Survivor In The Media

[LadyChatts]

I'd say Natalia had the least graceful exit of anyone this season.  When Natalie the Jacket hog had a better exit than you, that's saying something.

I do recall Probst saying earlier in the season (maybe right after Natalia's boot) that he would love to see her back and basically thought she got a bum deal and had so much more game in her.  Which translates to she's a hot young female that might have rivaled Angelina for being a character this season.

Now that I think about it, I guess Probst hasn't changed. 

Edited December 19, 2018 by LadyChatts

[jay741982]

On 9/27/2018 at 11:59 PM, simplyme said:

I think Rob was a good player, but we've seen him 4 times. For God's sake, no more. There are people I want to see back WAY more... like both Jay and Chelsea.

Which Chelsea? The one I want to see again was the very sexy Chelsea from One World. 

[jay741982]

16 hours ago, Eolivet said:

Yeah, Jeff sounds like he's describing Chrissy -- who actually was a powerful woman who made big moves, played a strong game and pissed a lot of people off. Angelina may talk loudly about rice, but she has fallen quietly into an all-male alliance and has made no moves on her own since. Jeff sounds like he wants pre-merge/early merge Angelina, with her jacket plans and her military strategy and her stirring stuff up before tribal council, not this Angelina who left the Goliath alliance so she could be told first by Carl, and now by Nick how to vote.

I couldn't stand Chrissy, but at least nobody told her how to vote.

And Chrissy sure liked voting off Other Women, trusting the men easily but not the women 

[ProfCrash]

3 minutes ago, jay741982 said:

And Chrissy sure liked voting off Other Women, trusting the men easily but not the women 

Chrissy voted off people who she thought she needed to in order to improve her game. There is nothing that says that women cannot vote off women. She played her game for her. She had a crap social game and it cost her.

[jay741982]

1 minute ago, ProfCrash said:

Chrissy voted off people who she thought she needed to in order to improve her game. There is nothing that says that women cannot vote off women. She played her game for her. She had a crap social game and it cost her.

She can vote off other women that's fine but she always believed a man spouting bull shit and not even tryed to believe the woman. Plus another real big reason I didn't like her was her air of Superiority like she was better than everyone else Quote "I'm the most dangerous player" Unquote and her arrogance. I didn't like Ben either and that season was just blah

[Eolivet]

2 hours ago, ProfCrash said:

she is young, white and kind of cute and wore tight yoga pants that showed off her ass."

I believe Angelina identifies as Latina, but passes as white, in the way I think a lot of Latino/Latina players on Survivor do. But I think you've hit upon the real reason he wants Angelina back, in that she's attractive and was edited to have a personality. She also pays lip service to "strong women" with her sexism confessionals and "no women find idols" confessionals.

59 minutes ago, ProfCrash said:

Chrissy voted off people who she thought she needed to in order to improve her game. There is nothing that says that women cannot vote off women. She played her game for her. She had a crap social game and it cost her.

Which is what Jeff keeps transposing onto Angelina. Chrissy is the one who played a game that many male winners played, but a woman winner is expected to do all that AND be nice. Chrissy wasn't, which is why she didn't win. If (when?) Angelina doesn't win, it won't be because she's a "strong woman." It's because she's an ineffectual player (love that word @ProfCrash) and Jeff and others will cry sexism. But unlike Chrissy, Angelina has not run an alliance, controlled the game, made big moves or won competitions. Yet, she's a "strong woman" because ... I guess she talks about strong women?

I hate that narrative, and I resent that Jeff is spinning it. It minimizes the inherent sexism against women who've played strong games and lost for being bitches, while trying to pretend Angelina will likely lose for any other reason than ... being Angelina.

[Special K]

5 minutes ago, Eolivet said:

I believe Angelina identifies as Latina, but passes as white, in the way I think a lot of Latino/Latina players on Survivor do. But I think you've hit upon the real reason he wants Angelina back, in that she's attractive and was edited to have a personality. She also pays lip service to "strong women" with her sexism confessionals and "no women find idols" confessionals.

Which is what Jeff keeps transposing onto Angelina. Chrissy is the one who played a game that many male winners played, but a woman winner is expected to do all that AND be nice. Chrissy wasn't, which is why she didn't win. If (when?) Angelina doesn't win, it won't be because she's a "strong woman." It's because she's an ineffectual player (love that word @ProfCrash) and Jeff and others will cry sexism. But unlike Chrissy, Angelina has not run an alliance, controlled the game, made big moves or won competitions. Yet, she's a "strong woman" because ... I guess she talks about strong women?

