S29.E07: Million Dollar Decision

[JudyObscure]

Oh, I don't think Julie ever had a chance in hell of winning. And I'm pretty sure she didn't think so either.

I know a lot of people have said that, but I think it's way too early for anyone to give up.  I've seen too many people seem to have no chance in the game at this point and do quite well in the end.  I'm always reminded of the woman who had a crying fit and put some man's expensive shoes in the ocean.  She later on had another crying fit and apologized, she proceeded to cry through the first three quarters of the game, then had some sort of major attitude adjustment and ended up sitting in the finals as a real contender.

 

Julie could have gone along with Missy's phony plea and sold herself to her, or another couple, as the all important third vote they will need when it comes down to the final two couples.  So much can happen toward the end when people get fed up with abrasive personalities.  It already looks like a women against the men thing might be heating up.  At the FC the odd dog often has a better chance with a bitter jury than the person they were tight with and now feel betrayed by.

 

Julie's business and acting roles might be very lucrative, or the business might just be a tax write off and the acting union scale odd jobs.  Either way I don't know anyone who would mind an extra million and -- cue Russell Hantz -- the title of Sole Survivor.

[choclatechip45]

The reason I think Jeremy is getting a better edit than Josh this episode is because Jeremy told everyone why it was their best interest to align with him and seemed very confident. While Josh looked like a scrambler and was just telling everyone why it was in his best interest for everyone to align with him.

Edited November 7, 2014 by choclatechip45

[candall]

I can’t believe Julie lasted as long as she did, because she was clearly not into the game.  I am sure it was Rocker’s idea to do the show, and he asked (probably begged) her to be his partner.  What I find interesting is that Jeremy and Natalie, the two people that were probably responsible for Rocker’s ouster seem to be in a trouble now that she is gone.  Karma!

Wow, you got the impression Rocker asks or begs Julie for anything?  I think it's more likely he told her she was going to be on Survivor the same way he told her she was going to pick the XXL bazooms.

[Guest]

Why is everyone calling Jon's girlfriend "Jacqueline?"  It's "JACLYN!"

Because they're pronounced the same and no one cares about the creative spelling.  Though you seem very upset about it.  

[Donny Ketchum]

Because they're pronounced the same and no one cares about the creative spelling.  Though you seem very upset about it.  

I am.  I happen to like Jaclyn way more than her try-hard boyfriend and think she deserves her name being spelled properly.  Truthfully, all the players do.

[viajero]

On top of that, I didn't find him particularly nasty or mean about Jeremy. He actually acknowledged that Jeremy was playing a very smart game but stated with a smile that unfortunately for him, Jeremy's game is working against his game. And that's basically why they're gunning for each other. I also disagree that Jeremy has had the better edit. I don't really dislike either guy to be honest and both have had their not so great moments but honestly, Jeremy is the one that has bitched repeatedly in a number of his TH's, got into a screaming match with Keith, always seems quick to lose his temper and basically spends half the time side-eying and looking annoyed at people. While I noted above I never saw Josh being mean or nasty to Jeremy, there were a number of not so subtle angry glares and stares from Jeremy at Josh. Now of course I recognize that editing comes to play and those may have been random moments by Jeremy that had nothing to do with Josh but it certainly did not make him look so good.

 

 

I don't think either one has been particularly nasty to the other.  But they both have a way of talking with and about the other people that doesn't make them particularly likable. 

 

I have no idea why Jon suddenly decided to switch to Josh.

 

I may be wrong, but I get the impression that a lot of it is that he simply feels more comfortable being aligned with the bros, rather than a bunch of women (and Jeremy).  We'll see how things play out next week.

 

This season not only lucked out getting food given to them frequently, but the weather gods have been very kind as well.  So far only one bad rainy night!  Remember the almost constant soaking some tribes got  from Day 1 - Philippines maybe??  People were losing toe nails and skin was sloughing off because it was so wet!

 

 

Good luck for the survivors, but not for the people who live in that part of Central America.  They’ve been really suffering from the lace of rainfall and this year was one of the worst ever.  From Colonial times up until about 20 years ago, the rainy season used to begin in about April or May and extend all the way to late November with daily afternoon showers, except for a brief break in about July.  Otherwise, you’d be lucky to go two consecutive days without rain.  I’m not sure when they filmed this season, but the rainy season has been steadily shortening over the past couple of decades due to the effects of climate change and this year was the worst in recorded history.  There was pretty much almost no rainfall until late September.  We were in Guanacaste (just across the border from San Juan del Sur) this August and the place was as brown and dry as it usually is in March. 

[Guest]

There has been a lot of discussion and focus on Julie's breastesses.  What about Jacqueline's?  Seems like hers could be fake too.

 

All I've noticed about Jaclyn is her almost freakishly tiny waist and how she looks startlingly like Heather Morris on Glee.  

[henripootel]

I remember he was particularly nasty with Purple Kelly and Naonka. He made this big spectacle at tribal about what should happen to their torches.

And then he allowed them to serve on the jury and help determine who'd win.  I wouldn't be too sure about what Jeff does and doesn't think.  I mean I'm sure he dislikes quitters but my guess is because they upset production schedules, not because they harm other players strategies or whatever other BS he mentioned. 

 

Is this the first time they decided to forego a TC because somebody quit?  And the first time players were allowed to go through each other's belongings?  I know this has happened 'by accident' before but I thought riffling through each other's stuff was specifically forbidden.

