Jump to content

Reflections on All Seasons


  • Please log in to reply

579 replies to this topic

#481

enlightenedbum

enlightenedbum

    Fanatic

Posted Apr 22, 2012 @ 2:07 PM

It is very hard for me to understand why her win was received with such annoyance by the fans. Her win was comprehensive and her gameplay was very, very good. I wish we could've seen her compete on another season without leaving because she really seemed to be at the center of the alliance in All-Stars as well.


Because she was kind of an awful, hateful human being when she was 21 (she seems to have matured considerably). She's basically the only winner to get a negative edit. Granted, she was better than Heidi.
  • 0

#482

Yogurt Baron

Yogurt Baron

    Fanatic

Posted Apr 23, 2012 @ 3:08 AM

Regarding Amazon: I think the Jenna hate is about half what enlightenedbum says, and about half that a lot of people think Cesternino was a genius and was robbed. I think Rob C.'s very overrated, but I think if you did a "which non-winner most deserved to win?" poll, he'd get about 98% of the vote. If you're bitter about Rob losing, you're going to minimize the work of the person who beat him.

In some regards, I think of Jenna as the Natalie White to his Russell Hantz, myself: he was so convinced that he was a brilliant strategist and that everybody around him was his puppet that he forgot to take people to F3 who he could either a)., beat in an immunity challenge, or b)., convince he wasn't a threat. Jenna was smarter than he gave her credit for.

I just ranked the winners a few days ago, and Jenna was toward the bottom of my list, but that more reflects that I think there've been a lot of great winners, and that she's more a "very good" winner for me.
  • 0

#483

enlightenedbum

enlightenedbum

    Fanatic

Posted Apr 23, 2012 @ 3:45 AM

Rob knew he lost control. He even says it, as I recall. And Jenna's gone at four if she loses that immunity challenge (in which case Rob wins the game, I think). She's also probably gone at three if she loses that immunity challenge (and then Rob DEFINITELY wins the game). I mean, credit to her that she recognized the guy who multiple people suspected was a serial killer planning on murdering them all was a better person to take to the jury than the guy most people liked and played the best strategic game. But that's not a tough decision. The more important thing was winning those two immunity challenges to save her ass.

One of which Matt threw, knowing he was in FTC regardless and hoping for the third place jury vote. Which didn't work, but still, decent job by him.
  • 0

#484

Bob Sambob

Bob Sambob

    Fanatic

Posted Apr 23, 2012 @ 12:02 PM

Yogurt Baron:

In some regards, I think of Jenna as the Natalie White to his Russell Hantz, myself: he was so convinced that he was a brilliant strategist and that everybody around him was his puppet that he forgot to take people to F3 who he could either a)., beat in an immunity challenge, or b)., convince he wasn't a threat. Jenna was smarter than he gave her credit for.

enlightenedbum:

Rob knew he lost control. He even says it, as I recall. And Jenna's gone at four if she loses that immunity challenge (in which case Rob wins the game, I think). She's also probably gone at three if she loses that immunity challenge (and then Rob DEFINITELY wins the game). I mean, credit to her that she recognized the guy who multiple people suspected was a serial killer planning on murdering them all was a better person to take to the jury than the guy most people liked and played the best strategic game. But that's not a tough decision. The more important thing was winning those two immunity challenges to save her ass.

I don't think Jenna was the Natalie to Rob's Russell, because Rob would've beaten her. Big difference. She won because of a perfectly-timed immunity run, and then making the right decision at F3. Sometimes that's enough. Rob would've beaten either one of them in the Final 3 ... it was all but confirmed in the reunion episode. Against Matt, he probably didn't have Butch and Alex; against Jenna, he probably gets Butch but loses Heidi.

And I don't think Rob ever lost control. BUT ... he (and Matt and Butch) only made one wrong decision, which at the time looked like the right one: Getting rid of Heidi instead of Jenna at F5. Remember, Jenna had her mini-meltdown after the fire about wanting to quit and Heidi was still hungry to stay. They didn't realize that Heidi was teetering on the brink physically, like Paschal was in Marquesas. In the Playboy interview that accompanied their spread (yes, I read the article in a Playboy), she said that after she was eliminated and walked down the path, she was immediately wrapped up in a blanket by production and whisked away to medical -- a skeleton with skin and a couple of D-cups bolted to her chest. I think it said she weighed under 90 pounds when it was over. I mean, she looked like one of the Gentlemen in the silent episode of "Buffy."

Anyway, Heidi may not have been able to do the things physically that Jenna was at the end, plus she was the one that flipped on the men at the merge, not Jenna. She was probably more beatable in every way.
But those guys didn't have the benefit of seeing the editing that we did. In the moment, all they saw was that Jenna was melting down and Heidi wasn't. You kick out the one who's still hungry to stay instead of the one who wants to quit.

Yogurt Baron, sometimes you make me think I should've given up football in high school for the debate team. I think I missed my calling.

Edited by Bob Sambob, Apr 23, 2012 @ 12:04 PM.

