First Aaron won...(what was that all about?), then Natalie got kicked out... Now the twins get kept in whilst Romeo goes out.
The results of shows such as this used to be so reassuring, it renewed one's faith in human nature. Nice guys finished first and evil doers were punished. Even looks and sex appeal did not necessarily count for much. Vulnerability and courage, kindness and moral callibre, were the order of the day and would win through. Yes there were debates from time to time on what a shame it was that the 'interesting' characters were getting voted out and wouldn't the viewers ever learn not to shoot themselves in the foot in this way, but there was something so edifying about seeing justice be done, and decent behaviour be rewarded. I may be alone but I enjoyed watching BB when it was harmonious and people got along. I enjoyed the 'boring' series when this was particularly the case.
However the cynical attitude of finding disharmony and evil entertaining seems to have finally caught upo with us. Now strategic votes keep morally reprehensible characters on shows and reward bad behaviour. Now contestants renowned for 'game playing' can win, like Aaron did, loving, nurturing characters like Natalie can get kicked out and Romeo, renowned for being a 'gentleman' is the latest to bite the dust. Ho hum. Not satisfactory at all. How far will this strategic voting go? Will we get yet more unworthy winners ironically crowned winners in anti-climactic finals? Surely for all their new 'sophistication' the British reality TV consumers haven't lost their love of an underdog and their instinctive distaste for arrogance. If this is the case then maybe the maligned, flawed but ultimately decent boy, Frankie 'Coke up his nose -a' will win as tipped, rather than - god forbid - those godawful twins
No comments:
Post a Comment