Season 17 Live Feed Discussion: Watch People Sleep All Day!

[Ceeg]

Liz is actually being a pretty good sport about being put up on the block with Austin/Julia. She had about 24-48 hours to meltdown and be bitchy about it, but she seems fine with everything now and is being nice to Steve, and they played Potball last night and want to again tonight too. It's kind of a stark contrast to Meg camping out in the Have Not room all week and cursing Vanessa's name 24/7.

[SpringTulips]

Bb feeds on twitter said that liz is wanting to leave so that Julia can stay. Liz said Julia has always had the short end of the stick so liz wants to give this to julia

 

Kind of pointless because Liz should know she s heading out the door.  Maybe this is just a public relations move on her part.

[TexasChic]

Was there any discussion about why Steve felt he owed it to Austin to give the him a heads up about going on the block, but not Liz? It seemed like she was really shocked to be put up.

[blixie]

She wasn't surprised, Steve told her, he just did it closer to when noms actually happened. She was just mad about being Clelli'd, specifically by Steve, since they've given him a lot of cover, and this showed again he's more allied with John than the twins.

Edited September 7, 2015 by blixie

[TexasChic]

Okay, that makes more sense, thanks!

[Kris117]

I'm lost who is being voted out this week? Ty

If you will look just a few posts back from your post, you will see that the question had just been asked and answered. Right now, it's Liz.

[alt0233]

I see Liz "giving it" to Julia as trying to set Julia up for a F2. If Liz is willing to "sacrifice her game" for her sister (which she isn't really, because she doesn't get a choice, but she's saying it anyway) it may set Julia up better to be someone's F2, since everyone knows Liz is the only one that would vote for her anyway.

Also, I think they realize Julia's more likely to make it to F2 than Liz was, because people will keep pulling her along.

[ByaNose]

Why does everyone (HG) keep saying Julia could never win. Why is this exactly? Is it because she wasn't in first? She's considered the mean one? She hasn't won (comps) as much as Liz? The twins don't seem that much different to me but everyone keeps saying Juila would lose against anyone. Just curious.

[liqidclark]

Julia has won fewer competitions, and hasn't played the social game (fucking around with a bad showmance who didn't even protect her in the end) as much as Liz. Overall, Julia has been the submissive twin, which is kinda hilarious since she has shown a much better understanding of non-sexual strategy throughout the season, and they would both probably be in better positions if Julia was more in control. But since neither of them ever really made any big strategic moves of their own, the comparison between them comes down to comp wins and handjobs at this point. So Liz has played harder so far, while it will probably turn out that Julia lasts longer and is therefore the better gamer -- but neither is very impressive, IMO.

 

And as personalities, I'm done with them. It's obvious at this point that their entire schtick is to play "Dumb Sexy Babies" and that's not something I find appealing.

Edited September 7, 2015 by Liqidclark

[Katesus7]

Eolivet, that was a very reasoned, interesting, well thought out post. Thank you for that. Even though it did nothing to change my mind on my feelings towards Vanessa or her game. :)

[perfectstorm]

Okay, I know that it is totally irrational, but I still have a feeling that with the twins hating on Austin, Steve thinks he can swoop in and the twins will be his allies going forward and will at least put up Vanessa for "great tv" (he and Austin have talked about that a lot).  It's a crazy move, but I keep going back there (since Austin won the veto) for reasons I can't fully explain.   Feel free to mock me when it doesn't happen.

Well, it didn't happen......

[peachmangosteen]

Austin was just in the bathroom and then when he came out he didn't immediately wash his hands and BB came over the loudspeaker and said, "Did you wash your hands?" Everyone started ribbing him. It was a really cute/fun moment. Production must seriously hate Austin lol.

Edited September 7, 2015 by peachmangosteen

[Nashville]

The comps aren't shown, but it was apparently some sort of knock-out bowling match, where you get to pick your competitor. I think Vanessa (and maybe Steve?) were both out at that point, Julia had to pick, she asked Vanessa who to pick, and Vanessa told her Austin. I know that John and Liz were still in the competition, so even if Austin had tanked his matchup with Julia, John still could have won. But yeah, Austin did have the opportunity to allow Julia to stay in the comp or get knocked out, and he knocked her out.

 

I got the impression there was all this, plus some more.  It sounded like:

1. Prior to the comp, both Austin and Liz had agreed if the last two in the comp were either Austin/Julia or Liz/Julia, A/J would throw it to Julia.  That way Julia could win PoV and take one of them (almost certainly Liz) off the block without Steve being able to put Julia up as a replacement nom - giving Austwins the closest thing they have to a shot at surviving this week's eviction intact.
2. When Austin saw Jesse hosting the comp, Austin got into an over-the-top "Time for GOOD TV!!!" mode.
3. Austin saw Julia and Vanessa whispering right before or during Austin's head-to-head against Julia in the comp, and his BB-inspired paranoia led him to immediately infer (1) Vanessa was helping Julia in the comp, which meant (2) they didn't trust him to follow through with the "throw to Julia" plan, which meant (3) they were planning a blindside backstab of Austin. 
4. So naturally, being in full GoodTVMode, Austin called them out on it.  Loudly.  In the middle of the comp.
5. Also - when Austin did finally win PoV, he naturally did a full-on over-the-top GoodTVMode celebration - which didn't sit too well with certain chromosome-sharing HGs.