  • 0

#485

Isuzu

Isuzu

    Fanatic

Posted Apr 23, 2012 @ 12:40 PM

I don't think Jenna was the Natalie to Rob's Russell, because Rob would've beaten her.


I don't think that's necessarily true. Jenna had Alex and Heidi for sure while Rob had Butch and Matt. Christy did end up voting for Jenna in the end, though the controversy about whether she truly understood the rules still holds. Rob seemed to hate Dave and Dave generally seemed to like Jenna more, while Deena might have still be reeling from Rob's "betrayal". One thing the editing hid from us was how beloved Jenna was by most of the cast, while Rob... wasn't. It's easy after the fact, when you've seen Rob's gameplay, Jenna's most odious moments and the comments on the Internet, whitout mentioning time away from the game to soften the blows, to say that you'd have voted for Rob. But at the FTC? It's not a sure thing, at all (and if Rob wins the final immunity and picks Jenna over Matt, who's to say who Matt and Butch would vote for..).
  • 0

#486

Bob Sambob

Bob Sambob

    Fanatic

Posted Apr 23, 2012 @ 1:28 PM

... while Deena might have still be reeling from Rob's "betrayal."

The only one I'm sure of was Deena. Rob had her; she said in interviews that she knew his hands were tied and didn't blame him at all for her ouster -- she blamed Jenna and Alex. Christy (assuming she truly understood the rules), I have NO doubt, would have voted Rob. Wouldn't it have been a hoot if it turns out she did think she was voting Jenna OUT against Rob and he lost 4-3 because of it? Against Matt, big whoop ... he loses 5-2 instead of 6-1. And I concede you may be right about Dave.

Edited by Bob Sambob, Apr 23, 2012 @ 1:29 PM.

  • 0

#487

ByaNose

ByaNose

    Fanatic

Posted Apr 23, 2012 @ 6:08 PM

Okay, it's been a while since I watched the Amazon season but what is all the Christy stuff? Am I to assume that since Christy is hearing impared that she thought she was voting thinking she was voting someone out and not a winner?!? Either I'm blocking all of this out or I don't recall hearint it. All I remember was when she got all wishy washy with Rob on whom she was voting for. Thus Christy getting voted out instead. Anyone?

Edited by ByaNose, Apr 23, 2012 @ 6:09 PM.

  • 0

#488

Bob Sambob

Bob Sambob

    Fanatic

Posted Apr 23, 2012 @ 6:29 PM

An old discussion on it in another thread starts here. I remember because I commented on it right afterward.
  • 0

#489

ByaNose

ByaNose

    Fanatic

Posted Apr 23, 2012 @ 6:56 PM

Thanks, Sambob. Catching up on the Christy thread cleared up somme of chatter here but now makes want to go back and watch the final Amazon tribal council all over again. I remember Jenna & Rob & Matt battling it out with the crown attached to a rope above their head and Rob wanting Jenna to step off. I don't remember the questions too much and of course, I do recall the reading of the votes. I'm going to look out for the castaways looking off camera as someone else had mentioned. It's a great Survivor conspiracy theory. Did Christy know what she was doing? It's so juicy. Well, it's of to YouTube. I'll check back later.
  • 0

#490

Yogurt Baron

Yogurt Baron

    Fanatic

Posted Apr 24, 2012 @ 5:21 AM

Oh, yeah, I wouldn't say Rob was overall a Russell type. His social game was infinitely better. But I see a similar arrogance in his, "I can beat this bunch of idiots, because I'm me and they're not!" attitude. At that one critical juncture, I still think he'd have been better off going with the Deena crowd---they were older, easier to beat in challenges, and likelier to a)., underestimate him, and b)., like him.

I'll give you guys credit on the "Jenna seemed not to have her head in the game" argument. But...look at her. Then look at Matt. Then look at Rob. He wasn't going to beat them in an endurance-based immunity challenge. The only reason he could possibly think he could is because, well, he's better than everybody in every way.

And...we've done the Colby-Tina-Keith thing to death, but it's certainly not unheard of for people to make the wrong choice when they're taking someone to F2. If I were an abrasive 21-year-old and I needed to choose between taking an awkward man-child who'd gotten gradually better at the game, or else an arrogant jerk who was largely responsible for putting all the jury members on the jury, I'd at least look at taking Rob. It would've been the wrong move...but he should have been able to sell her on making it. And he would have been able to, if she were as stupid as some seem to think.

Thought experiment: Thailand, F3 immunity challenge, they do away with standing on a pole and replace it with finding and burying dead animals. Jan Gentry wins in a landslide. Who does she take to F2?

Edited by Yogurt Baron, Apr 24, 2012 @ 5:25 AM.

  • 0

#491

enlightenedbum

enlightenedbum

    Fanatic

Posted Apr 24, 2012 @ 1:43 PM

I'll give you guys credit on the "Jenna seemed not to have her head in the game" argument. But...look at her. Then look at Matt. Then look at Rob. He wasn't going to beat them in an endurance-based immunity challenge. The only reason he could possibly think he could is because, well, he's better than everybody in every way.


