Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
Donny Ketchum

On an Island of One: Unpopular Opinions of Survivor

Recommended Posts

I also don't think Kim dominated from the start.  None of the women did.  The women's tribe was falling apart the first several episodes, in danger of getting Pagonged.  Two things saved them.  1) The men's moronic decision to go to tribal, after they won the IC.  2) The shuffle.  Once those played out, Kim took charge and did just about everything she wanted, while engendering love among the rest of the players (except delusional Troyzan). 

 

I think this is my unpopular opinion on One World: the men's going to tribal had no effect on the game whatsoever.  (I don't believe Kim would be in trouble no matter which side of the shuffle she was on, or if there was no shuffle, either, but I'm not sure that is an unpopular opinion.)  The only person it affected was Bill, who, frankly, I cannot see as a factor in the game one way or another, had he stayed, and Christina (I assume she would have been out) who in fact was not.  The women were never in danger of Pagonging because you can only Pagong another tribe if you vote together, and the men were a fractured mess anyway.  We've seen time and again that the tribe that never goes to tribal is usually the one with tension building with no release, resulting in exploitable cracks: Timbira, Tandang, etc.  Who wanted to stay MAN STRONG and take their fellow men to the end?  Maybe Tarzan, Leif?  Jonas was dispassionate enough to do it, but he couldn't do it by himself and he was by his own admission letting other people take the reins while he was out there.  Not Troyzan.  Not Mike.  Not Colton!  I bet Jay would have gone with whoever, but he was quite happy with Chelsea and Kim.  I can't really see any combination of people who would have targeted Kim and I'm sure she would have gotten the better of any group she ended up in.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

 

The women were never in danger of Pagonging because you can only Pagong another tribe if you vote together

Well, I think there is another way: if your tribe keeps winning, like Terry's tribe (in Palau?) did.  And it looked like that's where things were headed.  So long as the men didn't go to tribal after their victories, they could have picked off the women, one after another.  The shuffle was a lifesaver IMO. 

 

You make a good point about how screwed up the men were.  Which is a lot of what I'm saying about Kim's competition that season.  The guys, especially, sucked. 

Share this post


Link to post

Well, I think there is another way: if your tribe keeps winning, like Terry's tribe (in Palau?) did.  And it looked like that's where things were headed.  So long as the men didn't go to tribal after their victories, they could have picked off the women, one after another.  The shuffle was a lifesaver IMO. 

 

You make a good point about how screwed up the men were.  Which is a lot of what I'm saying about Kim's competition that season.  The guys, especially, sucked. 

But you've walked back into the strength of Kim's game.  It was in keeping her allies from fragmenting. There was little to no dissent, and in fact bent her allies to doing whatever she wanted.

 

Which could of course be argued as her fellow women being weak (and not just the guys). I mean who lets themselves be steered so completely into basically handing one person the victory?

 

So yeah, I suppose we can what if and say "what if there had been at least one other female player with a backbone"? Or "what if the men had one person who could unify them as well as Kim did the women"?  But we don't really know if the women would have acted like they did if Kim hadn't been there.  We don't know if she dominated them simply because they were weak or if she Svengalied them in a way that would have worked on other players in some other season.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

You make a good point about how screwed up the men were.  Which is a lot of what I'm saying about Kim's competition that season.  The guys, especially, sucked. 

 

This is the thing that frustrates me about One World: everything is taken as evidence that Kim's greatness doesn't count. 

 

"She got lucky, the men gave up immunity!"

"But that didn't change anything." 

"That just means her competition sucked even more!"

 

"She got lucky, she won final immunity!"

"She almost certainly would have been fine, Chelsea wouldn't have voted for her, and she could beat any of the other three at firemaking."

"That just proves they were all terrible players!"

 

"Everyone just let her win, they weren't even playing!"

"She bamboozled Troy, Jay, Alicia, etc so they thought they were doing exactly what they needed to win."

"That just proves they're morons!"