[elizacat]

And then he allowed them to serve on the jury and help determine who'd win.  I wouldn't be too sure about what Jeff does and doesn't think.  I mean I'm sure he dislikes quitters but my guess is because they upset production schedules, not because they harm other players strategies or whatever other BS he mentioned. 

 

Is this the first time they decided to forego a TC because somebody quit?  And the first time players were allowed to go through each other's belongings?  I know this has happened 'by accident' before but I thought riffling through each other's stuff was specifically forbidden.

Am sure Jamie and Pee Gee went through James' bag in China and discovered he had the idols.

 

Also am sure I have read somewhere that Jeff was really pissed about Naonka and Kelly being able to serve on the jury and that the rules have been changed now so that won't happen again. - Not 100% on that someone with better knowledge might be able to confirm or deny this.

[henripootel]

Am sure Jamie and Pee Gee went through James' bag in China and discovered he had the idols.

Ah, missed that season.  Trying to remember now why I thought they weren't allowed to do this. 

Also am sure I have read somewhere that Jeff was really pissed about Naonka and Kelly being able to serve on the jury and that the rules have been changed now so that won't happen again.

 

Fair point except for one thing: they've done far more for at least one quitter since.  Colton 'got sick' three seasons after this but he actually just quit.  Not only did they cover for him by faking a medevac, they invited him back for another season.  This is not speculation - Jeff admitted it when Colton quit again.  Conclusion: Jeff lies when it suits him.  Hey, he's a game show host so more power to him, but he does flat-out lie when required.

 

Don't see this happening again this time though.  I think Julie really wasn't having any fun, and now that John was gone, she didn't see any point in staying.  It did cross my mind that the whole 'discovery of the hoarded food' was filled in later when Julie decided to quit.  I'm not convinced: I'da thought any deal with Julie for a 'non-quitter' exit would have included her getting actually voted out a la Brandon Hantz.  On balance I think it probably happened something like we saw it - Julie got caught, figured 'fuck it anyway', and quit.  Jeffy came out to try and convince her to stay long enough to get voted out officially but she was having none of it.

[Nashville]

What made me laugh was when he was talking to the rest of the tribe he told them that with Julie leaving their odds of winning the million dollars just got a little bit better. As if Julie had any chance of winning the million, even if she made the jury.

 

Julie's infinitesimal chances of winning aside - mathematically speaking, Probst was 100% correct.  And they needed filler.  :)

 

I think she blew a chance at a million dollars because she was cold and hungry and wasn't having any fun and probably thought she didn't need to try to win a million when she could use her looks to marry someone rich like John Rocker.  

 

"a chance"?  Thanks for the best laugh I'll probably get all day.  :D

 

Yea, that's what I got from her, too. I didn't get "They're just jealous!" vibes from what she said. And honestly, I've seen lots of comments online about Julie that are super gross so I can easily imagine some of these people who have proven to be assholes saying some nasty shit. I don't think they're coming from jealousy, I think they're coming from misogyny/internalized misogyny.

 

I suspect a combination of both.  Unfortunately, THE EDIT didn't give us more than a smattering of clues on part of Julie's claims.  How unusual.  :P

 

I don't agree, he won immunity and he was safe from the impending eviction.  Just because there was no eviction doesn't mean he didn't benefit.  He didn't have to stress about being voted out, his alliance could take that into account, etc.  It turns out that everyone was safe because Julie quit, and that stinks for him.  But I don't see it as him losing his advantage.  It's just that Julie's decision had the effect of putting people on a level playing field.

 

It's not the same, because Keith was (or has thus far) been deprived of one of the key benefits of individual immunity - a relatively objective view of the TC pre-vote discussion, which would be especially valuable at the first TC following the merge.  That is an advantage he won fair and square, by the rules of the Game, and (so far, anyway) it appears he will be deprived of it through no fault or action of his own.

 

IMHO the only fair option would be for next week's episode to feature the Reward Challenge only, and let Keith's immunity carry through to the next TC - but I'm not holding my breath.

[Guest]

Ah, missed that season.  Trying to remember now why I thought they weren't allowed to do this. 

Fair point except for one thing: they've done far more for at least one quitter since.  Colton 'got sick' three seasons after this but he actually just quit.  Not only did they cover for him by faking a medevac, they invited him back for another season.  This is not speculation - Jeff admitted it when Colton quit again.  Conclusion: Jeff lies when it suits him.  Hey, he's a game show host so more power to him, but he does flat-out lie when required.

 

Don't see this happening again this time though.  I think Julie really wasn't having any fun, and now that John was gone, she didn't see any point in staying.  It did cross my mind that the whole 'discovery of the hoarded food' was filled in later when Julie decided to quit.  I'm not convinced: I'da thought any deal with Julie for a 'non-quitter' exit would have included her getting actually voted out a la Brandon Hantz.  On balance I think it probably happened something like we saw it - Julie got caught, figured 'fuck it anyway', and quit.  Jeffy came out to try and convince her to stay long enough to get voted out officially but she was having none of it.

 

Regarding Colton, I don't think they faked a medevac for him.  I think he faked appendicitis symptoms to get a real medevac.  And then Jeff, the show and the world learned he was faking because he didn't have appendicitis after all.  But no one knew until they got him to a hospital. And I guess the show could say they didn't really think he was faking it to get removed until he quit the second time, proving he was a quitter.