I'd have to go back and watch it again (or you can ask him, dude is pretty accessible) but it is my feeling that his thought was for Matt to win that immunity and that Matt would take him over Jenna. But he wasn't 100% sure of that, thus the "I have lost control of the game to Matt of all people." Which is arrogant, yes, but also totally true.
  • 0

#492

Yogurt Baron

Yogurt Baron

    Fanatic

Posted Apr 24, 2012 @ 10:19 PM

I'd have to go back and watch it again (or you can ask him, dude is pretty accessible) but it is my feeling that his thought was for Matt to win that immunity...


The bolded first: Rob does seem like an awesome guy. Maybe the biggest superfan this show/game has ever had, and he played it, and in many regards, he played it excellently. If you're reading this, Rob Cesternino: you're a first-ballot Survivor hall-of-famer for me just for having your podcast and being a great guy. And you ran the hell out of Amazon. Right up 'til you didn't.

Hey, wait:

Yogurt Baron, sometimes you make me think I should've given up football in high school for the debate team. I think I missed my calling.


Bob Sambob, are you Rob C.? Because when I think of someone who likes Rob C. a lot and who could have played football in high school...well, you know, you're halfway there.

Anyhow, this started out being about why Jenna's underrated, not why Rob's overrated, so, this:

...and that Matt would take him over Jenna.


See? He expected Matt to make the wrong choice. Surely the fact that Jenna didn't reflects well on her. There've been fourteen F2 seasons. This is really fourteen separate arguments, but off the top of my head, I'd say that in nine of them, it didn't really matter who the F3 IC winner took: nine times, that person has either been up against two people they could beat (Vanuatu, Tocantins) or two people they couldn't beat (Africa, Marquesas).

But look at the other five. Kelly, Jenna, and Danni picked the person they were likelier to beat. (Kelly lost anyway, obviously...but she obviously made the right decision at F3.) Colby and Lill picked the person they were less likely to beat. Arguably, a bunch of others made the wrong call too, though it didn't matter. (i.e., though I think she'd have lost either way, I think Africa Kim would have had a better chance against Lex than Ethan. Ethan was a strategist, he was a leader, and he was likable. Lex? Lex was also a strategist and a leader. And I think Danielle had a strong argument against Terry Deitz---"we outplayed this patronizing jerk at the actual game, he just immunitied his way here"---too.) The point of my Thailand hypothetical before wasn't, "Heidik is better than Rob," because, duh, Heidik is better than literally anything; it was, Jenna is no Jan Gentry.

Is being better than Lill and Kim J. and Danielle and my imagining of Jan and Rob's imagining of Matt really that high a bar to jump over? Of course not. Taking Matt over Rob wasn't some great strategic coup. But it was good gameplay---better gameplay than we've seen from a lot of F3 IC winners---and I think Jenna deserves credit for it.

I am now going to break my promise to Bob Sambob regarding the rewatching of various seasons upon which we disagree, and am instead going to rewatch Gabon. I remember feeling warmly about Bob in a "look at the sweet old man go!" way, but...more like Nicaragua Dan than like Yau. And I hated Crystal and Randy and had an inexplicable Survivor crush on Corrine, who everybody else hates, including Corrine. I don't even remember any of the other people. Was there a Ken? Kenny? And then the one gay guy and the one straight guy and the gay guy had a crush on the straight guy and they were both going to be Todd Herzog, except then they both came in twenty-third? Was one of those Ken? And "Sugar" was on that season. Ugh, "Sugar".
  • 0

#493

enlightenedbum

enlightenedbum

    Fanatic

Posted Apr 25, 2012 @ 12:39 AM

Ken was the Asian gamer who was portrayed as running things but was kind of a bumbling doofus. Super Smash Brothers does not a good Survivor player make. That was the season of bumbling doofuses though.
  • 0

#494

Yogurt Baron

Yogurt Baron

    Fanatic

Posted May 15, 2012 @ 5:39 AM

Bringing this over from the One World reunion thread:

Survivor seems to have left behind the days of villains you could love to hate, people like Richard Hatch. If they had cast a Hatch-like person instead of Colton, I'd have been 100% behind it.


The problem with this is, people gradually get desensitized. What was once "villainous" is now normal. What we once "loved to hate" is now just kind of there. Hatch was a villain because he...formed an alliance. Which is what literally every Survivor player does now. In the first season, Hatch was one of the very few who wanted to play his way; most wanted to have a fun adventure on an island. By the fourth season, Marquesas, everybody was in a rush to vote out Gabriel because that goofball just wanted to have a fun adventure on an island and not form an alliance - what a weirdo, right? And this was only, what, two years after Borneo aired?

