S41.E13: One Thing Left to Do... Win

[kaygeeret]

Admittedly I did not watch the entire season.  I started at epi 10 and was a bit intermittent after that.

That said, I really liked Xander and was stunned when he didn't score one single vote.  No problem with Evvie at all.  In fact, discounting Shan, this was a remarkably likeable group even with all the 'strategy'.

One caveat - if I had been playing and had access to a scissors - -Xander would have lost the lock of hair  - - - it really seemed affected and it took me a bit to warm up to him.  Once I did I really wanted him to win.  So it goes!

I do wish the best for him going forward.

I am so glad Ricard did not get it done.  For one reason or another, he just seemed too scheming.  The last minute reveal of his new child seemed profoundly calculated, altho' this is something very heartfelt apparently.  Damn editing.

 

 

 

[iMonrey]

Quote

Heather actually called the casting director to ask about her edit and he told her that they wanted to focus on the idols and advantages premerge.

And that, my friends, is the problem with this season (and overall, lately). I think it's interesting to see all the different interpretations of why who voted for who and who played the best game. If we can't all agree then the editing is jerking us around. They are clearly more interested in their myriad gimmicks and throwing the contestants curveballs that throw them into chaos than showing us what's really going on with them when they make their decisions. I shouldn't have to read about it in exit interviews. 

[himela]

7 hours ago, LanceM said:

Not sure why you would do that as the only one who got a purple edit this season was Heather and last time I checked she lost.

 

I remember people in here saying "there's an Erika"?!

[rr2911]

Season 41 is the worst season of Survivor for me.  I usually don't mind new twists but there were too many.  The show's decision to go "woke" just killed the show for me.  The black players forming an alliance because they're black and setting out to vote out the non-black players left a bad taste in my mouth.  There's no room for that.

Xander in my opinion played the better game among the final three.  But Xander was never going to win.  In fact, I think a POC was always going to win.  Xander fit the typical white dude winner of past seasons.  No matter who Xander picked to save and who to make fire, he was doomed.  If Heather and Deshawn sit next to him, Deshawn wins hands down.  One black vs. two whites?  Easy win for D.

I'll probably keep watching but Survivor has moved one step closer to being scrapped off my list.

Edited December 20, 2021 by rr2911

[MsTree]

25 minutes ago, rr2911 said:

The show's decision to go "woke" just killed the show for me.  The black players forming an alliance because their black and setting out to vote out the non-black players left a bad taste in my mouth.  There's no room for that.

AMEN!

[LanceM]

12 hours ago, himela said:

I remember people in here saying "there's an Erika"?!

First few episodes sure. But a purple edit lats the entire season.

[bankerchick]

14 hours ago, iMonrey said:

Quote

Heather actually called the casting director to ask about her edit and he told her that they wanted to focus on the idols and advantages premerge.

And that, my friends, is the problem with this season (and overall, lately). I think it's interesting to see all the different interpretations of why who voted for who and who played the best game. If we can't all agree then the editing is jerking us around. They are clearly more interested in their myriad gimmicks and throwing the contestants curveballs that throw them into chaos than showing us what's really going on with them when they make their decisions. I shouldn't have to read about it in exit interviews. 

This. 100x.  Added to the fact that apparently the Blue team wanted to throw the challenge to get rid of Sidney (not Erika.)  I understand keeping some things under wraps, and that some things just don't fit into the storyline, but to totally change the edit on two relatively major parts of the game is just giving us the game they wish everyone had played, rather than the one they did.  Why don't they just write a script and hire actors?

[LanceM]

It makes prefect sense to me why they would manipulate the edit to make it seem like Erika was the target because they wanted to show Erika (the winner) as this huge threat that her tribe failed to get out when they had the chance. We even had both Danny and DeShawn giving confessionals saying just that if they didn't get her out now and she makes them merge that she would "kill us".  t was a way yo show the viewers that this a player you should keep your eye on.  Good forshadowing in hindsight,  Now if they didn't waste so much time on stupid twists and advantages (that went nowhere) they wouldn't have to do that. They could have used that time instead to give more content to the winner and her #1 ally Heather.  If they did that you wouldn't have people reacting after episode 4 like Himela says above sating "there is an Erika?".

Edited December 19, 2021 by LanceM

[peachmangosteen]

2 hours ago, bankerchick said:

Why don't they just write a script and hire actors?

