PT
She really was a bully. I mean Charley last year was bad but I think she knew she wasn't intelligent enough to intimidate people.
There's ways of gameplaying i.e. Grace, Saskia, Makosi all major gameplayers in past series but then there's just pure intimidation and bullying and Alex was just the pinnacle of that.
There's ways of gameplaying i.e. Grace, Saskia, Makosi all major gameplayers in past series but then there's just pure intimidation and bullying and Alex was just the pinnacle of that.
ST
I think it's quite clear that Alex wasn't blessed with a great deal of intelligence either. You've got to be fairly stupid to make the comments she's reported to have made when wearing a microphone and surrounded by cameras and witnesses.
Endemol should really look seriously at how they select HMs. I can't imagine that Alex managed to hide all these bullying and agressive tendencies throughout the entire audition process. This isn't the forst time they've had someone who was totally unsuitable and had to leave in the early stages.
nok32uk posted:
She really was a bully. I mean Charley last year was bad but I think she knew she wasn't intelligent enough to intimidate people.
I think it's quite clear that Alex wasn't blessed with a great deal of intelligence either. You've got to be fairly stupid to make the comments she's reported to have made when wearing a microphone and surrounded by cameras and witnesses.
Endemol should really look seriously at how they select HMs. I can't imagine that Alex managed to hide all these bullying and agressive tendencies throughout the entire audition process. This isn't the forst time they've had someone who was totally unsuitable and had to leave in the early stages.
PT
Oh exactly. I'm not saying Alex is blessed with intelligence - she just thinks she is.
TO
So? What if someone missed your post? ****. Its like you want full credit, not split credit.
looks like schools out.
Ah, you can take it but you can't give it eh? Resorting to the "schools out" comment to belittle someone you don't approve of and what they have said are we? In future just don't throw your toys out the pram when someone posts a link you've already posted. The world isn't going to end because, shock horror, someone has posted a link that you must get full credit for, a link you didn't even post in the first place!
The thing between Charley and Alex is that Charley was argumentative but in the way she was argumentative she was not intimidating, she made no sense and she spoke 50 words per second. All round watching Charley argue was funny. However with Alex she was aggressive but she does come across as very intelligent (although whether she is or not is a different matter) and she does seem like she has her head screwed on. Alex makes sense with her arguments and she is extremely aggressive and intimidating. It wasn't funny watching Alex argue, it made for uncomfortable viewing at times. The only similarity that I can draw is that they are argumentative.
Jonathan posted:
Tom0 posted:
Jonathan posted:
Yes, exactly, someone has posted something that I did. ****.
So? What if someone missed your post? ****. Its like you want full credit, not split credit.
looks like schools out.
Ah, you can take it but you can't give it eh? Resorting to the "schools out" comment to belittle someone you don't approve of and what they have said are we?
In future just don't throw your toys out the pram when someone posts a link you've already posted. The world isn't going to end because, shock horror, someone has posted a link that you must get full credit for, a link you didn't even post in the first place!
The thing between Charley and Alex is that Charley was argumentative but in the way she was argumentative she was not intimidating, she made no sense and she spoke 50 words per second. All round watching Charley argue was funny. However with Alex she was aggressive but she does come across as very intelligent (although whether she is or not is a different matter) and she does seem like she has her head screwed on. Alex makes sense with her arguments and she is extremely aggressive and intimidating. It wasn't funny watching Alex argue, it made for uncomfortable viewing at times. The only similarity that I can draw is that they are argumentative.
JO
Weird news coming from the website... Friday's show will kick off with Davina's interview with Alex. Now usually, as far as I am aware, if a housemate is removed, they are banned from appearing on any of the other Big Brother output. Perhaps not banned, but for example, Dawn and Emily - we didn't see them ever again after they were ejected. Also, the interview is just going to be painful to watch...Alex will kick off, Davina will do her mummy voice - it'll be a repear of the Jo O Meara/Makosi interview.
What happened last year when the eviction was cancelled after Emily was ejected from the house? Did it still go ahead?
http://www.channel4.com/bigbrother/news/newsstory.jsp?id=2981&position=35
What happened last year when the eviction was cancelled after Emily was ejected from the house? Did it still go ahead?
http://www.channel4.com/bigbrother/news/newsstory.jsp?id=2981&position=35
GS
Gavin Scott
Founding member
Watching the BBLB repeat...
