Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
Tara Ariano

S29.E11: Kind Of Like Cream Cheese (11) / Still Holdin' On (12)

Recommended Posts

And let's remember that when Jaclyn was on the outs in original Coyopa she was all but invisible. We were never shown her attempting to do anything to save herself or even strategizing at all. I honestly can't remember Jaclyn even having many TH's at that point during the game.
Once the women's alliance fell apart, I think she was smart to remain in the background.  She appeared to be a physical threat amongst the women, she did well on that push each other off the floating raft challenge (where Baylor got hit in the face) and she could have been perceived as a threat.  But she sat back and let them pick off others who were more outspoken.

 

While I agree that it'd be difficult for a couple to make a final 2 or final 3, it's happened before (Rob and Amber).  I don't think she "needs" to make a move on Jon, and if she does, I would hope she would consult with him and they make a decision about who has a better chance in the final vote.  Frankly, I think Jon has a better chance.  He might be disliked by a few but at least he has played his game and done well in challenges.  Even if Jaclyn joined with others and voted out Jon, I highly doubt it would be considered "her" move.  It'd be considered Natalie's and Jaclyn would get no credit for it.  Unfortunately for her, I don't think anyone will ever view her as anything except Jon's second vote.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I'd say they're all goats except Natalie, Keith (inexplicably!), and Jon (also inexplicably!).

 

 

I can see this, maybe.  Keith can claim winning challenges as can Jon.  Not sure either can claim strategist though.  Jon would try but the jury knows about Natalie and Jaclyn telling him to play his idol so his planned lie won't work!  

Once the women's alliance fell apart, I think she was smart to remain in the background.  She appeared to be a physical threat amongst the women, she did well on that push each other off the floating raft challenge (where Baylor got hit in the face) and she could have been perceived as a threat.  But she sat back and let them pick off others who were more outspoken.

 

While I agree that it'd be difficult for a couple to make a final 2 or final 3, it's happened before (Rob and Amber).  I don't think she "needs" to make a move on Jon, and if she does, I would hope she would consult with him and they make a decision about who has a better chance in the final vote.  Frankly, I think Jon has a better chance.  He might be disliked by a few but at least he has played his game and done well in challenges.  Even if Jaclyn joined with others and voted out Jon, I highly doubt it would be considered "her" move.  It'd be considered Natalie's and Jaclyn would get no credit for it.  Unfortunately for her, I don't think anyone will ever view her as anything except Jon's second vote.

 

 

 

I agree.  My previous post about Jaclyn blindsiding Jon was not a serious one, really.  I just meant she would have to do that to gain any respect; she cannot win. 

 

Rob and Amber didn't enter as a couple; they became one on the show.  Slight difference but still couples are usually the target when that happens.  

Share this post


Link to post

I can see this, maybe.  Keith can claim winning challenges as can Jon.  Not sure either can claim strategist though.  Jon would try but the jury knows about Natalie and Jaclyn telling him to play his idol so his planned lie won't work!  

 

Jon has the dying father, and I wouldn't be quick to discount the power of that.    If he gets to final three, I suspect he'll play the "now my father can die proud of me" card, tears and all.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I think Jon is kind of a lock to win if he gets F3 with anyone except Natalie. Maybe Keith, but I think he'd beat Keith.

 

 

I think so, too and can see him do an II run at the end.  I do hold some hope they do their behind the scenes magic with shifting the challenges to favor a Natalie II win this week.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I don't like Natalie very much (can't forget her from Amazing Race) but I'd still prefer to see her win rather than Jon.    He comes across as one of these guys who has been handed everything in life -- including hidden Immunity Idols.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Guest

I don't watch near as closely as the rest of you but I would think Jon would have trouble with a jury due to all his flip-flopping.  If he sees himself as the swing vote, that means that jury is full of jurors he swung against, right?  Or was his/their swinging mostly done before jury formation started?  I know he's got Jeremy's blood on his hands.  Does he have the others?

