At first, the “Big Brother” finale on Wednesday night looked like it might be a repeat of last year: A skillful contestant with an advantage from a job in the outside world would win the $500,000 grand prize.
Then, things took a turn. Vanessa Rousso, a polarizing 32-year-old professional poker player who had been strategically manipulating the players, was the final person sent packing. It happened quickly, as she lost the final head of household competition to Steve Moses, an inconspicuous 22-year-old college student. Calling Vanessa “strongest female player” in show history, Steve booted Vanessa from the competition and chose to go head-to-head with 23-year-old marketing coordinator Liz Nolan — a much weaker player — as the final two contestants.
The “Big Brother” jury of previously evicted contestants awarded the $500,000 prize to Steve (Liz got $50,000 as the runner-up), so it worked out well for him. However, the ending illustrated the frustration with watching a show like “Big Brother,” a psychological minefield that traps competitors in a camera-filled house and makes them vote each other out, week by week. The other contestants hated Vanessa because she controlled them throughout the entire game, switching back and forth so effortlessly between subtle and intimidating tactics that most didn’t even realize her power until it was too late. But her manipulation made the show interesting. So is it really satisfactory for viewers to have a lesser player win, no matter how much you dislike her?
Advertisement
[‘Big Brother’ is a terrible show — here’s why I’ll never stop watching]
Last season, the winner was Derrick Levasseur, an undercover cop who used his sly observational skills to run the game. He was similar to Vanessa in the sense that he was able to read people because of his real-life job; unlike Vanessa, he didn’t make any enemies. Yet as impressive as it was to watch his strategy, and as much as he deserved to win … it was ultimately a pretty dull season since he was just so nice all of the time. Vanessa may have turned everyone against her by the end when her fellow contestants realized her dirty tricks, but at least she was a wild card who infused the game with some much-needed drama.
“How many people are here because of Vanessa’s influence?” former player Will Kirby asked the jury of evicted contestants during the finale. In “How many of you have ever felt personally victimized by Regina George?” fashion, everyone raised their hand.
Advertisement
So even though Vanessa was the one to keep the show moving with her constant manipulations, she lost out on the prize at the last minute, an irritating ending for people who have been invested in the show for the last three months. Even if you despised Vanessa, which many viewers did, at least she kept things entertaining.
Share this articleShareIt likely wasn’t the satisfactory ending CBS was looking for. A few weeks ago, CBS chairman Les Mooves publicly slammed this season: “This wasn’t a great year for casting on ‘Big Brother,'” he told Vulture. “Usually you have one or two disappointments. I think we had five or six disappointments.”
Really, the best way for “Big Brother” to avoid disappointment is to cast more than one real-life savvy, strategic player — ensuring that no matter who makes it to the end, viewers won’t leave feeling cheated.
Read more:
Is this the most sexist ‘Big Brother’ season ever?
‘Big Brother’ comes to D.C.: Talking to the casting director behind the polarizing show
How we went from ‘Survivor’ to more than 300 reality shows
ncG1vNJzZmivp6x7uK3SoaCnn6Sku7G70q1lnKedZLumw9JomKuso2Kur7CMnqWtnaKprqq6zJ6lrWenpXxzfJBuZmlxX2eBcK7IoGSbqp%2Bptaa%2BjJ%2Bgp5mcmnq1tMRmpKirpGK1osDEnWSppJGusrN50q2mqatdn8K0wIysn6iqpGK8p3nWoqWnoZ6cenZ8j2lnaWc%3D