Eolivet

Oh, Chelsea. Wanting to get on Survivor since she was eight years old, applied for, what, nine years, finally gets on the show, finds an idol, and ... gets in a showmance. You know, maybe there's a reason it took her nine years to get cast on the show.

Forgive me if this has been brought up before, but: has the nature of the fire-making at final 4 made it next to impossible for a woman to win Survivor? While it's an incredibly small sample (n of 4), the "fire-making at final 4" has resulted in four male winners in a row, and 3 of 4 who've made fire have won the show (i.e., it's almost a literal king-maker). Not to mention the ooh and ahh spectacle of it is an advantage for a man, even if he's sitting next to a woman in final tribal council. Women have been a part of every single final 3 starting at season 35, yet every single fire-making at final 4 has been won by a man, even if the man didn't ultimately win the game (in one instance). Since the final 4 fire-making, in all 4 final tribal councils, women have received a grand total of ... 2 votes? 3 votes? Whatever Chrissy received, since Laurel, Angelina and Julie received a grand total of 0 votes. (pre-fire making, Hannah and Tasha both received 0 votes, but the seasons afterwards had a woman winner). I was thinking about this as we near the end of the 30s, and if a man wins this season, Survivor -- which used to have about a 60/40 male/female winner ratio will be down to 80/20, which is Big Brother levels. But in the earlier part of the 30s, it was pretty back-and-forth. Pre-fire at final 4, it was 3 men, 2 women. Since the fire-making: 4 men and 0 women. I didn't care about these things before, but it's starting to be an uncomfortable pattern, especially seeing rumblings in the episode thread of a man this season with a supposed "winner's edit." I wonder if someone pointed this out to Jeff Probst -- that for all his praise of Angelina as a role model for his daughter, that she actually received no votes. That in the final 4 fire-making era, we're going to keep seeing Angelinas and Laurels and Julies -- women who sit there at the behest of a man who chooses them as a goat, so he can beat her. And yeah, that happened before the fire-making, but it didn't feel quite so icky because final 4 was a vote that sent someone home, not a "choose your own goat. and shocker! it's a woman!" Survivor is losing to the Masked Singer in ratings, and in order to stay relevant, they really need not to become American Idol (i.e. only young, mostly white men can win). And I sort of feel after a few seasons of data that the final 4 fire-making has been the turning point. Like we're supposed to ooh and ahh over the spectacle, and pay no attention to the fact that the spectacle has only been benefiting a specific type of player.

I have a problem with the judging this season. With the introduction of someone potentially as famous as Patti La Belle, and the changing in judging rules (where now the judges clearly get the final say vs being part of the audience vote last year), I feel that this is going to become a showcase for "reward the most famous singer." And true showmen and performers like the Fox, or even someone like the Rottweiler, are never going to beat the likes of the Flower because their voices simply aren't as good. At its core, I do feel like this show should be more like American Idol or Dancing with the Stars -- where the best performer, not necessarily the best pure singer/dancer wins. But if there are people still grumbling that the Monster beat Gladys Knight (the superior singer losing to the superior performer), this seems like a massive overcorrection. And I see little incentive to do this show unless you're massively famous, because the judges having the ultimate say means that they're going to reward someone based on their career outside the mask, not behind the mask. It makes it less fun, that's all. I watch this show for hidden gems like the Monster (where I'd never heard of T-Pain, but I loved watching the Monster because he could sing and perform) not "oh, that household name singer? breaking news: they can actually sing!"

Chelsea, the supposed Survivor super-fan, getting involved in a showmance ...

Live look-in at CBS producers choosing the episode titles:

Tommy bugged me yet again -- once again, someone comes to him with a plan (I think it was Jamal this time, to vote out Dan) and once again, he's like "no, I don't like that plan." Hey, fourth grade teacher -- you're starting to remind me of my kindergartener who's coloring with a blue crayon, and when someone wants him to give up the yellow crayon, he says "no, I was using that." And then someone wants him to give up the green crayon, and he says "no, I was using that." Tommy thinks he's coloring with multiple crayons at once, and people are just supposed to accept that, even though he's not using them now. In alliances, as in kindergarten: sharing is caring, Tommy.