Share this post


Link to post

I don't watch near as closely as the rest of you but I would think Jon would have trouble with a jury due to all his flip-flopping.  If he sees himself as the swing vote, that means that jury is full of jurors he swung against, right?  Or was his/their swinging mostly done before jury formation started?  I know he's got Jeremy's blood on his hands.  Does he have the others?

He has Josh's, as well.

Share this post


Link to post

If they see Jon as the best player he could win.  Many supposedly bitter juries do see the game play aspect even if reluctantly.  IF he is up there with a goat.  

Edited by wings707

Share this post


Link to post

The last two winners, Tyson and Tony, engineered the boots of many of the jury members. They both still won. They were the best players. And it helped that they were up there with followers. Tyson had his two alliance members. Gervase who was seen as a complete follower. Monica who had the opportunity to make moves but in the end just followed along. Tony was up there with Woo, a dim bulb who was nothing but Tony's lap dog the entire game.

I see Natalie beating everyone. Jon beats everyone except Natalie. Keith can beat everyone except Nat and Jon. Jaclyn beats only Missy and Baylor but that's only because those two are so disliked. And if it were a Missy/Baylor final, they don't need to vote because Missy would just give it to Baylor.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm interested in the consensus that Natalie could beat anyone.  I don't feel like I have a good grasp on how other players feel about Natalie's game.  I know that some of the boys respect her more than the other women because she's a hard worker.  But otherwise, I don't know how they feel.  Certainly she has not been the driving force that Tony was, for example.  I would guess that Jon would beat her, myself, but maybe I'm missing something.

 

I'm assuming it's gotta be a final 3 because otherwise one of the couples could get to the FTC and make the entire exercise meaningless, as Boston Rob did (his most brilliant move?  Sort of cheating?  Both?) lo these many years ago.  I guess in a world where they invented Redemption Island and sucked the drama out of being voted out, anything is possible, but I imagine they would want to avoid that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

 I don't feel like I have a good grasp on how other players feel about Natalie's game.  I know that some of the boys respect her more than the other women because she's a hard worker.  But otherwise, I don't know how they feel.  Certainly she has not been the driving force that Tony was, for example.  I would guess that Jon would beat her, myself, but maybe I'm missing something.

 

 

Natalie's at a disadvantage because all of her moves have been outside the view of the jury, in most instances even beyond the view of the remaining players.   We at home see what she's attempting, but we don't count.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't watch near as closely as the rest of you but I would think Jon would have trouble with a jury due to all his flip-flopping.  If he sees himself as the swing vote, that means that jury is full of jurors he swung against, right?  Or was his/their swinging mostly done before jury formation started?  I know he's got Jeremy's blood on his hands.  Does he have the others?

 

Depends on how well Jon plays it.  Each FTC vote is generally based on one of three factors:

  1. A vote for best strategy.
  2. A vote for best personality.
  3. A "sour grapes" vote (i.e., not for anything, but against someone by whom the voter feels personally betrayed/offended).

 

If Jon makes it to FTC:

  1. He could probably make a decent argument for the strategy votes simply by virtue of making it to FTC.
  2. Considering anybody who could be sitting next to him vs. who's on the jury, the personality votes would probably be the easiest for Jon to collect.
  3. The handiest way to collect the sour grapes votes is simple: "Gee, Jeremy/Josh/whoever - I hated having to blindside you, but you were SUCH a physical and/or strategic threat I didn't have any choice - there was NO way I could've won against you at FTC.  So I had NO choice but to take advantage of the chance to evict you when the opportunity presented itself, because I could NEVER be sure of having a second chance - you were just TOO good."  This also supports the "best strategy" votes as well.

Share this post


Link to post

Nat has Jeremy's vote.

 

I cannot see Josh and Reed voting for Keith, his strategic and social game has been horrible. They will not vote for Baylor or Missy because of their social game. I don't see them voting for Jaclyn because of her flip flopping and bad behavior prior to Reed's ouster. Honestly, the only people that I see them voting for is Jon or Natalie and if they have to choose, they choose Natalie because she kept Jon in the game.

 

Missy and Baylor have pissed off Keith, Wes, and Alec so they are not getting any of their votes. Nat gets Keith and Wes's vote if Keith is out of the game because she kept Keith in the game.

