S31: Previews and Speculation

[Vicky8675309]

Ugh really. They've already done away with closing statements, if the finale starts with 6 people they'll probably cut the opening statements, too.

 

Didn't they cut the opening statements last year and just do questions? If not then it went by quick and I don't remember it (I just remember Shirin's dead fish analogy and Dan's OTT everything).

[peachmangosteen]

Didn't they cut the opening statements last year and just do questions? If not then it went by quick and I don't remember it (I just remember Shirin's dead fish analogy and Dan's OTT everything).

 

You might be right actually. Maybe this season they'll cut out one or two jury questions all together.

[Vicky8675309]

You might be right actually. Maybe this season they'll cut out one or two jury questions all together.

 

I think last year each juror only got one question or speech except for maybe Shirin who made a speech out of a question. I really like the speeches and questions. It seems like each year they cut more and more of it. I wish they would extend the time or put it online. I can't see them skipping an individual juror but maybe they do in that sometimes they have short questions and just say "good luck" to all of them. In other words, the single questions already seemed tightly edited so they would have to cut out individual jurors or entertaining and enlightening (to how the juror is perceiving them) questions. Ok, I'll stop worrying until after it is shown but 6 finalists is insane for a 2 hour show.

[LadyChatts]

Didn't they cut the opening statements last year and just do questions? If not then it went by quick and I don't remember it (I just remember Shirin's dead fish analogy and Dan's OTT everything).

 

According to Carolyn they didn't even give opening statements, which she believes possibly cost her some votes (I kind of doubt that).  I think TPTB are more concerned about crazy jurors and hoping they will give some epic speech, that they'd rather save time for that.  I hate already that the reunion show is cut so short because the winner's announcement goes into the first 10 minutes of that.  I think they lose sight of what the fans actually like seeing.  Jeff's always all about these epic, dramatic moments that I see most fans (online anyway, maybe it's a casual thing) roll their eyes at.

[RedheadZombie]

I think you're right that it's Joe, that he passed out, and that he'll be fine and not med-evaced.  

 

I think Tasha is just a drama queen.  Look at her over-celebrating when she wins a challenge.  

 

If it's not just a fake out and someone is hit on the head, that doesn't mean that the injured person dropped the object on their own head.  I guess it's possible that Tasha's object hit someone else on the head, which would explain her upset.

 

I think Keith gets injured: it's definitely a guy, and the other three men do not have orange colors.  I suppose a loved one is possible, but seems unlikely to me. 

 

Past time for Survivor to retire these dangerous challenges, especially ones with falling objects.

 

When I first saw the preview I thought - look at those dirty fingernails, it has to be Keith.  Then I remembered everyone's nails are dirty on Survivor.  I think it's more likely Keith than Joe, simply because Keith is older.  But also because Keith spits so much he has to be dehydrated most of the time. 

 

I did remember thinking it odd that Joe didn't win the last HII.  It's practically tailor made to his yoga core strength.  Maybe Joe was already a little under the weather and this challenge puts him over the edge.  Also, prolonged standing with little movement is prime situation for someone to pass out.  In fact, it's part of a Tilt Table Test which attempts to elicit a fainting episode.  I've had patients experience seizures after fainting during a TTT.   What causes fainting during prolonged standing is this:  our BP slowly drops and our pulse picks up to compensate.  At some point, the elevated heart rate can no longer compensate, and the BP and heart rate crash.  During a TTT, I've had moments of a heart rate going to twenty or below.  Luckily, the treatment is to lower the table flat, which is what happens when we faint anyway. 

[BK1978]

Ugh really. They've already done away with closing statements, if the finale starts with 6 people they'll probably cut the opening statements, too.

 

I wish they would bring back the closing statements.  To me it was a way for the castaways to deal with some of the bitter jury members after having the time to process what was said to them.

 

I wanted to ask a question but I was not sure what thread it was supposed to go into.  Was it ever said who got Mike's spot on this season?  I know there was some speculation but is it a known answer or is it just pure speculation as to who it was that got his spot.

[LadyChatts]

Just speculation.  Jeff said out of respect for the contestants they wouldn't release the rankings (guess they don't want any hurt egos).  It makes me wonder sometimes how Mike would have fared on this season.  Would he and Joe have aligned?  Would he have made the merge or been an early boot?  He was jet setting all over the US visiting some of the rumored names on the list before it became official.  I think he got the earliest jump on making pre-game alliances.