 

Anything you ever say pro-Kim is turned around to be anti-Kim!  It's really annoying.  Like putting her ducks in a row early so that threats don't become threatening (she has said in interviews that she won the game by voting out Jonas), being adaptable to any situation, being friendly with everyone, running the game from very early without people realizing it (Mike at Ponderosa: "I sure hope Chelsea and Kim didn't join them to vote for me!"), knowing when to not run the game (letting Alicia dictate the Kat vote, which left Alicia literally believing she was in charge even during her jury speech), dominating the challenges, giving a totally killer FTC performance ("Sorry if I hurt your feelings but I've known you for a couple weeks, I need the money for the family I've had and will have all my life"), and so on, somehow makes her less impressive than more seat-of-the-pants and flukey winners.  I've actually heard the argument advanced that Kim is less of a great Survivor player because she has a natural gift for it, whereas others have had to struggle against their nature.  I don't feel like these things get said about any other Survivor winner, not to mention any athlete or competitor in any other game. 

  • Like 14

Share this post


Link to post

This is the thing that frustrates me about One World: everything is taken as evidence that Kim's greatness doesn't count. 

 

"She got lucky, the men gave up immunity!"

"But that didn't change anything." 

"That just means her competition sucked even more!"

 

"She got lucky, she won final immunity!"

"She almost certainly would have been fine, Chelsea wouldn't have voted for her, and she could beat any of the other three at firemaking."

"That just proves they were all terrible players!"

 

"Everyone just let her win, they weren't even playing!"

"She bamboozled Troy, Jay, Alicia, etc so they thought they were doing exactly what they needed to win."

"That just proves they're morons!"

 

Anything you ever say pro-Kim is turned around to be anti-Kim!  It's really annoying.  Like putting her ducks in a row early so that threats don't become threatening (she has said in interviews that she won the game by voting out Jonas), being adaptable to any situation, being friendly with everyone, running the game from very early without people realizing it (Mike at Ponderosa: "I sure hope Chelsea and Kim didn't join them to vote for me!"), knowing when to not run the game (letting Alicia dictate the Kat vote, which left Alicia literally believing she was in charge even during her jury speech), dominating the challenges, giving a totally killer FTC performance ("Sorry if I hurt your feelings but I've known you for a couple weeks, I need the money for the family I've had and will have all my life"), and so on, somehow makes her less impressive than more seat-of-the-pants and flukey winners.  I've actually heard the argument advanced that Kim is less of a great Survivor player because she has a natural gift for it, whereas others have had to struggle against their nature.  I don't feel like these things get said about any other Survivor winner, not to mention any athlete or competitor in any other game. 

 

I think the combination of the swap and the men giving up immunity changed a whole lot.  the way the women's tribe was falling apart then, there was a real chance only a few of them would have made merge. 

 

Kim did not get lucky to win FIC.  By then she was the challenge beast, who dominated all the remaining players.  Another dividend of her excellent strategy to boot all the men: it made winning challenges easier.  But it's no sure thing that she wins the fire-making contest.  And sorry, but I think your last point about Chelsea, taken literally, is correct.  Voting to keep Kim at F4 would have been a horrendous mistake, worse than Woo keeping Tony. 

 

It would have been worse than keeping James back in China.  As you said earlier in this thread about that, "He was an enormous challenge threat, a lock to win at FTC, and had 2 idols!  Vote him out ASAP!"  I agree with you!  It was smart to boot James.  It would have been 'stupid' or at least a fatal error, to keep him.  Even more so with Kim.  But Chelsea didn't want to win, and probably would have voted to keep the one person guaranteed to beat her.  Good on Kim to find and groom Chelsea.  Awful playing on Chelsea's part though. 

 

I've never said everyone just let Kim win.  I've always agreed she's a great, gifted player.  The question is, is she a Usain Bolt, as someone mentioned earlier, the best of the best?   She certainly trounced her competition, like Bolt often does.  But was she competing against other world-class players, like Bolt does in the Olympics?  Or was she competing against lackluster players, who repeatedly shot themselves in the foot, making elementary mistakes never before or since seen on the show?  

 

In running, we can look at how fast the actual winning times are.  If a man wins the 100 meters in 9.5 seconds, he's world's best (of all time), no matter how slow a time the others produce.  Not possible in Survivor.  When I see Kim's opponents make mistake after mistake, it makes me wonder where she stands on that all-time list.  Maybe she is at the top.  But until she proves it against top competition (like I think Parvati did in HvV, and many others say Sandra did that same season), it's an open question in my mind. 