They do have a story editor, so they just come up with a story they wanna tell and manipulate the show to tell it, even at the expense of the audience being able to understand how the winner won and/or why the losers lost. 

[treeofdreams]

17 hours ago, iMonrey said:

And that, my friends, is the problem with this season (and overall, lately). I think it's interesting to see all the different interpretations of why who voted for who and who played the best game. If we can't all agree then the editing is jerking us around. They are clearly more interested in their myriad gimmicks and throwing the contestants curveballs that throw them into chaos than showing us what's really going on with them when they make their decisions. I shouldn't have to read about it in exit interviews. 

I have always liked Jeff Probst, but it seems like each season he makes Survivor more and more about him.  This season was the worst, with the twists and advantages that he came up with.  They practically edited poor Heather out of existence to give more time to this new nonsense.  The more we complain about too many idols, twists, and advantages, the more he adds in to the game.  And each season it becomes less and less like the show that most of us have loved for so many years.

Jeff needs to start listening more to the fans on the forums and less to the fans in his head who keep encouraging him with his new ideas.  We are the ones who will keep the show on the air (hopefully!), not those imaginary voices.  

Please, someone, wake up and bring back Our Survivor!

[Porkchop]

Be sure to watch Heather's Ponderosa video ... she has so much fun and seems very different from the person we saw in the episodes! It seems like they must've worked hard to leave out any traces of her personality!

 

 

[Steph Sometimes]

On 12/17/2021 at 2:08 AM, candall said:

I'm confused by Erika.  I could barely stand to listen to her all season because, like, every third word was, like, "like."  Is that how she speaks when she runs those boardroom meetings or was that hesitant vocal tic some sort of gameplay strategy?

I was surprised by her persuasive campaign at FTC so maybe the earlier "like-speak" really was a calculated move to appear uncertain and unassuming.

I read a theory that she was nervous and getting used to the cameras at the beginning, and as she grew more comfortable, the "likes" minimized. I think that could be a possibility. 

[himela]

To be honest I do like some of the twists and advantages because I'm terrified that if there are no twists or advantages the season will just be a pagonging, the "weak" players will get eliminated first and we will get to see Mike Halloway type of players win in the end which I hate. The game is not only outplay but also outsmart and these advantages help smart players strategize more which I love.

[CountryGirl]

Probably at a table of one as well as the shallow end of the pool, but I think Xander and his luscious curly locks are gorgeous. My college boyfriend had hair like that, which I quite enjoyed running my fingers through. 

[whiporee]

Here's a few tidbits from Tyson's podcast. It really enhanced my enjoyment this season, and I don't even like Tyson. The final one was with Cirie, and they were gold together.

• One thing that has changed in recent years is the jury talks alot about the game at Ponderosa. This didn't use to be the case. In the old days, you'd arrive, be sort of debriefed infront of everyone, and then the game was off limits for conversation. But now they talk and politic the whole time, so the votes have already been decided before the finale begins. Tyson told of one scenario where a group campaigned to stop someone not only from winning, but from getting second-place money. Someone had the votes -- I think it was Michelle -- and they campaigned at Ponderosa to get someone to vote for someone else. In other words, the vote was going one way, and during sequester they got it to go another. They both seemed to think this is a very unfortunate change in the game. I agree. 
• According to them, the last thing you want to do after you vote someone out is say anything to them. Tyson thinks that Coach lost his final jury because he made an attempt to hug everyone before they left. He said the only thing that keeps you from trashing the place in rage is respect for the production crew. And Cirie agreed with him. That moment is so full of pathos and rage that all the person voted out wants to do is leave. 
• They both also thought the immediate after party was cruel to Xander and DeShawn for the same reason. 
• Both thought 28 days was for wusses. You're tired but you're not wiped out at Day 28. That's usually about day 33. 
• The greatest thing you can have is the tarp.
• They thought that they couldn't play this new Survivor (Tyson tried and failed) but also doubted the current players could survive an old one. (that would be neat to see -- a season with, without letting them know, no idols, no advantages, no twists, no turns, just playing it straight the entire time. I'd like to see how these people who have been learning to strategize so much would do in those circumstances.)
• China was, according to the producers the worst. 
• These new players talk too much. 

 

[Jeanne222]

In my opinion Jeff has very little say in games and rewards.  He's strictly the moderator.

