LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
jpoliver...I completely agree. I was disappointed at the first episodes schoolhouse pick’em. The contestants put their lives on hold and possibly sacrificed just to have the opportunity to play the game and two didn't get the chance.
Sort of a “ Congratulations your on Survivor………….NOT, pack your bags and go back home Loser”
Last night I was tempted to turn to another station, they were being so cruel to the Ulong tribe. For me that isn’t the kind of Survivor I enjoy watching.
To clarify, I don't think Survivor has jumped the shark, but I do think it's getting to the point where it's done all it can do, at least in the producers eyes. And I don't take it's ratings into consideration, since Thailand, AS, and Vanuatu all did well. But no matter how Palau turns out, it will never be anywhere near as bad as those 3 I just mentioned. I think Palau, like Vanuatu, had an interesting mix of contestants, but either those that were interesting or would have stirred things up got booted, or they'll be outnumbered and won't have a chance to shine.
I love the eye candy, so I don't have a problem with that.Maybe if they got back to letting people try out rather then go casting it would be a step in the right direction. I am sick of the actor/model wannabes. I'd rather see real poeple on any 'human drama/reality show' Maybe people I can relate to.I think it adds diversity, and to me, I don't want to see 16-20 Survivor fanatics who all look like every day people that I can relate to. This season aside, I think the past few seasons have gone back to casting more "normal" looking people instead of solely eye candy. Now, when it's someone like Angie who's average compared to the models, but not someone I've ever hung out with or could see myself as, I don't mind them casting people like that. But if they're going to cast people, I would like to see more people who are into the game (like Bobby Jon) and less people who want a way out (Jeff and Ashlee). But again, it's not like everyone needs to be playing the game for me to be interested in it. I just don't like the whiners who beg to get booted.
Actually, if they'd gone through with the "two tribes living on one beach" concept from start to finish, I think that it would have added a lot to the game, not the least of which being a diminishment of the likelyhood of yet another Pagonging. That's getting really old. By opening up the possibility of inter-tribal scheming and alliances pre-merge, I think that a number of players wouldn't know how to react to such a fundamental shift in game dynamics, which could lead to some exemplary gameplay. Keep the camps a good distance apart, sure, but allow a fair amount of cross-politicization.Originally Posted by jpoliver
But by all means, lose the school-yard team pick.
Ha ha! I was thinking the same thing. Hasn't this been said of the last 9 seasons?
From a personal standpoint, I know of quite a few people who actually just started watching Survivor this season, so I think there's still some juice left in the Survivor machine.Count me three. I saw this and thought, "Oh, is it time for the jumped the shark thread already?"
I suppose it depends on what criteria you use to determine when a show has jumped the shark. If you are looking at ratings, it obviously has not. Sometimes the twists are clever and shocking, sometimes they are not. This has been going on since the show started.
I suppose it depends on what criteria you use to determine when a show has jumped the shark. If you are looking at ratings, it obviously has not. Sometimes the twists are clever and shocking, sometimes they are not. This has been going on since the show started.I claim four!
Ted McGinley hasn't shown up yet, so "jumping the shark" does not apply.
And if I never hear that phrase again, I'll be quite happy. In my opinion, it's so overused whenever someone wants to complain that they don't like a returning show.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote