+ Reply to Thread
Page 11 of 15 FirstFirst ... 23456789101112131415 LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 145

Thread: 12/1 Show Discussion *Spoilers*

  1. #101
    everyone's a critic... holly71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    The Lone Star State
    Age
    43
    Posts
    4,363

    Re: 12/1 Show Discussion *Spoilers*

    Quote Originally Posted by TiaMaria62;4118881;

    I was shouting "Shove it up her _ _ _!!!!!!!!!!!"

    While it's still burning!
    Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

  2. #102
    Forum Assistant sweetpea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    5,798

    Re: 12/1 Show Discussion *Spoilers*

    Quote Originally Posted by KeepItReal;4118984;
    The precedent talk made me roll my eyes a bit as well. I will always remember the season where Cirie had set herself up for a final 3 spot, as it had been for the previous few seasons, only to get the twist that it would be a final 2. So the powers that be have no care in the world about killing off the chance of some contestant to win. They are on the jury because that's the way TPTB want it to be, and that's all there is to that. No explaination needed, it simply is what it is and some will not like it.
    I remember that season, and I remember being really ticked off by the 'twist' - I agree, they have no problems changing things up from season to season. However, we're talking about NaOnka here, so maybe Probst and Mark B were just trying to keep her from flipping her lid completely - who knows what she would do!
    Valar Morghulis

  3. #103
    FORT Regular
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    81

    Re: 12/1 Show Discussion *Spoilers*

    It's hard to believe that there could be any legal repercussions if "Survivor" had decided not to put Nayonka and Kelly on the jury. Every boxtop drawing has standard language along the lines of "Decisions of the judges are final." It has also become common to require participants in almost any ordinary transaction -- like getting a credit card or buying an appliance -- to agree to waive any right to sue in favor of binding arbitration, usually in a city and with an arbitrator selected by the lender. And these players are probably required to give up all kinds of other rights as a condition of participation, with the prospect of severe financial penalties if they don't behave. ("Survivor" is filmed months before it airs, but no player in 20+ seasons has ever given up any secrets before the broadcast. That's no accident.) The truth is that the producers probably think it will make for better TV -- more tension, more friction, more fireworks -- to have these two flunkouts on the jury. And I think they're right. What would be really interesting would be if Nayonka and Kelly refused to serve on the jury, too. I can just imagine Nayonka screaming "What part of 'I'm outta here!' don't you understand?"
    Last edited by fan999; 12-02-2010 at 10:04 PM.

  4. #104
    dance aggressively Endit's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    526

    Re: 12/1 Show Discussion *Spoilers*

    Quote Originally Posted by jadewarlock;4118579;
    Oh, no one forgetting? - Quitters I have seen on this show (Note, I have missed a few seasons due to work and other issues in real life)
    I mean in the real world, where everybody doesn't watch Survivor.

    Quote Originally Posted by jadewarlock;4118579;
    The torches are actually going to stay there, but not lit as a reminder.
    In the words of Jeff, and I quote, "Alright, so I'll snuff your torches but we're gonna keep them here at Tribal Council. They'll be a reminder to you guys when you come back in here as part of the jury as the decision you made to quit." Are they lit or not? Can't tell but it's not clear, to me it sounded like they could be.
    Last edited by Endit; 12-02-2010 at 10:13 PM.

  5. #105
    Sweet Lolli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,541

    Re: 12/1 Show Discussion *Spoilers*

    Quote Originally Posted by TiaMaria62;4118881;
    I have to think that all of America was shouting the same thing at their TV's that I was when Jeff asked NaOnka what he should do with her torch.

    I was shouting "Shove it up her _ _ _!!!!!!!!!!!"
    I was actually thinking snap them in half and don't let them on the jury. I can already see Naonka asking whoever's left "And why should I give you the million?" with her snippy attitude. I don't see a question either of them could ask that wouldn't make me laugh at them and their gall to pretend they have the right to grill the people at the final TC.

  6. #106
    FORT Fogey jadewarlock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    3,927

    Re: 12/1 Show Discussion *Spoilers*

    Quote Originally Posted by norm;4118752;
    Jeff Probst blogs 'Survivor: Nicaragua': Episode 12 | PopWatch | EW.com

    See Jeff Probst's blog as to why they were allowed to remain on the jury.
    I hate saying this, but Jeff is a bit wrong here - as was Burnett.