Don't shoot the messenger.

[WearyTraveler]

34 minutes ago, Jeanne222 said:

In my opinion Jeff has very little say in games and rewards.  He's strictly the moderator.

Don't shoot the messenger.

Jeff is an Executive Producer for the show, as well as, the host. Executive Producer titles come with a portion of creative control, which basically means he has a say in everything related to the show, including, but not limited to, structure of the competition, challenges/rewards, casting, and shooting locations/schedule.

Not to be confused with a plain Producer title, which can have, depending on the specific contract, some input on creative matters, usually with some limitations. Sometimes shows give this title to their main actors in order to increase their salaries, without having to negotiate contracts for other main characters, or when an actor wants some creative control over their character's plot/development.

But, to be fair, Jeff does not have total control, as there are other Executive Producers on the show (Charlie Parsons and Mark Burnett), who would also have creative control. Under normal circumstances, the EPs would come to a consensus over major creative decisions, which would then have to be approved by the Network (CBS), who has the final say.

That said, it's hard to think Jeff is not behind some of the major changes we have seen over the years, as he has been very vocal about them and seems to be the one EP that lauds and promotes all the changes.

I do think there's a lack of balance between the original concept of the show (outlive, outlast, outplay) and the advantages, idols and twists of the later seasons. After S1 Richard came up with a masterful winning strategy, it was easy to see to see that the show would have to introduce random elements that could change the circumstances of the game, so that we wouldn't have season after season of the same type of strategy play winning the game.

In my opinion, they have gone too far with it, to the point that the majority of the moves and strategies players make lose their value because there are too many advantages. Basically, luck plays too large a role in the game. It is starting to resemble the regular lottery, where someone picks a set of numbers and crosses their fingers in hopes of winning. No major decision-making or strategizing beyond picking a set of random numbers. Likewise, in today's Survivor, too many good strategic moves by smart players are being thwarted by random advantages/twists, and not by other players outsmarting them. And that is not as much fun to watch, for me at least. Why would anyone want to spend time strategizing and forming alliances if the possibility of all that hard work being undone by a random twist is so high? 

[Jeanne222]

5 hours ago, WearyTraveler said:

Jeff is an Executive Producer for the show, as well as, the host. Executive Producer titles come with a portion of creative control, which basically means he has a say in everything related to the show, including, but not limited to, structure of the competition, challenges/rewards, casting, and shooting locations/schedule.

Not to be confused with a plain Producer title, which can have, depending on the specific contract, some input on creative matters, usually with some limitations. Sometimes shows give this title to their main actors in order to increase their salaries, without having to negotiate contracts for other main characters, or when an actor wants some creative control over their character's plot/development.

But, to be fair, Jeff does not have total control, as there are other Executive Producers on the show (Charlie Parsons and Mark Burnett), who would also have creative control. Under normal circumstances, the EPs would come to a consensus over major creative decisions, which would then have to be approved by the Network (CBS), who has the final say.

That said, it's hard to think Jeff is not behind some of the major changes we have seen over the years, as he has been very vocal about them and seems to be the one EP that lauds and promotes all the changes.

I do think there's a lack of balance between the original concept of the show (outlive, outlast, outplay) and the advantages, idols and twists of the later seasons. After S1 Richard came up with a masterful winning strategy, it was easy to see to see that the show would have to introduce random elements that could change the circumstances of the game, so that we wouldn't have season after season of the same type of strategy play winning the game.

In my opinion, they have gone too far with it, to the point that the majority of the moves and strategies players make lose their value because there are too many advantages. Basically, luck plays too large a role in the game. It is starting to resemble the regular lottery, where someone picks a set of numbers and crosses their fingers in hopes of winning. No major decision-making or strategizing beyond picking a set of random numbers. Likewise, in today's Survivor, too many good strategic moves by smart players are being thwarted by random advantages/twists, and not by other players outsmarting them. And that is not as much fun to watch, for me at least. Why would anyone want to spend time strategizing and forming alliances if the possibility of all that hard work being undone by a random twist is so high? 

Wow I wasn’t aware of any of that. I always just thought Jeff just stood there and read lines and moderated!

So he’s on site and in the actual decisions and does have some control on how it all works out!

Thank you for the good information. 