I hate that narrative, and I resent that Jeff is spinning it. It minimizes the inherent sexism against women who've played strong games and lost for being bitches, while trying to pretend Angelina will likely lose for any other reason than ... being Angelina.

When I think of strong women this season, the first person that comes to my mind is Lyrsa.  But you'll never hear Jeff touting her strength.  As to physical strength, I'd have to say Kara is at the top.

[Lamb18]

9 hours ago, ByaNose said:

Jeff’s interview in EW is hysterical. I think he tries to be so deep which doesn’t make sense. He said that Natalia left the game this way, “To her credit, she took being voted out with a lot of grace. She didn’t complain, she understood that is how the game is played”. Did he forget that she told Alec to shut up a few times and she wanted to know if Kara knew? It was one of the more vocal exits and yet she handed it gracefully? Did he blackout while snuffing her torch? I guess we should be thankful that he even mentioned a woman. Usually, he’s all alpha male. 

I wonder if he got her mixed up with Natalie.

[ProfCrash]

45 minutes ago, Eolivet said:

I believe Angelina identifies as Latina, but passes as white, in the way I think a lot of Latino/Latina players on Survivor do. But I think you've hit upon the real reason he wants Angelina back, in that she's attractive and was edited to have a personality. She also pays lip service to "strong women" with her sexism confessionals and "no women find idols" confessionals.

You are 100% correct. Angelina talked about bonding over being Hispanic with Lyrsa. But most of us, myself included, would not think of Angelina as Hispanic because we suck at picking out different nationalities.

Lyrsa, Natalie, and Natalia all came off as strong women to me. I didn't get to know Bi or Jessica well enough to be able to say what I thought about them. Strong women does not have to equate with a great player. I think those four women all knew who they were and stayed true to themselves. I think Kara could fall into that mold as well but we have not seen enough of her to know who she is. She was more then willing to cut ties with Dan when she thought he was hurting her game. She has been confident in her plays and she seems to be confident in herself. But I would like to see a bit more of her.

I think that Alison and Angelina are well aware of how women are portrayed and are desperate to change that portrayal. Angelina wants to be seen as a negotiator or a manipulator who is confident. I think Alison has come off a bit better then Angelina but Alison strikes me as a bit more indecisive.

[LadyChatts]

I'm also going to throw Elizabeth into the mix of strong players.  She went to bat for her friend in the second vote and flipped the script.  While it may have ended up costing her down the road, I appreciate that she didn't just go with the numbers to be safe, but recognized where she stood with another alliance and schemed to keep someone around that was on her side.  In addition, I like that she didn't go down without a fight.  It seemed like she was trying to stir something up at camp but Carl refused to budge, so she at least brought it up at TC.  I would have loved to have seen her get to play longer.  Out of all the women this season she is at the top of my list of players I'd want to see back.  

[peachmangosteen]

20 hours ago, Lamb18 said:

I wonder if he got her mixed up with Natalie.

I wondered this, too. It makes a ton more sense. But it's Jeff, so who knows. As I said, he says dumb shit all the time.

[ProfCrash]

https://es.xfinity.com/sdmy/blogs/tv/category/survivor/

Gordon Holmes exit interviews with the final 6. They are some solid interviews.

[fishcakes]

This New Yorker article is specifically about Mark Burnett's involvement in the rise of Trump, but it's a good profile of Burnett himself and what an amoral, unrepentant d-bag he is. The opening paragraphs are about Survivor and its origins and after hearing about what happened after the initial version of Survivor in Sweden, it's hard to believe the show ever got off the ground, much less became the massive success that it is.
 

Quote

“Expedition: Robinson,” a Swedish reality-television program, premièred in the summer of 1997, with a tantalizing premise: sixteen strangers are deposited on a small island off the coast of Malaysia and forced to fend for themselves. To survive, they must coöperate, but they are also competing: each week, a member of the ensemble is voted off the island, and the final contestant wins a grand prize. The show’s title alluded to both “Robinson Crusoe” and “The Swiss Family Robinson,” but a more apt literary reference might have been “Lord of the Flies.” The first contestant who was kicked off was a young man named Sinisa Savija. Upon returning to Sweden, he was morose, complaining to his wife that the show’s editors would “cut away the good things I did and make me look like a fool.” Nine weeks before the show aired, he stepped in front of a speeding train.