 

I always thought Shemar's (was that his name?) evac for an eye scratch was suspect.  

 

I wonder if Julie stole the food in a two-pronged attempt to get either voted out or removed from the game without quitting.  Jeff referred to it as her 'stealing the food', which kind of supports my guess that stealing/hoarding food is actually against the rules. 

 

Jeff does hate quitters, he's very clear on that.  I think they had to let Naonka and Julie be jurors because the rules were set for the season in play.  Then they made a big deal of changing the rules.  Now they had to go back to the original rule, presumably because of not enough players to let 'juror level' players quit.

Edited November 7, 2014 by Guest

[cooksdelight]

It would not be out of question for them to have 8 on a jury and 3 finalists. They've done it before, I think. Donny Ketchum will know. :)

[Guest]

Yeah, it looks like Micronesia had a jury of 8 and a final two.  Wow, two medevacs and one quitter, too.  I don't think it affected the jury, though.  I wonder why they went with a jury of 8?  Anyone know?  

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivor:_Micronesia

Edited November 7, 2014 by Guest

[bluebonnet]

I am.  I happen to like Jaclyn way more than her try-hard boyfriend and think she deserves her name being spelled properly.  Truthfully, all the players do.

Her parents probably should have gone with the traditional spelling if they didn't want her to spend a life having to spell out her name to everyone.  But really, who cares how someone spells a name on a forum?  I'm pretty sure everyone knows who is being talked about regardless if they write John over Jon or Jacqueline over Jaclyn.  I doubt these players expect random forumers to spend several minutes before each post carefully checking the 'creative' spellings to make sure they have it correct.  I sure as hell wouldn't be that petty if I were in their position nor would I think I somehow deserved more of random people's time.  

[fishcakes]

Why is everyone calling Jon's girlfriend "Jacqueline?"  It's "JACLYN!"

 

True, but spelling names incorrectly honors the Survivors, for whom misspelling contestant names is tradition, going all the way back to the first vote of Season One.

 

[choclatechip45]

 

Yeah, it looks like Micronesia had a jury of 8 and a final two.  Wow, two medevacs and one quitter, too.  I don't think it affected the jury, though.  I wonder why they went with a jury of 8?  Anyone know?

It's been rumored ever since the finale of  Micronesia that it was supposed to be a final 3 and was switched when Jame was medevaced.

[Donny Ketchum]

It would not be out of question for them to have 8 on a jury and 3 finalists. They've done it before, I think. Donny Ketchum will know. :)

Philippines, Caramoan, and Blood vs. Water all had a F3 facing a jury of eight.  Philippines was changed due to Dana's quitting/evacuation.  Caramoan . . . I don't know.  It might've been altered with Shamar's evacuation, but I'm not sure.  Blood vs. Water was always going that way, though.  I suspect both might've decided to follow Philippines since they might've found it easier to handle.

 

Yeah, it looks like Micronesia had a jury of 8 and a final two.  Wow, two medevacs and one quitter, too.  I don't think it affected the jury, though.  I wonder why they went with a jury of 8?  Anyone know?

It was supposed to be a F3 facing a jury of seven, just as they'd done in China the season before and would also do with Gabon the season after.  James's evacuation ended up changing things.  Rather than making the F4 Immunity Challenge a simple Reward Challenge (since it was initially the F5 Immunity Challenge), they left it as an Immunity Challenge.  The planned F3 ended up being a F2 facing a jury of eight instead.

Edited November 7, 2014 by Donny Ketchum

[peachmangosteen]

I suspect a combination of both.  Unfortunately, THE EDIT didn't give us more than a smattering of clues on part of Julie's claims.  How unusual.  :P

 

Yea really. I mean I realize they can't show us everything, but for fuck's sake we don't need to hear every thought Jeremy has!

[ProfCrash]

I am.  I happen to like Jaclyn way more than her try-hard boyfriend and think she deserves her name being spelled properly.  Truthfully, all the players do.

Spell check auto corrects it to Jaquelyn and I can't remember the creative spelling properly.

[ratgirlagogo]

 

Well that was anticlimactic. Trailmixgate wasn't that interesting.

I fell asleep twice while trying to rewatch it off the DVR and generally Survivor always holds my interest, even if I can't remember it all that clearly by the time the next season rolls around.  Dull episode.

ETA:

 

Wasn't there something with someone throwing Colton's idol in the ocean? And the producers gave him a new one I can't remember if they had shown that or it came out in the exit interviews.

Yes, that was Bill and (supposedly, according to everyone's favorite bigot Colton in his exit interviews) the reason that Colton had it in for Bill.  Damn, we had a whole thread at TWOP on Hidden Immunity Idols Throughout the Ages since this comes up every season.  IIRC you can't do anything with the HII (keep it for yourself, get rid of it, etc.) if you find one that another Survivor has already found.  For reasons that completely escape me this is something that almost never makes it on camera.  If you find out another player has a HII that certainly is going to influence your own gameplay even if can't steal it and have to just leave it lay.

Edited November 8, 2014 by ratgirlagogo

[Guest]

Philippines, Caramoan, and Blood vs. Water all had a F3 facing a jury of eight.  

Oh. Then scratch my theory about them not letting Julie quit AND duck jury duty.  