Share this post


Link to post

We haven't seen anyone talk badly about Natalie in their DTs, yet anyway.  I think she is generally liked, respected and works around camp.   That goes a long way.  

Share this post


Link to post

I'm interested in the consensus that Natalie could beat anyone.  I don't feel like I have a good grasp on how other players feel about Natalie's game.  I know that some of the boys respect her more than the other women because she's a hard worker.  But otherwise, I don't know how they feel.  Certainly she has not been the driving force that Tony was, for example.  I would guess that Jon would beat her, myself, but maybe I'm missing something.

 

I certainly think there's a decent chance Jon would beat Natalie. If not only just because of a little good old fashioned sexism. But also, Natalie's game has been more subtle than Jon's. Everyone knows exactly what moves Jon has made. That could help him, but could also hurt him since it means everyone knows he's pretty much just a flip flopper.

 

But, as wings707 said, I think Natalie is probably better liked than Jon by most of the jury. Although I'm not sure if that's more just my perception than there being actual evidence of it. 

 

Nat has Jeremy's vote.

 

I'm not so sure. I'm not willing to believe Jeremy actually gets it yet that Natalie didn't vote him out! Also, I think Jeremy sees Jon as the power in the game and he seems like someone who would vote for the person in control. I hope I'm wrong though.

Edited by peachmangosteen

Share this post


Link to post

 When Jeremy first arrived at Ponderosa, he was angry at her thinking she betrayed him. They may all figure this out, though.  Everyone arrives with new information.  

Edited by wings707

Share this post


Link to post

Guest

The last two winners, Tyson and Tony, engineered the boots of many of the jury members. They both still won. They were the best players. 

But did they engineer boots by betraying deals/alliances they made, i.e. flip-flopping?  I feel like jurors respect a good player who gets them out by beating their alliance in challenges and wits and idol-finding and pure numbers more than one who blindsides them by flip-flopping or outright lying, but I guess the lying is probably the norm.  But I don't really recall much of past seasons (or this one) so maybe Tyson and Tony did win by putting themselves in swing vote position over and over.  It seems like both of them were just lucky enough to have won some challenges, found some sheep to follow them, found some idols, and survive in an alliance that made it to the end.  And not have the jurors all hate them, by that time.  

Share this post


Link to post

As Sandra so beautifully demonstrated in HvV, the most important element of jury management is making a jury member's vote for you a proxy vote for themselves. Players don't want to vote for a player that they can't stomach being beat by, which is why Baylor and Missy are so screwed, regardless of their surprisingly solid gameplay. 

 



But did they engineer boots by betraying deals/alliances they made, i.e. flip-flopping?  I feel like jurors respect a good player who gets them out by beating their alliance in challenges and wits and idol-finding and pure numbers more than one who blindsides them by flip-flopping or outright lying, but I guess the lying is probably the norm.  But I don't really recall much of past seasons (or this one) so maybe Tyson and Tony did win by putting themselves in swing vote position over and over.  It seems like both of them were just lucky enough to have won some challenges, found some sheep to follow them, found some idols, and survive in an alliance that made it to the end.  And not have the jurors all hate them, by that time.  

 

Historically, jurors will vote for the player that lied to them or got them eliminated, but only if a defensible alternative is not an option. In Samoa, Erik presented Natalie as a defensible alternative to voting for Russell by framing her gameplay as a reactive necessity to the game that was no worse than Russell's. Like Sandra, the jury was presented a narrative that allows them to vote for who they like best while still feeling they're voting for the most "deserving". This is why Jon only has the second best chance in front of the jury: Natalie is not somebody the jury will be embarrassed to lose to, and will present a defensible option for those unimpressed/pissed about Jon's gameplay.

 

Jon will obviously get Jaclyn's vote, and has a fighting chance for Missy's (assuming she isn't also finalist), Wes and Alec's. Natalie is a slam dunk to get Keith and Jeremy. I can't see Josh and Reed respecting Jon's gameplay, especially after his fight with Jaclyn sunk Reed's game, and Baylor will vote Natalie assuming Missy isn't in the F3. It isn't a sure thing, but my money would be on Natalie 5-2-1 against Jon and Missy/Baylor and 6-3 head-to-head against Jon.