 

I see Liz "giving it" to Julia as trying to set Julia up for a F2. If Liz is willing to "sacrifice her game" for her sister (which she isn't really, because she doesn't get a choice, but she's saying it anyway) it may set Julia up better to be someone's F2, since everyone knows Liz is the only one that would vote for her anyway.

Also, I think they realize Julia's more likely to make it to F2 than Liz was, because people will keep pulling her along.

 

That's real nice of Liz - especially considering it's not hers to "give". 

That's up to Austin/JMac/Vanessa - the only eviction-voting HGs.

And pardon me if I'm mistaken, but hasn't a HG begging to be voted out usually been considered a reason to keep them in the game?

[peachmangosteen]

That's real nice of Liz - especially considering it's not hers to "give".

That's up to Austin/JMac/Vanessa - the only eviction-voting HGs.

 

John and Vanessa said that they will vote however Liz/Julia decide. Now Vanessa is lying, but she did tell them that.

Edited September 7, 2015 by peachmangosteen

[Nashville]

John and Vanessa said that they will vote however Liz/Julia decide. Now Vanessa is lying, but she did tell them that.

 

Yep - but remember House's* Rule #1: Everybody lies.

 

 

 

* TV show House, not the BB House - although it could be..

[TheRealT]

My point is, when men use emotion as strategy, the general public sees the strategy. When women use emotion as strategy, the general public sees the emotion. Dan gets Danielle (who is emotionally close to him, at least in the house) to use the veto on him and then boots Shane and instead of going "Wow, what a jerk" the general public instead says "Wow! Great game play!" Vanessa wins competitions and forms alliances with people who hated her in the middle of all her crying and emotional manipulation and instead of "Wow, great game play!" the general public goes "Ugh, shut your whining."

I agree with your general point about how men and women are judged differently for being emotionally manipulative, but I think that negative judgment of Vanessa's emotional manipulation is also related to her general emotional dishonesty and hypocrisy. I can't stand Dan, but I think that if you pressed him about whether he was strategically manipulating Danielle, he would say something like, "I genuinely liked and cared about Danielle, but I was there to play the game and that was my primary concern..." I think if you asked Vanessa about her strategic emotional manipulation, she would cry, talk about what a straight shooter she is, state that she was completely alone in the game from day one, express how offended she is that anyone would question her integrity, etc., etc., etc. I believe that that general dynamic has a lot to do with sexism and how men and women are socialized to expect that certain types of behavior will be acceptable/excusable, etc., etc., etc., but I still can't respect Vanessa on that level. I don't think it's immoral to use lies, tears, and emotional manipulation to gain advantage in Big Brother, but, personally, I can't respect treating people that way, especially when there's zero self-awareness about it. I don't think Vanessa is a "bad person," but I don't think I would like her in real life and I don't respect the emotionally manipulative aspects of her game (I felt the same way, even more so, about Derrick last year). I guess it boils down to me not believing that Vanessa is thinking, "This is total bullshit, but if I can make this person feel bad for going against me in the game, awesome..." I think she really gets caught up in feeling entitled to demand loyalty, information sharing, selflessness, etc. that she feels no obligation to reciprocate. That might be necessary/advantageous to pull those kinds of game moves off, but it makes her kind of an asshole in my  book, not a "good person" who is behaving assholishly to win the game.

[blixie]

 

I think if you asked Vanessa about her strategic emotional manipulation, she would cry, talk about what a straight shooter she is, state that she was completely alone in the game from day one, express how offended she is that anyone would question her integrity, etc., etc., etc.

 

That's fine, but  I conversely think she would argue she was "alone" in the sense that she had no solid social bond in the house one to one with anyone, not claim she was alone in the strategic game sense of having allies, that she would shed ZERO tears, and that she would absolutely say she cared about her allies, but was willing to sacrifice any and all her relationships to win the game, and that integrity in such a game is bullshit and she  used the concept to win peoples trust, simple as that. And, frankly,  I DO think Vanessa is a straight shooter, she has always said in almost every game conversation she ever has how she has to do what's best for her game, which as much as saying she doesn't owe anyone shit, and that she has been far more loyal and honest with/to her allies then they have been to her (going to Austin with the back door plan, once the idjits lost BotB). She's been about as honest as anyone who wants to WIN this game should be to these peoples faces multiple times, and they are just too fucking dumb to get it, I wouldn't be able to stop myself from condescending to such idiots either.

