|
Bit of a rant here since this really bugged me about tonight's show. First of all, this is not to say that Porsche could have won because of Jury Questions. This has nothing to do with Porsche or Rachel, just the format as a whole.
Why have JQ's become so dumbed down and passed off as completely unimportant with this finale structure? In the past as I recall, they would have the last evictee walk in, do their debate and then turn on the screen to chew the final two out to wring every last drop of information. I always found them really interesting and they were usually very, very intense. It's the final shove to try to get votes after all. Even if I didn't like the final two, I'd tune in to the finale for the questions more than anything.
They don't always change the outcome, but I do think they play a very vital role. Jurors typically are very bitter about the events that occurred in the house, which is just human nature really. This gives the jurors the opportunity to hear their side of the story. Could you imagine if Memphis won BB10 due to how pissed people were over Dan's moves? I loved the Renegades, but it's no question Dan was the much better player. And even now with Survivor it's very evident with some people getting ready to actually vote Natalie over Boston Rob before the questions got people thinking a bit harder about writing someone's name down.
Now it's just four questions, moderated by the entire Jury (wtf?!) and the last juror has zero say in anything. Why? I understand with the Final 3 finale that they have to kind of rush through things, but that doesn't mean they can't just do them the three of them during their debate. It just feels really, really controlled and annoys me to no end.
Probably silly getting upset over this but I know I can't be the only one who has an issue with this.
|
Jury Questions