The producers dealt with this tragedy by suggesting that Savija’s turmoil was unrelated to the series—and by editing him virtually out of the show. Even so, there was a backlash, with one critic asserting that a program based on such merciless competition was “fascist television.” But everyone watched the show anyway, and Savija was soon forgotten. “We had never seen anything like it,” Svante Stockselius, the chief of the network that produced the program, told the Los Angeles Times, in 2000. “Expedition: Robinson” offered a potent cocktail of repulsion and attraction. You felt embarrassed watching it, Stockselius said, but “you couldn’t stop.”

In 1998, a thirty-eight-year-old former British paratrooper named Mark Burnett was living in Los Angeles, producing television. “Lord of the Flies” was one of his favorite books, and after he heard about “Expedition: Robinson” he secured the rights to make an American version. Burnett had previously worked in sales and had a knack for branding. He renamed the show “Survivor.”

"Hey, this concept made a guy commit suicide. I better franchise this!"

[MsTree]

10 hours ago, fishcakes said:

"Hey, this concept made a guy commit suicide. I better franchise this!"

I seriously doubt it was MB's main reason to franchise the show in the US.  He saw a concept based on his favorite book, tweaked it to fit US standards and produced a great show we call "Survivor".  I give MB a lot of credit for seeing the potential of what it could become.

[Ms Blue Jay]

Every time I read anything about Mark Burnett, the show is re-ruined for me.

[azshadowwalker]

2 hours ago, MsTree said:

I seriously doubt it was MB's main reason to franchise the show in the US.  He saw a concept based on his favorite book, tweaked it to fit US standards and produced a great show we call "Survivor".  I give MB a lot of credit for seeing the potential of what it could become.

Not only was it not the reason, but the Swedish show likely did not cause the guy to kill himself. He was a survivor of war. He was not doing well as far as settling into ex-pat life, from what I read years ago. He had been through hell in his life. He probably shouldn't have been on the show at all, but he had enough mental health issues from trauma that his suicide could have been triggered by just about anything. 

In short, there's nothing new or scandalous about that dude's suicide. 

[loki567]

That article pissed me off majorly. Not at Mark Burnett, mind you. But at the current trend of media/twittersphere where if you don't like a person's politics or don't like the politics of someone that person has a past/current relationship with, you try to rewrite their entire history as something sordid or despicable. This black-and-white thinking is just infuriating. 

[green]

3 minutes ago, loki567 said:

That article pissed me off majorly. Not at Mark Burnett, mind you. But at the current trend of media/twittersphere where if you don't like a person's politics or don't like the politics of someone that person has a past/current relationship with, you try to rewrite their entire history as something sordid or despicable. This black-and-white thinking is just infuriating. 

Yeah Burnett made Trump a star in a way and yeah coming into living rooms across the country probably gave Trump a huge edge because there seems to be a lot of TV viewers that just believe the projected personas they see on TV.  But Burnett didn't make The Apprentice as some super secret plot to get Trump elected president down the road and he even was on record saying he was supporting Clinton in the last election.

And no he isn't a Saint by any means but no again he isn't Satan either.  Just another Hollywood producer who wants to make a big score. 

And of course he didn't scarf up rights to Survivor in America because some poor, messed up guy was sadly miscast on the original Swedish show.  If anything that is on those producers for not screening him better.  Burnett just saw that The Swiss Family Robinson model would work far better here as a darker Lord of the Flies model.  And he was right and, with the help of Richard Hatch seeing it that way too, it took off immediately.  (One wonders if the entire Season 1 cast were all clones of ukulele-playing lady and her vision of sitting around the campfire singing for 30+ days if there ever would have been a Season 2).

[peachmangosteen]

6 hours ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

Every time I read anything about Mark Burnett, the show is re-ruined for me.

LMAO right!

[fishcakes]

6 hours ago, loki567 said:

That article pissed me off majorly. Not at Mark Burnett, mind you. But at the current trend of media/twittersphere where if you don't like a person's politics or don't like the politics of someone that person has a past/current relationship with, you try to rewrite their entire history as something sordid or despicable. This black-and-white thinking is just infuriating. 