 

I wonder why it went from 'you canNOT serve on the jury as a quitter' to 'you have to'?

[choclatechip45]

 

Yes, that was Bill and (supposedly, according to everyone's favorite bigot Colton in his exit interviews) the reason that Colton had it in for Bill.  Damn, we had a whole thread at TWOP on Hidden Immunity Idols Throughout the Ages since this comes up every season.  IIRC you can't do anything with the HII (keep it for yourself, get rid of it, etc.) if you find one that another Survivor has already found.  For reasons that completely escape me this is something that almost never makes it on camera.  If you find out another player has a HII that certainly is going to influence your own gameplay even if can't steal it and have to just leave it lay.

Thanks I think they consider it personal belongings.

[KimberStormer]

All your other belongings are fair game, it's only the idols which you cannot steal.  That is the rules as I understand them, at least in this post-Hantz world. 

[Eggman]

There has been a lot of discussion and focus on Julie's breastesses.  What about Jacqueline's?  Seems like hers could be fake too.

 

Do we know for certain that anyone has implants?   I mean, sometimes girls just have bigguns.  It happens.  The constant assumption that everyone's boobs are fake kind of transcends snarky, and not in a pleasant way, imo.

 

Re: HII's.  There was some hint that Chet actually knew where Ozzie hid his HII in FvF, but production would not let him touch it and in fact would not let him discuss it. 

[RedheadZombie]

If you knew she was going to quit why did you cast her?

http://insidetv.ew.com/2014/11/06/survivor-jeff-probst-julie-quit/

 I do think it says much about a person’s drive for life when they voluntarily quit. It’s not someone I want in my foxhole, that’s for sure.  But we have to take our fair share of responsibility for putting them in the situation in the first place.

 

Oh Jeff, did you really compare Survivor to being a combat veteran?

 

Has anyone happened to run across an interview where Julie describes what "take care of myself" is supposed to mean?  *sarcasm tone

 

In my opinion, this is her meaning - I haven't let myself go like the rest of you slobs.

 

Regarding Cochran's humor - I really enjoyed it.  His THs about Stealth R US were hysterical (to me), especially his appreciation of the irony at secret spy/agent Phillip being unable to utilize a grappling hook.

[henripootel]

All your other belongings are fair game, it's only the idols which you cannot steal.  That is the rules as I understand them, at least in this post-Hantz world.

That is my understanding too, that the stealing of stuff was first green-lit by producers for Russell Hantz (having previously been uber-verboten).  The fact that Russell was given permission makes me wonder if all such acts (possibly including searching other's belongings) need to be approved beforehand.  I mean what else keeps this from getting out of hand?  Left to their own devices, I think people might well search each other's stuff regularly and steal constantly.  It'd be a devastating move, taking someone's only pair of shoes or warm clothes.  The fact that they don't do this makes me think they're not allowed to.

Jeff referred to it as her 'stealing the food', which kind of supports my guess that stealing/hoarding food is actually against the rules.

 

 

I think if it was against the rules, they'd nip that shit in the bud and we'd never see it on tv.  More likely, this is a legitimately grey area.  Food that belongs to 'all of us' approximates a 'public good', yours as much as mine.  Now my taking some on the sly and hiding it might constitute a breach of trust between us but I can't be said to have 'stolen' what is partially mine.  Personally, I think Jeff used the word 'stealing' to shame Booberella because she was looking to quit, implying that she was doing so in a craven attempt to avoid expulsion (which was probably right) for doing something she knew was actually wrong (mmm - ethically, maybe, but rules-wise, maybe not).  Jeff is far from a neutral observer in all this, and it's reasonable to surmise that he might want to frame Jaclyn's quitting as poetic justice, that she brought this on herself by 'breaking the rules', not that she was just tired and bored.

Edited November 9, 2014 by henripootel

[Guest]

Jeff called it stealing in the EW article, I'm not sure if he also did to Julie's face, but I agree he is totally spinning a story along with the editors.  

 

The clothes thing is weird.  The first time I recall seeing clothing sabotage was Rupert's first season, when he took or hid a whole tribe's shoes.  I felt like after that they made a rule.  But we've seen people break it, too.  Some woman dunked some man's expensive shoes in the ocean.  Didn't they burn a hat of Russell's or something?  Someone took someone's socks?  But food sabotage has got to be forbidden but we still see it happen-- J'Tia, Brandon...  Though maybe each time we see food sabotage and theft lately is when someone doesn't care if they're booted.  Brandon wanted out.  Julie wanted out.  I'm not sure about J'Tia.  

[peachmangosteen]

I think that makes it pretty clear that the rules are just very loose and flexible. Basically, Production just does whatever they want.

[Hera]

I enjoyed Jeremy mocking himself for losing to the old guy, Mom, etc.  It made him a bit more likable.  Doing so poorly in the immunity challenge could actually help him, as other might see him of less of a threat than they originally thought and not look to vote him out so quickly. 

Yes. I wondered if he lost on purpose for precisely that reason; I know past contestants have deliberately done poorly in immunity challenges to reduce their chances of being seen as a threat and then voted out (and haven't always been shown admitting to it on camera). He was so adamant about how bad at challenges he was when someone suggested that he seemed like an immunity threat—even though he won his Exile Island/reward challenge against Val, was on a tribe that lost only one immunity challenge because one of its members decided to throw it, and there has only been one individual immunity challenge this season. I don't know for sure that he lost on purpose; he could have just been bad at it or unlucky about the wind direction, but his reaction to that comment struck me a bit like protesting to much.