 

But it's a moot point, because the chances of both Natalie AND Jon getting to FTC is nil.

Edited by Oholibamah
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Jon and Jaclyn are loyal to each other, and Missy is loyal to Baylor and Jon. Natalie really only had Baylor, and Alec could have threatened that if he stayed in the picture. With Alec gone, she still probably has Baylor and now she has Keith as well

Yes.  It's at 6 now with two couples, and Nat was going to be more or less coupled with whoever of Keith/Alec was left.  She was making a choice, rather than letting the other couples make it for her.  I'm pretty sure she figures Keith is a good goat, if it comes to that. 

 

And really, if the Missy injury is NOT a red herring (they allowed the medic on tape, which is serious) then Nat has caught a big break.  She should be able to marshal Keith and Baylor into a 3 to oppose J&J's 2.  Should be interesting.

 

For Jaclyn to be seen as an independent player, she has to actually make herself available to discuss strategy. So far, she has not.

I suspect the others see her as a floater and potential goat, thus they did not consider targeting her when Jon won immunity.

 

I think if a woman has three ex-husbands by the time she's in her forties, it doesn't take a lot of insight to realize she's making bad choices.

It's more like that there are 3 men out there somewhere who made bad choices.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

But did they engineer boots by betraying deals/alliances they made, i.e. flip-flopping?  I feel like jurors respect a good player who gets them out by beating their alliance in challenges and wits and idol-finding and pure numbers more than one who blindsides them by flip-flopping or outright lying, but I guess the lying is probably the norm.  But I don't really recall much of past seasons (or this one) so maybe Tyson and Tony did win by putting themselves in swing vote position over and over.  It seems like both of them were just lucky enough to have won some challenges, found some sheep to follow them, found some idols, and survive in an alliance that made it to the end.  And not have the jurors all hate them, by that time.  

 

Tony never won immunity and while he notionally had an "alliance" he in fact flipped on them over and over (and they inexplicably didn't flip on him, although the point was moot because of his Tyler Perry idol.)  I don't know about Tyson, haven't watched that season.  But Tony definitely did not play the "clean" game of a Tom or a Sophie (probably Sophie's is the cleanest/boringest "I gave you exactly what I promised" game of all.)

 

I personally would think that Reed and Josh would be Natalie's hardest votes to get.  They don't seem to have interacted with her much at all, and they will give credit to Jeremy for beating Josh and Jon for beating Jeremy.  If Natalie takes out Jon, and gets credit for it, then yes I could see them voting her way.  I don't think that Reed's ouster will have any effect on their vote at all.  He was a dead man walking whose (very clever) attempt to take over misfired thanks to Keith--no hard feelings there that I could see.  I think respect is exactly what they will feel towards Jon's game.

 

Jeremy strikes me very much as the kind of alpha male who thinks "if they beat me, they must be good!" and so I wonder if his learning Natalie had nothing to do with voting him out helps or hurts her?  Overall I think Natalie's instincts are right--her best bet by far is an all-women final 3, when I think she would almost certainly get Jeremy, Keith, Wes, and Alec's votes.  (Although who knows with Keith--he might vote for Missy, who he's been sort of flirting with all game.)  I personally would say that Missy would be more deserving in a Missy-Baylor-Natalie final 3, but I have no illusions about the chances of a middle-aged lady whose most obnoxious side is frequently brought out when she feels defensive about her daughter.  (And man alive have I ever learned about the stigma of divorce from the commentary this season!)

Edited by KimberStormer
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Guest

Heh, I don't think three divorces is that big a deal.  My own mother has had three, and two of her marriages were pretty long.  Some people are romantic and optimists.  I'm not sure it makes them fools when it comes to men.  

Share this post


Link to post

I'd like to see a new twist added to the game: jury nullification.    If the jury doesn't feel any of the remaining candidates are worthy of the million dollar prize, nobody gets it.