 

A lot of people think it was Keith, but I don't know.  It obviously wasn't Joe or Spencer, and I'm doubtful it was Jeremy or Stephen.  I'm wondering if it was Varner, Woo, or Vytas.

[bdestroyer88]

Just speculation.  Jeff said out of respect for the contestants they wouldn't release the rankings (guess they don't want any hurt egos).  It makes me wonder sometimes how Mike would have fared on this season.  Would he and Joe have aligned?  Would he have made the merge or been an early boot?  He was jet setting all over the US visiting some of the rumored names on the list before it became official.  I think he got the earliest jump on making pre-game alliances.

 

A lot of people think it was Keith, but I don't know.  It obviously wasn't Joe or Spencer, and I'm doubtful it was Jeremy or Stephen.  I'm wondering if it was Varner, Woo, or Vytas.

I'm like 99.98% sure it was Savage. Woo and Keith are extremely popular with the casuals. Jeremy's a fan favorite and Stephen probably finished 6th or 7th on the polls. 

[peachmangosteen]

Sneak peek:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7foCUVTSdy4

[LadyChatts]

I wish these sneak peeks were less challenge footage, more actual behind the scenes of camp life or some interesting moment that will lead to something bigger.

 

Also, I hate endurance challenges.  Though this one looks more interesting, I still am bored by them.

[peachmangosteen]

Also, I hate endurance challenges.  Though this one looks more interesting, I still am bored by them.

 

I like the old school ones, like the ones that were literally just stand here for as long as you can, but these ones are boring. And just the fact that literally every IC has been this type is so boring. And frankly suspicious to me. It's just very odd.

[LadyChatts]

I like the old school ones, like the ones that were literally just stand here for as long as you can, but these ones are boring. And just the fact that literally every IC has been this type is so boring. And frankly suspicious to me. It's just very odd.

 

I also use to like when Jeff would tempt them to leave the challenge.  I also miss the old school endurance challenges.  Those could be lost by losing your train of thought and briefly (like split second briefly) taking your hand off the pole, or being told by another contestant still in the challenge you were starting to pop out of your shirt.  That of course was in the pre-Jenna/Heidi stripped for peanut butter era.  I liked the endurance challenges they did for the final 3 during Thailand, Amazon, and Guatemala.  Or even during Exile Island.  Yeah, it may not be as dramatic in the promos as showing a statue falling and then someone on the ground.  But I liked it better than these.  I think a few people said endurance challenges cost less and may actually be more fair compared to some other challenges that are physical and/or mental.  But there've been numerous people over the years that surprised me by winning challenges that definitely seemed better suited to other contestants still in the game.

[Guest]

I'm glad they got rid of the endurance challenges that could go on for 6+ hours.  I felt bad for the crew, Jeff, the contestants, and it wasn't that fun to view, either.  

 

I'm guessing those super long ones held physical dangers of their own, too.  I could see a lawsuit for long-term foot damage due to standing on a pole for 10 hours. 

[cherrypj]

I'm glad they got rid of the endurance challenges that could go on for 6+ hours.  I felt bad for the crew, Jeff, the contestants, and it wasn't that fun to view, either.  

 

I'm guessing those super long ones held physical dangers of their own, too.  I could see a lawsuit for long-term foot damage due to standing on a pole for 10 hours. 

 

 

I dunno. I'm still fresh on my re-watch of that epic Tom vs. Ian final immunity challenge. That was stellar. Katie even made it 5 hours.

[LadyChatts]

I'm glad they got rid of the endurance challenges that could go on for 6+ hours.  I felt bad for the crew, Jeff, the contestants, and it wasn't that fun to view, either.  

 

I'm guessing those super long ones held physical dangers of their own, too.  I could see a lawsuit for long-term foot damage due to standing on a pole for 10 hours. 

 

I don't know if they'd have to worry about lawsuits.  I remember them saying once that by signing the contract you basically were saying you knew what you were getting into and the show could not be held liable for anything, injury, illness, even death.  Now, how well that would hold up, I don't know.  Like a lot of lawsuits that might drag on for years, even if CBS was legally in the right, they might do a payoff just to make it go away (and I believe that's where a lot of lawsuits with ridiculous amounts stem from in the first place).  Anyway, I do miss those challenges.  I never got bored by them.  Having 100 endurance challenges in a row that all start to blend together?  Yeah, that's putting me to sleep.   

 

I'd be curious, too, how the II have gone through the years in terms of winners.  In endurance heavy eras, does it benefit the men or women more?  Back when most of the II were more physical/mental, again, did it benefit one side more than the other or was it equal?  I know quite a few seasons had people go on streaks, right up until the end, so it might be hard to tell.  

 

Anyway, this looks like one of the better endurance challenges, but considering someone ends up passing out from it, maybe not.  And even if that statue isn't heavy enough to cause serious damage, I'd still be concerned about that falling on me or getting whacked with a pole.

 

ETA: I haven't seen press pics anywhere, but here is the RC layout for tomorrow via Survivor's twitter

 

http://www.cbs.com/shows/survivor/photos/1004814/what-you-might-not-know-about-the-challenges-from-survivor-cambodia/98113/jungle-love-episode-12-tiny-little-shanks-to-the-heart-/

Edited December 2, 2015 by LadyChatts

[LanceM]

I'm glad they got rid of the endurance challenges that could go on for 6+ hours.  I felt bad for the crew, Jeff, the contestants, and it wasn't that fun to view, either.  

 

I'm guessing those super long ones held physical dangers of their own, too.  I could see a lawsuit for long-term foot damage due to standing on a pole for 10 hours. 

 

I actually enjoyed those challenges.  The one In MIcronesia where Parvati held her arm over her head for 6 hours and I believe 47 minutes was one of my all time favorites.  The other players who were eliminated taking a nap. Amanda running off on the woods to go to the bathroom. Everyone convincing Jason that he should just give up and that they wuldn't vote him out.  If I recall this was the episode that Ozzy was blindsided instead. Good stuff.

 

I have heard that Jeff doesn't like these marathon challenges any more and that is why we no longer have them.

Edited December 2, 2015 by LanceM

[green]

I actually enjoyed those challenges.  The one In MIcronesia where Parvati held her arm over her head for 6 hours and I believe 47 minutes was one of my all time favorites.  The other players who were eliminated taking a nap. Amanda running off on the woods to go to the bathroom. Everyone convincing Jason that he should just give up and that they wuldn't vote him out.  If I recall this was the episode that Ozzy was blindsided instead. Good stuff.

 

I have heard that Jeff doesn't like these marathon challenges any more and that is why we no longer have them.

 

Probst is a real wuss.  He's not doing them.  Getting too old to sit around snacking for a few hours?  What a quitter.  I'd like to snuff his torch for that.

 

And put me down for loving the old school hour after hour ones.  People had to dig deep.  Really want it.  More heart than mere balance or whatever.  They were the best.

[Guest]

I don't know if they'd have to worry about lawsuits.  I remember them saying once that by signing the contract you basically were saying you knew what you were getting into and the show could not be held liable for anything, injury, illness, even death.  Now, how well that would hold up, I don't know.  

They do have to worry about lawsuits.  Businesses can have you sign all the waivers they want but you can't waive your right to sue for negligence.  

[peachmangosteen]

I have heard that Jeff doesn't like these marathon challenges any more and that is why we no longer have them.

 

I figured this was the reason. And probably also because it just cuts into Production's schedule and they want to stick pretty strictly to it I assume.

[cherrypj]

I figured this was the reason. And probably also because it just cuts into Production's schedule and they want to stick pretty strictly to it I assume.

The Palau FIC took so long, they couldn't do a formal TC. Tom just verbally voted off Ian.

(Still makes me mad. Ian was the shit.)

[Skeeter22]

The marathon challenges aren't good for the contestants' health either. Ian gave an interview a while back saying he and Tom both still suffer nerve damage from that immunity challenge.

[Zuleikha]

I'm glad they're not doing them if people were suffering permanent damage. It's not worth it. But I admit to loving them. Endurance is so much more mental than physical. I thought there was a really nice element of boiling down the challenge to who wanted the win more, which often corresponded to who needed the win more. I know it's not quite as simple as that--there can be trickery involved and some physical limitations above and beyond will--but it's a lot closer than what we're seeing now.