 

Agreed, I definitely did not get a sense that Josh or Jeremy were acting poorly last night, even in confessionals.  Honestly, I found it refreshing that their attitudes were basically "game on."  They didn't make it personal; they just knew that the other one had to go.  And I'm not sure that either of them were glaring so much as seeing what the other person was doing and thinking about how to counter the move.  It was really fun to watch these two guys maneuver.

I'm actually really annoyed with Julie for quitting precisely because it delays our getting to see how this will shake out, though I suppose it gives both sides room to maneuver . I think it's really refreshing to see two players target each other without either one pretending to hold some sort of moral high-ground over the other and with each giving respect to the other's game. I think Josh and Jeremy are smart to target each other and think they're pretty evenly matched. I'm curious about what happened to Jeremy's plan to stroke Alec's ego? Did it not take or is Josh mistaken about Alec's loyalty to him? Then again, if Josh can corral all the couples left in the game into his alliance, then he doesn't really need Alec.

 

Personally I think Jon is being underrated somewhat; he may look and talk like a big lunk but I think he's got a pretty good head for the game.  They like to highlight his Survivor Geek cred, and really I wonder if both Jeremy and Josh are going to end up taking the fall while Jon sneaks to victory.  If it wasn't for the fact that this episode he just told Jaclyn "no we're doing this instead", I'd like him a lot better, but I definitely don't think he's a moron.

Agreed. Jon reminds me of a friend of mine—good-natured and goofy personality with an athletic physique. And definitely not a moron.

 

 

His comments are kind of opposite what they've said in the past.  He said Julie quit now to avoid jury duty (LOL).  After Naonka and Kelly quit, they said the new rule was "quitters don't get to be on the jury".  So they must've told people this season that there was no escaping jury duty, due to the number of players.  If Julie quit (which they knew she would) and was supposed to be a juror but was excused, they'd have an even number of jurors, which wouldn't work.  So they'd have to exclude another player from the jury somehow, which also wouldn't be very fair.  

 

Here's the EW thing.  

http://insidetv.ew.com/2014/11/06/survivor-jeff-probst-julie-quit/

He doesn't say anything about a "new rule" or "necessarily" but it seems obvious that Julie would not have been excluded from jury duty, which does seem to be a new stance.

I don't think they've changed the rule about quitters not getting to be on the jury (a rule, I completely agree with—I was one of the outraged fans who thought NaOnka and Purple Kelly should not have been allowed to be on the jury in Nicaragua). I think what happened was that Julie wanted to leave the game and go back to her boyfriend. If she had asked to be voted out, then she ran the risk of not getting voted out or getting voted out and having to sit on the jury, since the jury often starts with whoever is the first voted out post-merge and its members have to stay until the end of the game. I think she could have quit the next morning or at tribal council and would have probably gotten out of jury duty in both instances, but that would mean either spending another night out there in uncomfortable conditions when she didn't have to, or having to quit in front of her tribemates and dealing with the comments and cajoling (from people who were mad at her for ruining their plans and/or for hoarding the trailmix) that would have inevitably ensued.

[RedheadZombie]

That is my understanding too, that the stealing of stuff was first green-lit by producers for Russell Hantz (having previously be uber-verboten).  The fact that Russell was given permission makes me wonder if all such acts (possibly including searching other's belongings) need to be approved beforehand.  I mean what else keeps this from getting out of hand?  Left to their own devices, I think people might well search each other's stuff regularly and steal constantly.  It'd be a devastating move, taking someone's only pair of shoes or warm clothes.  The fact that they don't do this makes me think they're not allowed to.

 

I don't know if production is green-lighting theft.  I think if they are, that requirement can still be gotten around.  Like when Lisa Whelchel "accidentally" found Malcolm's idol while going through his things to hang them out to dry.  I wish there was just an across the board rule - you cannot go into anyone's bag for any reason.  I didn't like Malcolm, but Lisa's outing him screwed his game a little.

[henripootel]

I don't know if production is green-lighting theft.

Trying to remember who said it, but I read an interview once with some returning player who was lamenting how things had changed since their first season, that it'd gotten nastier since 'They'd green-lighted Russell Hantz to start stealing from other players'.  I was also under the clear impression (though I don't remember why) that, originally, stealing was one of the few things that'd get you instantly kicked out.

I think if they are, that requirement can still be gotten around.

 

I just can't believe that there is any 'getting around it' - production is gonna find out that you did this (if it's caught on film), and if it's against the rules, you're in trouble.  But they not only film these incidents, they put them on tv.  This can only be production condoning theft and bag-searching, at the very least tacitly.

Edited November 9, 2014 by henripootel

[dolphincorn]

 

Spell check auto corrects it to Jaquelyn and I can't remember the creative spelling properly.

 

Screw auto correct! I just check the tag in my Jaclyn Smith for Kmart lounge pants for the proper spelling.

[Brookside]

 

 

Cooking the crab - you don't kill them before you boil them either.  Sorry.  The tender hearted sometimes put them in the freezer first.  Not an option here.

[Padma]

Is it really that difficult to kill a crab before roasting it?  They must love watching it writhe on the stick while it slowly cooks.  I hope they all starve.