 

I think Van is legitimately ill at ease in the BB house, and legitimately misses her girlfriend, and most of whatever tears she has are about the social isolation of the experience and never EVER about the game itself, except in how it reminds her of that social isolation, I mean shit that's why I cold never play this game, the stress would eat me alive the very least I would do is cry and now then, if not habitually. Actually Meg is good example of someone who cried ALL THE FUCKING time and yet she's "likable" because it wasn't strategy, that to me is SEXISM write large, it's this confluence of emotion/strategy in the form of a woman that people loathe, and I find that problematic. Dan may never have cried actual tears but he milked the fuck out of his sulking and isolation from the power centers of the house in both seasons. 

Edited September 7, 2015 by blixie

[Wings]

 

When Austin saw Jesse hosting the comp, Austin got into an over-the-top "Time for GOOD TV!!!" mode.

 

Also - when Austin did finally win PoV, he naturally did a full-on over-the-top GoodTVMode celebration - which didn't sit too well with certain chromosome-sharing HGs.

 

Good god.  

[solomonhancock]

Liz.

 

 

Boogie could do all  the shit he promised too, doesn't make it any less hilarious/awful that they use that as strategy.

Great strategy...especially with these clueless little tadpoles with stars in their eyes. I don't dislike the strategy, I dislike how easily they fall for it.  Just go on and give Vanessa the money. 

[TheRealT]

That's fine, but  I conversely think she would argue she was "alone" in the sense that she had no solid social bond in the house one to one with anyone, not claim she was alone in the strategic game sense of having allies, that she would shed ZERO tears, and that she would absolutely say she cared about her allies, but was willing to sacrifice any and all her relationships to win the game, and that integrity in such a game is bullshit and she  used the concept to win peoples trust, simple as that. And, frankly,  I DO think Vanessa is a straight shooter, she has always said in almost every game conversation she ever has how she has to do what's best for her game, which as much as saying she doesn't owe anyone shit, and that she has been far more loyal and honest with/to her allies then they have been to her (going to Austin with the back door plan, once the idjits lost BotB). She's been about as honest as anyone who wants to WIN this game should be to these peoples faces multiple times, and they are just too fucking dumb to get it, I wouldn't be able to stop myself from condescending to such idiots either.

 

I think Van is legitimately ill at ease in the BB house, and legitimately misses her girlfriend, and most of whatever tears she has are about the social isolation of the experience and never EVER about the game itself, except in how it reminds her of that social isolation, I mean shit that's why I cold never play this game, the stress would eat me alive the very least I would do is cry and now then, if not habitually. Actually Meg is good example of someone who cried ALL THE FUCKING time and yet she's "likable" because it wasn't strategy, that to me is SEXISM write large, it's this confluence of emotion/strategy in the form of a woman that people loathe, and I find that problematic. Dan may never have cried actual tears but he milked the fuck out of his sulking and isolation from the power centers of the house in both seasons. 

I don't know. I don't like Meg and I found her crying annoying, but not as intentionally manipulative as Vanessa's. I think Dan is an asshole and actually think less of him as a human being than I do of Vanessa. I get what you're saying, but I don't think Vanessa is a good "test case" for "women are vilified for being emotional." I think there's a genuine aspect to her tears/mania in the sense that she really is emotionally distressed by being in the house/the game/etc., but I think she's also consciously and unconsciously manipulative with the tears, the hurt feelings, and the accusations of betrayal.

 

When Vanessa does her "I've been 100% alone throughout this game" schtick, she doesn't frame it as "I haven't had a BFF in  the game," she frames it as her having no real allies throughout the game. That is bullshit. I believe that she has felt 100% alone because she is paranoid and distrustful, but that is not the same as having no game allies. Vanessa has made a point of making the majority of the people in the house her game allies or (successfully) targeting them for eviction. Which, good for her, great gameplay, but that's not being "solo dolo" in terms of the game. It just isn't. She's had more allies than anyone else and has worked hard to achieve that. I would be SHOCKED to hear Vanessa admit to anyone in the game/jury that integrity in this game is bullshit. Her schtick is so heavily based in "believing" in integrity and having more integrity than anyone. If she makes F2, I can't imagine her being like, "Hahaha! I played all of you suckers! Integrity is bullshit! I 'straight shooted' you to win $500K for myself!" I don't even think it would be a wise game move for her at this point, which has more than a little to do with sexism and how women are judged for being "not nice" compared to men, but still. My sense of Vanessa (which could, obviously, be wrong) is that she's much like she's been in the house- controlling, emotional, consciously and subconsciously manipulative- in real life. I'm sure all of that is exacerbated by the stresses of the house/game, but I totally don't buy her as this even-keeled, self-aware person outside the house. I think she probably genuinely sees herself as the primary "victim" in many/most cases, that she feels entitled to demand explanations/apologies from people she decides have "wronged" her, that she has a very difficult time letting go of any perceived slight or misunderstanding, etc., etc. I don't see any evidence that all of that is an act that she's consciously putting on for strategic reasons.

