Archive through September 22, 2002
MoveCloseDeleteAdmin

TV ClubHouse: Archive: Archive TWO: So? Better or Worse Without the Banners?: Archive through September 22, 2002

What555456

Sunday, September 22, 2002 - 08:16 am EditMoveDeleteIP
What say you?

Was the show better or worse without the banners this year?

I think the banners add something to the show -- some instability and shock -- and should have been allowed.

Gina8642

Sunday, September 22, 2002 - 08:19 am EditMoveDeleteIP
I did not enjoy Nicole's near mental breakdown last year, so I will have to say BETTER.

Edited to add -

And after last year's terrorist attacks I just don't like the idea of banner planes at all. I live in a college town and it makes me cringe when banners fly over the football stadium. I would perfer them all to be banned. Maybe I'm just paranoid now, but that is how I feel.

Gidget

Sunday, September 22, 2002 - 08:21 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Personally I LOVE the banners but they do not fit the isolation concept of the game. The audience has no business inputting information.

And Nicole was teetering on the edge for weeks anyway.

Must be hard for the producers to find people stable enough to withstand the pressure yet volatile enough to make the game interesting

Woodpecke®

Sunday, September 22, 2002 - 08:24 am EditMoveDeleteIP
No banners. Banners do nothing but ruin the concept of the game. By the way, I can't stand Danielle.

Maris

Sunday, September 22, 2002 - 08:24 am EditMoveDeleteIP
definitely better. it would have been a totally different game. The HGs would have known about dani and Jasons alliance. Gerry would have known about the tv show portrayals. Amy would have known what marcellas was saying behind her back.

It worked out great for them and for us. much more enjoyable to watch this year.

Bastable

Sunday, September 22, 2002 - 08:59 am EditMoveDeleteIP
I've always thought flying banners is tantamount to stalking. I'm glad they're gone.

And, yes, Nicole's breakdown last year was cruel. I can't believe any sensitive person would still want banners after the emotional torture they put her through.

The game ran by the game's own rules, which is as it should be. Banner-stalkers held no power, and I hope next year it's the same.

Angelbleu

Sunday, September 22, 2002 - 10:19 am EditMoveDeleteIP
No Banners.....mush more enjoyable...we have no business interferring in the house.....

Wiseolowl

Sunday, September 22, 2002 - 10:22 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Agree - better without banners. Also agree that what happened to Nicole was cruel - -but hey folks, let's not forget who put up the banner.

Tootseug

Sunday, September 22, 2002 - 01:14 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Definintely BETTER without the banners. The hg's are able to play much more strategically, because they are not being tipped off to events or people. Danielle alliance with Jason would have never gotten to the end of the game if banners were flying.

Yes, bravo BB. Definitely better.

Bmh

Sunday, September 22, 2002 - 01:17 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
definitely much better..the banners basically ruined BB2..in my opinion..it made Nicole go psycho and just give the hg's too much un-needed info..it was really bad...I think AS made the right decsion..no banners from now on!!

Niceguy

Sunday, September 22, 2002 - 01:34 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
I think a banner a week and a message that's cryptic would've been o.k. It doesn't need to be as obvious as, "Danielle's playing all of you."

Sanfranjoshfan

Sunday, September 22, 2002 - 01:37 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
better withOUT banners....

Wendo

Sunday, September 22, 2002 - 01:39 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
No banners, absolutely!

Oh, and...Go Dani!

Hermione69

Sunday, September 22, 2002 - 01:42 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
I echo Godget's sentiments exactly, "Personally I LOVE the banners but they do not fit the isolation concept of the game. The audience has no business inputting information."

Csnog

Sunday, September 22, 2002 - 01:46 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
I miss them.

They never believed them anyways.

We have banners all the time at the beach, no problems

Ruditoo

Sunday, September 22, 2002 - 01:55 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
I missed the banners and the Megaphone Lady,all the 'unexpected' they were on the same level as gossip etc. and just added another facet to the game,but that's not what a BB Society is about. Total control of their environment is the premise and to that end that's what ASP accomplished to a much higher degree this yr. Did it make for a better show? We'll never know.