 

That really bothered me. No one had the brains or compassion to kill it first? So far, I'm having a hard time liking any of these people.

 

I don't care for Julie, but we really don't know how that situation panned out.  It's possible she was rationing while the other hogs were gorging as usual.  I don't blame her for stashing some - half these people have shown they will eat as much as they want.  It seems like they took all of the trail mix anyway, so enough with the bitching.

 

I didn't understand that. If she could take trail mix back to camp, couldn't everybody? Why not divvy it all up and have personal rations, too?  As far as I saw (missed parts), she didn't "steal" it from a group supply. I thought it was strange that no one else thought of "saving something".

Edited November 10, 2014 by Padma

[Nashville]

That really bothered me. No one had the brains or compassion to kill it first? So far, I'm having a hard time liking any of these people.

It's not a compassion thing - it's a don't-get-food-poisoning thing. The meat of most crustacean-type seafood can start breaking down almost immediately after death - and by "almost immediately", I mean within minutes. So killing it first isn't really an option. In truth, if the killing process and the cooking process aren't so closely related as to be intertwined, there's no point in killing it in the first place.

I didn't understand that. If she could take trail mix back to camp, couldn't everybody? Why not divvy it all up and have personal rations, too? As far as I saw (missed parts), she didn't "steal" it from a group supply. I thought it was strange that no one else thought of "saving something".

• Several people took food leftovers from the Merge Feast; IIRC there wasn't a single scrap left behind.
• The edit suggests the other MF scavengers shared their take with the rest of the Tribe - although we are never shown this.
• IF the other scavenged food was shared, we also have no idea whether Julie shared in the communal bounty without contributing.
• The MF food is/was apparently considered an extension of the group supply - by some, at least.

The edit gave no indication one way or the other whether:

• There was any kind of discussion about the scavenged leftovers being/not being community property when collected.
• Anybody else had indicated a desire for some of the trail mix before Julie dumped the whole thing in her bag.

ETA: Fixed F'ed-up formatting.

Edited November 10, 2014 by Nashville

[ProfCrash]

After the feast the tribe was discussing who was taking what back to camp so that they could eat it later and extend the feast. They flat out mentioned group share. People were picking up baskets of food and announcing what they were taking back to camp and there was coordination. They knew Julie had the trail mix because she said she was taking the trail mix. Julie knew it was a communal good and was hoping to get away with not sharing it with the rest of the tribe. Her exit interviews make it seem like she wasn't going to eat it because it had been in with her dirty clothes but we saw her talking head about keeping it and sharing it only with the people she liked while eating some dried apricot. She was busted and knew she was busted. She was already on the outs because of her boyfriend, her lack of effort around camp, her sucking at challenges, and, apparently, her lack of a social game. The theft of the trail mix simply added another element.

 

I hope that she does not receive the stipend or the prize money associated with whatever place she came in. I wish that they had simply sent her to a different hotel and not allowed her to go back to John. It sounds harsh but you signed up to play a very specific game. I get that the game is harder then it appears at home. I do. It must really suck to have so little food, sleep on crap floors, freeze at night, and all the other things that come from playing this game. I get that. But you volunteered to do just that. And if you fuck it up so badly that you are a total outsider and feel so totally alone that you want to quit, that is on you. She was not ostracized because of the size of her breasts or the size of her lips or her great looks. She was not ostracized because of her boyfriend, Jeremy outed John and Natalie went off on him but they were both allies of Julie's.  

 

This season is a bit different because of the blood vs water element. The show wanted John and he had to have someone with him so Julie came along. Probst and comp knew she was going to suck and not be able to handle it but they so wanted John that they brought her along. I am not going to be surprised if Probst is later revealed to have told her that if John was voted out early that she could quit by day X she would be with John at the loser lounge. If they made it to the merge, she would see him at Ponderosa. I think they knew she would not stay there on her own and that they were ok with it and that is why Jeff was so weak in his meeting with her. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if someone reminded her that she needed to quit by day X in order to see John when she was voted out.

 

And that is why I am pissed. She didn't want to be there. She didn't want to play and there are a ton of couples who would play together that would have been far more interesting. I am sorry, but Rocker stepped in it ages ago when he made his comments and his recent blogs and comments do not make me think that he has changed a ton. He is welcome to his opinions and can voice them when and where he wants, that is what America stands for, but nothing about him screams as someone who the Producers should have wanted on the show. All they were looking for was controversy and they got some out of him. And to get him on the show they bring his girlfriend who does not want to be there. So we have one dude who is there for the controversy with a partner who doesn't want to play. Both are gone without really making much of a mark and one quitting. Just ugh

[Kel Varnsen]

Julie's infinitesimal chances of winning aside - mathematically speaking, Probst was 100% correct.  And they needed filler.  :)

 

Of course mathematically speaking with one person leaving, means that everyone's chances get better. But this isn't purely a game of chance so if Julie had stayed in the game, unless the trail mix in her bag gave everyone else food poisoning and they had to leave the game (or something equally crazy happened) she wasn't going to win.

 

Yea, after reading some thoughtful posts here, I no longer care about Keith's IC win. However, I do still kinda hope he gets to keep it for the next vote in addition to whomever wins the next IC just because, as others have stated, it might make the vote more interesting and the season is super boring so far.