 

Personally, I'd hate to be on the jury having to choose between, say, two losers like Tony and Woo, and be forced to give one of them a million dollars.   That would seriously piss me off.

 

If the million dollars weren't guaranteed, but actually had to be earned in the eyes of your peers, it might breathe some much needed life into this very tired and predictable "competition."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I'd say they're all goats except Natalie, Keith (inexplicably!), and Jon (also inexplicably!).

 

I'm not actually that sure that Missy is a goat.  If the previews are accurate it's a bit of a moot point, but she does seem to have been the key figure in the decision making and been acknowledged as the person organising several votes.  I know she's not well liked when she's defending Baylor, but I'm not sure that she's actively disliked on her own terms either.

 

I have to say the things I thought were most interesting about those two episodes were the insights into Jon's thinking ("He gets advice from his mother and Missy's taken over that role" - although that did make me wonder if Jaclyn should run now, heh), the insights into Jon and Jaclyn's relationship (get counselling in how to argue and communicate better when annoyed at each other, please!) and the insight into Missy and Baylor's relationship.  I didn't think from what was shown that she was being a brat, but I did find it surprising that she looked to her mother to defend her - and that Missy did.  I'm sure at some point they'll form an adult relationship, but at the moment it's very much parent-child still. 

 

Still hoping for Natalie for the win, although like many people here I think I've just jinxed her by saying that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

If that happened then nobody would ever win Survivor.  I don't know if even JT would win that game.

 

It needn't be a unanimous decision.   Just a majority, perhaps.    

Share this post


Link to post

Personally, I'd hate to be on the jury having to choose between, say, two losers like Tony and Woo, and be forced to give one of them a million dollars.   That would seriously piss me off.

 

 

Then you should have voted them out when you had the chance.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Boy, this crowd is among the worst I've ever seen on TV (on a per capita basis).  Missy seems like a really messy immature woman.  She screams, I've got lots of issues.  I imagine everyone in their trailer park has a Missy story.  I find her repulsive.  I do, however, like Baylor. 

 

Reed, with that annoying voice, and the preening, made me glad to see him go.  He's not half as clever as he thinks he is. 

 

Jon is an insufferable ass.  His many performances this episode were hysterical in their amateurishness.  That scene with Jax was like a third rate teen romance movie.  He was pissed when he returned from Exile Island because he expected to be greeted like a king returning from war.  I don't believe that he just wanted to spend a little time with Jax; he wanted fawning attention.  When she didn't give it to him, he shut her down.  All of that wheedling and touching and cajoling was right out of the adolescent male playbook:  all she needs is petting and pleading to shut up and shift focus on ME.  The pomposity of that performance over a bottle of plunk wine was jaw-dropping to me.  I have friends who are oenophiles who don't behave so badly- over very good wine.  He covers his fragile ego with a humorous self-aggrandizement.  He's going to have a midlife crisis for the books.  I loved that "big daddy's dyin' o' cancer" routine at tribal council.  Gladly, all of his targets on the jury saw right through it.  As was noted above, why are you here if you need/want to spend time with your dying father, Jon?  Your display just makes you look like an even bigger heel than before.  His win hinges on taking Missy, Baylor and/or Jax with him to FTC.  I don't think he could beat even Keith at this point. 

 

Keith is the human embodiment of a lazy, under the porch, hound dog.  He's actually grown on me.  I think Natalie was not just thinking about his skills in challenges (whodathought?), but also about votes when she saved him.  I think that show of respect/loyalty to Keith will secure her both his and Wes's votes, if she gets that far.  I think she has shown great social skills.  That little, is it okay if I'm here, guys? comment when she broke up the powwow was pitch perfect- it was direct, honest, and not at all manipulative.  If she can get to the end, I don't see how she loses.  She's certainly won me over. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I'm not actually that sure that Missy is a goat.  If the previews are accurate it's a bit of a moot point, but she does seem to have been the key figure in the decision making and been acknowledged as the person organising several votes.  I know she's not well liked when she's defending Baylor, but I'm not sure that she's actively disliked on her own terms either.