[green]

They do have to worry about lawsuits.  Businesses can have you sign all the waivers they want but you can't waive your right to sue for negligence.  

 

The waivers they sign to get on the show are pretty much 100% ironclad to prevent that ever happening.  Past Survivors and Amazing Racers have said it even covers accidental deaths. So no way they can sue.  They volunteered, weren't drafted.  They were the ones that wanted on the show so much that they chose to sign away their normal legal rights in a totally binding contract.  (CBS' team of lawyers are good at what they do).

 

Also add in that no one is chaining them to a platform or whatever.  No one is forcing them to stay in a challenge.  They can drop out of a challenge at any time they want.  And many do just that in individual challenges.

Edited December 2, 2015 by green

[LadyChatts]

The waivers they sign to get on the show are pretty much 100% ironclad to prevent that ever happening.  Past Survivors and Amazing Racers have said it even covers accidental deaths. So no way they can sue.  They volunteered, weren't drafted.  They were the ones that wanted on the show so much that they chose to sign away their normal legal rights in a totally binding contract.  (CBS' team of lawyers are good at what they do).

 

Also add in that no one is chaining them to a platform or whatever.  No one is forcing them to stay in a challenge.  They can drop out of a challenge at any time they want.  And many do just that in individual challenges.

 

When Mike Skupin had his accident during Outback (which was more of a freak accident than the show's negligence) but I remember it being brought up then about whether the show could be held liable if someone on the show was seriously/permantly injured (losing a limb or paralysis) or if something on the show caused their death.  Medics are always right on site, and after Mike's incident Jeff said they really take no chances.  During Africa I remember Lindsey and Ethan saying they had to receive medical attention but it wasn't enough to remove them from the game.  Look at the case of Erik during Caramoan, though.  He said that after a couple of hours he was perfectly fine and could have carried on with the game.  But erring on the side of caution, they removed him from the game.  They test these challenges to the best of their ability and probably go over anything that could go wrong.  Sometimes it isn't design, but more the error on a contestant's part.  In any case, going back the original point, I remember when Mike was injured both Mark Burnett and Jeff Probst said that essentially, you sign your life away when you go on that show.  They are not liable for anything that happens and that is clearly spelled out.  Again, it probably wouldn't stop someone from suing or trying to find a loop hole.

 

ETA: Here's a clip from People tonight of Val/Jeremy reuniting (she told him the sex of the baby in this clip).  Okay, usually my cold, black heart doesn't get into these visits.  But I'm already tearing up at seeing everyone's reactions just from Jeff mentioning it, then toying with them that they might not be seeing their loved one.

 

http://www.people.com/people/mobile/article/0,,20970531,00.html

Edited December 2, 2015 by LadyChatts

[Guest]

If the show could be proven negligent, waivers don't apply.  The fact they can quit at any time isn't that relevant.  They contracted to participate in challenges that are presumed safe.  Mike's accident wasn't due to negligence on the part of the show.  Sue's claim of harrassment included that there was negligence on the part of the show.  The waivers are to protect from lawsuits like "now I have an eating disorder" or "my bug bite scars never completely healed".

[LadyChatts]

If the show could be proven negligent, waivers don't apply.  The fact they can quit at any time isn't that relevant.  They contracted to participate in challenges that are presumed safe.  Mike's accident wasn't due to negligence on the part of the show.  Sue's claim of harrassment included that there was negligence on the part of the show.  The waivers are to protect from lawsuits like "now I have an eating disorder" or "my bug bite scars never completely healed".

 

That is the key, though.  They'd have to be proven negligent.  They test these challenges, and many of them are repeats or variations from previous seasons.  The show could probably easily show where a contestant might have gone wrong.  I think it would be an uphill battle.  Most likely, the show would just pay the family off in exchange for the years of fighting the lawsuit and to make them go away.  They wouldn't say it was there fault, but that this was 'the right thing' and turn it around to make it look like a gesture of goodwill.

Edited December 2, 2015 by LadyChatts

[Oholibamah]

An interesting example here is Kourtney's medevac in One World. They showed footage of Jeff explaining the "proper" way to jump. They don't normally show this footage, but it makes me think they always explain it.