Edited September 8, 2015 by TheRealT

[pennben]

 

pennben, on 05 Sept 2015 - 8:29 PM, said:

    Okay, I know that it is totally irrational, but I still have a feeling that with the twins hating on Austin, Steve thinks he can swoop in and the twins will be his allies going forward and will at least put up Vanessa for "great tv" (he and Austin have talked about that a lot).  It's a crazy move, but I keep going back there (since Austin won the veto) for reasons I can't fully explain.   Feel free to mock me when it doesn't happen.

 

ifoundit has noted:

 

Well, it didn't happen......

 

Welp, it finally happened, I, pennben, was wrong about something:)!  Like I said at the time, it was an irrational thought, but one that I kept having that evening; perhaps because each week, I think, is the week that is going to be Vanessa's last.

Edited September 8, 2015 by pennben

[solomonhancock]

LMAO! You know I agree!

 

 

Vanessa would be very different on vacation in Vegas. It is, after all, her home.  It's the place where everyone knows her name, she has an extraordinary mansion in a great neighborhood, all in all, it would be fun for everyone.  It's not like they will have to share rooms, most of their game play and concerts would be comped...a better than usual Vegas vacation. 

[Turtle]

TheRealT, I tend to agree that Vanessa would be getting much less crap for her gameplay if she would just own it. It's so frustrating for us as viewers to have no idea if all these tears and freak-outs are real or strategy as a combination. If it's all strategy and she's withholding it, I'm sure it's because she thinks she's avoiding the risk of alienating America, but it's having the opposite effect. That said, I also agree that there is some institutional sexism at play but I think she might be using it to her advantage- she knows how emotionally volatile, weepy women are perceived and how people react to them, and so she's playing up that aspect of her personality to prevent people from challenging her or suspecting her: she's not rational, and so she can't be good at strategy / playing the game. I could be totally off base, just a thought.

It will be hysterical if Vanessa win HOH and puts up Steve & Johnny Mac. Those two would be besides themselves. Vanessa would lock herself in the HOH room & then cry that she is a victim. LOL!!!

  

As mentioned above, there's no way she wins this HoH unless it's a total crap shoot (unlikely) or everyone else is just terrible (slightly more likely).

Yeah it makes me insane, as does the forwarning everyone about the "plan". To some extent PoV sort of created the idea of pawns/targets/back doors, but I don't recall the kind of lockstep and coordination we have now, nor this fear of blood on the hands, the whole point of BB is to have blood on your hands and for competitions to save/fuck you over. There has to be some way to shake the game out of this crap next year, it brings down the feeds and the show.

  

My theory is that's it two things. First, the extreme aggression of some of the folks in season 15 sort of cowed everyone in to just going along. Second, with BotB, two people were HoH and four people were nominated every week, making everyone's odds of being nominated a lot higher, and so folks started being even more afraid of ruffling anyone's feathers.

Do we think the Before-After HoH is this week or next?

Not completely sure, but I think before & after is at final four. This week could be the days comp, but it's really possible they won't do that this year because of the twins. Julia told Vanessa awhile back that she had been told they wouldn't do it, and I think it's possible they won't. Even though Julia has had time to catch up, I think it's not fair that she would have to rely on other people for the information. Although, they could do days for when she entered the game, so maybe that's likely.

[ByaNose]

I guess they could do the number of days since Week 5 for Julia, right? They haven't done the number comp yet and it's usually done so we"lol see. I do believe that before/after is usually at Final 4. He 3 will play and e previous HOH won't. It's getting down to the wire for Vanessa's win. I wonder what she'll do with the money? Wait! She hasn't won yet? I swear that auto correct just took over my iPad. LOL!!!

Edited September 8, 2015 by ByaNose

[Ceeg]

LOL John just told Vanessa that sometimes ESPN will show poker tournaments and Vanessa was like, 'Oh really? I don't watch much tv.'

[Sandiscot]

Maybe John was letting her know that he knows who she is.

[mooses]

TheRealT, I tend to agree that Vanessa would be getting much less crap for her gameplay if she would just own it. It's so frustrating for us as viewers to have no idea if all these tears and freak-outs are real or strategy as a combination. If it's all strategy and she's withholding it, I'm sure it's because she thinks she's avoiding the risk of alienating America, but it's having the opposite effect. That said, I also agree that there is some institutional sexism at play but I think she might be using it to her advantage- she knows how emotionally volatile, weepy women are perceived and how people react to them, and so she's playing up that aspect of her personality to prevent people from challenging her or suspecting her: she's not rational, and so she can't be good at strategy / playing the game. I could be totally off base, just a thought.