[seltzer3]

 

[WearyTraveler]

1 hour ago, Jeanne222 said:

Wow I wasn’t aware of any of that. I always just thought Jeff just stood there and read lines and moderated!

So he’s on site and in the actual decisions and does have some control on how it all works out!

Thank you for the good information. 

My pleasure. You can always check IMDb.com if you want to know how many titles a person that works in a show/film has.

[Chicago Redshirt]

On 12/19/2021 at 1:16 AM, rr2911 said:

Season 41 is the worst season of Survivor for me.  I usually don't mind new twists but there were too many.  The show's decision to go "woke" just killed the show for me.  The black players forming an alliance because they're black and setting out to vote out the non-black players left a bad taste in my mouth.  There's no room for that.

Xander in my opinion played the better game among the final three.  But Xander was never going to win.  In fact, I think a POC was always going to win.  Xander fit the typical white dude winner of past seasons.  No matter who Xander picked to save and who to make fire, he was doomed.  If Heather and Deshawn sit next to him, Deshawn wins hands down.  One black vs. two whites?  Easy win for D.

I'll probably keep watching but Survivor has moved one step closer to being scrapped off my list.

None of us may like things divided along racial lines, but why is there "no room for it," given that the game has routinely been divided on gender lines with women plotting to vote men out or vice-versa?

In any case, seems to me that Heather would have gotten most if not all the votes Erika did in a Heather/Deshawn/Xander final three. Heather played a similar/identical game to Erika, and even though that may not have been impressive to us viewers, we aren't the ones who count. Of the people who voted Erika his time around, I am not sure of anyone who would for sure switch to vote Deshawn in a HDX F3. I'm pretty sure Ricard would not; I would see him most likely voting Xander in that scenario. I think Shan and Liana probably would vote Heather. If people's decision for Erika was based in large part on her gameplay, that suggests Heather would win. If it was based on likeability,  that also suggests  that Heather would be more likely to win. Deshawn obviously rubbed most people the wrong way who were not named Danny, and Xander did as well. If it was based on the notion that it was too long since a woman won, that too points to Heather potentially winning. 

Even assuming that the black players line up behind Deshawn, where does he get the two additional votes to win outright?

Heather would presumably get: Erika, Evvie, Naseer, and Tiffany.

It's unfortunate that Xander probably did not have a path to victory in the end, but that (presumably) isn't because he's a white guy but because he didn't have a very good social game.

[kassandra8286]

4 hours ago, Chicago Redshirt said:

Heather/Deshawn/Xander final three. Heather played a similar/identical game to Erika, and even though that may not have been impressive to us viewers, we aren't the ones who count. Of the people who voted Erika his time around, I am not sure of anyone who would for sure switch to vote Deshawn in a HDX F3. I'm pretty sure Ricard would not; I would see him most likely voting Xander in that scenario.

Ricard has said he would have voted for Heather in that scenario. 

[Nashville]

8 minutes ago, kassandra8286 said:

Ricard has said he would have voted for Heather in that scenario. 

Ricard also thought he was one of the greatest players in the history of the game, so I’d already consider his judgment to be more than a little suspect….

[Maverick]

Ricard is certainly a legend.   At least in his own mind.   

I don't understand how everyone is saying they would have voted for Heather when there's something in her thread on here where all the other castaways were calling her things like "ignorant" and "demonic".   

[Chicago Redshirt]

1 hour ago, Maverick said:

Ricard is certainly a legend.   At least in his own mind.   

I don't understand how everyone is saying they would have voted for Heather when there's something in her thread on here where all the other castaways were calling her things like "ignorant" and "demonic".   

Some possibilities come to mind:

1. In answering the word association game, the castaways were not being 100 percent honest or not going by what we might think of those terms. They could for whatever reason be exaggerating or flat-out lying in terms of what they were saying, especially if they knew the line of questioning was coming. Or "demonic" obviously has a bad connotation normally, but the person who said it could have meant it in a positive way, like "she works like a demon" or "she's charming as hell."

2. The first thing that popped in their mind about Heather was honestly things like "ignorant" and "demonic" but that is counterbalanced by whatever positive qualities that they felt toward Heather. They felt "ignorant," "demonic" etc. are actually reflective of Heather but those traits aren't enough to diminish their respect for Heather's game, her as a person, etc etc.

