Eolivet

Tommy: I always root for the underdog! Also Tommy: I was in an eight-person cool kids alliance targeting the house "bottom feeders."

I still am puzzling over this season, because of the very idea of needing Survivor "mentors," like Boston Rob and Sandra are akin to Tom Collichio or Tim Gunn is just ... antithetical to Survivor. You can teach someone how to edit a dish or shape a garment, because you're teaching them how to please a group of experts with certain expectations. But you cannot teach social dynamics that enable a person to integrate within a group of their peers, all with entirely different agendas. And you don't win Survivor through "teachable" skills, like knowing how to build a fire (well, I guess in some cases, you do). In this case, Boston Rob and Sandra might as well be telling players to "make it work," that's how useful any of their advice is going to be. They can't teach the intangibles, the magic, and that's what players need to win Survivor. What a colossal waste of time (that I look forward to watching in two weeks).

Would you think less of me if I said that I would totally watch "4 Weddings and Dan's Funeral?" The first time they did BBFlix and Chill, I thought it was kind of silly, but I love how it honors/mocks old seasons and contestants. It's a nice call-out to their (mostly recent) history -- something I wish Survivor did more of (in a way that wasn't Ghost Island). Moreso than Otev or even Zingbot, this is the show at its irreverent best.

Boy, do I find it difficult to believe these winners would let Parvati sniff the final 3. I believe the rest, but I'm skeptical about that one. I wasn't even looking for spoilers on Instagram, when some random person posted a rumor that Adam is indeed out, pre-merge. So, I thought I'd bring that over for everyone.

I also never saw Will's original season, but if someone wants to put him over Dan as the GOAT, I won't object (Dan is my personal choice, but I've seen both his seasons). However, I will strenuously object to anyone putting Derrick over either one of them. Every time I see an argument like "Derrick never would've allowed himself to get in that situation," I want to scream, "He was a ringer! An undercover cop! It was literally his job to blend in with people! It's like being shocked that the NFL quarterback can play college ball!" And he only won 6-3, besides. Can't believe Dan's Funeral was seven years ago yesterday.

I thought Tommy's was by far the best. "Little Shop of Attention Whores." Clever and relating to him personally (given his job). Nicole's wasn't only mean, it was predictable (I actually said "you should feel right at home" before Zingbot did). Zingbot was really good this year. Oh, wait -- that's more ... fake news. Zing!

I don't understand family visits on this show. I get them on Survivor (deserted island, starving, forced to compete, live with strangers who you have to vote out -- i.e., a big psychological toll on someone). This is more like ... jury duty, with a competition element. Aren't they going back to a hotel afterwards? They don't seem like they're being deprived of much. And if the show feels like family visits will make me like someone more, that never works either. It usually makes me hate them (or hate them more).

Except that if Nick is nominated, and doesn't win the veto and stays up against Christie on the block, Tommy could seemingly martial the votes to keep Christie and send Nick home (especially within their newly formed six). Nick's a comp threat who's won an HoH and a couple (?) vetoes. If Jackson's goal is to get rid of Christie, he has to put a pawn like Analyse next to her. Sure, Nick could win veto, take himself off and you put Analyse up in his place. But if Nick doesn't win, he's now sitting on the block as a tempting target. Nick winning the veto and taking Christie down means that three distinct things have to happen: 1) Nick has to get picked for the veto, 2) Nick has to win the veto and 3) Nick has to use it on Christie. There's a lot of wiggle room in those areas, and if they all three happen, to me, that's acceptable risk in order to get the most favorable voting match-up for your chosen target.

I disagree with this, and was glad Nick wasn't nominated. If he's nominated, he's for sure playing in the veto. This way, there's a chance he doesn't get picked. And using the veto on someone else is always dicey. Plus, with Tommy saying he can't save Christy this week after saving her last week, I'm not sure anyone else will be gunning for it but the nominees. That segment felt like setting up Nick as a replacement if one of the two nominees wins veto. And I hate to say it, but Tommy may be playing the smartest game of anyone. A new alliance with half the house, and friendly relations with the other half ensures he's not really on anyone's radar screen.

Angelina is pregnant, per her Instagram account (due February 2020). I find it odd to link to that kind of stuff, so just the facts here, ma'am. She has a post up on Instagram about it if you'd like to read more.

