It's that time of year again for me as a Big Brother fan. With summer so close I can smell it, my anticipation for the Big Brother Season 28 premiere is heightened to the point where only rewatches of former seasons will satisfy me until the new season arrives on the 2026 TV schedule. After rewatching a few seasons so far, there's one twist I'm fed up with and needs to never return -- eliminating players without a traditional nomination and vote.
This terrible twist certainly doesn't happen every season, but it was revitalized just last season when Big Brother legend Rachel Reilly was eliminated on a hamster wheel. I'm not here to rant about that specific nightmare right now, but it was on my mind when I rewatched Season 18 and saw Glenn Garcia sent out on Day 2 after a series of competitions. There was no vote to determine his exit; he just narrowly lost a competition that determined his elimination.
In Season 19, Cameron Heard was eliminated on Day 1, also after a series of competitions. Technically, he did get voted out, but it wasn't the normal process (he ended up one of three people on the block after half the house was saved by friendship bracelets that Paul handed out, and the remaining people competed for safety).
In Big Brother Season 21, David Alexander was among the four houseguests who were "banished," which ultimately led to his elimination on Day 1 in Season 21. In all of those seasons, there was some kind of battle-back twist that might have returned them to the game, but none of the eliminated people won their way back.
I know these weren't the first houseguests sent out without going through the usual nomination, Veto and voting process. I could never forget Jodi Rollins' exit in Big Brother Season 14, and I have a vague recollection of the first eviction(s) in Big Brother 9 being a twist-situation, but my memory of that season is fuzzy. The point I'm getting to is, Big Brother has done an elimination twist before, including one as recently as last season, and it has never been entertaining or satisfying.
I can't say I was devastated when any of the mentioned early eliminations happened, since we barely got the chance to get to know them when it happened. Still, what is the point of bringing someone into the game just to have them sent out without really getting to play? "Expect the unexpected," I know, but it seems like a massive waste for a twist that really never lands.
I get that there's a high-stakes element to this kind of twist that creates suspense in the moment, as the houseguests scramble not to be the one sent out, but it's such a fleeting bit of excitement, and I don't think the outcome has ever been so exciting and entertaining to warrant ending a player's game. At best, we'll be relieved the people we're rooting for most are safe, and at worst, well... see Season 27.
I appreciate that Big Brother has to change things up each season to keep the players on their toes and the viewers on the edges of our seats. I have no doubt that it's not an easy job and chances have to be taken. With that said, if a twist's outcome ranges from neutral to terrible when tried in the past, maybe don't do it anymore?
I'll just add, when it comes to the hamster wheel twist from last season, I don't actually hate a competition that involves each player choosing who goes next, with a ticking clock involved and some kind of big stakes to that -- Head of Household, a secret power, a punishment, whatever. I do think the Reindeer Games competition has potential to work in a traditional season of Big Brother, just not for a houseguest's elimination as a result.
In the meantime, after last season's surprise elimination competition resulted in Rachel Reilly leaving the house, I do hope Big Brother officially retires these kinds of scenarios. The outcome hasn't been worth the gamble.