I hope he doesn't get to keep it. I mean Jeff's standard line is that the immunity necklace keeps you safe for the next 3 days or safe for tonight's tribal council. Letting him use it for the next tribal council and keeping him safe for 6 days would seem a bit unfair.

[peachmangosteen]

Honestly, I don't particularly care about fairness, I care about being entertained, and there's a chance that allowing Keith to keep the II while also letting someone else win one too might make for some interesting/entertaining strategy so I'm for it.

[Jersey Guy 87]

There have been other cases of people winning immunity and then someone quitting/being medevaced.  In no case did the person get to carry over their immunity win - great that you won it, you would have been safe if there had been a vote but there was no vote.  The Immunity Idol is only good until the next immunity challenge.  As it should be.

[henripootel]

Of course mathematically speaking with one person leaving, means that everyone's chances get better.

 

Yes and no, but mostly no.  This would be true if the chances of winning approximate a lottery, where every ticket has an equal probability of winning.  This just ain't so in Survivor - no matter how fond Jeff might be of this notion ('You now have a one-in-five chance of winning!'), some folks actually have a near-zero chance of winning.  Removing Julie's very, very small actual chance changes everyone else's not at all.  

 

Or maybe your chances will change, but not for the better.  Worthless as Julie may be, she had a vote.  If she was part of your alliance, you may be pretty fucked now as your chances plummet from 'decent' to 'headed for a pagonging'.  But this would take more than a soundbite from Jeffy to explain.  

[Special K]

 

If she was part of your alliance, you may be pretty fucked now as your chances plummet from 'decent' to 'headed for a pagonging'.

 

Perhaps that's what she had in mind, or at least part of her thinking.  After all, her alliance includes two people (Jeremy and Nathalie) who verbally attacked Her Boyfriend John.

[blackwing]

Or maybe your chances will change, but not for the better.  Worthless as Julie may be, she had a vote.  If she was part of your alliance, you may be pretty fucked now as your chances plummet from 'decent' to 'headed for a pagonging'.  But this would take more than a soundbite from Jeffy to explain.

True, she was a vote, but it does still seem to depend on Jon and Jacqueline.  If they stick with Jeremy, Natalie, Baylor and Missy, it's still 6 to 5.  Previously it was 7 to 5.  Julie's chances as others have said were minimal, and perhaps it's best that with her attitude that "they all jus' jealous" that she isn't on the jury.

[Oholibamah]

I was stuck with Julie in my Survivor pool since all of the other women were snatched up first. She was turning out to be a pleasant surprise, but color me very disappointed.

 

It's not the same, because Keith was (or has thus far) been deprived of one of the key benefits of individual immunity - a relatively objective view of the TC pre-vote discussion, which would be especially valuable at the first TC following the merge.  That is an advantage he won fair and square, by the rules of the Game, and (so far, anyway) it appears he will be deprived of it through no fault or action of his own.

 

IMHO the only fair option would be for next week's episode to feature the Reward Challenge only, and let Keith's immunity carry through to the next TC - but I'm not holding my breath.

 

This happened in Tocantins when Tyson won the first IC after the merge, but there was no TC due to Joe's medevac. Personally, I don't think he should get to keep it since winning guarantees you make it through the current round of play, which Keith did. People may have strategically thrown the challenge knowing that people typically don't flip at 6-6, with the intention of trying to win the following week. Having Keith automatically have Immunity the following week would be just as unfair to the other 10 players.
 

Because they're pronounced the same and no one cares about the creative spelling.  Though you seem very upset about it.  

 

MMV, but I pronounce "Jaclyn" and "Jacqueline" differently. It's subtle, in a similar vein as "Erin" v. "Aaron", and probably doesn't matter anyway since I'm sure her family calls her "Jackie", but the difference exists.

[Way Wes Jr]

The production team had given away that someone would quit in the “coming this season,” preview after the first episode.  The editing of Julie was pretty ham-fisted in foreshadowing that it was going to be her, eventually.  So, I guess the best that can be said is that she bought Jeremy three more days?  As others have said, from an alliance / Pagonging perspective, her quitting just changes the margins - it doesn’t flip power.

 

Huyopa (green)

 

The downside of Julie’s quitting was that we didn’t get to see how the vote went down.  And now that Julie isn’t there, perhaps Jon will decide not to flip, (as being in an alliance with a food “thief” he couldn’t trust was what was implied to drive him towards Josh and the “Couples alliance.” [Also amusing?  That this is coming from what is being reported as the biggest eater from the tribe that had blasted through their initial bag of rice.])

 

Without that information, I’ll go with a (modified) version of my conjecture from last week.

 

1. Josh (1H)  I really don’t think he’ll win, but as the edited brains of his faction, I’ll put him in at number one.  Someone upthread said that Josh’s gameplay seems frantic, as opposed to Jeremy’s relative level-headedness, and I concur.  I think that he’ll end up making one move too many.

 

2. Keith (1C)  The idol.  Once he uses it, he’ll drop.

 

3. Jacyln (4C)  Hear me out.  She made the quote used as the episode title, a quote that qualifies as only the second “million dollar quote,” of the season.  If Josh’s faction makes it to final seven, (or even six if they punt Alec first,) she is not going to be viewed as a threat by these misogynists. At five, if they’ve gotten rid of Jon, all of a sudden in addition to not being a threat, she’s the deciding vote between Josh/Reed and Wes/Keith.  (And after that, why wouldn’t the two singles be up for a rock draw against the remaining pair? An “all pairs” alliance is fraught with tactical conundrums.)