Perhaps Zezi isn't that bad. She's handling the interview (with Liz somebody or other) quite well. She's listening and shaping her questions to what her guest is saying.
If she could get past starting everything with a "look at what I'm wearing today" then she might actually be alright.
Or maybe I've just tuned in at the right moment.
Perhaps Zezi isn't that bad. She's handling the interview (with Liz somebody or other) quite well. She's listening and shaping her questions to what her guest is saying.
If she could get past starting everything with a "look at what I'm wearing today" then she might actually be alright.
Or maybe I've just tuned in at the right moment.
ST
I agree that Alex shouldn't be given the oxygen of publicity after being ejected for rule breaking. She'll rant and rave for about 10 minutes trying to justify her intimidating behaviour as 'normal street talk, innit'. She won't be challlenged in any meaningful way by Davina, who let's face it, is no Paxo when it comes to interviewing techniques.
I'd much rather Alex went back to just being 'famous in Croydon' and never heard from again.
Jonathan posted:
Friday's show will kick off with Davina's interview with Alex. Now usually, as far as I am aware, if a housemate is removed, they are banned from appearing on any of the other Big Brother output.
I agree that Alex shouldn't be given the oxygen of publicity after being ejected for rule breaking. She'll rant and rave for about 10 minutes trying to justify her intimidating behaviour as 'normal street talk, innit'. She won't be challlenged in any meaningful way by Davina, who let's face it, is no Paxo when it comes to interviewing techniques.
I'd much rather Alex went back to just being 'famous in Croydon' and never heard from again.
TO
Dawn refused to do her interview but I heard she was offered one. I'm not so sure about Emily. However when Emily was ejected it was Emily v Shabnam for eviction, but that eviction was cancelled. But they had a twist planned for that night anyway- 2 housemates entered (Gerry and Seany). But when Dawn was ejected in BB7, I *think* it was Bonnie v Dawn v Glyn for eviction but the eviction wasn't cancelled and Bonnie was evicted. If there had been more than 2 people up tonights would have gone ahead. I think thats a fundamental flaw in our eviction system. I think a minimum of 3 should be up not just for that reason but to make the voting less predictable and essentially voting to save. An example is when Orlaith and Science went head to head in BB6. People would have voted to save Science by voting to evict Orlaith and vice versa, then people would have voted to evict both of them anyway. If more than three were up it would stop the 'voting to save' type scenario and would make evictions a little less predictable.
Jonathan posted:
Weird news coming from the website... Friday's show will kick off with Davina's interview with Alex. Now usually, as far as I am aware, if a housemate is removed, they are banned from appearing on any of the other Big Brother output. Perhaps not banned, but for example, Dawn and Emily - we didn't see them ever again after they were ejected. Also, the interview is just going to be painful to watch...Alex will kick off, Davina will do her mummy voice - it'll be a repear of the Jo O Meara/Makosi interview.
What happened last year when the eviction was cancelled after Emily was ejected from the house? Did it still go ahead?
http://www.channel4.com/bigbrother/news/newsstory.jsp?id=2981&position=35
What happened last year when the eviction was cancelled after Emily was ejected from the house? Did it still go ahead?
http://www.channel4.com/bigbrother/news/newsstory.jsp?id=2981&position=35
Dawn refused to do her interview but I heard she was offered one. I'm not so sure about Emily. However when Emily was ejected it was Emily v Shabnam for eviction, but that eviction was cancelled. But they had a twist planned for that night anyway- 2 housemates entered (Gerry and Seany). But when Dawn was ejected in BB7, I *think* it was Bonnie v Dawn v Glyn for eviction but the eviction wasn't cancelled and Bonnie was evicted. If there had been more than 2 people up tonights would have gone ahead. I think thats a fundamental flaw in our eviction system. I think a minimum of 3 should be up not just for that reason but to make the voting less predictable and essentially voting to save. An example is when Orlaith and Science went head to head in BB6. People would have voted to save Science by voting to evict Orlaith and vice versa, then people would have voted to evict both of them anyway. If more than three were up it would stop the 'voting to save' type scenario and would make evictions a little less predictable.
BR
Dawn refused to do an interview, Emily did one with Dermot on BBLB but prior to that housemates kicked out by Big Brother (Nick, Kitten, Emma) all got an interview with Davina.
They'd be mad though to do that first tonight - best hold it back to the second show to try and keep the ratings up.
They'd be mad though to do that first tonight - best hold it back to the second show to try and keep the ratings up.