3. They dislike various things about Heather but they dislike Deshawn and Xander even more. 

4. The people who said the bad things about Heather are not necessarily the same ones who said that they would be voting Heather in a HDX F3. Ricard's word association for Heather was "frustrating but underestimated." 

16 hours ago, WearyTraveler said:

In my opinion, they have gone too far with it, to the point that the majority of the moves and strategies players make lose their value because there are too many advantages. Basically, luck plays too large a role in the game. It is starting to resemble the regular lottery, where someone picks a set of numbers and crosses their fingers in hopes of winning. No major decision-making or strategizing beyond picking a set of random numbers. Likewise, in today's Survivor, too many good strategic moves by smart players are being thwarted by random advantages/twists, and not by other players outsmarting them. And that is not as much fun to watch, for me at least. Why would anyone want to spend time strategizing and forming alliances if the possibility of all that hard work being undone by a random twist is so high? 

I agree that there were certainly too many twists this season for my liking. But the interesting thing is that almost none of the twists actually had much of an impact on the game. 

The Knowledge Is Power advantage? It was amusing to see Liana get shown up by Xander, but it didn't seemingly have much of an effect on the game. 

The three Hidden Immunity Idols? Two went home in pockets and the third was never flushed or played, and almost didn't seem to be a consideration. It didn't matter that the people who found them were temporarily deprived of votes because they were on the side of the numbers.

The couple of extra votes that existed? They were played but were more a security blanket. If they did not exist, the end results of those votes probably would have been the same.

The one twist that had a concrete impact was Erika's decision to Turn Back Time. If it didn't exist, then one of Xander, Erika, Shan, Liana, Heather and Tiffany would have been voted out rather than Sydney. Who knows how big a change that would have been? Maybe it would mean Sydney would win, or Sydney on the jury might have pushed for person X to get it. Maybe Erika would have been voted off then and there. Or maybe things would have been mostly the same except Sydney and Tiffany swap places of being booted off. But unlike my prediction, nobody targeted Erika because she made the decision, and at least in the edited version of Tribal Council, she didn't seem to brag about how she made that decision or that was why she should win or whatnot.

So using this season as an example, I would say we haven't gotten to the point where it's just dumb luck like a lottery winner that results in who wins. 

[LanceM]

The player who called Heather "demonic" was Sydney and something tells me she didn't mean it in a positive way. 

[peachmangosteen]

Sydney also a) thinks she's funny and b) seemingly had no idea what was really going on game-wise lol.

[Guest]

 

14 hours ago, LanceM said:

The player who called Heather "demonic" was Sydney and something tells me she didn't mean it in a positive way. 

 

33 minutes ago, peachmangosteen said:

Sydney also a) thinks she's funny and b) seemingly had no idea what was really going on game-wise lol.

Sydney explained in one of her exit interviews the weird dynamic she and Heather had. They had an initial bond over Heather being a mother and Sydney wanting to be a mother, and Sydney was asking her for life advice. But Heather apparently went too far with it and started giving a lot of unsolicited advice and mothering Sydney, possibly even venturing into judgy territory. Obviously this is coming from Sydney's perspective, but I definitely can see Heather thinking she's being helpful when she's just being kind of a pain. "Demonic" is hyperbole for sure, but something like that could really grate on a person when you have no way to get away.

[ByaNose]

Sydney was a one off pre merge. Thank god.

I saw Xander on the Specialist podcast and he’s so well spoken. I could barely form two sentences together at his age. Joking not joking. He didn’t have the votes and the jury either didn’t want to award a 20 year old a million dollars or thought he was just plain insincere in general. I still haven’t watched Heather’s Ponderosa because I stopped watching them after Ricard arrived and claimed himself the best winner ever. There is so much revisionist history after someone is voted out so I have no idea who would win or not no matter the configuration of the Final 3. Although, this season was the closest to an honest reaction from the Final 3 (DeShawn & Xander) since they didn’t have time to ponder the reading of the votes. Usually, we don’t see any of that until months later after watching the show back over a season. 

[Fretful]

On 12/17/2021 at 12:51 AM, SVNBob said:

That said, I would like to see reform to the setup. 

One way would be to have the final immunity challenge decide all of who makes it to the final three. Last place in the challenge is the final jury member.

Or another way would be that everybody but the winner of the final immunity challenge has to build fire, and the last person standing gets in.

I don't understand how that would work.  