Share this post


Link to post

ETA: let me contrast One World with still another season.  Philippines.  Philippines had a fantastic cast.  They played balls to the walls from the start.  No one ran that season.  Too much great competition.  Besides one of the best F4's ever (maybe the best), a number of other players could have won as well, or at least contributed outstanding play and moves. 

 

IMO Kim didn't compete against a single player of that caliber.  That is the question mark on her resume, at least in my book.  I don't have the answer, but the question is there. 

Share this post


Link to post

I dunno.  I have trouble fully admiring a season where Facts of Life's Blair was a runner-up.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Here's still another example of competition.  I don't rate Mike as the greatest challenge monster of all time, even though he accomplished what no one else has done in the ICs.  The reason is competition.  Mike might not have been the best challenge beast in his season, much less all time.  Joe might have been better.  But the contestants managed to boot Joe early after merge.  That cleared the way for Mike's great challenge run. 

 

Kromm, why do you think Lisa was not a good player? 

Share this post


Link to post
Joe might have been better.  But the contestants managed to boot Joe early after merge.  That cleared the way for Mike's great challenge run.

 

 

Yeah but you can argue that they were only able to get rid of Joe because he lost the immunity challenge. In a way, Joe faced the same situation Mike later did - he needed to win IC every time to save himself and in the end he didn't, whereas Mike did. When his back was against the wall he won every single time (save for one time where he was able to save himself with a necklace that could have been Joe's except he stupidly shared the clue's contents with Tyler).

 

So to me that does make Mike more impressive than Joe, regardless of the competition he was up against. And for the record, Carolyn was no slouch in challenges and neither was Tyler or even Sierra. Many of these challenges weren't strength based - they just required patience, focus and concentration. Yes we saw Joe win what was it, two immunity challenges in a row and two reward challenges - impressive sure but hardly the most impressive thing we've seen. Tasha in Cagayan had a good Immunity run and even Spencer had some impressive wins when his back was against the wall and he needed those wins.

 

I am not saying Mike is the greatest challenge monster of all but I disagree that his success is somewhat diminished because of the people who were left in the game and that Joe's being eliminated somehow diminishes Mike's success. Again, sure Joe showed he was impressive in some challenges but in the end he couldn't save himself whereas Mike did. 

Share this post


Link to post

truthaboutluv, the point I'm trying to make is that when Joe was in the game, Mike could not win individual challenges, while Joe won almost all of them.  The challenges required everything from strength to endurance to puzzle solving -- and Joe was killing them and everyone else.  His problem is that he had no backup.  So when he did lose, they booted him.  Mike did have a backup, i.e. the HII.  So he was able to lose one IC, and stay in the game. 

 

How would Mike have done had Joe been around to take part in the challenges?  Well, Joe beat Mike in every individual challenge, reward and immunity, except one.  He was younger, more fit, with better endurance and agility.  Plus he was great at solving puzzles.  Booting Joe was critical -- essential IMO -- for Mike to go on his immunity run. 

Share this post


Link to post

Survivor isn't a sport with objective criteria like running, so the Bolt comparison is not so good I agree.  (I was just saying that it's entertaining to see a not-close race sometimes too.)  It will always be based on the people you're playing with, I agree.  SO let's think of Kim as being like Wilt Chamberlain maybe?  I've overheard my brother getting in arguments with people who say Wilt the Stilt was just playing against Washington Generals-caliber suckers and that accounts for all his amazing feats and stats.  To me, even conceding she (or Wilt) was not playing against the tippety-toppest competition (and I don't think the cast of One World was particularly weak myself), I personally feel that I can recognize greatness when I see it.

Share this post


Link to post

If we're going the Kim-as-NBA star analogy route, she's Tim Duncan --- quietly ran roughshod over everyone, succeeded in every aspect and a lot of people still think she's "boring."  (Kim is also from San Antonio, to boot.)

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

People are really dismissing Kim's game?  I will fight you.