I had been thinking Missy was the only one besides Jon/Josh/Jeremy who was a contender for the win, but the edit in the recent eps and some post-show interviews has made me go the other way. Has she been acknowledged as organizing several votes? I don't remember anyone acting like Missy was the one deciding boots. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

See, I think Natalie being single aligned with two couples is best. Neither one of the couples will want to go to the four as couples. It guarantees a tie and fire making competition. It also gives a jury advantage to the couple that loses at the four in terms of a vote, campaigning at Ponderosa, and the possibility of votes being split since the couples are going to be see as playing as one. Honestly, the couples should be looking to get rid of their partner but I don't see that happening.

 

Jon/Jaclyn and Missy/Baylor do not want Keith in the finals because he will get Wes and Alec's vote. Keith could even get votes from folks for his immunity wins although he might not get some of those votes for his poor strategic and social play (thinking Josh and Reed here). So Both couples have an incentive for keeping Natalie. Given the way the two couples have acted, they think that finals as a couple will be great for them. If it is a final two, then yes, one of them wins. If it is a final three, and Survivor tends to have final threes these days, going to the end as a couple sucks.

 

Although I would kind of like to see Jon win and Jaclyn get no votes only to watch her completely melt down and walk of the set pouting, crying, and giving Jon the silent treatment for ages.

Share this post


Link to post

If I were a singleton and it was a final three, I would rather be sitting with a couple (ex. Baylor and Missy) that with one of each of two couples (ex. Baylor and Jaclyn. or Baylor and Keith).  Loved ones on juries are going to vote for their loved ones on the FTC. plus loved ones on juries will probably try to influence the rest of the jury to vote for their loved one. Also, if you really thought Baylor should win, but Baylor is on the jury with you and Missy is sitting on the other side, you may vote for Missy because she is the closest thing to voting for Baylor. On their other hand, a couple at the FTC may actually split votes, benefiting the singleton.  And the singleton gets to play the "I had to be out there on my own since the merge, I had to strategize more."

 

Of the people left, I think Natalie would give the best speech to the jury - if she stays calm.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I think Jon and Jaclyn are two of the most boring contestants to ever be on the show. Both individually and as a couple they are completely boring to me. They would have been complete non-entities (especially Jaclyn) had that swap not happened, which set off them being in the swing position for the rest of the game up until this point. They are not compelling enough people/players to have practically a whole episode devoted to them.

 

Their fight reeked of immaturity. On the one hand I think the issues they were fighting about were issues that a lot of couples have, where one partner feels like the other one doesn't listen to them or value their input and then the other feels they've heard it all before and are tired of listening. However, to then go and alternately give each other the silent treatment for 5 hours in a game like this when a million dollars is on the line is just foolish. Even the way they handled the silent treatments were dumb. Jaclyn could have said to Jon "I'm very upset right now and need some time to cool down" instead of just flipping out back at him. I think she also shouldn't have made such a big deal of that particular moment of him "snapping" at her, but explained more clearly about how this fight had been building up for a while because he doesn't listen to her input. 

 

Jon did the right thing in apologizing to her for snapping, but his attitude of "I didn't want to talk about the game, I just wanted to hang out with my girlfriend" just shows that he's not a very good player. The Jon/Missy thing is kind of weird too and Jon seems kind of childish to need attention and decision-making help from a mom or mom-figure all the time.

 

Given that they were worried about people thinking they were the "perfect" couple or other posters suggesting that they probably always get their way in life, I thought it was interesting that Jaclyn mention that a lot of Jon's plans actually don't work out in real life and that he gets very upset about this. So they don't always get their way.

 

Love Natalie's snarky confessionals and criticisms of Jon. It's pretty funny.

  • Like 1
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post

When Jon came back from Exile, and Jacklyn wanted to discuss strategy with him, and he didn't care, his ENTIRE FACE was covered in dirt for the longest time.  It was so hard to take him seriously.  It was pretty funny.  I just kept thinking where did all the dirt come from.

The editors choosing to show Jon whining like a pouty child "I'm almost done with my wiiiiine" so that Natalie would offer him more is also really funny.

Reed is hot.

Edited by Ms Blue Jay
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size