At final immunity (4), once one person is out, the challenge is over.  What is the advantage to continuing/winning the challenge?    Plus, it puts way too much emphasis on the physical game for my taste, and is inherently unfair to the social players.

On the other hand, if three people make fire, the last one to do so would be out, not in. 

 

[rr2911]

On 12/22/2021 at 6:01 PM, Chicago Redshirt said:

None of us may like things divided along racial lines, but why is there "no room for it," given that the game has routinely been divided on gender lines with women plotting to vote men out or vice-versa?

 

Yes, there has been many times that women conspire to vote out all the men and vice verse.  I referring to race here.  The black alliance made it a point to say that they were voting all people that weren't black.  They weren't successful but whether you're black, white, brown, or anyother color shouldn't be used in Survivor in "my opinion"  There is enough division in this world, why add fuel to the racial tension fire just to be "woke"?

[Chicago Redshirt]

1 hour ago, rr2911 said:

Yes, there has been many times that women conspire to vote out all the men and vice verse.  I referring to race here.  The black alliance made it a point to say that they were voting all people that weren't black.  They weren't successful but whether you're black, white, brown, or anyother color shouldn't be used in Survivor in "my opinion"  There is enough division in this world, why add fuel to the racial tension fire just to be "woke"?

The question is why is it worse for black players (or for that matter white players) to say "Let's vote people out by race" than it is for male or female players to say "Let's vote people out by gender?"

The objective of the game is to essentially use any means necessary and within the rules of the game to get to the end and convince people to give you a million dollars. I don't think it's any more wrong for players to say "let's bond together as African-Americans and get to the end" than it is for players to say "let's vote out all the African-Americans because they are bonding" or for players to say "let's vote out all the men/women/members of X tribe."

[Nashville]

Personally I think it is bone-stick stupid to base your gameplay on ANY arbitrary metric - be it gender, race, or anything else - which does not directly pertain to something of benefit to you IN THE GAME.

That being said, I also believe every player is absolutely free to make any and all  chuckleheadedly moronic decisions they so desire - and if they stupidly torpedo their own game in the process, so be it.

Edited January 10, 2022 by Nashville
Grammar

[ProfCrash]

44 minutes ago, Nashville said:

Personally I think it is bone-stick stupid to base your gameplay on ANY arbitrary metric - be it gender, race, or anything else - which does not directly pertain to something of benefit to you IN THE GAME.

That being said, I also believe every player is absolutely free to make any and all  chuckleheadedly moronic decisions they so desire - and if they stupidly torpedo their own game in the process, so be it.

Like vote people off alphabetically and tell everyone!

There has been plenty of bad game play over the years. People have bemoaned the Jock Alliances, normally the Alpha Males wanting to protect Alpha Males as well as the attempts at all Female alliances and this years AA alliance. The reality is that none of these alliance attempts have really worked. 

People should make alliances that they think will advance them in the game and that they are willing to leave if the alliance no longer serves that purpose. My main issue with the Female alliance and the AA alliance this year is that neither of them seemed to really serve the purpose of the people organizing the alliances.

Shan wasn’t into an AA alliance. She voted out JD early on. Her number one was Ricard. Not Liana, Ricard. Danny and DeShawn really were not important to her. Danny was cool working with anyone who would forward his game. DeShawn was all over the place. Liana needed something to replace the Yellow Tribe which she abandoned because she felt a bond with Shan. These were not people who trusted each other or thought they could work together. There reakky wasn’t an alliance there. I am not certain it even was a coalition. 

Evie and the female alliance was another nothing burger. For all of Evie’s talk, she didn’t seem to be close enough with Tiffany or Liana to make an alliance work. If Evie wanted it to work, she should have voted Xander out instead of Voce and made Liana happy. But that wasn’t going to happen because Evie wanted to use Xander for some reason. 

The reality is that most alliances based on some sort of outside influence don’t work very well. The alliances that work well tend to be with 2 or 3 people who respect each other and the other persons game play. That is why Erika and Heather worked and I think they were able to bring Ricard in. I think that there was a degree of respect there. 

The issue specific alliances this year failed because the players didn’t really want them to work. There was no bond there that made them valuable. Shan was trying to use the AA alliance to find a way to get DeShawn and Danny to work with her. DeShawn saw that he had no voice in the alliance and Danny realized that Shan wasn’t really with them, she was with Ricard. 

