+ Reply to Thread
Page 37 of 39 FirstFirst ... 27282930313233343536373839 LastLast
Results 361 to 370 of 384

Thread: 5/16 Finale Show Discussion *Spoilers*

  1. #361
    FORT Fogey
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    5,117

    Re: 5/16 Finale Show Discussion *Spoilers*

    Quote Originally Posted by northernviewer;3907920;
    I don't like there being a jury vote who the "survivor" is... I'd rather they win a challenge to get it... as it stands - it's just a bunch of whiners upset that they got lied to and, as they perceive themselves to be "victims," they vote who they think is a fellow victim. big thumbs down on how the Survivor is chosen in my book. It started with the first season when Richard was sole survivor and not Rudy ... give me a break .... As an audience, we watch week after week, the manipulating, the lying, the alliances formed and then broken, the back-doors at tribal council, the search for immunity idols, we cheer on our faves and boo the ones we can't stand...... and it ends with a bunch of pouty "you lied to me's" .... I'd rather see them mud wrestle for it, or build a fire for it or even answer a skill testing question LOL.... the endings disappoint me most seasons, especially as it's such a mentally and physically challenging game.

    it's been awhile and just remembered that Rudy didn't make it to the final 2, but I think you can get my drift as to how the votes go
    Outstanding idea, northern! End it with a challenge, or a series of challenges, to be fair to all. One physical, one mental, one endurance. It certainly would eliminate the do-nothings pretty quick.

    I agree the "you lied to me" argument is pretty lame. They all lie. They have to. Some are just better at it than others. And some are more gullible in believing the lies. Can't pin that one on the liar -- that one goes to the believer.
    This isn’t the Sound of freaking Music we’re watching.......sdl

  2. #362
    FORT Fogey ironcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    2,454

    Re: 5/16 Finale Show Discussion *Spoilers*

    Quote Originally Posted by northernviewer;3907920;
    I don't like there being a jury vote who the "survivor" is... I'd rather they win a challenge to get it... as it stands - it's just a bunch of whiners upset that they got lied to and, as they perceive themselves to be "victims," they vote who they think is a fellow victim. big thumbs down on how the Survivor is chosen in my book. It started with the first season when Richard was sole survivor and not Rudy ... give me a break .... As an audience, we watch week after week, the manipulating, the lying, the alliances formed and then broken, the back-doors at tribal council, the search for immunity idols, we cheer on our faves and boo the ones we can't stand...... and it ends with a bunch of pouty "you lied to me's" .... I'd rather see them mud wrestle for it, or build a fire for it or even answer a skill testing question LOL.... the endings disappoint me most seasons, especially as it's such a mentally and physically challenging game.

    it's been awhile and just remembered that Rudy didn't make it to the final 2, but I think you can get my drift as to how the votes go
    While your suggestions might make for an interesting game to compete in, it would not be the game of Survivor as we know it, which was from the start billed as a psychological social experiment. If you take the psychology and the human emotions out of it and reduce it to largely a series of physical challenges, it would become a variation of many other competitions already out there, and I for one would probably not waste my time watching another one.

  3. #363
    FORT Fogey jadewarlock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,203

    Re: 5/16 Finale Show Discussion *Spoilers*

    I'm sorry, but I will rant... I'm getting tried of people saying "Bitter Jury," Sandra did nothing, etc.

    This is a game where you outwit, outplay and outlast. There are many definitions of those words, and sorry, Sandra does still fit in all three - particularly Outlast.

    As people have said, it's a social experiment, which in a real life situation being thrown into a situation like that you have to decide if you work together or you do not. "LOST" kind of gives an example of both and "Lord of the Flies" gives a notion to what happens when groups divide up.

    Sandra did more than what people give her credit for, and as most of the Survivors have said, what she did worked for her.

    What I miss are the mental question challenges, which Sandra could do well in and possibly won. Those haven't been an individual immunity challenge in years, and probably because they are experimenting on what works and doesn't.