I actually think that less people in The House made me realize how good Vanessa's gaming is. It can blow up at any moment, of course, but I would still think she runs circles around these HGs. Her strategy felt so messy and frantic with more people, but now we can see more of the road map she's working with. I'm going to guess that the tears and freak outs are half genuine at most, which, kudos to her. She manipulates people emotionally, yes. I feel like most strategy is emotional manipulation in different ways - whether you act like you're their besties or you make them feel guilty. They are pieces for her to play with to get to the end. I always complain that HGs are horrible strategically, so I will totally root for a player who is going all out there to win.

I don't think she's done damage that isn't game related or too far (like the Boogie/Erika situation). All the HGs will feel used, because they were. But I don't think it was in an ugly, take their dignity kinda way.

Edited September 8, 2015 by mooses

[mayziemay]

It's driving me crazy this season that the players inform the other players who is going up on the block before they are nominated.  They act like this is a requirement.  I don't remember other season's doing this and what is the point?  It just gets people paranoid and upset.

 

I see Steve's newest strategy is to try to drive a wedge between Austin and Vanessa.  Hope he can do it because I loathe Austin.

Edited September 8, 2015 by mayziemay

[blixie]

 

but I think she's also consciously and unconsciously manipulative with the tears, the hurt feelings, and the accusations of betrayal.

 

I think she absolutely is being both consciously and unconsciously manipulative with her emotions, and I take no issue with it whatsoever, like mooses said, Vanessa isn't exploiting anyone in a deeply personal way, like Boogie did with Erika. 

 

 

I would be SHOCKED to hear Vanessa admit to anyone in the game/jury that integrity in this game is bullshit. Her schtick is so heavily based in "believing" in integrity and having more integrity than anyone. If she makes F2, I can't imagine her being like, "Hahaha! I played all of you suckers! Integrity is bullshit! I 'straight shooted' you to win $500K for myself!" I don't even think it would be a wise game move for her at this point,, which has more than a little to do with sexism and how women are judged for being "not nice" compared to men, but still.

 

But still what?  You admit it's sexist but who cares so what? This is the predicament of a woman who plays this game this way, she's damned if she owns it, and damned if she doesn't. I would be shocked too if she argues that in Jury, because it would be dumb as shit to admit that or argue it to this particular group she played with, because she's had to play against people who do not give two shits about strategy, and are even more likely than the average jury to be resentful of the person who they feel orchestrated their booting, would prefer to hand it to who was playing "nice" Summer Camp, and who also happens to be a dude.

 

As for whether Vanessa is like this in RL? I don't care, I'm not her friend or her mother or Mel, that's between her and the people who are her friends and family, I would never presume to think I know what someone's "real" personality is like by watching them on BB, I'm sure she has lots of failings, and I'm also sure those failings are magnified in the house. It doesn't undermine the quality and success of her "game play" if she is an equally flawed person outside the house, for me. 

 

I really am trying to figure out what votes Van is playing for right now: I think one of the only reasons she wouldn't go to F2 with Steve is because he's the only jury vote she'd be 100% sure of, regardless of who she's standing next to, he knows her game, he respects her game, and he likes/trusts her as a person (BTW, interesting discussion after Veto in the Kitchen with Van/John backs up the idea that Steve is gay, they were discussing how you can't predict who you will fall in love with and Steve looked at Van and was like don't I know THAT, we BOTH know how that is, and then he mentioned how he didn't want to look at girl nipples so haha yeah.)

Edited September 8, 2015 by blixie

[peachmangosteen]

As always, I wanna +1 every post you've made TheRealT. Thanks for so eloquently explaining my problems with Vanessa.

 

Vanessa would be very different on vacation in Vegas. It is, after all, her home.  It's the place where everyone knows her name, she has an extraordinary mansion in a great neighborhood, all in all, it would be fun for everyone.  It's not like they will have to share rooms, most of their game play and concerts would be comped...a better than usual Vegas vacation.

 

I for one would not wanna go on vacation with Vanessa. Sure, I hate her gameplay, but I also just really do not like her personality. I wouldn't wanna spend any length of time with her. And that's OK! I'm not sexist just because I don't like a woman! Sometimes you simply don't like someone. Many viewers don't like Liz but I don't see 'it's sexism!' being bandied about for that.

 

I would never presume to think I know what someone's "real" personality is like by watching them on BB ...

I feel the opposite. IMO there is no way someone (minus maybe Derrick because of his job) could not show who they really are in the 90+ days they're living their life on BB.

 

I really am trying to figure out what votes Van is playing for right now ...

She will get almost everyone's votes. Everyone on jury and in the game sees her as the master manipulator who's run the whole game. For most of them that will be what they base their vote on. Meg and James, maybe Jackie and Shelli, they might go the other way and vote for someone they like better, but I can't see Becky, Steve, Liz, Julia, John, or Austin not voting for Vanessa against most of the people left.