 

4. Alec (4H)  Only this high for his goat potential.  (The Phillip Shepard position - he can actually go higher.)

 

5. Reed (3H)  To be honest, Reed (and Wes’s,) relative invisibility is the main factor in making me question if I don’t have the winner of next week’s showdown wrong.  If Jon and Jaclyn end up causing Josh (or Alec,) to get their torch snuffed next week, I’ll have been wrong, but not surprised.

 

6. Wes (2H) See Reed's commentary.
7. Jon (2C)  The Individual Immunity threat to Josh’s plans.  (In Josh’s eyes I’m assuming.)

 

8. Baylor (3C)  She’ll try to glom back onto Josh once she sees which way the wind blows.  He won’t trust her, but he’ll have bigger fish to fry.

 

9. Missy (5C)  I can imagine she’s not particularly well liked by the rest - and if it comes down to her versus Baylor, I can imagine Missy throwing her vote away, while Baylor pulls a Cierra.

 

10. Natalie (5H)  Potential immunity challenge wins could keep her alive, but Josh’ll recognize that and target her.

 

11. Jeremy (7H) Or twelfth, depending upon how you want to view my post last week.  The quit gave him three more days to work on Jon, and with the “untrustworthy” Julie gone ...  This whole list could be flipped on its head.

 

QUIT Julie (6H)  Pretty well covered in this thread already.  Nothing to add.

[Dobian]

This show does some tricky edits.  When Jeff was telling the group that Julie quit, they kept cutting to Josh talking in his personal aside about whether or not they would still have tribal council and what the strategy should be.  But Jeff told them right there on the beach that there would be no tribal council following his Julie announcement, so Josh's segment had to have been filmed before his announcement.  Something feels staged, like they already announced off-camera to the group that Julie quit, filmed Josh's reaction, and then had Jeff do the on-camera theatrics with people acting shocked and surprised.  Or maybe they just told Josh in private to get his comments on camera.  That's probably it.

[choclatechip45]

 

This season is a bit different because of the blood vs water element. The show wanted John and he had to have someone with him so Julie came along. Probst and comp knew she was going to suck and not be able to handle it but they so wanted John that they brought her along. I am not going to be surprised if Probst is later revealed to have told her that if John was voted out early that she could quit by day X she would be with John at the loser lounge. If they made it to the merge, she would see him at Ponderosa. I think they knew she would not stay there on her own and that they were ok with it and that is why Jeff was so weak in his meeting with her. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if someone reminded her that she needed to quit by day X in order to see John when she was voted out.

In her exit interviews she mentioned that Probst told her there was no guarantee she would be able to see John if she did quit. When she went to loser lounge she was surprised when they asked her if she wanted to see John.

[blackwing]

In her exit interviews she mentioned that Probst told her there was no guarantee she would be able to see John if she did quit. When she went to loser lounge she was surprised when they asked her if she wanted to see John.

Don't you mean "my boyfriend John"?  Seriously, we have had Blood vs. Water before, and I don't recall any of the contestants being notable for repeatedly saying things like "my boyfriend Hayden" or "my husband Brad" or "my mother Tina".  Someone on one of the other episode threads suggested that she was being coached to say "my boyfriend John" to distinguish him from the younger football player Jon.  

 

Yeah right.  The camera people who are purportedly coaching her to say "my boyfriend Jon" know full well that every time her puffy lips show up onscreen when she's in a talking head, there's going to be a graphic saying "Julie.  John's girlfriend".  Would they really think people are that dense that when she's going on about "they were being mean to John" they would have to say "hold up, we have two Jo(h)ns, people might think you are talking about younger better-looking Jon, you need to redo that, please refer to him as 'my boyfriend John', "

 

John Rocker is the famous person, she was just the tagalong, She seems to define herself and her identity as being his girlfriend.  In a talking head, she was commenting about Drew saying he was a famous model by saying something to the effect of "Beeyotch, please, my boyfriend is John Rocker, you ain't got nuttin' on him."

 

Have there been any snippet in the interviews about "[her] boyfriend John" 's take on her quitting?

[choclatechip45]

 

Don't you mean "my boyfriend John"?  Seriously, we have had Blood vs. Water before, and I don't recall any of the contestants being notable for repeatedly saying things like "my boyfriend Hayden" or "my husband Brad" or "my mother Tina".  Someone on one of the other episode threads suggested that she was being coached to say "my boyfriend John" to distinguish him from the younger football player Jon.

Have there been any snippet in the interviews about "[her] boyfriend John" 's take on her quitting?

I agree it was annoying. Just like  how it was annoying everyone had to reference either Laura M or Laura B  during the last Blood vs Water when it was obvious who they were talking about. She said Rocker has been supportive.

Edited November 12, 2014 by choclatechip45

[jb0495]

It's frustrating that people keep saying Jacqueline also. Her name is Jack-Lynn, spelled Jaclyn. It's a pretty common spelling, like Jaclyn Smith. Jacqueline is way more uncommon.

I'm rooting for Reed & Josh. I think they make it far considering how much airtime Josh got in the first half. At least he's trying to play the game. I like Jon and Jaclyn as well.