Something despicable happened on the Challenge a few years ago where, had cast members been willing to testify, likely would have resulted in a successful lawsuit for negligence by production.

[LadyChatts]

From what I understand, don't they do run thoughts of these challenges before actually competing in them?  The contestants, I mean, not just the dream team.  Maybe I'm imagining that lol

 

Something despicable happened on the Challenge a few years ago where, had cast members been willing to testify, likely would have resulted in a successful lawsuit for negligence by production

 

 

I think I vaguely remember hearing about.  I can't remember the details, though. 

[cherrypj]

An interesting example here is Kourtney's medevac in One World. They showed footage of Jeff explaining the "proper" way to jump. They don't normally show this footage, but it makes me think they always explain it.

 

There are photos of Jeffy demonstrating, from this season, something as mundane as using the pole through bars:

 

 

[Guest]

That is the key, though.  They'd have to be proven negligent.  They test these challenges, and many of them are repeats or variations from previous seasons.  The show could probably easily show where a contestant might have gone wrong.  I think it would be an uphill battle.  Most likely, the show would just pay the family off in exchange for the years of fighting the lawsuit and to make them go away.  They wouldn't say it was there fault, but that this was 'the right thing' and turn it around to make it look like a gesture of goodwill.

Oh, I know.  But the network lawyers probably look at things like Ian and Tom's nerve damage and Jonathan's leg infection and decide some things aren't worth the risk and they stop certain types of challenges, or change the conditions.  I'm sure they pay off potential claimants regularly because it's easier than chancing it in court.  But my point was they do have some liability in these things.  It's not like they could have them out there shooting guns toward each other and be covered by waivers.  

 

Plus it's just ethically the right thing to do, and I do think they care about that.  If players are suffering long term damage from 10-hour endurance challenges, they should stop them whether there's legal liability or not (and they did).  

[kikaha]

They contracted to participate in challenges that are presumed safe. 

 

Are you sure?  My guess is they are expressly told the challenges may not be safe; and that by taking part in them they recognize they could get hurt or worse.  I would think that's standard phrasing in the agreements the contestants sign.  It also wouldn't surprise me if the contestants are told this orally, i.e. not only in writing. 

[Guest]

Get mildly hurt, yes.  "Worse"? I don't think so.  They can sign it and discuss it all they want but it doesn't protect the show from liability for negligence.

 

Don't you think if they really could avoid all liability by using waivers, there'd be some channel running an actual Hunger Games type reality show by now, where people were hurt or even killed?  

[LadyChatts]

Episode 13 is called "Villains Have More Fun"

 

Jeff's teaser:

http://www.ew.com/article/2015/12/03/survivor-jeff-probst-cambodia-second-chance-medical-emergency

 

Just two episodes left! Tease us up for the big penultimate episode.
It makes me sad that this season is winding down because as all Survivor fans know, each season is a new adventure and I really hate to let this one go. Next week is a pivotal episode. Seven players left. It’s do or die. The vote here is critical. You are deciding whom you will go toe to toe with in that final week. Nobody is certain of the right move. Plus, another scary situation and another Survivor in trouble.

 

[KimberStormer]

WIth Kimmi getting her head in the game I can say that I would be happy with any winner and any combination of people in the final 3.  I like all of them and they've all done some good gaming to get to where they are.  Tasha is taking control of the game right now and had to do some fine work in shitty circumstances dismantling Angkor.  Kelley has been able to chameleon her way through several situations, starting with the Shirin boot, which could easily have been her undoing, and has overcome being totally outnumbered at the merge to be in a fairly good spot.  Spencer similarly has had to sneak through (sometimes by pure luck, but everyone has had that too) on the bottom and made a big play to get rid of a threat, then when it didn't work out he didn't abandon the idea but re-grouped and realized his goal.  Jeremy was the social and strategic center of his tribe/alliance for a long time, yet always avoids the target, and hustles for idols in case that fails.  Kimmi has accomplished the rare feat of seeing where she stood on the alliance hierarchy and actually doing something about it before it was too late, by organizing this women's alliance.  And Abi, also, has come through a sort of amazingly unlikely series of events and at every turn the people targeting her feel the mysterious, capricious wrath of the Survivor gods; she is some bizarre force of nature.

