with 7's need for the new eviction format. There is such a thing as compromise and this is a very good example of just that.
 
the Theorist said:
I’ll probably elaborate on this in the future, but I actually believe having the HMs vote each other out all season and then suddenly leaving the final evictions up to the public is a contradictory move that actually makes little to no sense.

I feel like Endemol agreed on having the public vote for the winner to keep some semblance of the original format, but it actually works against the new format and ultimately can make or break a HM’s gameplay. The new format encourages this idea of “playing the game” and, as the US and CAN seasons prove, often this must rely on deceit and lies to get you there. But the public are usually going to have a different opinion (case in point with what’s currently happening in regards to Dan and Mat), so having the public’s involvement at the last minute actually makes an entire season’s worth of game playing (or even lack of game playing) completely redundant if it means absolutely nothing in the end anyway.

I just don’t think melding the two voting systems makes much sense at all. I think this Wednesday’s finale is going to make this point even more evident.
Click to expand...
Personally I think it makes it more interesting.

You're not only in a competition with the housemates to form alliances and win them over, but also having to win over the audience because they'll have the final say, and also win over the producers so you can end up with a "good" edit so you're in favour with the audience.

If you can mesh all those together you have Sophie & Chad (Sophie more so). Good with not breaking any housemates alliance, good at the challenges, fan favourite (to some extent), and producers pick (imo from the final 5)!
 
Gayspie said:
Endemol are trying to merge the fans want for the old eviction format with 7's need for the new eviction format. There is such a thing as compromise and this is a very good example of just that.
Click to expand...
I am fully aware of that and I mentioned exactly that in my post.

Is it a “very good example” though? Debatable.

My point is combining the different forms of elimination are completely contradictory of each other, and I question whether they actually work side-by-side as intended. There’s a lot of flaws in the audience having the ability to vote for the end result in a game that consists entirely of contestants eliminating each other all season, just as it would if it was the other way around. Consider this - imagine if the public voted for who they want to evict all season, but then the final decision for who won was up to the HMs. How would you feel then?

The two systems are counterintuitive of each other.
 
sav0001 said:
I don’t think completely taking out the public influence is a good idea though. Then it really would be just Survivor 2.0.
Click to expand...
Joel123ee said:
You're not only in a competition with the housemates to form alliances and win them over, but also having to win over the audience because they'll have the final say, and also win over the producers so you can end up with a "good" edit so you're in favour with the audience.
Click to expand...
I agree that it adds a different element to a contestant’s gameplay and sets it apart from something like Survivor. I just question whether it will in fact work long-term, especially knowing how Australia tends to vote in general.

As I said, Wednesday will be a good indication of this.
 
This seems to be the current format in these rushed COVID times.
The Voice (current format) was basically the same - eliminations controlled within the show (in this case by the judges), until each ended up with the person of their choice, making up a final four. Then the voting is allegedly handed over to the public to choose a winner.
 
Meglos said:
This seems to be the current format in these rushed COVID times.
The Voice (current format) was basically the same - eliminations controlled within the show (in this case by the judges), until each ended up with the person of their choice, making up a final four. Then the voting is allegedly handed over to the public to choose a winner.
Click to expand...

7 decided on this format before COVID.
 
Joel123ee said:
Personally I think it makes it more interesting.

You're not only in a competition with the housemates to form alliances and win them over, but also having to win over the audience because they'll have the final say, and also win over the producers so you can end up with a "good" edit so you're in favour with the audience.

If you can mesh all those together you have Sophie & Chad (Sophie more so). Good with not breaking any housemates alliance, good at the challenges, fan favourite (to some extent), and producers pick (imo from the final 5)!
Click to expand...
Yeah I agree.
I think it’s totally possible to be a big game player and become a public favourite. If Angela got to the end she would have had a very high chance of winning the public vote whilst also being a game player making big moves imo.
David on Survivor All-Stars is a good example. I fully believe that he would have still won if the last vote was a public vote.

You’ve got to be an interesting personality and be the neck moving the head of the snake but not actually being the head so you don’t get chopped off. That’s the strategy you need in this format ... so if it stays the same next year, the housemates have got to be smarter if they want to be a big player.
 
Joel123ee said:
If you can mesh all those together you have Sophie & Chad (Sophie more so). Good with not breaking any housemates alliance, good at the challenges, fan favourite (to some extent), and producers pick (imo from the final 5)!
Click to expand...

I don’t know why everyone is obsessed about this alliance being “official” on the basis Sophie had a tantie about it. The alliance agreement was made in a passing sentence, as far as I can tell, and there was barely any reinforcing discussion at all.