    Frankly the ONLY thing that needs to change is the physical contact allowed rules. IMHO, Stephanie's injured shoulder should NEVER have happened - it was inflicted when they were overly physical - nor Rupert's broken toe (though that was probably more his fault). I feel that in that case, if someone does not stop when someone tells them to in a physical challenge and it causes this severe of an injury (one that could eliminate the player on medical) the player inflicting it should be ejected TRULY from the game. This goes especially true when there has been a death in an international verison. I'm still surprised to this day we haven't had any concussions, anyone knocked unconscious or worse with this standard.

    In short - Sandra did what she needed to do to win, and Russell's arrogance bit him in the butt... again. Both women he lost to he didn't think he would and he did quite soundly (7-2-0 (Mick had 0) , 6-3-0 (Russell had 0).

  4. #364
    FORT Fanatic CuckoosNest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    414

    Re: 5/16 Finale Show Discussion *Spoilers*

    Quote Originally Posted by jadewarlock;3908005;
    I'm sorry, but I will rant... I'm getting tried of people saying "Bitter Jury," Sandra did nothing, etc.

    This is a game where you outwit, outplay and outlast. There are many definitions of those words, and sorry, Sandra does still fit in all three - particularly Outlast.

    As people have said, it's a social experiment, which in a real life situation being thrown into a situation like that you have to decide if you work together or you do not. "LOST" kind of gives an example of both and "Lord of the Flies" gives a notion to what happens when groups divide up.

    Sandra did more than what people give her credit for, and as most of the Survivors have said, what she did worked for her.

    What I miss are the mental question challenges, which Sandra could do well in and possibly won. Those haven't been an individual immunity challenge in years, and probably because they are experimenting on what works and doesn't.

    Frankly the ONLY thing that needs to change is the physical contact allowed rules. IMHO, Stephanie's injured shoulder should NEVER have happened - it was inflicted when they were overly physical - nor Rupert's broken toe (though that was probably more his fault). I feel that in that case, if someone does not stop when someone tells them to in a physical challenge and it causes this severe of an injury (one that could eliminate the player on medical) the player inflicting it should be ejected TRULY from the game. This goes especially true when there has been a death in an international verison. I'm still surprised to this day we haven't had any concussions, anyone knocked unconscious or worse with this standard.

    In short - Sandra did what she needed to do to win, and Russell's arrogance bit him in the butt... again. Both women he lost to he didn't think he would and he did quite soundly (7-2-0 (Mick had 0) , 6-3-0 (Russell had 0).
    Excellent post - really well put, especially about the physical contact thing. The last five +/- seasons have been marred by injury. Good player or bad, I don't like seeing anyone leave the game because of a medical evac caused by rough play.

    I'm with you 100% about Sandra. Yes, the main pillar of her gameplay - trying to oust Russell, failing, and then cracking her attempts up to be "heroic" - was accidental... but man do I give her props for recognizing it and running with it. That took some expert analysis and thought; it wasn't just a bunch of snap decisions like the kind that got Russell so deeply into trouble this past season. I also think she did a brilliant job at making herself look like she would never win, when you knew all along she had a very healthy chance.

    I think Sandra, more than anyone else, watched the game and the players closely, and made moves that were as bold as possible without drawing too much attention. Undoubtedly, the best under-the-radar player ever.

    (Sidebar: I thought that Boston Rob's observation about watching who people sleep with/near was brilliant as well.)
    Coach Ken: "Kid, you make this kick and you die a legend."
    Curt: "Can I pee first?"

  5. #365
    Forum Assistant sweetpea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    5,964

    Re: 5/16 Finale Show Discussion *Spoilers*

    I always think back to the Yul/Ozzy finale, where you had two very strong competitors, but one had the slight advantage in being more well-liked by the jury and also more devious in strategy, and he won. If they had had a final challenge, physical, endurance, whatever, most likely Ozzy would have taken it and won. He remains, in my mind, the most physically adept player this game has ever had, with Boston Rob a close second. I would have loved to see Ozzy win it all, as he was a big favourite, but he lacked that social aspect that Yul had, and so the jury gave it to the person they liked better. It's important, the social aspect. It's a huge part of the game. This time around the jury just liked Sandra's game better, and so gave her the prize. Probably some bitterness prompted the votes, but they also seemed to respect her way of playing this season and so she won. I agree with Tom, whoever wins that particular season deserves it. And I say this grudgingly since there have been many seasons where I have not liked the winner one bit.

