Eolivet

Jay did a podcast with Rob Cesternino last week on the newest Survivor season, but had a couple of interesting tidbits about mvgx. In retrospect, he said he regretted blindsiding Michaela because she was loyal and "his best friend on the island," while Will ended up selling him down the river (and Will knew he had an idol, so he should've gotten rid of him then). Jay never did a single podcast after his own season, so it's interesting he's doing them now. Another weird tidbit -- he was going to be Corrine's date to her high school reunion because I guess they live near each other in Florida, but that was cancelled due to the hurricane. (Jay said he was going to "party with" Corrine, but is not "dating" her -- apparently, there's a distinction). He and Adam are going to Taylor's wedding in January, and he, Adam and David are planning a trip back to Fiji together at some point (I guess the Fijian government gives them all flight vouchers to come back? Sounds nice.) http://robhasawebsite.com/survivor-35-heroes-v-healers-v-hustlers-episode-3-recap-jay-starrett/

Agree with this. Michaela's reaction was the best blindside reaction in the history of ever (I wish there was a gif of her forgetting her shoes).

I was glad to see Ryan's gamebot-y style of "get to the merge wah wah wah" ultimately overruled by people like Lauren and Devon, who realize these are people you're playing with, and team chemistry is important, and also if you're ultimately just going to be slotting into other alliances, you need people who are loyal. And if Patrick wouldn't even give up the ball during a challenge, what chance did he have of listening to anyone down the road? I used to love people that played overtly strategic games, but now they make my ears bleed. Go along to get along, be flexible, have a vague idea how you're gonna get there, but don't plan everything to the most minute detail. It's actually pretty boring.

Was coming here to say the same thing. If it was '94, The Real World had been on MTV for 2 years (including, I think the season of Pedro with AIDS). Begs the question why the writer didn't just say "Trying to turn this into The Real World," unless they thought the audience wouldn't get that reference. (Who is Anthony Edwards in this? I keep looking for him, but I haven't been able to recognize him.)

I know Cameron's sister is annoying, but I laughed way too hard at "Your fruit smoothies -- sorry, your homosexual smoothies." I'll see myself out.

I found this episode a zillion times better than the one last week. It's so much better with the "original cast." The rapport, the chemistry -- a guest shark just disrupts that. But for the rings -- like Mark, I wish they'd gone with the angle of "fun silicone ring as jewelry trend" rather than is your wedding ring TRYING TO KILL YOU??? I put this product in the same category as protect your wallet from thieves with EVIL CREDIT CARD STEALER READER THINGS and a handbag with straps that can't be CUT BY KNIVES.

I saw it a little differently. When Ben went to the medic, I saw him looking for an excuse to quit (a la Survivor). But he had no medical reason for doing so other than "I'm winded" and "I have blurry vision." I guess there must be something in the contract about "you can't quit unless you have an absolutely rock-solid medical reason for doing so" (or we'd get people quitting left and right). I actually thought it was sort of kind to formally send him home at an elimination -- since it was clearly what Ben wanted. I looked at it akin to "allowing" someone to be voted out at tribal council on Survivor. James and his broken leg on Heroes vs Villains come to mind -- he was useless in challenges, but he was bandaged up and sent back to the game to be voted out by his tribe after a few days instead. They had no medical reason to remove Ben from the game, so he was allowed to compete, completed a service on the winning team, and was then "honorably discharged" with a handshake from Ramsay. And the guy was clearly relieved. I thought they handled it pretty well, by Hell's Kitchen standards.

I renew my objection to a game-sanctioned fake idol. You live by the fake idol, you die by the fake idol -- whether it's a masterwork like David's in mvgx or a "freaking stick" like Eliza's/Ozzy's/whoever drew the smiley face on that stick in Micronesia. It's annoying, because it's a cool strategy that the contestants came up with themselves, that now the show has decided it's going to stick its nose into. Big thumbs up for the clue on the tree, though. I love that. No more whining about "you stole my clue," and a greater potential for an idol free-for-all.

This show makes me miss The People vs O.J. Simpson something fierce. The acting, the writing ... everything.