It doesn't have anything to do with his politics for me because I don't think he has any particular political beliefs. But Burnett is a guy who told Howard Stern and all of Howard Stern's listeners on the air that he was divorcing his wife before he told his wife. No one has to rewrite history to paint him as despicable. He is despicable. None of that makes me not want to watch Survivor. I love Survivor, but Burnett is garbage.

[Special K]

22 hours ago, fishcakes said:

It doesn't have anything to do with his politics for me because I don't think he has any particular political beliefs. But Burnett is a guy who told Howard Stern and all of Howard Stern's listeners on the air that he was divorcing his wife before he told his wife. No one has to rewrite history to paint him as despicable. He is despicable. None of that makes me not want to watch Survivor. I love Survivor, but Burnett is garbage.

Kind of like Giuliani telling a press conference that he was divorcing Donna Hanover before he told her. 

[Hanahope]

On 1/1/2019 at 6:20 AM, green said:

And he was right and, with the help of Richard Hatch seeing it that way too, it took off immediately.  (One wonders if the entire Season 1 cast were all clones of ukulele-playing lady and her vision of sitting around the campfire singing for 30+ days if there ever would have been a Season 2).

I think Burnett got a lot of help via Richard Hatch, with the alliance idea.  Gotta admit, they made an excellent casting choice with him for the show's future.  They did a pretty good job with casting the first 3 seasons, which help them weather the awfulness of S4.

[ProfCrash]

I have difficulty believing that anyone would need help with the alliance idea. Anyone who took a class dealing with how Congress works should be able to understand the importance of alliances and voting blocks.

I get that there were people playing in the first season who were playing more for the adventure but anyone who ginned onto the money and decided that winning the money would be good should understand the need for alliances. And while some folks were not calling themselves an alliance, if you are voting out people because they are not your friends, which could have happened in that first season, it would have essentially been an alliance.

[Hanahope]

4 hours ago, ProfCrash said:

I have difficulty believing that anyone would need help with the alliance idea. Anyone who took a class dealing with how Congress works should be able to understand the importance of alliances and voting blocks.

I get that there were people playing in the first season who were playing more for the adventure but anyone who ginned onto the money and decided that winning the money would be good should understand the need for alliances. And while some folks were not calling themselves an alliance, if you are voting out people because they are not your friends, which could have happened in that first season, it would have essentially been an alliance.

Oh, I'm sure if Hatch didn't create the alliance, someone would have, most likely on  Tati.  But Pagong got its eventual designation for a reason, the people on that tribe didn't form an alliance, even when it became clear that a voting block/alliance voted out Gretchen, and allowed themselves to be voted out one by one.  

[loki567]

Several people on Pagong considered an alliance and IIRC somebody actually got voted out because they openly suggested the idea. When a million dollars at stake based off of who gets voted out, people banding together to vote out other people is inevitable. In fact, I go as far to say that Pagong was the more unusual group than Tagi. 

[LanceM]

Stacey Stillman tried to create an alliance with Sue and Kelly so it is not like Richard was the only one who came up with that idea.  

[LadyChatts]

3 hours ago, loki567 said:

Several people on Pagong considered an alliance and IIRC somebody actually got voted out because they openly suggested the idea. When a million dollars at stake based off of who gets voted out, people banding together to vote out other people is inevitable. In fact, I go as far to say that Pagong was the more unusual group than Tagi. 

That was Joel, and that was one reason he was voted out.  If you believe the guy, he said he was aware of the alliance on Tagi because the camera man was giving him intel, so that was why he tried getting Pagong to get their own counter alliance.  The rest of Pagong had the mentality of just voting how they wanted for whatever reason.  It would have been interesting had Joel made the merge, or if Pagong had gone in with a majority, how that would have played out.  I still think the Tagi 4 would have pulled through, just because Pagong seemed too naive.

IIRC Probst said they were worried when Hatch originally won that he wouldn’t be well received by viewers and end up having the show cancelled.

[ProfCrash]

The players on Pagong were far more interested in the survival aspect then they were in the game. I kind of like the idea of the Castaway series that was on this summer. Dump people onto the island with supplies to be found and see what happens. Make it into a game, last person surviving wins, but remove the voting and competition element. See what people do when they have basic resources and a lot of time. It will never happen but that sounds more interesting to me.