 

Okay, not really. But I think it's hard to compare winners objectively. Every winner benefits from bonehead moves from the other side, but not the same bonehead moves. The weather conditions, food and water availability, twists from the producers, etc., are all effectively random.  And the other people and personalities are different. And of course we're also looking at 44 minutes out of every three days, and not necessarily the 44 minutes we'd want to see.

 

Kim rolled in having never played before, like everyone else.  Whatever gameplan she had beforehand, she adapted immediately and continually, laid low early while not getting on anyone's radar to be an early boot, and did it all while making friends in both tribes.  Compare that to the Great Boston Rob who took four tries to practice a game plan and was ultimately a celebrity on his final season.

And Kim did it while dealing with effin' Colton and the delusional Alicia. Either of them alone would be worse than Phillip, pink manties and all.

 

All MHO of course.  Kim is one of my faves.  But then, so is Danni, so take my view for what you think it's worth :)

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

 

But then, so is Danni, so take my view for what you think it's worth :)

I've always liked Danni, and don't think she gets enough credit among the winners. She remained stealthy until the numbers were against her, and then pulled a Chris Dougherty and won anyway--but without all the nastiness and lying he had to do to get to the end. (And don't get me wrong--I also think Chris deserves more credit than he gets.)

 

Also, someone said upthread that they were fascinated watching Heidik win Thailand, and I agree completely. He's a sleazeball, yet he went through the game like a dead-eyed shark and ate the competition, and yet had them fooled enough that they just rolled over for him.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I think HvV is an interesting season strategically, but such a bummer to watch; no one in it seem to enjoy being there, there is no joy in the show at all, except for Russell's joy at being a shitty person.

It's been said more than once by several returnees that season why the enjoyment was limited.

 

The Heroes had James's terrible, bullying behavior to deal with.  It dragged their morale down enormously.  They also dealt with the sexist, misogynistic behavior of Rupert, Colby, and especially J.T.  And speaking of the latter, his lying and double-dealing got the tribe paranoid and distrustful of one another, so no one could get comfortable for more than a few hours at a time.  Most of the Heroes have rather pointedly, squarely blamed their lack of true fun or enjoyment on him, in fact, and I can believe it.

 

The Villains . . . well, they had Russell.  That's reason enough to not enjoy oneself.  They seemed to be, at first, but after a few weeks . . . not so much.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

It's been said more than once by several returnees that season why the enjoyment was limited.

The Heroes had James's terrible, bullying behavior to deal with. It dragged their morale down enormously. They also dealt with the sexist, misogynistic behavior of Rupert, Colby, and especially J.T. And speaking of the latter, his lying and double-dealing got the tribe paranoid and distrustful of one another, so no one could get comfortable for more than a few hours at a time. Most of the Heroes have rather pointedly, squarely blamed their lack of true fun or enjoyment on him, in fact, and I can believe it.

The Villains . . . well, they had Russell. That's reason enough to not enjoy oneself. They seemed to be, at first, but after a few weeks . . . not so much.

This is why Jerri is such a hoot this season. Her attitude is literally "no fucks given!" from day 1, and it resulted in her most successful outing yet.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

It's been said more than once by several returnees that season why the enjoyment was limited.

 

The Heroes had James's terrible, bullying behavior to deal with.  It dragged their morale down enormously.  They also dealt with the sexist, misogynistic behavior of Rupert, Colby, and especially J.T.  And speaking of the latter, his lying and double-dealing got the tribe paranoid and distrustful of one another, so no one could get comfortable for more than a few hours at a time.  Most of the Heroes have rather pointedly, squarely blamed their lack of true fun or enjoyment on him, in fact, and I can believe it.

 

The Villains . . . well, they had Russell.  That's reason enough to not enjoy oneself.  They seemed to be, at first, but after a few weeks . . . not so much.

I've never heard that about JT. That's funny considering Parvati' s biggest social mistake that season was mocking JT in front of the heroes. I know Amanda has said she doesn't like Survivor anymore because of Russell and the fact that Parvati was given inside information about him before the game started.

I know James didn't exactly cover himself in glory with the way he talked to Tom and Stephenie, but Tom has a bit of a bully streak himself, and Stephenie is just awful. I didn't really feel badly for anyone involved in that dust up.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Guest

My UO:  I think Jeff is ten times the host Phil K. is.  I've grown to love Jeff.  I wouldn't have said this until recently but now that I've seen all but two seasons, I think Jeff is a big part of the show's longevity and popularity.  He consistently adores the game and his job and it shows.  