[Mstk3000]

On 12/15/2021 at 11:36 PM, Lantern7 said:

I wound up watching The Challenge, which ran at the same time . . . and even with the all-too-regulars, assholes and train wrecks posing as human beings, I got more from them than S41.

Are you telling me that The Challenge is still on, and with the same people?   By this time they have to be at least in their 40s.

[UnikornRainbowz]

What a disappointment. The whole season sucked. I watched because I have never missed a season, and this show done3 Jump3ed the Shark. The shov3ed in your face wokeness about did it, but I decided to watch. Mistake. Not one likeable person this year, and the most insufferable winner in ages. What really burns my craw is how this show has messed with the merge feast.

 

YOU DO NOT MESS WITH MERGE FEAST!!!

 

I tune in for the show, and merge feast is so satisfying as a watcher to have this episode. Now they even have to earn a merge feast? 

 

YAWN.

[jsm1125]

On 2/14/2022 at 9:54 AM, UnikornRainbowz said:

What a disappointment. The whole season sucked. I watched because I have never missed a season, and this show done3 Jump3ed the Shark. The shov3ed in your face wokeness about did it, but I decided to watch. Mistake. Not one likeable person this year, and the most insufferable winner in ages. What really burns my craw is how this show has messed with the merge feast.

 

YOU DO NOT MESS WITH MERGE FEAST!!!

 

I tune in for the show, and merge feast is so satisfying as a watcher to have this episode. Now they even have to earn a merge feast? 

 

YAWN.

I did find that a lot of the players this season could be irritating, but how was Erika one of them? 

[PurpleTentacle]

Xander didn't sell himself super well at final tribal. But the juries mind is usually already made up, anyway.

Still don't quite get why Erika won. From what we saw Xander made way bigger moves and controlled the game more than she did. He wasn't exactly a mastermind, but certainly better than her. Then again, maybe we didn't see everything. Or the Jury didn't see the things we saw.

[PurpleTentacle]

On 12/16/2021 at 4:57 PM, Jeanne222 said:

She received NO special treatment!  She was sent to Exile island alone with nothing!  She made fire and grew stronger from that experience.

She was there two days. She even had flint, a machete, a pile of firewood and more food than she would have had at camp. At the end she got handed "time travel" which meant immunity for her. That that is really added as a plus to her resume is bonkers to me.

On 12/16/2021 at 5:05 PM, blackwing said:

Yep.  All of this.  I can't believe there was that midnight meet up where the tribes could get a tarp... that they apparently didn't need because none of them even attempted to make a shelter.  I have no idea how these people slept at night out in the open.  What about rats, snakes, spiders, etc.?  

A shelter isn't going to help with rats snakes and spiders. It might even be detrimental, as those critters love enclosed spaces.

On 12/16/2021 at 5:15 PM, Wildcard said:

Even if this is true (and I don't think it is) - is it not possible that the jury looked at the resume and performances of all three finalists and thought Erika did play the best game?

It is possible, but would be baffeling.

That being said, social game is part of Survivor and I think the jury can and should take sympathy into consideration. Once you throw that out of the window it's not Survivor anymore. The interesting part is how you screw people over and still not make them hate you.

That being said, I don't quite get how and why the jury liked Erika more than Xander. Were they really a petty jury who were satly about the few moves Xander made and gave the win to no-moves-Erika or did Erika do a bunch of stuff we didn't see? But then why wouldn't the editors show us?

On 12/16/2021 at 5:21 PM, seacliffsal said:

I don't know what is going on with him, but he has been the host of what was once one of the greatest reality shows on t.v. (IMO)

Nah, TAR has always been better and they have the Emmys to prove it.

On 12/16/2021 at 5:59 PM, JudyObscure said:

No one had to live with Russell Hantz for39 days.

The most terrible torture, outlawed in most countries!

On 12/16/2021 at 6:09 PM, fishcakes said:

To me the biggest tell that Xander had a poor social game is that he thought Erika was a goat. Social game isn't just having people like you; it's understanding the social dynamics of the group, and Xander clearly did not. His bringing Erika to the F3 isn't the same as Colby bringing Tina or Woo bringing Tony. Colby and Woo did it because they (foolishly or not depending on anyone's particular point of view) wanted to go up against someone they considered deserving of winning the game. Xander bringing Erika to be the goat is like Russell bringing Sandra to be the goat, just a bad, wrong decision that shows they didn't know what was happening in the game. 