 

They've all made mistakes--every one of them has done something I would say was a huge error.  But they're all cool with me, and they've all actively played, and I'm just super-pleased to feel positively about everyone left.  What an amazing contrast to last season!

[NutMeg]

I'm with you, KimberStormer - but you did forget Keith! as I see it, if he makes it to FTC while continuing to enjoy himself and regaling us with such not often said truth as "at this stage, I'd be happy to see anyone I know, even my fifth remote cousin" [probably not the right quote] instead of the usual "oh, that person is the one that is all my life and that I needed the most", more power to him too. I'm actually enjoying him a lot this season. He's like the voice of the salt of the earth or some such...

 

Although I keep hoping she'll disappear from my screen asap, I'm even ok with Abi being there, even though I find her extremely unpleasant. But she could say, well, you all wanted to go to the end with me because you thought I couldn't win, but hey, I did what I could to get here, and if you all wanted to take me, that was due to my [negative] social play, so I'm not here by chance, I'm here because I worked to be here. (I still don't think she wins, but she could theoretically weave that argument).

 

And on this season being better that the last? Absolutely, a million times better! At least people are being active/proactive even here, whereas I don't thing "proactive" was in last seasons rule book, because apparently no player knew what that meant.

[Bryce Lynch]

They do have to worry about lawsuits. Businesses can have you sign all the waivers they want but you can't waive your right to sue for negligence.

I believe you can waive your right to sue for negligence, but not gross negligence. I think most suits against Survivor would technically be barred based on waivers and assumption of risk.

However, that doesn't mean suits could not be filed that might prevail despite legal technicalities and would cost a great deal of legal fees to defend them

Besides that, I don't think TPTB want to see anyone seriously injured or killed regardless of immunity from lawsuits.

[KimberStormer]

NutMeg, on 04 Dec 2015 - 06:27 AM, said:

I'm with you, KimberStormer - but you did forget Keith!

 

Haha, I did, but I like Keith too!  Unfortunately we don't get to see what Keith's thinking a lot of the time, so it's hard to say how he's been playing.

[Special K]

Besides that, I don't think TPTB want to see anyone seriously injured or killed regardless of immunity from lawsuits.

 

When that contestant died on the first episode of French Survivor, didn't they just cancel production?  And they were sued anyway (not sure of the outcome).  And the on-set doctor committed suicide because of the backlash.

 

Lots of bad consequences.

[LadyChatts]

When that contestant died on the first episode of French Survivor, didn't they just cancel production?  And they were sued anyway (not sure of the outcome).  And the on-set doctor committed suicide because of the backlash.

 

Lots of bad consequences.

 

They did cancel production.  I also believe the French version was discontinued for awhile.  I know TPTB can only do so much to ensure these challenges are safe, and that contestants need to use common sense back at camp to be safe.  Obviously they seem to be really good at erring on the side of caution when it comes to medically removing people from this game.  And while I question how well they sometimes mentally screen people on here, physically I think they do the best they can at the time.  But no matter how many run-through s they do or tests on the equipment, there's always that margin of error where something can go wrong.  I still believe for the sake of good press, and probably because they would genuinely feel horrible if something happened to a contestant, that the show would financially give something to the contestant and/or their family in the event of their death (god forbid that ever happens).

 

ETA: New preview

 

https://youtu.be/zishF6cV1go

Edited December 4, 2015 by LadyChatts

[Special K]

I also think they get more medical care than we're shown, in terms of treating wounds and sores, etc.  In one of Jeremy's bonus clips this week, you can see that he's wearing some kind of ace bandage around one of his wrists.  And I believe I saw a bandage on someone's back earlier this season.

 

I'm sure Joe was given glucose in some form after his fall last episode and maybe IV fluids, and I always assumed people were given antibiotics for GI infections (when appropriate).