    Janu did ask to leave the game; however, the tribe voted her out - even if vocally agreed to it, it was a vote.

    That said, these two simply said "I quit," and they gave Jeff the torch. No jury vote - it was decided already at the reward challenge.

    Personally, I think they had to let the duo stay there because of some tiny loophole in the contract that would've let them sue and win if Burnett et al tried to deny them the money.

    Or CBS wanted the drama that would obviously ensue at the reunion - you can bet this will be the most talked about incident at the reunion, unless Burnett decides to penalize the duo for their actions and not allow this to be discussed. You remove the two from the show entirely - no PR stuff, no reunion, you won't get that drama.

  7. #107
    FORT Fogey jadewarlock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    3,927

    Re: 12/1 Show Discussion *Spoilers*

    Quote Originally Posted by Endit;4119054;
    I mean in the real world, where everybody doesn't watch Survivor.
    Note, I said I haven't seen every episode - some seasons I've never seen, and yet can list most of them.

    And - if they haven't seen the show, they won't know who these people are anyway. No doubt they'd "forget in a month."

    In the words of Jeff, and I quote, "Alright, so I'll snuff your torches but we're gonna keep them here at Tribal Council. They'll be a reminder to you guys when you come back in here as part of the jury as the decision you made to quit." Are they lit or not? Can't tell but it's not clear, to me it sounded like they could be.
    They won't be lit - all quitters have had their torches laying on the ground, unlit. In the case of Osten, I don't even think he got to do a reflection speech when they did the "fallen comrades" walk. There was no stop at his torch, no comments at all.

    Jenna and Sue I think had their torches laid down, but they did at least get a comment about why they left as they were legitimate positive reasons.

    I forgot about Janu's, but I'm sure the torch was laid down.

    None of these torches stayed at council as far as I know - the only time I've seen them just move the torches from the side competing to a "fallen hero" side was the first season.

    Frankly - I would HOPE they don't stay lit. It's disrespectful to those who are competing and have dealt with a lot of things, a couple even wanting to quit but overcame it, to let two quitters who were overall in good health and let a little bit of rain get to their heads or (in NaOnka's case) just seemed to think it was a toy that could be discarded just because she was bored.

  8. #108
    FORT Fogey TripleGemini's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Lynn, MA
    Posts
    1,912

    Re: 12/1 Show Discussion *Spoilers*

    If Nay's anemia was so bad that she had joint pain, how'd she pass the physical? It's not like you just wake up with anemia one morning...it takes time to develop. I've been borderline anemic for several years now (and when I get sick, it's full-blown to the point that I need an injection..this happened in September when I got diverticulits). Where was medical with iron supplements, Aranesp, or Epogen? (I didn't even know joint pain was a symptom of anemia before yesterday.)

  9. #109
    FORT Regular
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    81

    Re: 12/1 Show Discussion *Spoilers*

    Ponderosa questions: If Ponderosa only houses the jurors, what happens to the players who were voted out previously? They can't go home; everybody would know they didn't win. Do they get sent to another hotel, maybe back in the U.S., or what? Also, in Ponderosa part 2 at about 3:12, the women are shown shopping in an outdoor market and Nayonka picks up a burgundy t-shirt with a design on the front, but the design is blurred out. What could be on a t-shirt for sale in the town square that would be so offensive to an American audience that we can't see it?

  10. #110
    FORT Fogey jadewarlock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    3,927

    Re: 12/1 Show Discussion *Spoilers*

    Quote Originally Posted by fan999;4119103;
    Ponderosa questions: If Ponderosa only houses the jurors, what happens to the players who were voted out previously? They can't go home; everybody would know they didn't win. Do they get sent to another hotel, maybe back in the U.S., or what? Also, in Ponderosa part 2 at about 3:12, the women are shown shopping in an outdoor market and Nayonka picks up a burgundy t-shirt with a design on the front, but the design is blurred out. What could be on a t-shirt for sale in the town square that would be so offensive to an American audience that we can't see it?
    They probably are in a hotel or an area of Ponderosa away from the jurors so they can't influence the game.

    As far as the blurring out of the shirts - they usually do this if it's a trademarked business (because to show it they'd have to pay royalties), or it's offensive.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.