At least what he told us, his initial thought process was that she'd get there anyway, since she would be great at fire. Once he noticed that she sucked at fire, he really should have reconsidered, his promise be damned.

On 12/16/2021 at 8:31 PM, TVbitch said:

I think this group's egos are a bit out of hand. A lot of them seem to think they were exceptional players, and they all seem to have an over-inflated sense that this season is one of the best/most important seasons in the legacy of the show. I was rooting for Ricard, and he played a good game, but dude, the BEST players of all time actually get to final tribal. ...and even win.

I don't think we can necessarily blame them for this. Jeff was hammering it all the time, how this was the hardest survivor season yet. Which no, not even close. The hardest seasons were when people had to spend double the time in the rainy season, without a tarp.

Having less days out there actually makes it easier. The challanges being a bit closer together doesn't make up for the shortened timeframe.

On 12/16/2021 at 8:31 PM, TVbitch said:

Jeff always tries to convince us that the conditions are so hard. I watch most of the international versions of the show and think the US cast has it the cushiest, by far.

Which versions would you recommend and is there a good place to view them?

Sadly survivor never took off in germany. But then again, the german version was a bit shit, so it's understandable. Also it changed its name like 3 times.

On 12/16/2021 at 9:06 PM, 30 Helens said:

I would have sworn I heard him say that beforehand, and also that he thought she was strong competition (or maybe I just inferred that part).

You are correct. He thought she would be in the final 3 anyway, so why give her an extra win? That might have been bad strategy, but people saying he didn't think she was a threat, clearly weren't paying attention.

[PurpleTentacle]

On 12/18/2021 at 7:26 PM, ProfCrash said:

Dude had an immunity idol and no one cared. That really is all that needs to be said. He was not seen as a threat to win the game. I can get why he thought he was in a better place then he was but his perception of his standing in the game was just wrong. He saw himself as Ozzy or Malcolm but he just wasn’t.  

That could also be read as "dude had an immunity idol and nobody could rangle the votes to flush it.".

He made it to the end. That could have been anybody else's spot. So I think the jury might have been a bit bitter that they didn't go after him, when they had the chance.

On 12/18/2021 at 7:31 PM, Blissfool said:

That being said, I didn't quite understand how emotional Xander got when Ricard told him about expecting a baby back home. I consider myself very sentimental person (You think you can hurt my feelings?! Yes. Yes you can. Easily.), but I didn't think Ricard's baby story warranted a Xander ugly-face cry.

Eh, it's survivor. They are all one story, about somebody dropping a dollar into the running garbage disposal by accident, away from a breakdown, after like 10 days out there.

On 12/18/2021 at 7:31 PM, Blissfool said:

And then, Xander said a few times that he and Ricard were very close. Really? I didn't get that throughout the season. I always felt that Ricard was anti-Xander and trying to flush his idol.

Well the editing was apparently attrocious this season, as in the editors showed us nothing but their "great new twists!" So I can believe it...

On 12/18/2021 at 11:32 PM, Jobiska said:

Another aspect of this:  I'm glad making final three was meaningful for Xander's personal journey.  I was fine with him describing it (fat kid, tried cross country, began to excel, went on Survivor which he never thought he would do) However, the last straight white male other than Jeff in that whole room,

Are we sure that boy is straight? I wouldn't be so sure.

On 12/21/2021 at 6:39 AM, whiporee said:

One thing that has changed in recent years is the jury talks alot about the game at Ponderosa. This didn't use to be the case. In the old days, you'd arrive, be sort of debriefed infront of everyone, and then the game was off limits for conversation.

I call bullshit on that one. Rob Cesternino has talked about the politicing on ponderosa before and he was on season 6. So maybe in Tysons first season people just didn't talk about the game, but that certainly wasn't the norm or a rule.

On 12/22/2021 at 3:33 PM, WearyTraveler said:

It is starting to resemble the regular lottery,

This season they had one elimination literally decided by a game of chance with a 33% chance of staying in the game. It was bonkers.

[TVbitch]

1 hour ago, PurpleTentacle said:

Which versions would you recommend and is there a good place to view them?

I would recommend Australia, South Africa and New Zealand. I will PM you!