Good point about not being here to make friends. I only meant in terms of partner challenges or "pick who has to cook what," I can recall people who said, "I like him/her, so I'm not going to give them someone/something too terrible." But back to Micah. Has someone called out/handpicked for an elimination challenge in this type of scenario ever gone home? I mean, ever? I can think of times where they ended up in the bottom 2, but I don't recall someone being sent home after being picked for the elimination challenge in one of these scenarios. So, to me, when the judges say "Pick someone you want to put up for elimination," I believe they're really saying is "Pick someone who will definitely stay." Micah picked the weakest cook, who he ostensibly can beat. So it made sense to me.

I was glad Micah picked Subha, because he did what I always hope contestants will do on these challenges: pick the weakest. Picking the strongest never ever works out -- I can't remember a time in recorded history where a contestant picked someone to compete in an elimination that sends them home. It's unnecessary drama. Maybe they're bottom 3, but the judges don't send them home. Then that cook just makes an unnecessary enemy. But picking the weakest forces the judges to keep the weakest, (to prove you wrong, of course) so they have to send someone stronger home. In a way, Micah's choice was helping to clear the field for himself, just among Shari, Noah, Nick, Bri and Fred. Had Micah done something like pick Dorian, she could've presented the judges with dog food and they would've kept her. That would've given them license to send someone weaker home, like Bri. But because Micah picked Subha, they have to keep him, and they've hyped up this "somebody stronger could go home" storyline, so Fred gets cut in a "shocking" elimination. Now Fred's gone, Micah has the goodwill of the stronger cooks on his team (who are likely to win challenges and maybe not put him with a terrible partner) and Subha's still there, who he can ostensibly beat. As far as I'm concerned, Micah played that perfectly.

What I liked about this Veto (other than the result) is once you landed on a high score space, you couldn't land on it again -- it reverted to zero. That did take some of the skill out of it, since you could tell that once Jack hit the 21 score in the first round, he was aiming for it in the second round. This way, it was a true crap shoot. There were a few spaces I didn't recognize in the BB Galaxy -- wonder if there was a "key" with all the past houseguests. Other than Swaggy, Paul, Hayleigh and Fessy, I thought I saw Meg and Da'Vonne.

It's not Bri's looks that bother me, but her attitude. When she gets critiqued, she goes into "little girl mode," crying and apologizing in a little voice. Simpering is the exact right word for it. I don't like that, and I think it's saved her more than once. Bri reminds me of that episode of How I Met Your Mother where Robin talks about how men like women they can save. Women who play dumb, women who act helpless. That's Bri, to me. She's not using sexuality directly, but downshifting into sad school girl mode creates an image of helplessness. Looking up from her eyelashes, all, "Aww, you wouldn't eliminate l'il ol' me?" Anyone think that would have the same effect on Tosi as it does on Ramsay, Aaron Sanchez and Joe? Can anyone imagine Sarah doing that? She's a fairly attractive blonde, and she stands up there and takes her critiques like an adult. She doesn't start crying and pouting like a child. That's my main objection to Bri.

I think that's a factor for some more recent contestants. Jodi Wincheski may be a former contestant on the Amazing Race -- what it doesn't say is she's a current Survivor casting director. I'm sure more than a few of them know that. Though I truly don't think anyone from say, Vanuatu or China is under the illusion they'll be picked for another Survivor season. I'm guessing that's a mix of "oh, it's so nice to be recognized" (since they have autograph sessions, and who's going to want autographs of former Survivor contestants except Survivor super-fans?) and some altruistic interest in the charity.

I feel it's a tad disingenuous to point out minor discrepancies in an article whose main point is to call out contestants for their gross racism. Why does "Big Brother contestants are racist" need a "Yes, but" rebuttal? Do these discrepancies dilute the article's main point? I'd argue that they don't. The fact that minor discrepancies are a focus indicates to me that casual racism (which I think most of this is) isn't thought of as "real" racism. Because it's "only" three out of four contestants of color who were banished, and the house didn't banish David, and Analyse is Latina and they still like her. And if I'm going to call people racists, by golly they'd better be wearing white hoods and yelling racial slurs. To me, there's extremely strong evidence of casual (and in the case of the Reality Blurred linked article, overt) racism in this house, and the article did a great job laying out the evidence why this is the case. A few discrepancies in details don't erase those points.

I wasn't sad that Sam left -- he seemed to be an arrogant ass, and less entertaining than that other arrogant ass, Evan. He ran roughshod over a lot of people in team challenges with wrong decisions. Glad he's gone. However, when Bri started to cry prettily after Ramsay judged her food, I couldn't help but think of how Joey on Friends described how women sometimes apologize to men: ::squeezes breasts together, leans forward:: I didn't mean it. I'm sooooooo sorry.