My favourite example of how the game has changed---and I'm not trying to start the Colby-Tina argument again---is Keith Famie. Keith was a nice, witty, likable guy who was 2% grouchy 2% of the time, as befits someone who hasn't slept or eaten in a month. On almost any of the past twenty seasons, Keith wins fan favourite. In Australia, Keith wasn't only the villain; he was such a villain that it was an absolute moral imperative that he be stopped from going to FTC.

I frequently compare two players from One World to two players from my favourite season, Panama. Terry Deitz was overbearing and paternalistic and Panama was HIS ISLAND (in his mind)...but he never made disparaging comments about women (despite Aras randomly accusing him of doing so) or swore at people or voted out of bitterness like Troy. Shane Powers was absolutely batshit crazy, wrongly thought he was running things because he had a very rudimentary strategic game that he thought was brilliant, and then went out fifth...but he never said special needs kids had IQs of 0. Modern players are nastier, yes...but would another Terry or another Shane get the same reaction, when we've already seen a Terry and a Shane?

I agree that they've gone too far in casting some of the obnoxious jerks they have, and wonder where we'll be in ten more seasons, if the show is still on. But I see why they do it, too: people acclimate, and things get boring, and they think if they don't keep pushing the envelope, people will get bored. It's tough.
  • 0

#495

Yogurt Baron

Yogurt Baron

    Fanatic

Posted May 17, 2012 @ 11:08 PM

xr made an interesting post in the Kim thread that would be off-topic to reply to there, in part:

And that's kind of why Survivor is a stupid and flawed game that's basically heavily edited to create the facade that it's this big strategic thing. Survivor had a story to tell, so you had out of thousands of hours, a few instances of Kim (or Rob or whatever past winner) socially manipulating someone, but 98% of the work put into winning the show was just being popular and likeable (unless you fall backwards into your win like half of seasons).


I really think that does the game a disservice. The winner is almost never who's most popular and likable. I mean, Hatch won the first season. Would you argue that he was either popular or that he fell backwards into his win? It's usually who's most popular and likable of the F2/F3, yes, and getting there is easier if you're liked. But getting there is a big, strategic thing

Let's talk about Aras. Was Aras more likable than Cirie? I would marry Aras right now if such a thing didn't contravene his stated sexual preference, and even I don't think any group of nine people, including one comprised of eight members of Aras's immediate family and me, would make that argument.

Aras's game isn't one of the best, but it's one of the cleanest, for me, in that it breaks down into four easily-discussed and chronological parts.
1. early days: charismatic - establishing himself as the Quasi-Alpha Male from whom people would take the lead (via lame bullshit like making everyone do that yoga put-your-hands-together-until-you-feel-something routine, and asking the women to decide amongst themselves who should be voted out, since he was too sensitive a soul too; it was weak sauce, and any other would-be charism would've blown him out of the water, but compared to Shane Powers screaming at Sir God? Aras was the closest thing to a capital-L Leader they had.)
2. after that was established: strategic - making sure that his alliance (Cirie, Shane, Danielle, Courtney) would be a)., people who liked him, b)., people who didn't like each other, and c)., with one exception, people so batshit crazy that their liking of him and disliking of each other would outweigh their strategic interests.
3. mid-game: social - working those four people, making sure they still liked him more than each other.
4. endgame: all of the above coalescing to give him the win. First his established leadership led to: "We have to keep Aras around to beat Terry in immunity challenges, even though Terry poops bigger things than Aras and, objectively, Danielle's a better bet to win challenges than Aras---after all, we subliminally think of him as the leader because of those days when everyone was all over the place and Aras yogaed us together!" Then social: "Aras said he'd only take me to final three, but I know he was joking! He's my pal!" (This was Survivor legend Cirie talking, by the way.) Then, at the jury level, the strategic: "I hate that smug yoga bastard, but I hate Danielle more."

If everyone had just hung out on the beach and waited for everyone to vote out who they liked least in order, well, Cirie wins and Aras doesn't make the jury. No question: he won on his relative likability. Relative to Danielle and Shane and Courtney. But strategically positioning yourself to be up there at the end with people you're more likable than---that's not falling backwards into anything. It's interesting that you speak so well of Fabio---I think on any other season, where there are any good players, he's the first out at the merge. "So, that friendly dolt---let's vote him out before he starts winning immunities and we're toast. Let's write his name down tonight. How many b's are there in 'Jub'?"

And my favourite example of where the likable meets the strategic is Earl. Anybody think Earl is more likable than Yau-Man? To win, he had to both be a)., really likable, b)., smart enough to know who was more likable than him, c)., cunning enough to take that person out, and d)., social enough to convince others to. It's a much more complicated game than "just be likable".
  • 0

#496

SpeciousLogic

SpeciousLogic

    Fanatic

Posted May 25, 2012 @ 8:20 AM

Hatch was a villain because he...formed an alliance.


No, Hatch was a villain because he was an arrogant, obnoxious SOB. His confessionals are replete with "This is my island!"-type statements (plus "Just go ahead and write me that check for 1 million" -- in the first episode, GAH!), and I never got the impression that anyone other than Rudy and Sean actually liked him.