  6. #366
    FORT Fogey jadewarlock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,203

    Re: 5/16 Finale Show Discussion *Spoilers*

    Quote Originally Posted by sweetpea;3908428;
    I always think back to the Yul/Ozzy finale, where you had two very strong competitors, but one had the slight advantage in being more well-liked by the jury and also more devious in strategy, and he won. If they had had a final challenge, physical, endurance, whatever, most likely Ozzy would have taken it and won. He remains, in my mind, the most physically adept player this game has ever had, with Boston Rob a close second. I would have loved to see Ozzy win it all, as he was a big favourite, but he lacked that social aspect that Yul had, and so the jury gave it to the person they liked better. It's important, the social aspect. It's a huge part of the game. This time around the jury just liked Sandra's game better, and so gave her the prize. Probably some bitterness prompted the votes, but they also seemed to respect her way of playing this season and so she won. I agree with Tom, whoever wins that particular season deserves it. And I say this grudgingly since there have been many seasons where I have not liked the winner one bit.
    I think the Yul/Ozzy season has been the ONLY season I was rooting for both players to win, but only one could. Yul played a brilliant strategy with the hidden immunity idol - never needed to use it except to say "You go after me, I'll use this and one of you will end up going home." It was that gameplay that got him to the finals, and why now they MUST play it no later than final five. (While I do like Yul, I did think it was fair that due to an oversight on the show's part they still allowed the HII to be used at four to three. This was the second season I think they had the HII in existence... BUT this season was the first that had a final three - so Yul got an automatic trip to the final three).

    Ozzy as you said played a brilliant physical game and IMHO could've won too if he had the social aspect. I think the final was 5-4 in Yul's favor though. Sad that Ozzy was a bit of a dunce in All-Stars, I think he could've gone a lot farther than he did.

    I loved the fact that Ozzy won fan favorite, and that both were the top two vote getters. They both earned their awards that season, and I wish Yul wouldn't be quite so much a jerk now about "Survivor" - I'd like to see him play again. HE could give Russell a run for his money on how a true strategist uses all three PLUS social and win.

    (The only other thing I can remember from that season was that Becky and the other gal who was competing in the firebuilding contest for that third spot were so inept that they had to use matches to start the fire, and even then it took a long time for them to start a fire. Ensured them that whoever won, Yul and Ozzy didn't have to worry about the person getting any votes in final TC).

  7. #367
    FORT Fogey northernviewer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,894

    Re: 5/16 Finale Show Discussion *Spoilers*

    Quote Originally Posted by jadewarlock;3908005;
    I'm sorry, but I will rant... I'm getting tried of people saying "Bitter Jury," Sandra did nothing, etc.
    This is a game where you outwit, outplay and outlast. There are many definitions of those words, and sorry, Sandra does still fit in all three - particularly Outlast.

    As people have said, it's a social experiment, which in a real life situation being thrown into a situation like that you have to decide if you work together or you do not. "LOST" kind of gives an example of both and "Lord of the Flies" gives a notion to what happens when groups divide up.

    Sandra did more than what people give her credit for, and as most of the Survivors have said, what she did worked for her.

    What I miss are the mental question challenges, which Sandra could do well in and possibly won. Those haven't been an individual immunity challenge in years, and probably because they are experimenting on what works and doesn't.

    Frankly the ONLY thing that needs to change is the physical contact allowed rules. IMHO, Stephanie's injured shoulder should NEVER have happened - it was inflicted when they were overly physical - nor Rupert's broken toe (though that was probably more his fault). I feel that in that case, if someone does not stop when someone tells them to in a physical challenge and it causes this severe of an injury (one that could eliminate the player on medical) the player inflicting it should be ejected TRULY from the game. This goes especially true when there has been a death in an international verison. I'm still surprised to this day we haven't had any concussions, anyone knocked unconscious or worse with this standard.

