|
Post by bbg95 on Jun 6, 2020 15:33:56 GMT -5
I'm watching Cook Islands, which was pretty ho-hum for the first eight episodes (well, except for Cao Boi, who was a character--one of my favorite moments of any season was when he dominated a fire making challenge in which he did some kind of fire dance in the middle of it, and it was also great that he had some dream that inspired him to be the father of the vote split strategy to counteract an immunity idol). But I just got to the mutiny episode, and now I'm very interested. Both mutineers made a really dumb move in my view, as they instantly alienated their former tribe members, and neither one was in any real danger of going home next and probably could have made it to the merge without making so many bitter enemies.
|
|
|
Post by XAsstCoach on Jun 6, 2020 18:05:04 GMT -5
Just finished Ghost Island, and have to say the final vote was surprising on how it played out. Loved the reaction from the jury. Guess you can say saved the best for last. 😊
|
|
|
Post by Orpheus on Jun 6, 2020 18:48:10 GMT -5
Just finished season 14 Fiji and boy was Dreamz a dumpster fire. Yao Man completely got screwed. And Cassandra must be the queen of doing nothing in challenges and camp. She literally wouldn’t even try in challenges.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2020 19:29:59 GMT -5
Just finished Ghost Island, and have to say the final vote was surprising on how it played out. Loved the reaction from the jury. Guess you can say saved the best for last. 😊 the gameplay from laurel was really frustrating. really all of the merge was.
|
|
|
Post by XAsstCoach on Jun 6, 2020 20:17:46 GMT -5
Just finished Ghost Island, and have to say the final vote was surprising on how it played out. Loved the reaction from the jury. Guess you can say saved the best for last. 😊 the gameplay from laurel was really frustrating. really all of the merge was. I agree...no way the jury would have thought of her of anything but a goat. So many times she could have changed the game, but baaaaahhhhh...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2020 20:22:29 GMT -5
the gameplay from laurel was really frustrating. really all of the merge was. I agree...no way the jury would have thought of her of anything but a goat. So many times she could have changed the game, but baaaaahhhhh... 3/4ths of the cast were goats lol
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Jun 7, 2020 16:05:10 GMT -5
I finished Cook Islands. The Aitu 4 were a nice story for a little while, but that died off a bit after they gained control after the merge. The late-game alliance of Candice, Adam, and--yes--Parvati may have been my least favorite in any season. Not only were they fairly inept (after being fairly unimpressed with Parvati in the three seasons I've seen, her Micronesia game better be like the best ever to warrant the hype around her), but they just constantly whined. Anyway, Yul was a worthy winner, even if his idol was pretty overpowered (not only could it be played after the votes were read, but it could also be played at the final four and guarantee his spot at the final tribal council). To his credit, he did use the threat of it to force Jonathan back at the key vote.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2020 21:00:29 GMT -5
I should've posted this earlier but it seems almost every weekend Peih Gee hosts a game night on twitch (twitch.tv/peihgee) with Survivor alum and they're really entertaining.
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Jun 8, 2020 22:43:53 GMT -5
I'm watching Vanuatu, and this is a really good season. The location is great, and there are a lot of interesting characters. Like Pearl Islands, I also appreciate the challenge variety. It was hilarious how the "Fat Five" alliance of older men systematically eliminated all the younger guys (I think this was a little shortsighted, as it put them at a numbers disadvantage later), only to get systematically eliminated (except for Chris) by the women after the merge. At the final seven, three of the women and Chris pulled off one of the greatest blindsides in Survivor history. I'm really looking forward to the endgame.
|
|
|
Post by Orpheus on Jun 8, 2020 23:35:28 GMT -5
I'm watching Vanuatu, and this is a really good season. The location is great, and there are a lot of interesting characters. Like Pearl Islands, I also appreciate the challenge variety. It was hilarious how the "Fat Five" alliance of older men systematically eliminated all the younger guys (I think this was a little shortsighted, as it put them at a numbers disadvantage later), only to get systematically eliminated (except for Chris) by the women after the merge. At the final seven, three of the women and Chris pulled off one of the greatest blindsides in Survivor history. I'm really looking forward to the endgame. Agreed. And Chris was the biggest failure of the first challenge lol.
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Jun 9, 2020 20:59:01 GMT -5
I finished Vanuatu, which was quite good. The jury was one of the angrier ones that I've seen. Chris did a good job of telling them what they wanted to hear, and Twila did a frankly terrible job. Chris definitely deserved to win after surviving what seemed like impossible odds, but I have to say that I'm a little sad that the winner wasn't Ami, the powerful leader of the women's alliance and perhaps my favorite non-winner ever. She made one critical error (allowing Leann to talk her into voting off Eliza before Chris because Eliza was "less deserving" of sixth place than seventh place), and it cost her the game. If they just vote out Chris like they should have, there's no way Eliza flips, and Twila and Scout have nowhere to go and get taken out next. Alas. Apart from that, I loved the way Ami effortlessly ran her alliance and outmaneuvered all the other guys. I'm kind of mystified that a lot of people consider her a "villain." I'm not sure what she did that so villainous. She didn't excessively lie to people or mistreat them. She just built a powerful alliance of women and wielded that power to get rid of the guys. She may have been the antagonist for the eventual winner and his alliance, but that doesn't make her a villain in my book.