Agreed. I think Stanford Business School woman was put on there to be made an example of -- perhaps that this season, the Sharks will not tolerate you coming in asking for 5% unless you're actually willing to negotiate. I agree with Cuban that the businesses that come in asking for 5% -- save that one breathalyzer guy a couple years ago -- generally do not want a deal and just want the exposure. I'd like to see less of that myself. I think she was the triple threat: a tech app from Silicon Valley, asking for lots of money and low equity. And I hated Richard Branson. Not as much as Mr. Uber-ful, but close. I liked Oza. He had a sense of humor, some humility and asked good questions. And he only name-dropped "pop chips" which (Uber) I don't even (Uber) know what those (Uber) are. Branson throwing water at Mark Cuban struck me like a particularly snotty guest at someone else's dinner party. You're a guest shark for a reason, buddy. I don't care if you're Richard Branson -- it's not your house. The new set is funny. Half-aquarium, half-late night talk show (with the skyline in the background).

I remembered most of these people, but I've completely blocked out Michelle. And she was third? This is going to be a hopefully entertaining trainwreck, but I do like that they brought back cooks who made it to black jackets. Still so weird that some of these people actually work in a kitchen and their plating is far beneath the "untrained" home cooks on Masterchef. I never minded Elise. "Most hated Hell's Kitchen contestant of all time?" By whose standards? No thanks, I'll save that dubious honor for the parade of misogynist toolbags that crow about "losing to a bunch of grrrrrrrrls."

Another 90s murder I only have vague memories of, but production-wise and acting-wise, People vs O.J. this is not. Edie Falco is a good actress, but Leslie Abramson: Evil Rich Kid Savant isn't quite working for me. She turns on the TV and knows immediately they did it? How? Why? They established she defends clients like that, but it struck me as more of a narrative device than an actual character trait. With the caveat that I remember very little about these murders. It got better as it went on -- I found the opening scenes a bit much. Looking forward to see how it progresses.

That was a good one, though my favorite exchange was Mitch and the so-obviously-gay-but-didn't-like-Mitch guy: "Want some free bait? Have a lure?" "Apparently I don't have allure." Classic Modern Family wordplay.

To be fair ... we had an emotional connection/kindred souls/whatever between a nerdy super-fan and a surfer dude on the last newbie season a year ago -- Millennials vs Gen X, with Adam and Jay. Though I'd think if super-fan Ryan saw that season, he'd recognize that was lightning in a bottle as opposed to an indication that all nerdy super-fans should attempt to form emotional connections with surfer dudes, and vice-versa. Because I see Devon selling Ryan up the river pretty fast once there's a swap and he can bro up with other bros (or hot chicks).

As others have noted, this seemed frenetic to me -- maybe it was the hour-long time period that made it seem a lot more intense. I kept waiting for it to slow down and breathe, so I honestly can't tell if it was the condensed time period or that there are that many aggressive players this year. It felt like there were more than usual. I mean, make your day one alliances (most of which will implode on day ten), but this overly pointed targeting of people -- both from Joe and Alan -- seemed out of place this early in the season. Chill out, people. Will probably know more next week, but that was A Lot for a first week (and not necessarily in a good way). And good god, is Fiji gorgeous.

He has David's build, Adam's coloring, Spencer's awkwardness with people and Cochran's voice. He's the Survivor Super-Fan Gamebot 9000!

Dan is the only unanimous winner in U.S. Big Brother history. He won the game once and came in second a second time -- I believe he is the only person to make it to F2 on both occasions he played. His second-time game didn't work for him, but his first? He did better, vote-wise, than both Will and Derrick (the 6-3 winner, who has somehow become the GOAT for reasons I can't understand). In fact, because Dan's first-time game worked so well for him -- a very good, nice social game with a secret alliance and a couple of big "game! moves!" that made fun TV -- he had to completely change his game around, or so he thought. No, it won him no friends. But he'd already won. But if I'm ordering the hierarchy of Reality Dumbasses Who Thought Strategery Could Get Them The Win, I place Paul at the tippy top of that tree -- even ahead of Russell Hantz (and forgive me if someone else has made this argument). Because Russell Hantz went directly from Samoa to Heroes vs Villains, there was no way for him to watch his season. He left his first game assuming he'd won, so there was no reason to change up his second game. Paul literally had all year to watch his first game, to make adjustments, to play differently than he did last year. Instead, he claims he never watched his season. As others here have said: Paul ... you played yourself!

I haaaaate the twins, but there's a part of me that hopes -- like we used to speculate the American Idol bottom 3 wasn't the actual bottom 3 -- that they keep putting one in the top and one in the bottom, to the point where the one who ends up in the bottom gets so fed up and turns on her sister. If "helping" is allowed, I want to see it continually sink the "helper" and then maybe she'll "help" herself to designing better clothes. Bonus points if the judges go on and on about how wonderful one twin is (without her ever winning) and continually rag on the second. No power in the 'verse is going to tear them apart -- they must turn on each other of their own freewill. Or getting kicked off for cheating would be fine, too.