Edited December 4, 2015 by Special K

[Vicky8675309]

I thought the bandages and various wraps were to cover tattoos that may have copyright or advertising/marketing (or something) issues. lol

[LadyChatts]

In Joe's Ponderosa vid, when he went to the medical tent, Dr. Joe was there and said something about not expecting to see him so soon.  Joe said he was hoping at least not until the morning, which makes me think the doctor would have gone and checked on him to make sure he wasn't as risk again.  During Africa, either Ethan or Lindsey mentioned being removed from camp for several hours due to dehydration.  And last season, when Joe won that first II and got those nasty cuts on his chest from the pole, he mentioned that medical was there with anti bacterial wipes to keep them cleaned out.  I don't think they take any chances, especially because of the injuries and illnesses they've had over the years.  In the past they use to get a basic first aid kit at camp, with band-aids and stuff that they could mend on their own.  Not sure if that is still the case or if they just rely on the medics that are nearby.

 

Looking at that photo above of the first IC, there are a lot of people hanging around behind the scenes.

[Trick Question]

Looking at that photo above of the first IC, there are a lot of people hanging around behind the scenes.

I have to give credit to the Survivor editors for so rarely including ANY of the camera or sound people in shots when there are so many of them around the players at all times.  It makes you wonder how many key conversations or "why didn't they include that?" moments we hear about from players after the fact were omitted simply because there was a crew member in the way at an inopportune time.

[KimberStormer]

Trick Question, on 04 Dec 2015 - 7:42 PM, said:

I have to give credit to the Survivor editors for so rarely including ANY of the camera or sound people in shots when there are so many of them around the players at all times.  It makes you wonder how many key conversations or "why didn't they include that?" moments we hear about from players after the fact were omitted simply because there was a crew member in the way at an inopportune time.

 

That's actually something that made Joe's collapse extra-scary to me, suddenly seeing all these camera  and sound people in the frame.

[Nashville]

That's actually something that made Joe's collapse extra-scary to me, suddenly seeing all these camera  and sound people in the frame.

 

Same here.  When Joe initially went down, three thoughts immediately shot through my head:

1. Oh, that looked like a simple faint.
2. At least the statue didn't hit Joe on the head coming off the pole.
3. He didn't hit his head on the rail going down, did he?

 

That was it, until I saw various crew - some of whom have spent over a decade and a half perfecting the Art of Staying Out Of the Shot - saying fuck it and hauling ass.  Then I got scared for the boy, because this crew has seen a lot more extreme than your average bear; they are NOT an alarmist bunch.

[Guest]

Not to minimize the situation but I assumed when we saw the crew members it was a conscious decision of the editors' to do so to up the drama?  I don't know much about taping but I assume they had footage from the cameras we saw taping the scene and the one(s) that hung back enough to catch the others in the shot.  And the editors chose the latter because it was cool.  

 

And it was. I love the cinematography on this show.  

 

But I think they could've just as easily presented it the usual way-- with no crew in the shot.  No?  

[cherrypj]

What ever happend to that idol that didn't look like an idol?
 

... Probst adds, “On top of it, one idol might look beautiful, and the next idol might look like a kid made it in a craft room — but both are equally powerful.”

 
Have we already seen it? Must have been a big nothing-burger. Or maybe there'll be another one found. Imagine that, three idols and only three TCs left to play them!

[peachmangosteen]

Why I think the women's alliance will not sweep the men, i.e. at least one man will make finals:

 

3.  Jeremy's idol.  Along with his WA mole Tasha, a pretty potent weapon that keeps him safe and could bounce one of the women, in one fell swoop.

 

I think that this is probably the biggest factor in whether or not the women's alliance will work out. I could even see a scenario where Tasha decides to go with it, but then Jeremy uses his idol and a woman goes, probably Kelley, and then Tasha goes back to Jeremy/Spencer.

 

I am giving Tasha the benefit of the doubt that she's not so incredibly dumb as to not go with this women's alliance, handed to her on a silver plate.  I guess we'll see.  A lot of smart people have been incredibly dumb on this show, so it's certainly not out of the question.  But it would be on an Erik-gives-up-immunity, Tyson-messes-up-the-split-vote level to me.

I agree with you that it would be astronomical levels of dumb for Tasha to not go with the women, but honestly I just don't think she's going to. I really hope I'm wrong though.

 

I don't see why it's any more likely for the men to sweep the challenges than the women.  This just seems like the usual pre-merge silliness where all women are weak and all men are strong.  Tasha has proven to be a challenge beast in the past, and Kelley has been doing pretty well this season.  Abi beat everyone left in a challenge already.  Anyway, challenges are a wild card.  Can't know till it happens.