After RobM (whom I don't count because it took him 4 tries), my least-favorite winners from a personality standpoint are Brian, Richard, & Aras, and the common theme amongst them is that they are all arrogant/cocky bastards. As soon as someone starts displaying that trait consistently, they immediately move to my "Hate to Hate" list.

Edited by SpeciousLogic, May 25, 2012 @ 8:20 AM.

  • 0

#497

Yogurt Baron

Yogurt Baron

    Fanatic

Posted May 25, 2012 @ 1:46 PM

No, Hatch was a villain...


Okay, you've got a point there: Hatch is and was a jerk in his way, and I'm sure that turned a lot of people off. But I definitely remember people (by whom I mean viewers and also Kelly Wiglesworth) thinking that the alliance itself was a villainous and unfair concept, and that even if the leader of the alliance were a swell dude, it'd be somehow wrong to vote based on anything other than "this person doesn't do much around camp".

After RobM (whom I don't count because it took him 4 tries)


Well, you dislike Mariano the most, so I think you and I have much to discuss, and you also don't count him, which means I might mail you some money, but you lose me around:

my least-favorite winners from a personality standpoint are Brian, Richard, & Aras, and the common theme amongst them is that they are all arrogant/cocky bastards.


On the bright side, hey, someone else remembers Aras exists! I was starting to think I imagined him.

I can see how you came to your opinion - no specious logic here - but those are my three favourite people ever to play Survivor, and it's because of how I think they're the opposite of arrogant and cocky. I saw them all as having plans, and being self-aware enough and socially dynamic enough to understand that they could probably make their plans work. Troy's attitude is, "This is my island!" Hatch, Heidik, and Aras's, for me, all come closer to, "If I can execute this, I can make this my island." But they're all, always, aware that they could fail. What was Brian Heidik's most famous line ever?* It wasn't, "I'm Mr. Freeze!"

Per the recap, it was:

What skills come into play at this part of the game? Skating skills. Who's the best skater -- ice skater? Who's got the longest skates on? Who's the best at cutting corners -- going around in circles? Because usually on [sic] skating, you gotta be ice cold. You can't lose your cool. You gotta be like ice. You gotta have friendship. You gotta cut off those friendships. You gotta keep stringin' people along and then bam! Throw 'em a nice slider. Mr. Freeze is in the house. Even though it's about 110 out here, I got my skates on.


(Can I just say, also, that especially given his remarkable genius at certain parts of life, I will never get over how poorly-spoken Heidik is? "on skating"? Really?)

Now, the theme of this incoherent ramble is not, "I am great." The theme of this incoherent ramble is, "I understand that there are certain things someone needs to do in order to win this game, so I will do them." Not a single thing he says plays up a single skill that he has that other people don't---just his understanding of the game, his willingness to do certain things, and his implicit understanding that no matter how pretty he is, if he doesn't play it a certain way, he will lose. An arrogant player doesn't think that way. An arrogant player thinks they'll win by showing up and doing what they would usually be doing on a Tuesday, and everyone will say, "Wow, Alicia, you're really cool! Let's give you a million dollars!" I can see where people see arrogance in the kind of player who figures out what they need to do, explain what they need to do, and then does it, but for me, it's literally the opposite of arrogance. For a contestant on a reality TV show (which I don't usually consider Survivor to be, but let's go with it), acknowledging that there are things you have to do to make yourself great is remarkable humility.

I'll find a quote later, but another I'd put in this box was Fiji Alex. He gave at least one striking confessional where he said, basically, "Things seem to be going really well for us right now, but that could change." That's not arrogance. That's knowing you're at the top, which, if it's true, isn't wrong.

And Aras...well, Aras is not of the same species as Heidik, Hatch (or Kim, who's in that species too). In him, I see more of a "fake it 'til you make it". He knew Terry was kicking his ass in challenges, that Terry was the Alpha Male and that he himself was a squeaky little yoga boy. But he needed to sell others that cockiness, because that's what you respond to if you're Shane Powers, which Shane Powers was. That's the one way in which I would put Aras in the same league as Heidik, Hatch, and Kim: a very clear-eyed, cold-blooded, "I will do what I need to do to get what I want" style, as opposed to an "I'm really great and I know what I want will find its way to me."

A small, tiny point that nobody but Aras's biggest fan could possibly care about, but I'm going to raise it anyway: remember Cook Islands, when the Queen of the Social Game met her tribe, and they were all, "Hi, Poverty!" And she was all, "Par-va-ti." And they were all, "So, Poverty?" And she was all, "*rolls eyes, reins in her irritation, opts to flirt with them instead* Oh, you!" Little-known fact: Aras is "odd us", not "our ass" (in fairness, some would say the latter would've been a reasonable nickname for him around camp). You ever hear anybody but his dad in his video from home call him "odd us"? 'Cause I didn't. And what was his response? No response at all. Because as long as he got a million dollars, what did he care? And he got a million dollars.