No, you're probably right, now that I think about it. I think what I mean is BB will always show all the "loser's" votes. So, if someone wins 8-1, it won't just be 5 keys drawn for the winner. Same with 7-2 and 6-3. But you're right -- they can't show all 8/7/6 keys for the winner because the winner only needs 5 to win. But I believe the losers will always have all their keys/votes shown. Same with Survivor. (the unanimous wins on Survivor and the one time on BB10 are always interesting, because it's 5 or 6 of the same person in a row, it gets to be anticlimactic and really sinks in for the losers "you did not get one single vote." Heh.)

This. Sure, it worked out that they could read them backwards, but I don't think there have ever been seasons where all the votes aren't read/keys aren't pulled, including 8-1, 7-2 and 6-3 seasons. It's like Survivor -- they must "tally" the ... keys, I guess.

I got into a huge argument with my husband about whether the "best player won" or if it was a "bitter jury," and I told him that Paul's loss hinged on Jason and Alex. He royally screwed over those two. They were not Matt and Raven, who would nod and play along dumbly with whatever he said. They genuinely believed they had a "friendship" (blech) and a game deal with Paul. I thought he completely mismanaged telling Alex he wasn't using the Veto on her ("it's not you, it's me me me me me me.") and that he hid behind Josh and Christmas to get rid of them and then was like "hey! wasn't me!" ... and didn't realize that was never going to fly with either of them. Paul got so caught up in being the "puppetmaster" that he made the fatal mistake of thinking everyone else was stupid, just because they went along with his machinations. When you start thinking other players are stupid, that's when you lose.

I'm so happy for Josh -- I liked him all summer, which I know wasn't too popular. I saw a young, immature kid who was desperate to fit in, but someone with ultimately a good heart. I loved his emotion, and he won my heart as a super fan with his enthusiasm. As others have said, I think he'll look back on this season and be embarrassed by some of his behavior. But the fact that Mark, who warred with him, and Elena, who butted heads with him, could vote for him let me know he wasn't that bad of a guy, deep down. Hey, Paul -- you were Boston Rob on Survivor after all. You were just Boston Rob in Survivor All Stars, losing to the person you carried by one vote because you were kind of an asshole who lied when you didn't need to and thought everyone would respect it.

I think Paul has this on lock, because the way I see it, he has five votes already: Kevin, Matt, Raven, Cody (if he can hold his nose and vote for Paul) and from how she seemed to be leaning, Alex. Jason, Mark and Elena seem like definite Anyone But Paul votes. I wish Josh had been a little more vocal about his "Paul is bad news" whisperings to other people besides the diary room and ... himself when he was HoH. He could pull out Survivor Sandra's "I tried to warn you, but you wouldn't listen" argument. Instead, he goes down as a sycophant who knew what was going on and did nothing to stop it. That's almost worse than a sycophant who had no idea he was being bamboozled. I'd love to see Paul Vanessa'd (sigh) out at F3, but that won't happen because she was a non-attractive woman and he's a guy and it's Big Brother, so. I would, however, laugh forever if he threw it to Josh (no spoilers, but F3 HoHs are pretty physical and I can't see Christmas winning one, but I could be wrong), because he didn't want to get Christmas' "blood on his hands" and Josh evicted him.

Men (sincerely) crying on reality shows is the way to my heart (hi, my favorite recent Survivor season was Millennials vs Gen X), so I have a soft spot for Josh. I think he's impulsive, immature and clearly it's the first time he's been away from his family. The discussion about "what kind of people they are outside the house" resonates for me with Josh, because I don't think he goes around banging pots and pans in real life. But I see him as desperately, desperately wanting to fit in here. His conversation with Christmas broke my heart -- he's imprinted himself on her, and she wants no part of it. I think this was not the game for Josh and he needs to stay far away from reality TV in the near future (and I think it's better than even money he walks out the door at final 4 unless he wins Veto). I don't quite ... get Paul with the fake crying, unless he thinks Josh is making him look cold and heartless. But him crying on Christmas' shoulder seemed skeevy to me. Like he was going to try to cop a feel if Josh hadn't been in the room.

So, Paul gave Alex the "It's not you, it's me" speech -- as in "it's me who wants to win money." I really do wonder about a bitter jury (petty jury?) with Alex's parting remarks. Will Jason and Alex be able to rally the Anyone But Paul votes?