Share this post


Link to post

My UO:  I think Jeff is ten times the host Phil K. is.  I've grown to love Jeff.  I wouldn't have said this until recently but now that I've seen all but two seasons, I think Jeff is a big part of the show's longevity and popularity.  He consistently adores the game and his job and it shows.  

 

I've always wondered over the years how it would have worked out if Phil had become the host over Jeff, and if he would have stuck with it for 15 years/32 seasons (or been kept onboard).  His interaction is far more limited on TAR with contestants than Jeff's is on Survivor.  Phil seems like such a sweet guy, but Jeff would scare me going into tribal.  He really knows how to play the role of judge, jury, and executioner and keep the castaways on their toes, and get under their skin.  I don't know if Phil could bring out the same aggressive traits.  Of course, it did take Jeff awhile to get there himself.  Watching those early seasons, he was as clueless as the contestants.  My big issue with Jeff is his love of the alpha males, and when an idea or contestant is unpopular that Jeff came up with or adores, we're the one whose wrong.  Sometimes his adoration of certain contestants and hype regarding a season or eye roll inducing, as though it is the greatest thing ever.

 

Also makes me wonder, what if they offered the TAR role to Jeff and he accepted?  What would he have been like, and would he have stuck with the show like he did Survivor.  

Edited by LadyChatts
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I'm totally new to this forum although I have been a fan since day one.  I have downloads of maybe 25 seasons  (i'm a little behind)     

 

But I would LOVE to see Richard Hatch host a season, or even fill in for jeff on a few TC's.  

 

Don't know if this is an UO or not or if it's ever been discussed,  but I do miss Richard Hatch!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Cochran ranks as one of my top 5 most overrated players ever.  Never liked him, and think he got extremely lucky during Caramoan.  

[...]

I don't believe Dreamz is a horrible human being for backing out of his deal with Yau-Man over Cargate.  It's the game.  Yau-Man made a nice gesture and took a gamble. 

 

Yau-Man tried to get one over on Dreamz, and he lost. He thought he could buy loyalty from a kid who'd never had a car. Take advantage of someone else's poverty, old man. Dreamz schooled you on that foolishness.

 

And Cochran... Don't get me started on how overrated he was. Not half as smart as he thinks he is. I also didn't buy him as the poor bullied child that they tried to feed us his original season.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Yau-Man tried to get one over on Dreamz, and he lost. He thought he could buy loyalty from a kid who'd never had a car. Take advantage of someone else's poverty, old man. Dreamz schooled you on that foolishness.

 

 

I think Dreamz was the big loser in that deal.  He had no chance -- zero -- of winning the season.  He could have come out of the game a positive celebrity, though.  The honest guy who lived up to his word, in front of an international audience, even when it might have cost him a million dollars.  He could have used that as a launching pad for a bright future.  The p.r. value would have been through the roof. 

 

Instead he was widely seen as a lying scumbag with no integrity, who could not be trusted even when he invoked God and his son. 

 

Yau got a quick return invite.  He is famous and beloved.  Dreamz got nothing that lasted.  Talk about the mistake of a lifetime. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Guest

I totally agree, kikaha.  Probably the smartest thing Dreamz did all season was use a nickname.  Now he can probably pass himself off as someone other than that guy, at least when he first meets people or applies for jobs.  

 

Breaking your word to someone in the game is standard operating procedure.   Taking a $60,000 prize from someone and then welshing on your end of the deal is a whole other level.    I mean, go ahead and welsh on the deal but don't keep the truck.  

Share this post


Link to post
And Cochran... Don't get me started on how overrated he was. Not half as smart as he thinks he is. I also didn't buy him as the poor bullied child that they tried to feed us his original season.

If I recall correctly, Cochran was quite the presence over at Sucks before he got cast, bullying and misogynistic, even for Sucks.  I was surprised that they didn't make him wear a pocket protector and put tape on his glasses, just in case his 'nerd' persona was too subtle.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Yau got a quick return invite.  He is famous and beloved.  Dreamz got nothing that lasted.  Talk about the mistake of a lifetime. 