*Oh, hey, trying to find a clip of Heidik calling himself Mr. Freeze, I found this.
http://www.youtube.c...h?v=FXpyvVrCnC4
Surely this just cements his best-ever status. Everything he did out there, he was doing without his much-needed calories.

Edited by Yogurt Baron, May 25, 2012 @ 2:21 PM.

  • 1

#498

enlightenedbum

enlightenedbum

    Fanatic

Posted May 25, 2012 @ 2:27 PM

You know what's arrogant (and sexist): hey ladies, decide amongst yourselves who's going home tonight.

Fuck Aras.
  • 1

#499

Yogurt Baron

Yogurt Baron

    Fanatic

Posted May 25, 2012 @ 4:24 PM

You know what's arrogant (and sexist): hey ladies, decide amongst yourselves who's going home tonight. Fuck Aras.


Obviously, my enthusiastic interest in the second half of your comment outweighs my ability to objectively argue with the first half, but I'll try.

I put "can we come to some kind of decision here"-gate in the same league I put a lot of unpleasant behaviour on Survivor: if that's him in real life, arrogant douche. I can totally see him making two women at the bar deciding which one's going to come home with him, and, yeah, gross. But if that's gameplay, that's good gameplay. When one of those ladies ended up going home and the other ended up as his day-39 alliance partner who was more loyal to him than was a good idea in the end, I'd say that turned out okay for him. From home, he looks like a douche. When you're the person he's too goshdarned sensitive to vote out, then you give him a million dollars.

Has Cirie ever commented on why she didn't flip at 4? If you're the kind of genius Cirie was in Micronesia, well, you go to Terry, you make a deal to vote Aras with him, Aras goes home at 4, Danielle wins immunity at 3, Danielle probably takes Cirie, Cirie probably has a million dollars. I can only see two reasons Cirie doesn't flip at 4: one, she preferred for Aras to have a million dollars rather than for herself to have a million dollars; two, she bought into the "only Aras can beat Terry in a challenge" meme, which sure wasn't built on Aras's...you know, build, and was built on the Aras-is-the-leader vibe that was born when he asked the ladies to decide amongst themselves who was going home tonight. I'd like to hear her thoughts on that, if they exist anywhere.
  • 1

#500

SpeciousLogic

SpeciousLogic

    Fanatic

Posted May 25, 2012 @ 4:26 PM

You know what's arrogant (and sexist): hey ladies, decide amongst yourselves who's going home tonight.

Fuck Aras.


Yeah, that's the quote that really sticks "odd-us" up on that Arrogant Asshole Hall of Fame for me.

LOL at the "Mr Freeze" quote from Heidik, there was nothing wrong with that one in my eyes. Actually my dislike of him is partly (or even significantly) because of his extra-game crap. As an animal lover, I wanted to go beat his head in with a shovel when I read about his shooting a puppy with a bow and arrow. He could have been Mahatma F Gandhi on the show and he would have instantly dropped to my Most Hated Reality Contestant Ever.

As for his game itself, I probably remember the specifics of Thailand less than any other season because it's the season I disliked the most, and the only one I've never rewatched. What I most remember is continuously thinking as the season progressed "I hate that effin' Brian and I hope to God he doesn't win" -- and then throwing something at my TV when he did. It's the only time in my life I've ever done that. So if my hatred of all things Heidik is slightly irrational and not all about his gameplay, then grant me that one indulgence.
  • 0

#501

Yogurt Baron

Yogurt Baron

    Fanatic

Posted May 25, 2012 @ 4:33 PM

Actually my dislike of him is partly (or even significantly) because of his extra-game crap. As an animal lover, I wanted to go beat his head in with a shovel when I read about his shooting a puppy with a bow and arrow. He could have been Mahatma F Gandhi on the show and he would have instantly dropped to my Most Hated Reality Contestant Ever.


Yes, but that puppy had many useful calories in it, so you can see where...no, joking, I'm with you 100%. You know, looking at the list of winners, yeah, outside the game: Mariano, Hatch, Heidik and (breaking my heart here) Aras are probably the four I'd least want to be pals with. I would pay all of my money to sit down with any of the middle two for a week and have them teach me everything they know about everything, but to like as a person as opposed to a strategic mind or something to look at? Okay, I see where you're coming from, they're all kind of the worst.

Edited by Yogurt Baron, May 25, 2012 @ 7:38 PM.

  • 0

#502

KimberStormer

KimberStormer

    Couch Potato

Posted May 26, 2012 @ 12:36 AM

I really couldn't notice any arrogance from Aras because I was being blinded by the smugness of Terry. There is only one contestant in Survivor who has excited a deep down visceral hatred in me, and that is Terry. I loved almost everything else about that season (though sorry Yogurt--your devotion to Aras is my constant delight, but I thought Danielle should have won) but I will never watch it again because I don't want to see that man ever again.