Anybody know why Nick Wilson canceled going to Hearts of Reality, the charity event/reality reunion/excuse to party in Orlando in a couple weeks? Seeing as he's a former winner on a really popular recent season, that kind of shocked me: (lots of famewhores in this link, click at your own risk and be prepared to go "what? huh? who?" when you see many of these people) Also: "Celebrities" (no). https://support.gktw.org/site/SPageNavigator/hor_celebrities.html;jsessionid=00000000.app206a?NONCE_TOKEN=A90CB3928ED3903A39CF95FEF96400A9

@HeShallBMySquishy why'd you have to show me Jon Pardy? He fills my soul with a white-hot rage, for reasons you've probably guessed. As for the People article -- to me, this is the most telling part of CBS' statement: Translation: "We did not intentionally cast racists, and if houseguests are in fact, racist, that's not our fault." I actually believe them ... but I also don't think they look very hard for it. But when they cast not-exactly-Mensa candidates, and very, very few people of color, and then put out the statement equivalent of the shruggie emoji ... it's kind of hard to take this defense seriously.

I am also all in on Survivor 40, come what may [/Moulin Rouge]. (ironic, given that I'm on record as saying I wanted nothing of the sort. But times change and people do, too). Give me all the cluster-whatever of the upped prize money, the Edge of Winner's Extinction, the bizarre twists they will use to keep their faves. Heck, they gave All Stars a freaking Home Depot tool kit to make their shelter -- I'm surprised they didn't let these folks bunk with Jeff in his Fijian resort. And also -- maybe unpopular opinion -- but I think they needed the Edge of Winner's Extinction. You can't woo some of these people with families and lives and actual jobs to come to Fiji, only to be voted off on day 3. This isn't The Challenge (at least last season) where you lose and they send you home. And it isn't Ghost Island, with 11 under-30s either. They needed to be able to tell these people if you lose, your chances aren't over. Is that special treatment? Maybe. But in this case, I think it's almost warranted. The more I think about it, the more I think this is production's answer to social media and increased flow of information. You can't guess winners based on weight loss and it's harder to leak a boot list (maybe you still can) when you're not entirely sure who's booted until day 36. There's no stream of people coming into Ponderosa and no big group on a pre-jury vacation either. They're all playing Schrodinger's Survivor on Edge of Extinction. What I will find interesting is exactly how many of these people had ... shall we say ... neutral to skeptical reactions to this twist, who will avail themselves of it and prove themselves to be giant hypocrites? Can't wait to find out.

Besides the in-game aspects, Edge of Extinction eliminates any potential guessing of winners/finalists based on amount of weight lost. Your day 3 boot is as emaciated as your day 33 boot. I wonder if in the era of social media, they like this added wrinkle. The only way this would be acceptable is if they brought back Reem to roast them all as they arrived. Bonus points is if the booted winners had to sit and listen to her rehash her Season 38 game, complete with cursing everyone who voted her out.

I thought his power was just re-picking for the Veto. Wasn't Ovi's power was changing nominations (unless he willed it to Jack, which actually wouldn't surprise me if that could happen). The non-Level 6 folks last year, whose alliance name I've forgotten, didn't do a lot right, but Scotty gave the blueprint about how to deal with a dudebro duo when he put up both Brett and Winston: nominate them both, and one will go home. Sure, the other one will be coming after you, but there's one less of them.

Yeah, I was hoping Liz and Sam would go. I thought Michael could cook, he was just so frazzled from losing the team challenge and seemingly having a useless partner. Sam was the one who suggested the seventh dish (a slider), which was something they definitely couldn't pull off. He was also the idiot who cooked the fish in the stainless steel pan in the prior challenge after being warned constantly to use a cast-iron pan -- both by his station leader and then by the judges. I'd have sent him home just for that.

I don't understand what was so earth-shattering about what Chrissy heard from Cliff. Ooh, a guy who barely has an alliance has teamed up with two people outside your alliance (including one who isn't even back in the game yet) and has successfully deduced that several people that appear to be sleeping together are couples?! She might as well have awakened everyone by screaming, "water is wet, you guys! Water is wet!"

I keep hearing Beavis and Butthead's neighbor, who always talked about them "whacking off in [his] tool shed." Then I think of Howie. Yeah, I wouldn't use "whack" for anything Big Brother-related.