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016)
Posts: 12,373
|
Post by bluepenquin on Jun 11, 2020 13:28:59 GMT -5
I finished S32 (Kaoh) for the 2nd time. Michelle remains one of the least deserving winners in my opinion. I just don't like it when players win - while really doing nothing to get to the final and then winning because the jury doesn't like the other two. I realize there are multiple strategies - but I cannot stand her 'game' for survivor.
It would appear that Scot, Debbie, and Jason didn't vote for Aubry in large part because Aubrey was the person that got them voted out. I think this is a sour grapes reason for voting someone out - and it leads to undeserving winners like Michelle. Even Cydney seemed to base her decision on being voted out by Aubry.
Tai just wasn't able to explain his moves in the game - otherwise he was 'worthy' of winning.
For Michelle - she did win a couple individual challenges which was pretty huge. Although claiming to be on the bottom and having to fight her way up - she only received 2 votes the entire season - both from Tai in the same tribal. She and Aubry ended up voting together in all but the Scot and Cydney eliminations - but it was Aubry that was making the decisions on who was going home in the ones where they voted together. Michelle was only blindsided once - the Scot vote - which at least means she had a solid awareness of what the other players were doing and thinking. She was fortunate to never have to go to a tribal until after the merge - thanks to being on strong challenge tribes. She also benefited from each of the medical evacuations in the game.
Again, for me - I am just not a fan of a winner that gets votes because they were not responsible for getting the players out of the game. I much prefer the players that make moves to blindside members of the jury.
|
|
|
Post by donut on Jun 11, 2020 15:42:43 GMT -5
I finished S32 (Kaoh) for the 2nd time. Michelle remains one of the least deserving winners in my opinion. I just don't like it when players win - while really doing nothing to get to the final and then winning because the jury doesn't like the other two. I realize there are multiple strategies - but I cannot stand her 'game' for survivor. It would appear that Scot, Debbie, and Jason didn't vote for Aubry in large part because Aubrey was the person that got them voted out. I think this is a sour grapes reason for voting someone out - and it leads to undeserving winners like Michelle. Even Cydney seemed to base her decision on being voted out by Aubry. Tai just wasn't able to explain his moves in the game - otherwise he was 'worthy' of winning. For Michelle - she did win a couple individual challenges which was pretty huge. Although claiming to be on the bottom and having to fight her way up - she only received 2 votes the entire season - both from Tai in the same tribal. She and Aubry ended up voting together in all but the Scot and Cydney eliminations - but it was Aubry that was making the decisions on who was going home in the ones where they voted together. Michelle was only blindsided once - the Scot vote - which at least means she had a solid awareness of what the other players were doing and thinking. She was fortunate to never have to go to a tribal until after the merge - thanks to being on strong challenge tribes. She also benefited from each of the medical evacuations in the game. Again, for me - I am just not a fan of a winner that gets votes because they were not responsible for getting the players out of the game. I much prefer the players that make moves to blindside members of the jury. I've always had issues with the notion that there are some "deserving" winners and some "undeserving" winners. Objectively, if you get to the end and you get the most jury votes, you are a "deserving" winner. Subjectively, you can say "well I would have voted for someone else" or "I enjoyed someones game more" but my favorite thing about Survivor is that it truly is a social experiment. We've had 40 different juries, 40 different jury dynamics, and not a single jury voted the same way or valued the exact same elements of the finalists' games. If blindsides, resumés, "strategy," always won out, the overall "social experiment" aspect of the show would get boring to me, even if episode-to-episode the action was more exciting. I think the "Michele only won because of a bitter jury" theory is exaggerated (and Nick, who voted for Aubry, has debunked that myth on at lease one podcast I've listened to). Scot and Jason? Maybe. But Michele still wins. Debbie and Cyd I don't buy, especially because Debbie didn't seem bitter at all towards Cyd when she arrived to Ponderosa (whereas Scot, Jason and Julia did). Cyd votes for Michele because of loyalty, which is different than bitterness towards Aubry. Some of Aubry's flaws I think were highlighted on her later seasons, which maybe didn't appear in the edit in Kaoh Rong. I don't find her particularly likeable (which is important in a game like Survivor), and I think she plays a rather "fickle" (a word used to describe her gameplay once that I thought fit) game (like the whole Julia-crossed-out-Peter vote - bleh). Michele also had a brilliant FTC performance, and regardless of whether or not you think she was truly "playing from the bottom," theatrics and persuasion are a huge part of the FTC. I'm glad you respect Tai's game, but I think he was pretty clearly a goat. And even if he "deserved" it, FTC performances are a huge part of your game (see: Amanda Kimmel). Side note: I think a huge moment from this season that goes undiscussed (and IMO may have had an impact on the voting) was Neal's cringe words to Michele after he got voted off.