Why would Mat & Dan need their alliance? In fact that final 4 was obviously undesirable for them, since they had Xavier and Casey already in the Alpha alliance. Simply adding in the word “sure” without any substantiation wouldn’t hurt their game.

There was really no final 4 pact made between them. It was more like Chad saying “please don’t vote me or Sophie out, and we won’t vote you guys out”. Now answer me honestly, would you shake your head & say “sorry, we already have an alpha alliance, and guess what. You’re not in it”.

That’s what people seem to be missing. Sophie played it well with her tears but fact is she was unable to take out Mat because Chad was too numnum to see that actually the Alpha alliance was gunning to break them up.

So the argument that Chad & Sophie were the only that didn’t go against their “alliance” doesn’t wash with me. More like they had been too afraid to make big moves to take out the actual biggest threat to their game.

Then again my argument is based on a very edit, contrived & produced version of what their experience in the house was, so who knows what the deeper mechanics really are! But we all saw the same edit, so as much as we can do is compare notes really.
 
Last edited:
Who the audience voted for to win will determine the gameplay of housemates in any future series. If they vote for someone like Chad then obviously being strategic is irrelevant. If they vote for Daniel then obviously strategy will be important. If they vote for Sophie then determination and grit is important.
 
See, I don't get this whole format - you're a threat, I'm a threat, they're a threat. WTF ? Everybody is a threat to your gameplay, strategy, blah blah blah.

To me it's boring as whale-shit (with apologies to marine biologists). I can't get my head around "I have an alliance with person X" - but why ? What for? How? How do you reach that conclusion? Why did you select that person over another?

For me, this changed format doesn't fit with the Big Brother format. It's too much of a change to even allow this to be called Big Brother anymore.

/rant
 
👌👌👌@buck07

This bit of fluff/ cheese.....should be called 3rd cousin x 3rd removed........someone’s teeny weeny lost brother

I watch 30 mins notice time, bored, get refreshments or surf net.....sometimes watch another 30min show
Drift back for end, usually catch most of challenge and eviction, could care less missing bits
Last show I actually watched all of it!
 
If they reverted back to original big brother where audience voted every week for evictions then it would rate poorly and be cancelled after one season imo.
 
reepbot said:
If they reverted back to original big brother where audience voted every week for evictions then it would rate poorly and be cancelled after one season imo.
Click to expand...
Not suggesting that
Just make something better than this CRAP .
It is so poorly conceived and executed
Canada version I watched with Tim was far better, so was only other I have seen ....USA celeb bb
 
BB Daze said:
I don’t know why everyone is obsessed about this alliance being “official” on the basis Sophie had a tantie about it. The alliance agreement was made in a passing sentence, as far as I can tell, and there was barely any reinforcing discussion at all.

Why would Mat & Dan need their alliance? In fact that final 4 was obviously undesirable for them, since they had Xavier and Casey already in the Alpha alliance. Simply adding in the word “sure” without any substantiation wouldn’t hurt their game.

There was really no final 4 pact made between them. It was more like Chad saying “please don’t vote me or Sophie out, and we won’t vote you guys out”. Now answer me honestly, would you shake your head & say “sorry, we already have an alpha alliance, and guess what. You’re not in it”.

That’s what people seem to be missing. Sophie played it well with her tears but fact is she was unable to take out Mat because Chad was too numnum to see that actually the Alpha alliance was gunning to break them up.

So the argument that Chad & Sophie were the only that didn’t go against their “alliance” doesn’t wash with me. More like they had been too afraid to make big moves to take out the actual biggest threat to their game.

Then again my argument is based on a very edit, contrived & produced version of what their experience in the house was, so who knows what the deeper mechanics really are! But we all saw the same edit, so as much as we can do is compare notes really.
Click to expand...
I agree with all you said. We can only go by what we were shown, and there wasn't a real a final 4 with Sophie and Chad. Sophie couldn't vote one of the boys out only because Chad didn't want her to, she would have otherwise, pity though
 
kxk said:
Not suggesting that
Just make something better than this CRAP .
It is so poorly conceived and executed
Canada version I watched with Tim was far better, so was only other I have seen ....USA celeb bb
Click to expand...

You should write a strongly worded letter to channel seven outlining your displeasure.
 
Last edited:
reepbot said:
If they reverted back to original big brother where audience voted every week for evictions then it would rate poorly and be cancelled after one season imo.
Click to expand...
Reverting back to the old BB format will also be very expensive too because you would need more cameramen, more editors, more security, more insurance, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top