Also I sort of feel compelled to defend Alicia, who of course said and did some horrible horrible things, but she was actually playing and when she lost, she semi-correctly identified where she'd gone wrong and took it with very good grace. She thought she was playing better than she was (probably still does) but she didn't just think she could do nothing.
  • 0

#503

myriadphalanx

myriadphalanx

    Fanatic

Posted May 26, 2012 @ 2:57 AM

Has Cirie ever commented on why she didn't flip at 4? If you're the kind of genius Cirie was in Micronesia, well, you go to Terry, you make a deal to vote Aras with him, Aras goes home at 4, Danielle wins immunity at 3, Danielle probably takes Cirie, Cirie probably has a million dollars. I can only see two reasons Cirie doesn't flip at 4: one, she preferred for Aras to have a million dollars rather than for herself to have a million dollars; two, she bought into the "only Aras can beat Terry in a challenge" meme, which sure wasn't built on Aras's...you know, build, and was built on the Aras-is-the-leader vibe that was born when he asked the ladies to decide amongst themselves who was going home tonight.


The "only Aras can beat Terry in a challenge" thing wasn't a meme, it was a fact --- Terry had won literally every single immunity challenge up until Aras beat him in the F4 episode. If you're Cirie, you're somewhat forced to take Aras into the F3 since that final challenge almost always involves endurance or hand-eye coordination. I don't think Cirie thought it was a bad move to take Aras along and frankly, neither do I, since Cirie knew for a fact that she would've beaten Aras in a final tribal council vote. The one she was worried about was Terry since most of his old tribe was on the jury and they might've been impressed by his string of immunity wins. Though, frankly, I suspect Cirie would've won a final jury vote over anyone in that season given how she was so well-liked and Terry was such a dick, even to his own team.
  • 1

#504

Yogurt Baron

Yogurt Baron

    Fanatic

Posted May 26, 2012 @ 12:22 PM

Wait, I thought Terry had immunity at F4. If Aras had immunity at F4, why the heck wouldn't the three of them have just taken out Terry? Well, Aras having immunity would explain why Cirie didn't take out Aras. Okay, I like Aras less now---90% of my respect for his strategic game is based on "he kept Cirie from taking him out at F4!"

Some brief research: oh, right, Terry had an absurdly powerful immunity idol. So he was immune even though Aras beat him. You know what I'm surprised they never did on a Hantz season? An immunity idol you can play at F2.

Edited by Yogurt Baron, May 26, 2012 @ 1:32 PM.

  • 0

#505

Unconditional

Unconditional

    Loyal Viewer

Posted May 30, 2012 @ 9:38 PM

Terry Deitz was overbearing and paternalistic and Panama was HIS ISLAND


I was always entertained by this narrative because it's all editing, and what's worse is that it's BAD editing. Bad in the sense that it's not even consistent with the story that they are trying to tell, the fact that that story is inaccurate beside the fact.

In Australia, Keith wasn't only the villain; he was such a villain that it was an absolute moral imperative that he be stopped from going to FTC.


Keith wasn't a villain though. The editing certainly didn't make him look like a villain and the other players didn't consider him one either. He just happened to be the 3rd in a three-person alliance, and someone that both the 1/2 didn't want to win. There was a solid 3 minutes of Keith-bashing from Colby/Tina after he was voted out but Tina actually liked him and so did Rodger and Elizabeth (reluctantly at first on account of the Jerri deal but then genuinely later on). You don't really have to look any further than the reactions at the F5RC where Keith proposed to his girlfriend. I think the only people that genuinely disliked Keith were Mitchell and Jerri. Most of Colby's negativity was purely game-based and all of Tina's negative comments were game-based. There were far more people (Mad Dog, Mike, and Jeff come to mind) that really liked him as opposed to people that really disliked him. Colby and Tina simply thought that Keith didn't deserve the opportunity to go to the FTC and didn't deserve to win the game, and they were right about both.

Edited by Unconditional, May 30, 2012 @ 9:39 PM.

  • 0

#506

Yogurt Baron

Yogurt Baron

    Fanatic

Posted May 30, 2012 @ 10:30 PM

I was always entertained by this narrative because it's all editing, and what's worse is that it's BAD editing. Bad in the sense that it's not even consistent with the story that they are trying to tell, the fact that that story is inaccurate beside the fact.


How can we really know what's accurate and what's editing, though? Terry looked pretty overbearing and paternalistic to me most of the time, even though I think on a season where he has the numbers, he's probably a mini-Westman and wins easily.

Bad in the sense that it's not even consistent with the story that they are trying to tell


Really? I thought the story they were trying to tell in Panama was "gang of adorable misfits overcomes evil challenge monster jerk". So whether it's accurate or not, I feel like it fits perfectly with the story they were trying to tell.

Keith wasn't a villain though. The editing certainly didn't make him look like a villain and the other players didn't consider him one either. ... He just happened to be the 3rd in a three-person alliance, and someone that both the 1/2 didn't want to win.


