BIG BROTHER: REVIVAL VS REALITY
Like every millennial who once arranged their entire evening around a 7pm daily show, spent way too much phone credit on 55c voting texts and stayed up for Big Brother Uncut when we absolutely should’ve been asleep, I approached the 2025 reboot with a mix of nervous excitement and cultural muscle memory.
I’ve always been BB-obsessed, and I’ve skirted around the edges of BB fame for years.
I’ve known Tully (2013 season) since we were awkward teenagers and have cheered her on from afar - professionally and personally - ever since.
I fangirled so hard over Geneva (2005) that when I ran into her at The Greenwood Hotel post-eviction, I somehow weaselled my way into her orbit and befriended her. We stayed in touch until she moved to London a few years later.
I’ve known 2014’s short-lived intruder Tom since we were 12.
I have another friend who auditioned, made the cut, and turned it down.
And I met 2006 winner Jamie in Bali in 2012 and we’re still Facebook friends to this day (whatever that means, lol).
But somewhere around 2015, the show fell off a cliff of gimmicks, flashy twists, hyper-produced drama and housemates cast for their meme-ability instead of their humanity.
The magic dissolved and the social experiment stopped feeling like a social experiment and started looking like an extended audition tape for influencer collab deals.
So when Ten promised a “return to roots” in its 2025 season - live shows, real people, fly-on-the-wall viewing - you better believe I was perched like Gretel Killeen with a mic on eviction night.
And one week in…it is a revival. But it’s also a remix. And the tension between nostalgia and modernity is where this season is either going to soar or completely implode.
So - here are my top three thought bubbles from Week One of #BBAU25
First: Where is the eviction interview?!
This one had me floored last night.
A housemate gets evicted, climbs the stairs, walks out onto the stage and instead of the classic full interview: first reactions, footage packages, the “Here’s who nominated you…” reveal, we get five minutes of awkward chit-chat and a breezy: “See you tomorrow night!”
Sorry? What? Pardon???
The eviction interview was the emotional spine of the OG seasons. It was cathartic. It was chaotic. It was where awkwardness, denial and public perception collided in unpredictable ways and removing it completely changes the rhythm of the show.
I can’t tell if this is:
ratings strategy (pull viewers into another live ep),
production strategy (manufactured cliffhangers), or
WHS strategy (contestants needing psych clearance before being allowed near a live camera)
My hunch? A combination of all three.
Modern reality TV is a compliance minefield, so perhaps the show has engineered its way around duty-of-care responsibilities. But it also dampens the drama.
No live reaction = no real stakes.
It’s the first sign that this “return to roots” isn’t quite as unfiltered as advertised. What are they so afraid of? Another Merlin? Another Michael?
Ok, nevermind.
Secondly: The TikTok Live Stream Is Actually Genius
Credit where it’s due - this is the smartest adaptation of the whole reboot.
Big Brother Up Late walked so the TikTok 24/7 feed could run and it taps perfectly into how we consume content now:
ambient background entertainment
continuous low-stakes voyeurism
algorithm-ready viral snippets
the ability to tune in or out at will
It recreates some of that early-era rawness and mimics the unstructured perverted charm, but acknowledges that audiences now scroll, they don’t sit.
But (and there’s always a but): housemates today know every whispered conversation can be clipped, captioned, dissected and shipped to 300,000 FYPs before sunrise.
That changes behaviour - even subconsciously.
No one forgets the cameras anymore, especially when most of them are wall-mounted, moving, and tracking you from bed to shower (instead of being hidden behind a two-way mirror).
I’ve already watched housemates clock the lens and break the fourth wall more times than I can count.
The genius is the accessibility. The trade-off is the self-awareness.
Thirdly: Vote to Save vs Vote to Evict is BB's Fatal Flaw
This is where the reboot’s identity crisis shows most clearly.
Old-school BB used a Vote to Evict method. The house became a pressure cooker because the public actively removed the most controversial personalities first.
In doing so, it gave us:
villains who lasted weeks (despised by the house, loved by the public aka Tim Dormer)
delicious unlikely alliances
genuine tension
finals full of heavy hitters with huge fanbases
It meant housemates had to navigate each other, not an audience.
The “Vote to Save” flips the psychology completely. Sure, it still reward loudness, divisiveness and micro-fandoms but it punishes quiet housemates, low-drama personalities and anyone not polarising enough (for better or worse) to rally an emergency vote-to-save frenzy.
Vote to Save splits votes across the biggest players, so we evict the people we care about least.
Which means instead of watching personalities collide under pressure, we’re watching housemates survive because they’re entertaining. It’s casting preservation disguised as public power and it deflates the social experiment.
Would Holly have gone last night under Vote to Evict? Almost certainly.
Under Vote to Save? She survived because she annoys people in an interesting way.
So…is it a return to roots?
In spirit, yes. They’ve brought back all the right elements - the nomination chairs, the live streams, the 24/7 voyeurism and the “ordinary Australians” diversity casting.
But the beauty of early BB was the lack of control. It was messy, uncomfortable, certainly not PG and it wasn’t produced with an eye toward virality.
Housemates weren’t performing for future followers and evictions detonated the cultural and emotional ecosystem weekly. This reboot brings back the original frame but fills it with 2025’s instinct for social optimisation and psychological safety.
And that’s not the producers’ fault - that’s our fault. Reality TV can’t legally do what it did in 2001. And audiences don’t watch the way they watched in 2004, 2010, or 2014.
So yes I’m absolutely watching (…the livestream more often than I should publicly admit).
But am I under any illusion that this is the Big Brother of our youth? Absolutely not. Though it's the closest it's been in a long time.
Now - off to watch Nominations tonight
This piece first appeared in Excessive Consumption - a weekly dispatch on culture, branding, politics and whatever other modern internet brain rot the algorithm has emotionally assigned me that week.
Subscribers get every edition first. The archive opens later.