Edited September 8, 2015 by peachmangosteen

[TheRealT]

But still what?  You admit it's sexist but who cares so what? This is the predicament of a woman who plays this game this way, she's damned if she owns it, and damned if she doesn't. I would be shocked too if she argues that in Jury, because it would be dumb as shit to admit that or argue it to this particular group she played with, because she's had to play against people who do not give two shits about strategy, and are even more likely than the average jury to be resentful of the person who they feel orchestrated their booting, would prefer to hand it to who was playing "nice" Summer Camp, and who also happens to be a dude.

 

As for whether Vanessa is like this in RL? I don't care, I'm not her friend or her mother or Mel, that's between her and the people who are her friends and family, I would never presume to think I know what someone's "real" personality is like by watching them on BB, I'm sure she has lots of failings, and I'm also sure those failings are magnified in the house. It doesn't undermine the quality and success of her "game play" if she is an equally flawed person outside the house, for me. 

But I still don't think Vanessa deserves any credit for being self-aware or honest about her emotional manipulation. I don't think it's sexist to think that Vanessa is emotionally manipulative, hypocritical, and dishonest and I don't think it's sexist to react negatively to that behavior. I  think there are complex reasons why any individual or group behaves in certain ways and sexism and other forms of oppression can play into scenarios such as a woman using tears to manipulate others and not taking ownership of it on a number of different levels. To me, that doesn't mean that that behavior cannot be negatively viewed or commented on or that it's inherently sexist to do so.

 

I don't really care what Vanessa is like in real life either, but after watching these people for months I can't help but form opinions and analyses of them. That's part of the entertainment value for me. I have no qualms about speculating about Vanessa's personality outside the house since she has voluntarily put herself on display for me 24/7 for 3 months.

[peachmangosteen]

Catching up on stuff from last night and this is amazing: Vanessa coyly asks Austin if anyone has played BB who was already famous pre-BB. Austin answers Frankie and possibly himself.

 

LMAO! He has got to be kidding me!

 

Have Liz/Julia realized they actually need Liz to stay yet? I wanna see them tell Vanessa that they want her to vote out Julia instead. That's the only potentially interesting thing left to happen this week.

[Ceeg]

When Vanessa does her "I've been 100% alone throughout this game" schtick, she doesn't frame it as "I haven't had a BFF in  the game," she frames it as her having no real allies throughout the game. That is bullshit. 

Strangely enough, I just rewatched Vanessa's conversation with Meg, right before the veto ceremony, and Vanessa reiterated to her that it's not that Vanessa doesn't have friends or allies in the game. It's that there's no one in the game who considers her their "person". James and Meg were each other's #1's. Steve and John were each other's #1's. Julia and Liz were each other's #1's, and Liz was Austin's #1. I think people are taking Vanessa too literally when she says that she has been alone in the game. IMO, and just as she said in that conversation with Meg, she's talking about having an ally that you know for certain will have your back above all others in the house. Which is glaringly obvious that she doesn't.

 

I feel the opposite. IMO there is no way someone (minus maybe Derrick because of his job) could not show who they really are in the 90+ days they're living their life on BB.

I sort of agree, but I sort of disagree. I think you can get a relative idea about who these people are in their real lives. Steve is socially awkward, Meg is a fun girl, James is a class clown, etc. And I think that especially for recruits, real life and BB life are all blended together, because they don't come out guns blazing, and I don't think they realize they're playing a game 24/7, much like Meg's Summer Camp Fun Times and her amazement at people playing dirty or playing hard. But for people like Vanessa, Austin, and Steve, who knew what to expect and had a gameplan coming in, it's pretty clear that from Day 1, they knew they were playing a game, and every move they made and conversation they had is calculated and thought of as an extension of the game. Even personal conversations are ways to make allies and get close with someone else, in the hopes of putting themselves in better positions in the game. 

Catching up on stuff from last night and this is amazing: Vanessa coyly asks Austin if anyone has played BB who was already famous pre-BB. Austin answers Frankie and possibly himself.

LOL I watched that part too. Austin is so clueless. 

[peachmangosteen]

Maybe you're right. I guess I just don't wanna believe that because it creeps me out that people could be fake 24/7 for 3 months. I still maintain that you get a pretty good idea of who these people really are.

 

I wonder if it actually isn't a bad idea for Steve and John to keep Liz. Once Liz is gone Vanessa will most likely decide to go after Steve/John and stick with Austin/Julia. She has a much better chance to make it to the end with those 2. But if Liz stays then Vanessa will have much more incentive to stick with Steve/John. This is probably why John told Liz/Julia he'd vote how they want, secretly hoping they realize Liz should stay and then he can keep her with 'no blood on his hands' with regards to Vanessa.