If Survivor is the be-all and end-all of your existence, I guess. Ask most people who Yau-Man is, and they couldn't tell you, even if being famous is a worthy goal. Which, I'd argue, it is not. Being famous for being on a reality TV show even less so.

Edited by azshadowwalker
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

My super UO is that I honestly didn't like Yau-Man and liked him even less so after the Dreamz car situation. But then I also wasn't a fan of Earl and wanted Cassandra to win, so I'm just full of unpopular Fiji opinions!

Edited by peachmangosteen
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I have a lot of unpopular Fiji opinions too (although I do love Yau):

 

Probst was right and Earl was boring.

I didn't mind the haves and have-nots twist.

Michelle was cute but not as cute as she thought she was.

I couldn't stand Cassandra. She never had an original thought and her constant, "mmmm hmmmm, yeah" got on my nerves.

Edgardo wasn't a terrible person, just dumb.

Alex wasn't a terrible person, except for at FTC where he lost his damned mind.

 

I thought the season started out okay, but got progressively worse. Though I do give it credit for having the greatest collection of contestants with unfortunate names: Dreamz, Rocky, Boo, Mookie.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I couldn't stand Cassandra. She never had an original thought and her constant, "mmmm hmmmm, yeah" got on my nerves.

 

I thought that was popular opinion lol. I don't really remember what the consensus was on things during Fiji.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I can't remember either, although she seems pretty well-liked in retrospect, just not by me. I tend to change my opinions on players over time, especially as new, more heinous players appear (waves with both hands to the Worlds Apart cast!) but I've seen Fiji a few times and I like her less each time. I think I was originally pretty neutral on her when the season first aired.

Edited by fishcakes
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Guest

 Though I do give it credit for having the greatest collection of contestants with unfortunate names: Dreamz, Rocky, Boo, Mookie.

Most of those were nicknames they chose for the show.  Some of their real names are more unfortunate:  Andria (Dreamz), Kenward (Boo).  Rocky is just a James.  Survivor probably suggested he use that nickname.  Apparently, Mookie is Mookie.  

 

Lots of nicknames in this game:  Coach, Fabio, Shambo, Boston Rob, T-Bird, Sugar, Benry, Tarzan, Troyzan, Mad Dog, Fairplay, Sarge, Flicka, Dreamz, Boo, Rocky, Frosti, Sash, RC, JT, Woo, Chicken, GC, Cao Boi...

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post

My unpopular opinions (based on people I watch with - no idea if these are unpopular by board standards)

 

I love watching people like Judd from Guatemla (Scumbags! Sporstmanships! Awkward segues into ice skating puns! what's not to love?) and Philip Special Agent (?) Sheppard. I would absolutely lose my shit if I had to play with them, but they're entertaining to me, and I feel like they're pretty harmless - there's no malice there, just humorous delusion. Now, someone like Abi-Maria or James from his HvV appearance - those are just plain mean, and I actually do believe the rudeness and bullying stems from malice.

 

I like Shi Ann, Heidik, Ami, Matt (from Amazon), Penner, Jean-Robert, Coach, Big Tom, and a lot fo the other folks that seem to have people divided.

 

I don't mind Lex.

 

I thought Johnny Fairplay was brilliant w/ dead granny move.

 

I dislike Sean from Marqueses. Sugar. Sue Hawk (love her accent tho!). Rupert. Amanda. Stephanie. Eliza. Rafe. Ozzy. Tyson.

 

Never got the hype surrounding Colby, Bobby Jon, Skupin, Varner, Boston Rob, Courtney, Cirie, J.T and Brenda.

 

I hate Vanuatu and have only seen it twice. Same with Nicaragua. Worst seasons in my opinion. I loved Borneo when it aired and watched it a bunch of times shortly thereafter, but I don't think it holds up well. Not a fan of Marqueses , Fiji, Tocantins, Caramoan or Samoa. My favorite seasons to watch are Guatemala, Amazon, Pearl Islands, HvV, Thailand, Cook Islands and China. 