|
|
|
Post by donut on Jun 11, 2020 15:44:13 GMT -5
(P.S. Started watching Survivor with China, first time posting in the thread, hi everyone)
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016)
Posts: 12,373
|
Post by bluepenquin on Jun 11, 2020 16:10:58 GMT -5
I finished S32 (Kaoh) for the 2nd time. Michelle remains one of the least deserving winners in my opinion. I just don't like it when players win - while really doing nothing to get to the final and then winning because the jury doesn't like the other two. I realize there are multiple strategies - but I cannot stand her 'game' for survivor. It would appear that Scot, Debbie, and Jason didn't vote for Aubry in large part because Aubrey was the person that got them voted out. I think this is a sour grapes reason for voting someone out - and it leads to undeserving winners like Michelle. Even Cydney seemed to base her decision on being voted out by Aubry. Tai just wasn't able to explain his moves in the game - otherwise he was 'worthy' of winning. For Michelle - she did win a couple individual challenges which was pretty huge. Although claiming to be on the bottom and having to fight her way up - she only received 2 votes the entire season - both from Tai in the same tribal. She and Aubry ended up voting together in all but the Scot and Cydney eliminations - but it was Aubry that was making the decisions on who was going home in the ones where they voted together. Michelle was only blindsided once - the Scot vote - which at least means she had a solid awareness of what the other players were doing and thinking. She was fortunate to never have to go to a tribal until after the merge - thanks to being on strong challenge tribes. She also benefited from each of the medical evacuations in the game. Again, for me - I am just not a fan of a winner that gets votes because they were not responsible for getting the players out of the game. I much prefer the players that make moves to blindside members of the jury. I've always had issues with the notion that there are some "deserving" winners and some "undeserving" winners. Objectively, if you get to the end and you get the most jury votes, you are a "deserving" winner. Subjectively, you can say "well I would have voted for someone else" or "I enjoyed someones game more" but my favorite thing about Survivor is that it truly is a social experiment. We've had 40 different juries, 40 different jury dynamics, and not a single jury voted the same way or valued the exact same elements of the finalists' games. If blindsides, resumés, "strategy," always won out, the overall "social experiment" aspect of the show would get boring to me, even if episode-to-episode the action was more exciting. I think the "Michele only won because of a bitter jury" theory is exaggerated (and Nick, who voted for Aubry, has debunked that myth on at lease one podcast I've listened to). Scot and Jason? Maybe. But Michele still wins. Debbie and Cyd I don't buy, especially because Debbie didn't seem bitter at all towards Cyd when she arrived to Ponderosa (whereas Scot, Jason and Julia did). Cyd votes for Michele because of loyalty, which is different than bitterness towards Aubry. Some of Aubry's flaws I think were highlighted on her later seasons, which maybe didn't appear in the edit in Kaoh Rong. I don't find her particularly likeable (which is important in a game like Survivor), and I think she plays a rather "fickle" (a word used to describe her gameplay once that I thought fit) game (like the whole Julia-crossed-out-Peter vote - bleh). Michele also had a brilliant FTC performance, and regardless of whether or not you think she was truly "playing from the bottom," theatrics and persuasion are a huge part of the FTC. I'm glad you respect Tai's game, but I think he was pretty clearly a goat. And even if he "deserved" it, FTC performances are a huge part of your game (see: Amanda Kimmel). Side note: I think a huge moment from this season that goes undiscussed (and IMO may have had an impact on the voting) was Neal's cringe words to Michele after he got voted off. Agree with the idea that if you won - you deserve the win. And that strategy is relative to when you played (which in theory is 40 unique games). I am speaking to my vision of the game - which could/is very different than anyone else. Specifically, I see this as a game and not a social experiment and don't think much of people that hold grudges and such. Not sure if the show would be as popular if played the way I would like to see it. I haven't read much on this - but I consider Survivor originating as a 'reality' TV show in the lines of Real World or probably more like Road Rules. Except they wanted to add the 'social' element of greed and open up to all ages instead of college age kids. I don't consider Survivor to be a reality TV show, but as a game. The game early on was based on the social interaction between the players and seems to me have involved into more of a game of strategy. Each season, the show has less on air of the social aspects or the 'reality' of surviving and is mostly about game strategy. Now 'strategy' is subjective - being a wallflower to the end and being the less objectionable player left can be a strategy (for me if that was really what they were trying to do). Amanda is interesting - at the time I thought she got robbed because of horrible FTC. Watching those seasons again - I wouldn't have voted for her regardless. She was outplayed in S16 - my perception of how the game should be played and rewarded has changed. Anyway - my opinion on the game is probably unique and may very well be a minority opinion.
|
|