Don't want to start the whole Colby debate again, but the only other time someone has ever made a who-to-take-to-FTC decision based not on maximizing their own chances of winning, but on keeping somebody else from winning? Fairplay. The idea that Colby and Tina cared so much not just about one of the two of them winning, but about Keith not winning, suggests to me that he's what passed for a villain back then. That said, I love Keith.
  • 0

#507

Unconditional

Unconditional

    Loyal Viewer

Posted Jun 3, 2012 @ 12:04 AM

Don't want to start the whole Colby debate again, but the only other time someone has ever made a who-to-take-to-FTC decision based not on maximizing their own chances of winning, but on keeping somebody else from winning?


But that's not why he made the decision that he did. It's not even close. He took Tina because he wanted to beat Tina because that to him meant something whereas beating Keith meant nothing. He's said this many times. He did not want Keith to win and that's a side-effect of sending him home instead of Tina. If he/they didn't want Keith to win at any cost then they would have just booted him like they did Jerri. They got Amber/Elizabeth/Rodger to go home exactly when they wanted them to as part of the Jerri deal, Keith could have gone at any point after F6.

Really? I thought the story they were trying to tell in Panama was "gang of adorable misfits overcomes evil challenge monster jerk". So whether it's accurate or not, I feel like it fits perfectly with the story they were trying to tell.


No, they tried to make Aras likable and continue the trend of making their winner "heroic" and admirable, and that had to really battle in order to win the prize. The failure starts with the fact that unlike Danni the season before, or Tom, or even Chris, Aras wasn't any of those things and they had to edit everyone around him in such an over-the-top manner manner to smokescreen his bullshit. He wasn't likeable, he was an entitled brat. He didn't overcome anything, he sat around while Cirie had to parry all of Terry's moves to take control all while other people sat around and waited too long to make a move. He wasn't admirable, Terry kept kicking his ass despite being double his age and having to work against an entire group of people in half the challenges and he (Aras) responded to that by saying moronic things about Terry that clearly weren't true. Terry wasn't evil, he wasn't even mean. He put up with psychopathic Casaya bullshit for 20 days and never lost his cool, and that's why the editing is so inconsistent. The show had to constantly manufacture drama in order to try to portray Terry in that negative light, the "torch incident" being a prime example where Cirie drops her torch on the beach at F4 right as they're all walking back to camp together and Terry gets mad because she couldn't have just laid it up against something (which they are supposed to do)

So had Terry really been a dick, and had he actually showed any signs of being "evil," I wouldn't have cared if the show had to stretch that out to make ends meet. But because the thing was such a blatant, hamfisted attempt to pass off the entitled jackass as the likeable underdog suffering under Terry's tyranny, they can shove it. Aras is and always will be the "decide for yourselves who goes home, because in 3 days the other one's going too" guy who hides behind Shane and stokes that obnoxious fire as long as it benefits him.

Edited by Unconditional, Jun 3, 2012 @ 12:06 AM.

  • 0

#508

KimberStormer

KimberStormer

    Couch Potato

Posted Jun 3, 2012 @ 9:43 AM

"such a blatant, hamfisted attempt to pass off the entitled jackass as the likeable underdog"

Haha, that's exactly what I felt the edit was trying to do with Terry! Especially with the loved ones reward, it really felt to me like "HEY LOOK AT THIS AMAZING SPECIMEN OF PERFECT AMERICAN MANHOOD!" But my loathing of him is, I admit, pretty much irrational. Similarly, Shane is one of the Survivors I'd most like to meet in real life--also completely irrational.
  • 0

#509

Jyn

Jyn

    Couch Potato

Posted Jun 3, 2012 @ 1:54 PM

I guess I was in the middle of the whole Aras/Terry spectrum. Given that both of them had aired confessionals of the other castaways basically telling us how much of an ass each of them was, accompanied by actual footage of them both actually being asses at different times, I frankly think both of them were almost equally awful. So I don't think any loathing of either would be "irrational."

Add to that post-show interviews of nearly everyone saying they couldn't stand either Aras, Terry, or both of them, and I have to think the editing was incredibly kind to both of them.
  • 0

#510

Yogurt Baron

Yogurt Baron

    Fanatic

Posted Jun 3, 2012 @ 5:59 PM

Unconditional, I don't disagree with much of your read of Terry or of Casaya. Where I'm still confused is by your claim that it's:

Bad editing...in the sense that it's not even consistent with the story that they are trying to tell


It may not have been consistent with the story they should have been trying to tell; it may not have been accurate; but the editing is consistent with the story they were trying to tell: that of condescending blowhard Terry losing to the leader of a gang of misfits. Things like the torch-dropping incident you mention play into that story. (I agree with you, though, that they went far too far marginalizing Cirie and Shane and even Danielle and Courtney to make Aras look better by comparison.)

Oh, and:

Terry kept kicking his ass despite being double his age


Yeah, but look at Aras and look at Terry. If John Cochran circa South Pacific went up against Tom Westman circa Palau in some strength-based challenges, literally nobody would think, "Ha! I feel sorry for this old bastard, having to go up against a young buck half his age!"
  • 0