    In short - Sandra did what she needed to do to win, and Russell's arrogance bit him in the butt... again. Both women he lost to he didn't think he would and he did quite soundly (7-2-0 (Mick had 0) , 6-3-0 (Russell had 0).
    No matter how tired you are of people saying it, it's true, the jury was bitter, I hear Colby even admitted it, Sandra got the default vote, and if Jerry or Colby or Danielle or Rupert etc was that 3rd person, they'd have won as the rest were bound and determined NOT to vote for Russel or Parvarti... that says "bitter" to me. Not one would man-up and say to Russel or Parv "good for you, you got me good" what a bunch of crybabies LOL
    I hate to brag but I tried on some earrings that I wore in highschool... and they still fit
    Proud member of the Rose Coloured Glasses Club

  8. #368
    FORT Fogey jadewarlock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,203

    Re: 5/16 Finale Show Discussion *Spoilers*

    Quote Originally Posted by northernviewer;3908926;
    No matter how tired you are of people saying it, it's true, the jury was bitter, I hear Colby even admitted it, Sandra got the default vote, and if Jerry or Colby or Danielle or Rupert etc was that 3rd person, they'd have won as the rest were bound and determined NOT to vote for Russel or Parvarti... that says "bitter" to me. Not one would man-up and say to Russel or Parv "good for you, you got me good" what a bunch of crybabies LOL
    You know what? - it's the aspect of this game, and you have to cater to the bitter jury. It's going to ALWAYS be bitter - the final two do always have a part in making it bitter - they're the ones competing for the million dollars. That's even if neither actually voted for some of the jurors.

    That's my burr with it - if you can't figure that aspect out (and ALL the winners have), then you really don't know how to play the game and probably shouldn't. This is the OUTWIT - read SOCIAL part of the game that people such as Russell tend to think is not part of the game.

    This is why Russell failed and TRUE weak players such as Vecepia and to a point Natalie have WON "Survivor" in the past. At least winners such as Sandra and Yul do play the game - even if on a mental level. I have more respect for those who can play it on a mental level, adapt to their situations, be the underdog (and Yul was briefly until he found the HII), and can win on that.

    And, anyone also would've won over Sandra and Parvati SAVE Russell because the other two were winners. That's why Jerri was also a threat... Parvati would've most likely lost to Jerri as she did Sandra. So comments of "Oh, I'd won hands down" if it were Colby or Jerri makes sense - no one respects Russell's gameplay (which BTW, he could've turned down playing this season - Shambo apparently did), and the other two were previous winners.

    This is where I get tired of the bitter jury aspect - it will never go away, so you have to deal with it or you don't compete at all. This is why Sandra, Vee, Bob, Tina, Yul and a few other weak players have won - heck even Will in "BB2" have won - they know that it's the social aspect that will factor in changing people's votes.

    So, the only sour grapes and the only ones who are truly bitter are those who don't win... and it'll be that case because only one will win the million, so you have 19 bitter people and 1 who is not.

    Everyone is bitter save the winner... period.

  9. #369
    FORT Fogey KeepItReal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,490

    Re: 5/16 Finale Show Discussion *Spoilers*

    Thing is, the people who make it to the end and lose are no different than the losers that came before them. Yes, the jury may be a bit bitter, but guess what-so may Russell and so may Parvati. In the end there is one Survivor, one person who didn't get knocked out of the game, one winner, one million dollar check. Bitterness is not reserved for the jury-bitterness is shared by those who go pre-jury and final 2 or 3 as well. It is a part of the game, and the better you are at stroking egos and rubbing it and making it feel better,the better your chances at the million. That's that.
    "Worrying does not take away tomorrow's troubles, it takes away today's peace".

    -Unknown Author-

  10. #370
    FORT Fan ManySkills's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    baltimore
    Posts
    315

    Re: 5/16 Finale Show Discussion *Spoilers*

    Quote Originally Posted by jadewarlock
    ...I wish Yul wouldn't be quite so much a jerk now about "Survivor" - I'd like to see him play again. HE could give Russell a run for his money on how a true strategist uses all three PLUS social and win.
    OMG, I would so LOVE to see Yul against Russell.

    Lopsided as they may be, Russell DOES have some skills, dare I admit. A battle of Titans, I would think.

    jadewarlock - how is Yul being a 'jerk' now about Survivor? Did he turn them down or something?

+ 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.