Yea, I really don't think it's a guarantee at all that the men will sweep the challenges now. It really just depends on what challenges they use. If they continue with these endurance/balance challenges then I could easily see Kelley, Tasha, or Abi being able to win. And I think Tasha and Kelley have good shots at puzzle challenges.

 

The women's alliance is going to have to target Spencer or Jeremy while the hidden immunity idols are still valid, and I think Jeremy would use his idol to save himself or Spencer and bounce Kelley or Abi ...

It'll be interesting to see if Jeremy would use his idol to save Spencer. Maybe the "I'd do the same for you," was foreshadowing. I suspect the women might target Spencer first. I think it'd probably be a bad idea for Jeremy to save Spencer tbh. Spencer is probably the only person left that can beat Jeremy in the end so he might be better off letting Spencer go, using the idol to save himself, and banking on winning immunities until the end. But this is assuming Tasha sticks with the women, which I don't believe she will.

 

I also think there's a chance Spencer could try to get back in with Kelley/Abi and dump Jeremy. It's certainly what he should do.

 

And, especially if the challenges continue to be the endurance/balance type that most of the post-merge have been, I wouldn't rule out Keith being able to immunity run his way to the end tbh. I still couldn't see him winning though, unless he was there with a combo of Abi/Kimmi/maybe Tasha.

Edited December 6, 2015 by peachmangosteen

[Guest]

I kind of feel that unless her game (and her edit) change a lot the next two episodes, Tasha is screwed regardless.  If she goes to the end with the guys, she'll get labeled a coattail rider.  If she flips, she pisses off any guys who leave.  

 

I think Abi is the only one she might be able to beat and even that I'm not sure of.  

[LadyChatts]

I kind of feel that unless her game (and her edit) change a lot the next two episodes, Tasha is screwed regardless.  If she goes to the end with the guys, she'll get labeled a coattail rider.  If she flips, she pisses off any guys who leave.  

 

I think Abi is the only one she might be able to beat and even that I'm not sure of.  

 

Tasha sticking with the ladies is the best thing she can do.  It would mean turning on Jeremy and Spencer, but at least she could use that argument to the jury.  That she wasn't looking to be 2nd or 3rd, but she was looking to be 1st, and she took out the two biggest threats in her way.  Numerous jurors have said both on the show (before being bounced) and in post show interviews that they are voting for a gamer, someone who was real and played.  I don't think anyone is going to be rewarded for being a coattail rider.  If Jeremy wins immunities from now until the end, even if he was in the sights of the WA, then Tasha could try to argue that they tried taking him out but waited too long.  

 

However, the fact that she went back to Jeremy and Spencer and clued them in on the WA makes me think she isn't intending on sticking with the ladies.  Maybe she is trying to keep her options opened, or maybe she can argue (if the WA succeeds and all 3 men are the next to go) that she tried warning Jeremy and Spencer about it.  One could argue that certain people were kept around specifically to help get rid of someone else (Joe with Stephen, Ciera/Wentworth/Abi for Kelly Wigles) so maybe her intent is to lead the girls into the false sense of alliance security, but use them to help bounce Keith, then Jeremy uses his idol at the final 6 for either himself or Spencer and gets rid of Abi or Wentworth.  I think Jeremy is a fool to use it on anyone but himself at this stage, but I also think those girls are idiots if they target Spencer over him.  I believe Spencer has a good shot at winning, but I believe Jeremy's is better with who we have on the jury.

 

I do think everyone except Abi can win.  It just really depends who they are up against in the final 3.   

 

Have we already seen it? Must have been a big nothing-burger. Or maybe there'll be another one found. Imagine that, three idols and only three TCs left to play them!

 

 

I've been wondering about this, too.  I'm kind of disappointed, because I was hoping with the idols not resembling each other that it could lead to chaos at TC with someone producing a fake idol and no one knowing for sure if it was real.  I think the problem is, no one is revealing to anyone that they have an idol until they play it at TC.  So no one, except Kelley and Jeremy (kind of disappointing the same people found all the idols this season, assuming there aren't more) would know that they are different.  But when he said that it would look like something a kid made in arts and crafts, all I could think of was an idol being legit but resembling Ozzy's stick during Micronesia (that Jason actually believed was real).

Edited December 6, 2015 by LadyChatts