 

I really just want Julia to go instead lol. She's more fun to watch, but she has no chance of winning and she is nothing but Vanessa's puppet. Her staying is so boring. There's more potential for drama and shake-ups if Liz stays.

Edited September 8, 2015 by peachmangosteen

[Ceeg]

I wonder if it actually isn't a bad idea for Steve and John to keep Liz. Once Liz is gone Vanessa will most likely decide to go after Steve/John and stick with Austin/Julia. She has a much better chance to make it to the end with those 2. But if Liz stays then Vanessa will have much more incentive to stick with Steve/John. This is probably why John told Liz/Julia he'd vote how they want, secretly hoping they realize Liz should stay and then he can keep her with 'no blood on his hands' with regards to Vanessa.

 

I really just want Julia to go instead lol. She's more fun to watch, but she has no chance of winning and she is nothing but Vanessa's puppet. Her staying is so boring. There's more potential for drama and shake-ups if Liz stays.

Keeping Liz would be dumb for Steve and John, though, because Steve can't compete for HOH. So Liz staying decreases Steve/John/Vanessa's odds of winning both the HOH and veto. Keeping someone who has won 3 HOHs and who will put you up is always going to be a bad decision when it's against someone who's won 1 comp all season, at this stage of the game.

 

Last night, Vanessa also sort of reaffirmed to both Steve and John, separately, that they can't scumbag each other if it's them in the F3 + Julia. I really think she's envisioning a F3 with either her, John, and Julia, or her, Steve, and Julia, and is trying hedge in case she doesn't win that final HOH. Because she knows Julia is a desirable F2 for everyone.

It's kind of funny that Steve and John are both threatened by a potential Austin/Vanessa power alliance, when Vanessa wants to cut Austin out so badly. She doesn't want him anywhere near the F3.

Edited September 8, 2015 by Ceeg

[Biosynth]

I'm just not wild about a millionaire winning this whole thing.  Ug.

[tinderbox]

Liz is actually being a pretty good sport about being put up on the block with Austin/Julia. She had about 24-48 hours to meltdown and be bitchy about it, but she seems fine with everything now and is being nice to Steve, and they played Potball last night and want to again tonight too. It's kind of a stark contrast to Meg camping out in the Have Not room all week and cursing Vanessa's name 24/7.

Keep in mind, Meg was not only nominated but on slop which makes them all cranky. Liz hasn't been on slop for weeks.

Edited September 8, 2015 by tinderbox

[Ceeg]

I really just want Julia to go instead lol. She's more fun to watch, but she has no chance of winning and she is nothing but Vanessa's puppet. Her staying is so boring. There's more potential for drama and shake-ups if Liz stays.

Julia thinks Vanessa is playing all sides of the house now and no longer trusts her, so I don't think she's Vanessa's puppet. 

[mooses]

Why does everyone (HG) keep saying Julia could never win. Why is this exactly? Is it because she wasn't in first? She's considered the mean one? She hasn't won (comps) as much as Liz? The twins don't seem that much different to me but everyone keeps saying Juila would lose against anyone. Just curious.

I personally think anyone, including Julia, could and should win against John. He was evicted, so pretty much already outplayed by all HGs left already.

The jurors, especially Shelli, Becky and Jackie, know he's loved by viewers, though, and I could see them voting for him to win so they look good in front of America.

[blixie]

 

Julia thinks Vanessa is playing all sides of the house now and no longer trusts her, so I don't think she's Vanessa's puppet.

 

Because Vanessa IS playing all sides, I knew you had it in you Jules!

[PaperTree]

She's playing all sides and getting away with it,  

[gunderda]

Liz is actually being a pretty good sport about being put up on the block with Austin/Julia. She had about 24-48 hours to meltdown and be bitchy about it, but she seems fine with everything now and is being nice to Steve, and they played Potball last night and want to again tonight too. It's kind of a stark contrast to Meg camping out in the Have Not room all week and cursing Vanessa's name 24/7.

Say what.....?? I saw Meg get up more than ever to make sure she participated with everyone.  She even made sure she got out of 'bed' when the camera came out. She does sleep a lot but Liz has never slept as much as Meg. Liz had WAAYYYY more of a pity party than Meg!

[AndreaK1041]

I'm just not wild about a millionaire winning this whole thing. Ug.

If she outplays them, I hope she enjoys her money on top of her other money, which she also acquired via skill, intelligence and hard work. This is not a charity.

[gunderda]

Strangely enough, I just rewatched Vanessa's conversation with Meg, right before the veto ceremony, and Vanessa reiterated to her that it's not that Vanessa doesn't have friends or allies in the game. It's that there's no one in the game who considers her their "person". James and Meg were each other's #1's. Steve and John were each other's #1's. Julia and Liz were each other's #1's, and Liz was Austin's #1. I think people are taking Vanessa too literally when she says that she has been alone in the game. IMO, and just as she said in that conversation with Meg, she's talking about having an ally that you know for certain will have your back above all others in the house. Which is glaringly obvious that she doesn't.