 

I love Jeff Probst, will always love him, will defend him with my last breath! Is he sexist? Yes. Does he pick on people during challenges? Absolutely. Does he sometimes ask stupid/insensitive questions? Damn right. But I think this franchise would be nothing without him and I actually think he's a great host - all of the above notwithstanding.

 

Anf finally, my unpopular Survivor crushes (I realize some of these are downright embarassing) : Joel and Sean from Borneo, Nick from Australia, Ken from Thailand, Rob Cesty from Amazon, Burton from Pearl Islands (....and Savage from Pearl Islands. I'm so ashamed), Ian from Palau, Brandon from Guatemala, Shane from Panama (seriously), Yul from CI, James from China (I know, I know), Ace from Gabon (hangs head), Mike from Worlds Apart........I'll just see myself out, folks.

(Holy cow, I'm pretty slutty with my Survivor crushing!)

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

Wow, I love James from China too.

 

Can somebody remind me how he was a bully during HvV?  I don't remember that, honestly.

Edited by Ms Blue Jay

Share this post


Link to post

I wouldn't mind Redemption Island if they knew when to stop it (at the merge). The way they've played it in the past, however, means that towards the end of the game, there are as many people on Redemption Island as there are in the game, which is ridiculous.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

I once would have liked to have seen Redemption Island on an all rookies season, but knowing that it was in place solely for Boston Rob, Russell, Coach, and Ozzy, four of the most over-exposed Survivor players, left a sour taste in my mouth.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

jsm1125, on 05 Nov 2015 - 7:25 PM, said:

I once would have liked to have seen Redemption Island on an all rookies season, but knowing that it was in place solely for Boston Rob, Russell, Coach, and Ozzy, four of the most over-exposed Survivor players, left a sour taste in my mouth.

I agree.  If they ever bring Redemption Island back, I could accept it only if it was a.) in an all-newbie season and b.) only used till the merge.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I wouldn't mind Redemption Island if they knew when to stop it (at the merge). The way they've played it in the past, however, means that towards the end of the game, there are as many people on Redemption Island as there are in the game, which is ridiculous.

Yes! Not to mention, they continue calling them "Duels" with 3 or 4 people. The drama and excitement is severely diminished when a player "stays alive!" by coming 3rd out of 4 people.

It was nice seeing Tina and Andrea inserted back into the game for a vote or two, because they played totally balls-to-the-wall knowing they were getting a second shot. But knowing Fucking Ozzy was 1 puzzle away from challenging his way to a win makes me feel ill, and summarizes exactly why it needs to end at the merge.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
But knowing Fucking Ozzy was 1 puzzle away from challenging his way to a win makes me feel ill, and summarizes exactly why it needs to end at the merge.

Now I know I have a truly unpopular opinion: while my favorite players are the most strategic and social ones (my top 5, in random order, are Yul, Parvati, Sandra, Kim and Rob), when there isn't anyone in that vein that I like in a season, I'm quite happy for the challenge monster to take it all (i.e. that Judd who was called Fabio, for instance). So while I thought Coach for once played a more than decent game, I disliked Sophie so much that I would have been ok with Ozzy challenge running himself to the end - and to a win.

 

Also, in the Yul vs. Ozzy vs. Becky season, I knew it was going one of the first two for the win, but I would have been happy with either, become while they benefitted a lot from each other Ozzy had more to overcome and was in danger at some stage, which was never the case for Yul. The latter is still one of my favourite winner, but that may be bacause the season is one of my favourites.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

What I think might be a good thing for Redemption Island is that they don't get to go watch, they know these duels are going on, but they're in the dark as to who's winning, so it's a mystery to them as to who might be coming back after the merge.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

My unpopular (and maybe wrong!) opinion: there's no such thing as under the radar.

How can there be? Everyone has talking heads, everyone talks to everyone else (or tries too!), everyone is looking to win.

I keep reading that so-and-so is laying low, such-and-such is biding time. Horseshit: they're edited that way. Let's not forget that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

No such thing as a wrong opinion :p

Wow, I love James from China too.

 

Can somebody remind me how he was a bully during HvV?  I don't remember that, honestly.

 

 

I guess his "one voice" diatribe could be seen as bullying. Well that and his hulking up against Randy after that sumo challenge.