I think that had Bear potential, as well. Isn't a Bear a more well-liked, personable second-in-command to the Fox? I feel like "I got to know you as a person" can help build bonds, strengthen trust and be a pretty effective final tribal council argument (as long as you did other things). And the lesson didn't seem to be "just listen to people and have no strategy." But that getting to know people is part of Survivor, where the goal is to be useful/likable/good enough to not be voted out, and to get people to vote for you to win. But maybe I don't see how people could benefit from Bunny lessons, since pure Bunnies so rarely win the game, unless a more obnoxious player is sitting next to them (an Ox?) and I really do think the goal of these Survivor "make it work" mentorships is to help advance a winner's game (thus, to build players into a Fox or Bear).

Is it me or are these opening shows going on way too long? I get that they want to drag out the suspense, but one of the cool parts of the first season was I thought we got to know and hear a number of different performances from the same modest group every week. The Masked Singer seems like it's adopting more of a Survivor/Masterchef format (i.e., a huge bunch of people, with only a few you'll remember until the numbers thin out enough) versus an American Idol format (where they cull down to the top singers fairly quickly). Since it's people in goofy costumes, it's even weirder. I guess I don't see the point in stretching out the "intro" episodes three weeks, it makes the show weaker. Next week, I'm supposed to remember people who sung three weeks ago?

I don't remember seeing this covered, but I actually found Kellee's lie about Giant Zombie Head Island (someone on this board called it that, and it's what I've been calling this season in my head) was much better than Elizabeth's. Kellee did say there were two giant statues of a man and a woman there. Theoretically, the next person could believe that maybe only a few people (or select people) get a visit from Boston Rob and Sandra. Whereas Elizabeth's "it was basically Ghost Island" is going to unravel the minute the next person goes. Adam Klein would like you to know, three years later, that his edit was bad, really bad, really really bad. 😉 But I'm always skeptical of over-the-top positive edits, as they normally spell doom (as was the case for Rick Devens). Malcolm on Game Changers comes to mind. When the halo appears, the end is near.

Something about this guy rubs me the wrong way. I think it's the way he seemingly shut down talk of getting Molly out (even though he ultimately went along with that vote). That it was a few women bringing it up, and him being all "no, no, no, it's too soon." He strikes me as a guy they want me to like, but he's not bringing enough to the table for me to like him. So, I don't like him. And the fourth grade teacher stuff leaves me cold. Ooh, fourth grade teacher playing Survivor -- no different than a social worker, a minister, anyone else with a "meek" profession. Thus far, he hasn't shown any Russell Hantz-type tendencies, which is the only way the fourth grade teacher contrast works. Otherwise it's ... yeah, he's a fourth grade teacher playing Survivor by being nice, probably like he is in real life. Meh.

Speaking for myself only, Jay is one of my favorite players of the 30s. The chill surfer dude archetype, but with a brain and a heart (and courage enough to look Michaela in the eye after he blindsided her). Not Malcolm level by any stretch, but a solid social player who won two immunity challenges. He seemed pretty well-liked by fans, as well, though I think Jeff Probst found him too lazy and not Alpha enough to merit a return invite. But anyone in a minority alliance who can sit through 4-5 tribal councils with an idol, and be able to read the room well enough not to play it, has my respect -- even if he went out like a doofus in the end with the fake idol. And "go ahead, Jeffrey -- snuff my torch" made great TV.

Jay, of Millennials vs Gen X, and late of MTV's Ex on the Beach, is likely Will be curious to see if this opens the door to others from Survivor in the future.