 

If that instance she was being honest... however over and over she has manipulated everyone into thinking that she has NO ONE, that her back is constantly against the wall and she's fighting for her life.  Which couldn't be further from the truth.  She's always been sitting pretty in many circles.  She may not be someone's #1 but obviously we can see that's better to be good with lots of people vs BFF's with 1 person.

[Ceeg]

Say what.....?? I saw Meg get up more than ever to make sure she participated with everyone.  She even made sure she got out of 'bed' when the camera came out. She does sleep a lot but Liz has never slept as much as Meg. Liz had WAAYYYY more of a pity party than Meg!

Meg and James never talked to Vanessa at all after the veto ceremony. They pretty much stayed in the Have Not room from Monday until Thursday, and only talked with John, and every now and then talked with Austin. I'm just saying it's a huge contrast to Liz and Julia hanging out with Steve all the time, joking around with him, playing Potball, etc. Meg and Liz both had their little meltdowns and crying fits. But, Liz is the one who seems to realize it's a game and isn't taking it personally, and she knows that Steve made the best move he could for his own game. Meg, however, couldn't get over her Vanessa hate, she was positive her nomination and eviction were personal, and even went as far as telling James if he teams up with Vanessa she'll be pissed.

[Waldo13]

She's playing all sides and getting away with it,

Virtually this is the F6/F5 tactic that most winners use to ensure their position in F2. Julia is not doing this because she is not that BB savy. I don't think that Julia even realizes that Austin is doing exactly the same thing. With Liz gone, I hope Julia gets clued into this tactic.

[gunderda]

I think Vanessa likely deserves to win but I will only be happy with her winning IF she admits how she played them all. And that her manic and delusional persona is all an act. 

[Kris117]

I'm just not wild about a millionaire winning this whole thing.  Ug.

If she outplays them, I hope she enjoys her money on top of her other money, which she also acquired via skill, intelligence and hard work. This is not a charity.

Amen to that.

She may not be someone's #1 but obviously we can see that's better to be good with lots of people vs BFF's with 1 person.

  

Virtually this is the F6/F5 tactic that most winners use to ensure their position in F2. Julia is not doing this because she is not that BB savy. I don't think that Julia even realizes that Austin is doing exactly the same thing. With Liz gone, I hope Julia gets clued into this tactic.

This season is unusual for me because most of the six are doing that. I went on and on about that in the episode thread, but the gist of it was that it refreshing to see that instead of the Brigade-type juggernaut.

[gunderda]

Meg and James never talked to Vanessa at all after the veto ceremony. They pretty much stayed in the Have Not room from Monday until Thursday, and only talked with John, and every now and then talked with Austin. I'm just saying it's a huge contrast to Liz and Julia hanging out with Steve all the time, joking around with him, playing Potball, etc. Meg and Liz both had their little meltdowns and crying fits. But, Liz is the one who seems to realize it's a game and isn't taking it personally, and she knows that Steve made the best move he could for his own game. Meg, however, couldn't get over her Vanessa hate, she was positive her nomination and eviction were personal, and even went as far as telling James if he teams up with Vanessa she'll be pissed.

Liz and Julia are just better at being fake nice than Meg.  They spew nasty things from their mouths about anyone and everyone and then act like they're all friends. 

Which is fine if you want to play that game.... but they've said some awful awful things about Steve.  But yea... they're not taking it personally.... ok.... 

 

Meg would go out and hang out with the group. She didn't hyperventilate for an hour like Liz (but that did make for some entertaining feeds it was so ridiculous)

[mooses]

Meg and James never talked to Vanessa at all after the veto ceremony. They pretty much stayed in the Have Not room from Monday until Thursday, and only talked with John, and every now and then talked with Austin. I'm just saying it's a huge contrast to Liz and Julia hanging out with Steve all the time, joking around with him, playing Potball, etc. Meg and Liz both had their little meltdowns and crying fits. But, Liz is the one who seems to realize it's a game and isn't taking it personally, and she knows that Steve made the best move he could for his own game. Meg, however, couldn't get over her Vanessa hate, she was positive her nomination and eviction were personal, and even went as far as telling James if he teams up with Vanessa she'll be pissed.

Yeah, I always said I really liked Meg, but her attitude after nominations put a bad taste in my mouth. She was just so offended and really couldn't understand how it could possibly be a game move - which, looking back, shouldn't have been a surprise because she really was a completely clueless about Big Brother. She was such a bitter, poor sport.

It's definitely different from the twins and even James, who talked a lot of trash and vented but clearly understood that it was just strategy after all.

Edited September 8, 2015 by mooses