Sean was clearly more in the Pagong camp then Tagi but most people in Tagi seemed to understand what Hatch was doing. I bet a good number of Tagi thought that they could beat Hatch and he might of been the first attempt at a goat.

[Hanahope]

5 hours ago, ProfCrash said:

I bet a good number of Tagi thought that they could beat Hatch and he might of been the first attempt at a goat.

I think that was Kelly's intent (since she probably thought people liked Rudy and vote for him).  But Sue got her snakes and rat speech and seems to have flipped the script, with some help from Hatch, who did a pretty good speech too.

[Nashville]

3 hours ago, Hanahope said:

I think that was Kelly's intent (since she probably thought people liked Rudy and vote for him).  But Sue got her snakes and rat speech and seems to have flipped the script, with some help from Hatch, who did a pretty good speech too.

Ah yes - the best-laid plans of rats and men led astray at the last second by Sue Hawk, the Original Bitter Juror.  :>

[Bryce Lynch]

On 1/9/2019 at 8:52 PM, LadyChatts said:

That was Joel, and that was one reason he was voted out.  If you believe the guy, he said he was aware of the alliance on Tagi because the camera man was giving him intel, so that was why he tried getting Pagong to get their own counter alliance.  The rest of Pagong had the mentality of just voting how they wanted for whatever reason.  It would have been interesting had Joel made the merge, or if Pagong had gone in with a majority, how that would have played out.  I still think the Tagi 4 would have pulled through, just because Pagong seemed too naive.

IIRC Probst said they were worried when Hatch originally won that he wouldn’t be well received by viewers and end up having the show cancelled.

I recently watched Season 1, for the first time, and it was clear that most of the contestants didn't have a coherent strategy and that players like Hatch were inventing strategy for how the game is played.   Many seemed to want to vote based upon merit (which is how I thought people should vote when I first heard about the show).  Of course Dr. Sean voted alphabetically, which was idiotic.  But, in context, maybe not quite as crazy as it seems today.  I think a lot of players were more focused on being "fair" than strategic.  The idea of a alliance seemed almost like "cheating" to some of the Season 1 castaways.  

[ProfCrash]

No, most people thought Sean's voting strategy was idiotic at the time. Essentially, he wasn't willing to play the game because he didn't want to hurt anyone's feelings by voting them out. Not only that, but his voting strategy was the reason why some people were voted out sooner, because Richard knew who Sean was voting for and could count on that vote.

I don't have a problem with voting people out based on merit but what is it that should be rewarded? Fishing? Hunting? Gathering wood? Winning competitions? The reality is that there are so many elements to the game that merit is going to vary from person to person, which is fine and would probably keep things interesting.

[Bryce Lynch]

3 hours ago, ProfCrash said:

No, most people thought Sean's voting strategy was idiotic at the time. Essentially, he wasn't willing to play the game because he didn't want to hurt anyone's feelings by voting them out. Not only that, but his voting strategy was the reason why some people were voted out sooner, because Richard knew who Sean was voting for and could count on that vote.

I don't have a problem with voting people out based on merit but what is it that should be rewarded? Fishing? Hunting? Gathering wood? Winning competitions? The reality is that there are so many elements to the game that merit is going to vary from person to person, which is fine and would probably keep things interesting.

I got the vibe that Sean didn't want to be "mean" by choosing to vote someone out, so he voted alphabetically.  It was idiotic, but I don't think quite as idiotic as it would seem today, after 36 more seasons of lies, backstabbing, manipulation. etc.   In the first season, they frequently called Survivor a "social experiment" and I think some people wanted to believe you could win the game without telling any lies or voting anyone off who didn't "deserve it".   

I didn't watch it back then, but hearing about it, I think my instinct was that people could and should play "fair".  I think that quickly went out the window, or at least the concept of what is "fair" has evolved (devolved?).  More and more, players and fans seem to compartmentalize the game vs. real life and do and approve of things they would deem unacceptable in real life.  That said, despite this, very few true villains have won the game.  If you aren't decent enough to be liked or respected, you generally strike out with the jury.  

[Jextella]

I remember Season One and Target adds with the bulldog and bullseye.  That was some smart marketing on Target's part to align with such an under-the-radar show.  It really did wonders for them.