I fail to understand why people think the poker and Survivor skill set are the same things. I actually think they're almost opposite. Emotion is the enemy of poker, while I think it can help you win Survivor (at least the appearance of it). Why would a game where you stare stonily at a hand of cards be equivalent to a game where you have to live with people, and form relationships, form alliances. People are not a hand of cards. People are not things to be bet on or dealt or discarded (well, you can, but you end up like Russell Hantz). And people see through others who see people like a hand of cards. For a poker player, Ronnie utterly failed to read the room -- there was no enthusiasm for voting out Elaine. Explaining it like "but she is a card I must get rid of to strengthen my hand" makes no logical sense. Elaine isn't a jack of clubs, she's a living, breathing person, who forms bonds, relationships, developing trust with others. It was a totally emotionless calculation, and I'm so glad to see it bit him squarely in the behind. I'm not the biggest fan of poker to begin with, but I can't stand when it's compared to Survivor. Emotion is beauty in real life, and emotion is power in Survivor. Emotion helps you sway a jury and avoid getting voted out and gets people to play idols for you. Emotion is the strongest weapon you have in Survivor, and these people like Ronnie (and War Dog last year) who come in with the "this is my hand, what am I dealt, how much do I bet" mentality will always, always lose.

But will they write the check out to Jackson or to the Jack-bestowed pointless nickname they insisted on calling him all season? Also, was Dr. Will wearing a tuxedo, orange lipstick, cropped pants and no shoes? Just checking.

Did anyone else see those CBS previews ("Survivor will be right back after these commercial messages/preview") where they showed the shot of the tribal council, which pretty much gave away that Lairo lost the challenge at 8:21PM. Good job, CBS promo department. Let's not do that again. I'm so happy Ronnie is gone for many reasons, not the least of which was that he described being from Brockton as "south Boston" when it's more like an hour south of Boston. Go home, ya losah.

I feel like she's going to be the Angelina of this year. She appears to be an alumnus of Survivor Maryland (which: don't get me started on those college shows, because one-third of the point of Survivor is to starve on an island, so unless you're starving in the middle of College Park, Chelsea ...) Like Angelina: don't sleep on her, but I'm not sure she'll be likable either.

Oh good, because I was going to say Bring on All Stars!

I got lost with the metaphor -- first B-Rob and Sandra were milkshakes, then they were tomato sauce on a plate? I did enjoy this, though:

Then why wasn't Nick sent home at F4 for leaving a string on his venison and having an inappropriately boozy trifle? Noah was a perfectly acceptable goat to take to the end, and much easier for Dorian to beat than Nick. And they really wanted Dorian to spend time in all their restaurants? To what end? To me, that's a prize for someone you want to mold in your own image, and that doesn't fit Dorian. Also, last year's winner, Gerron, also cooked southern food with a home-style flare -- why would they want two of that style of cook in a row? Wouldn't their cookbooks be pretty similar? After Arron says the fish is not cooked properly ("that's underdone, underdone by a lot"), instead of Ramsay going into his trademark "dear, oh dear" or Joe looking like he wants to throw a dish in the garbage, they are very low-key. Joe sits with his arms folded in a defensive position, frowning at Arron (not Nick). Ramsay then goes back to Joe about it: "Joe, was your fish cooked?" Joe responds, "Perfectly," and Ramsay says, "Mine's cooked," and Arron says, "I got the funky one." Have we ever seen Ramsay look at a protein, and then say "but wait, are these other ones cooked? Oh, well if you only undercooked the one, I suppose it's not that bad." No, he says it's RAWWWWW and he throws it against the wall. And if this reason was entirely fabricated out of whole cloth, why not keep Nick until F2 and have him lose to Dorian then? Why cut him at F3? To me, Occam's Razor makes sense on this one -- they didn't want to cut him at F3, but the mistake was so bad, they couldn't overlook it. And that's absolutely reflected in Joe and Ramsay trying to sweep it under the rug. If Nick is not the chosen one, then they're dancing a jig that he undercooked a protein, not trying to fast-talk their way out of it. Unless he was the chosen one, and this forced them to change their plans. Which is, to me, the most plausible explanation for what happened.