Seanflynn

Sunday, September 22, 2002 - 01:55 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
After last year's banner experience, this year I suspect banners would have been more actively misleading as the Roddy vs. Danielle sides would have taken the battle to the skies. There was no requirement for the banners to be truthful; this year sineibe would have figured out how to influence the game.
No banners, ever; much better game without.
(Go Danielle! Congrats on outlasting 10 of the 12, and good luck this week).)

Betty

Sunday, September 22, 2002 - 01:56 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
The banners made it much more enjoyable for the viewers and I missed them.

Some have said they interfered with the rules of the game. Well, having Amy come back in may have been part of Arnie's game rules but it wasn't in true Big Brother form. Having a comp to go out of the house also isn't true BB. Neither is the internet chat, the internet "pages" with quotes on them, nor the live concert. Then there's more outside contact with family and friends through letters and phone calls that shouldn't be allowed. There's the occasional comments from behind the windows such as the time one caused D to start in on A again. And at the top of the list is the DR sessions. We've all suspected, with good reason, BB leads them on in the DR. So, with all this interaction with the outside world, what's wrong with a few banners?

Also, since some also suspect the comps are staged to a particular HG's advantage, why can't BB announce the comp schedule to the viewers at the beginning of the season? Seems much more above board that way. It's not like BB needs to keep it a secret.

Vanillarose

Sunday, September 22, 2002 - 02:04 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
I thought the banners were great and I miss them!!! Obviously, though, I don't think that the messages should be cruel. I think that the banners make for a more interesting game. It's one of the reasons that BB1 was my favorite.

Talk about twists in the game! Can you imagine if banners had been allowed?? The twists wouldn't have had to been manufactured by the producers, but would have been much more spontaneous.

Rts

Sunday, September 22, 2002 - 02:15 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
No I hate banners. They are the opinion of the person sending them. There would be no way for a secret alliance like Jason and Dani if there were banners.
Most of the time they are just a scam to raise money for webmasters. I'm glad that Shapiro found a way to eliminate them. Fact is the number one way to stop them is for the houseguests never to mention them.

Auntiedotcom

Sunday, September 22, 2002 - 02:17 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
i liked the banners, i loved the hysterics and confusion and instability they caused.

Ginger1218

Sunday, September 22, 2002 - 02:36 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Ok, question is was it better or worse? Well, I liked the Banners, I would have loved to see these intense strategizing hamsters with a little banner info thrown in. Whether it makes it a better game or not is debatable. But, I would find it funnier.

John32070

Sunday, September 22, 2002 - 02:41 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
I can see both sides of the banner argument. I'll say this much; if banners were allowed this year, Dani might not be there right now, and Lisa might not either.

Cndeariso

Sunday, September 22, 2002 - 02:45 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
I loved the banners and missed them terribly this year. They added so much for the houseguest to TALK about and rethink their stategies.
And, what is the bunk about Nicole and a breakdown? I watched all of last year and didn't see anything that ever resembled a breakdown. She was just scared to death her husband was going to beat her when she got out for doing things she had no business doing.

Bastable

Sunday, September 22, 2002 - 02:49 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
You must remember that these are people under extreme psychological stress that you and me could never understand. We can never fully grasp how damaging any banner can be their senses of security.

Betty, all of the things you mentioned were carefully controlled by the producers (with psychologist input, I'm sure) not to make the HGs feel like the whole world was ganged up against them. Banners, however, are reckless and selfish.

To toy with the HG's well-being for the sake of mere amusement, to me, means a fan is not connected with his/her emotions and the basic dignity/humanity of the game contestants. It is, by definition, cruel.

If people feel such a strong urge to impose their views upon the Big Brother game, they should apply to be contestants. Otherise, their input is not welcome and it spoils it for the millions of fans who DON'T share such an extremist urge to be heard.

The fun of the game is WATCHING it. It's why we're fans. Wanting to affect the game is, IMO, a very unhealthy impulse. Not caring how it affects the HGs is, IMO, just mean.