I'd like to watch Season One and the first few after it.  The show took a nosedive for me around the time of Rupert - or shortly after his season.  I left for quiet a few years.

[loki567]

Something to remember about Sean's votes, all the former Pagong players had names with initials at the beginning of the alphabet (Colleen, Gretchen, Greg, Gervaise, Jenna). All the Tagis' names had initials at the end (Kelly, Richard, Rudy, Sean, Sue). So in a very stupid way I think Sean playing the game the same as everybody else on Tagi, get rid of the Pagongs but do it in a way he could claim he was being "honest and fair." 

[LadyChatts]

1 hour ago, loki567 said:

Something to remember about Sean's votes, all the former Pagong players had names with initials at the beginning of the alphabet (Colleen, Gretchen, Greg, Gervaise, Jenna). All the Tagis' names had initials at the end (Kelly, Richard, Rudy, Sean, Sue). So in a very stupid way I think Sean playing the game the same as everybody else on Tagi, get rid of the Pagongs but do it in a way he could claim he was being "honest and fair." 

That was always my thought (and hey, Sean might have been the first one to think of jury management by voting that way).  I don't think it's any coincidence that he stopped his ABC voting strategy after Jenna was voted off, since Kelly would have came next.  I know he put on this front about not believing Jenna was in any real danger, so that's why he felt comfortable voting for her.  He could pretend to be the nice guy who was playing fair for jury votes to Pagong, yet still remain loyal to his original Tagi tribemates.

Which makes me wonder, if Jenna had won that IC the ep she got voted off, what would Sean have done?  Kelly was next in line with the ABC voting, and if Sean voted for her that might have given the Pagongs a life line where they could have gone to a tie vote.  Or would he have just abandoned the strategy and come up with some stupid reason so he didn't have to turn on Tagi.

[Eolivet]

This is really old, but I went back in the Media thread and didn't see it posted. While Jeff may be more involved in casting (and this guy has a de facto title), here's an article about the guy who formally replaced the former casting director:

https://survivingtribal.com/2018/09/14/survivor-casting-director-report/

He cast Big Brother: Over the Top and the last two seasons of the Amazing Race (which ... was on so long ago, I don't remember. There were Big Brother players on that season, so I wonder if we can expect more of that on Survivor going forward).

(Wow, remember when we all speculated that the casting and winner of 37 and 38 must've been awful for the casting director to lose her job, and then David vs Goliath was the best season in years, with an excellent winner? I don't see how that didn't buy her more time, no matter how terrible 38 ends up being. Though for my money, I don't love her choice of returning players. But 37 wasn't enough to save her job?! Oh well.)

[cooksdelight]

I wish they’d stop bringing back former players. You get one shot and you’re done.

And yes, I’ve known about them reshooting scenes forever, usually when Probst screws something up by running his mouth. 

[SVNBob]

14 hours ago, Eolivet said:

(Wow, remember when we all speculated that the casting and winner of 37 and 38 must've been awful for the casting director to lose her job, and then David vs Goliath was the best season in years, with an excellent winner? I don't see how that didn't buy her more time, no matter how terrible 38 ends up being. Though for my money, I don't love her choice of returning players. But 37 wasn't enough to save her job?! Oh well.)

Then again...

Apparently Angelina did a live Q&A on her Instagram, and she said she nearly didn't make the show because one of the casting directors didn't like that she was a young, attractive, and married woman.  Someone else in casting took Angelina's application straight to Peachy, which is how she got on.

 

Rumor has it that the director in question that didn't want Angelina was Lynn, because she had a history of "trying to cast the next Parvati" and attempting to manufacture showmances.  (Meaning that she probably cast Dan and/or Kara for each other...and Alex wasn't in the original plan (doubly so since he was originally supposed to be on the David tribe, while Dan and Kara were Goliaths, and he only got tribe-swapped when Cirie's son dropped out and Davie joined the cast.))   Her freezing out this great "character" was potentially the last straw after her hugely failed attempts on Ghost Island (Jenna/SeaBass notwithstanding).

[marys1000]

21 hours ago, Eolivet said:

This is really old, but I went back in the Media thread and didn't see it posted. While Jeff may be more involved in casting (and this guy has a de facto title), here's an article about the guy who formally replaced the former casting director:

https://survivingtribal.com/2018/09/14/survivor-casting-director-report/

 

Hadnt seen this said before

On the other hand, Jeff’s insistence on a more fast-paced game has brought on way too many game advantages.