Same here, which is why I believe his fish was actually undercooked. Both Joe and Ramsay seemed to be willing to give him a pass (because 2 of 3 were cooked), but Aaron Sanchez made a great big noisy fuss that it was, in fact, raw, not just underdone. Had they kept Nick at that point, when they'd sent every single person with raw protein home, the fix would've been too massive to ignore. If Dorian was the chosen one, send Noah into the finale as a goat and cut Nick at F4 (as he left the string on his venison and put two different drinks in the trifle, which seemed to be a huge technical no-no). I still believe the reason they were going to cut someone prior to dessert was to cut Dorian, so Nick's creativity could triumph over Sarah's middle of the road safe chocolate cake. The weird thing is that once Nick imploded with raw fish (which I do genuinely believe was raw/undercooked to the point of being a massive technical error), they had to keep Dorian to make her the winner. Because she was good enough, she just wasn't the chosen one. There's no way they included "the winner gets to spend time in each of our restaurants" as a special added bonus if Nick wasn't the chosen one. That was tailor-made for Nick the college student, not Dorian the working mom with a family. Dorian was their plan B, and she's a good, solid plan B (she was my favorite, her food always looked delicious to me). But I don't buy for a second that they didn't have Nick scripted in as the winner until he made it impossible for them to reward him.

You will never, ever convince me that if Nick hadn't undercooked that second piece of fish, he wouldn't be the winner. Dorian was the next best thing (I actually thought they wanted to eliminate her first, so he'd have an easier time in the dessert round). The "train in all three of our restaurants" was made for Nick as a winner. He just ... couldn't execute when the time came. The way Joe was saying "well, he only undercooked one piece of fish" ... just, wow. Congratulations, Dorian! When the prize morphed from "who can we train to be just like us" to "who do we trust to cook consistently well and not embarrass us," she was the logical choice. A solid, consistent cook with a nice story. And for the hyperbolic "Season! Ten!," maybe that's quietly revolutionary in its own way.

Live look-in at Cliff on Thursday's Veto ceremony.

Wow, they announced the winner in Fiji? I guess Australian cast and crew can keep a secret more than Americans can. When I realized Baden was going with my least favorite argument ever, "Survivor is my personal story of growth," I had a feeling Pia would take it 9-0. It was deserved, but eh. I would've been interested to see Harry vs Baden -- make the Champions choose. I do wonder if Baden pulled a "I know I can't win, but I'm going to make sure you don't win either" with Harry. I did enjoy Harry's Snidely Whiplash mustache on the jury, though. I actually found what Pia did to Luke with his vote-out was cruel. He's absolutely not owed her vote, but I think she owed it to him as a decent human being, to be upfront about it. And who knows if she was, but I hated that she was like "oh, maybe I will save you" to Luke's face (if she says it in confessional where he can't hear it, that's one thing). She was never going to save him. And dithering about her vote just twisted the knife for Luke. I realize they had to build suspense, but in a way, what Harry did was the kindest thing: I'm voting you out and there's nothing you can do. Saying "well, maybe ..." when you have no intention of ever following through is unnecessary. A fun season that was so strong up until the end game, for me.

Can somebody explain to me like I'm stupid why Holly throwing HoH was so integral to ... tricking Cliff and Nicole into believing Holly was still honoring the deal made to keep her for final 4 when there were ::checks notes:: four people left?

I saw that a little differently. Tommy was visibly crying, with tears streaming down his cheeks during the eviction moments before. Julie had clearly been watching the house meeting fight (which she said as much during the live show), so she knew how upset he was. I think she felt sorry for him. To me, if Tommy had been evicted on a "normal" night, she wouldn't have acted that way.