 

To add my own unpopular opinion to the mix, Sandra is a horrible player. Her second win was basically Russell being a hard headed dumbass and her own plans failing. If anything she planned goes though, she would've not been in the finals.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Guest

My unpopular (and maybe wrong!) opinion: there's no such thing as under the radar.

How can there be? Everyone has talking heads, everyone talks to everyone else (or tries too!), everyone is looking to win.

I keep reading that so-and-so is laying low, such-and-such is biding time. Horseshit: they're edited that way. Let's not forget that.

I think there is an under the radar strategy but I think that we as viewers see such a tiny amount of their playing that it's pretty hard to judge who's playing UTR vs. who's playing their ass off and it's not making the edit.  

 

I think too you can't make any judgments about what people are not doing out there.  "Kelly's not really playing hard", "No one's looking for idols", "Kass didn't try to flip the right people", etc.  

Share this post


Link to post

I think an under the radar strategy:

  1. Exists.
  2. Can be pretty dern effective, especially pre-merge and immediately (1-2 weeks) post-merge.
  3. Makes for really boring television, which is why you wont see much about it on the broadcast.
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I think an under the radar strategy:

  • Exists.

What does it look like then? You've got to come down on one side of the vote or another. If you're on a winning tribe, maaaybe you play UTR, at perhaps the cost of forming relationships with other players.

I just can't see what UTR is in Survivor.

Share this post


Link to post

My unpopular (and maybe wrong!) opinion: there's no such thing as under the radar.

How can there be? Everyone has talking heads, everyone talks to everyone else (or tries too!), everyone is looking to win.

I keep reading that so-and-so is laying low, such-and-such is biding time. Horseshit: they're edited that way. Let's not forget that.

The other players don't hear what is said in talking heads so those do nothing to put players on the radar.

I think some players take active leadership roles in alliances. Others stay in the background and while they may strategize, they try to make it seem like it was someone else's idea and they are going along with it. The latter I would consider under the radar.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
I just can't see what UTR is in Survivor.

My take: depends on whose radar you mean.  I think you're right, you just can't fly under your teammate's radar, there's just nowhere to hide.  But you can fly under the producer's radar.  Let me explain.

 

Some players do what they can to get the cameras turned their way because, for them, this is what they're there for.  In the early days with a huge number of folks to choose from this seems to be about doing outrageous things - getting in a public feud for no particular reason (eg. Naonka and the one-legged chick), destruction of property for no particular reason, spending a lot of time in your underwear, that kinda thing.  Later on it's about 'big moves' and ridiculous antics.  Tony The Cop's absurd 'spy shack' comes to mind - seems incredibly unlikely to generate any actionable intelligence but the producers love that shit.

 

My guess: under the radar means eschewing this kinda fame-whoring, airtime-seeking behavior.  Doing shit like that puts a target on your back for all the other players who also want airtime.   Agitate all you want with other players but abstain from jumping up and down waving at the cameras - you're UTR.  Not completely convinced I'm right about this so I invite all to bag on this idea.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Agitate all you want with other players but abstain from jumping up and down waving at the cameras - you're UTR.

I buy it!

Cases in point (this season at least):

Jeff V.: caught production's eye. Playing 'balls to the wall'!

Monica: scheming and talking with everyone, but not to camera. Playing 'UTR'!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I have a UO to do with Micronesia: I hated, hated, HATED the Black Widow Alliance (or whatever it was they were calling themselves).  It pains me to say that because I'm normally all for women's solidarity in a game that you'd think would tend to favor males.  Not in this season, though.  That whole "stir the pot" thing they did set my teeth on edge.  I especially hated Natalie and was glad when she was voted out.  The only one of that bunch I wanted to win was Cirie, and that didn't happen.

 

Although I don't think it's anywhere near the best season, I enjoy Fiji more than most.  I liked Earl, even if he was kind of boring.  I wasn't bothered by the "haves" and "have nots" twist, and I think it contains one of the best blindsides ever (although I don't think that opinion is unpopular).

 

And finally, from this season and from Cagayan: for some reason I can't put my finger on, I like Spencer.  Can't explain it, I just do.  Now I'm heading over to my lonely little island to try and figure that one out.

Edited by wallflower75
  • Like 2

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