[green]

When does the next season start?  I read it was hopping over The Amazing Race (TAR not starting until after Survivor this year) so does it mean they start the first Wednesday after the Super Bowl?

[peachmangosteen]

The premiere is February 20th.

[loki567]

If Probst is responsible for Angelina and Lynn's responsible for all the various, "next Parvati," female cast members, then maybe is a good time for a switch. 

I will say that Big Brother Over the Top was way better than any regular Big Brother season has been over the past few years and it was primarily because its cast. Most impressively, that season was cast in about a quarter of the time because it started a week after regular Big Brother. 

[LadyChatts]

DvsG didn't seem like the same cookie cutter cast we got every season.  Even the stereotypical "types" didn't neccessairly live up to those stereotypes.  I can't say I agree with decisions Probst makes, or the fact that he can't take constructive criticism, but if this means stronger casts that aren't the same dime a dozen people we've been seeing for years, than I'm all for it.

I think it was speculation that S37 and S38 bombed and that's why Lynn was booted.  I'm still skeptical S38 will be any good, but S37 did surprise me.  And I still think Ghost Island would have been better if the twist was used more and that idols were also hidden out there vs at camp.  The cast wasn't terrible, and it sounded like a lot of good stuff happened behind the scenes.  So I blame that on editing.  

[ByaNose]

It's January 31, 2019 and still no cast reveal. What's up with that? They used to do it a full month before the premiere date. Either they are too busy with the Super Bowl (it's on CBS this year) and Celebrity Big Brother or Survivor: Edge of Extinction stinks and they don't feel like publicizing it. LOL!!!! Take your pick.

[LadyChatts]

1 hour ago, ByaNose said:

It's January 31, 2019 and still no cast reveal. What's up with that? They used to do it a full month before the premiere date. Either they are too busy with the Super Bowl (it's on CBS this year) and Celebrity Big Brother or Survivor: Edge of Extinction stinks and they don't feel like publicizing it. LOL!!!! Take your pick.

https://ew.com/tv/survivor-edge-of-extinction-cast-gallery/

Just released today!

ETA: and they found an occupation for Joe-multimedia artist.

Edited January 31, 2019 by LadyChatts

[ByaNose]

17 minutes ago, LadyChatts said:

https://ew.com/tv/survivor-edge-of-extinction-cast-gallery/

Just released today!

Too funny! See. You ask and you will receive. Thanks.

Most of the men have the dumbest tattoos. Did they look in the mirror before going to play? Just curious. The one girl was so amazing looking and then I realized it was Kelley Wenthworth. I knew she was playing but for some reason I thought it was one of the newbiews. Yowza!!!!! I'm looking forward to another season. It's always interesting to see the following season because the cast never see how the previous ended and/or what twists were played.

Edited January 31, 2019 by ByaNose

[Nashville]

@LadyChatts - thanks for posting the link, but I played out on all the clickbait before I made it halfway through.  :P

[ByaNose]

None of the newbies thrill me yet. Granted, it just their picture but I’m not feeling it yet. Looking forward to the first episode to get a better read. Too bad it’s only an hour episode. The first one should always be two hours so you get to know everyone better. 

[LadyChatts]

1 hour ago, Nashville said:

@LadyChatts - thanks for posting the link, but I played out on all the clickbait before I made it halfway through.  :P

You didn't miss much ;)

Oddly I don't see the new cast posted anywhere on CBS, which is why I posted the EW link in the first place.  

Quote

None of the newbies thrill me yet. Granted, it just their picture but I’m not feeling it yet. Looking forward to the first episode to get a better read. Too bad it’s only an hour episode. The first one should always be two hours so you get to know everyone better. 

Oh, I didn't realize it was an hour.  I'm wondering how exactly the twist is going to play out, and how that will affect editing.  If they do a tribe swap into 3 tribes, as the norm anymore, plus the outcast island footage (because that's pretty much what this is is the Outcast Tribe 2.0), that's going to be a lot in hour long episodes.   

ETA: Here's a clip of Jeff talking about the twist/theme this season.    

Edited February 1, 2019 by LadyChatts