-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Survivor 41 Discussion Thread
- Thread starter PUSH
- Start date
A little over 24 hours from now we have new episodes of Survivor back on our TVs! We've waited a long time for this!
To start the season I've done a male and female winner pick. I've had some successes (I picked Adam as my male for MvGx). I've had some flops (I picked Figgy as my female for MvGX). And I've had some in betweens (I picked Alison as my female for DvG).
This season I'm picking Ricard as my male pick and Sara as my female pick.
To start the season I've done a male and female winner pick. I've had some successes (I picked Adam as my male for MvGx). I've had some flops (I picked Figgy as my female for MvGX). And I've had some in betweens (I picked Alison as my female for DvG).
This season I'm picking Ricard as my male pick and Sara as my female pick.
Wendy Pleakley
Well-Known Member
It's only been four days for those of us watching the international series, just 'sayin.
Still, exciting. It's one of the more fun and unpredictable shows on TV, and isn't boring 20 years in.
I just watched an almost two hour podcast of Rob Cesternino trying to name all 608 Survivor contestants, including the season 41 cast. I won't spoil the outcome if you want to watch, but this is something he's been saying he's wanted to do for quite a while.
Season 41 will not have a live reunion. They revealed the winner during the filming of the finale. That's the first time since Borneo. They filmed a reunion in Fiji immediately after the season with just the jury and finalists. Jeff said it was risk vs risk. Either they risk not being able to film a reunion in the US once the season finishes airing, or they risk a spoiler getting out.
Wendy Pleakley
Well-Known Member
I'm surprised they didn't film multiple endings. Rumour has it Australia did it that way.
It's not uncommon in reality TV to film all of the winner outcomes and the contestants don't actually find out who won until it airs.
Maybe they did, and Jeff just left that part out of the interview so the public wouldn't know.
Wendy Pleakley
Well-Known Member
The only issue is it would impact the reunion, but they could still discuss the season as a whole without knowing the final result. They could also read the votes at the end of the reunion. This might annoy some viewers but would also force people to tune in.
Honestly, I don't think spoilers are a huge concern. This isn't like Borneo where everything was being publicly discussed and reported on (remember the quaint days where people could discern future tribal council makeups by pausing the opening credits). You'd have to actively seek out spoilers, and honestly, if one can go online and find out who the final 2 or 3 are, does keeping the winner secret even matter at that point?
And with probably fewer people allowed on set this season, the only people who could spoil it are the crew and cast. The crew is heavily invested in keeping it a secret, and most players are too.
And who knows how much the reunion even is. They've pretty much eliminated any true reunion once the game became less personal.
I can't believe I just watched a new episode of Survivor again! I missed the Twitter community that surrounds the show. It's so much fun interacting with past players, bloggers, podcasters, etc.
And before we continue on, I told you some of my winner picks flop (Sara), but Ricard is still hanging on!
Overall, I really enjoyed this episode. I loved getting the backstory of players. Anything to increase storytelling through the players' eyes is a plus. I thought the characters were fun. My favorite part of the episode was Shan's adorable villainous hum. And then the show played it a couple times after that. I was literally laughing out loud. It may be my favorite Survivor "funny" moment since Mike White was stumbling around the beach with a glass of wine.
I also enjoyed seeing a little bit of the behind-the-scenes stuff. The crew deserves so much credit for everything they do. I don't need to see it all the time, but I enjoyed it here. I also found Jeff breaking the fourth wall pretty funny. I think too much of it could become annoying, but after such a long layoff, it was carefree fun.
The one thing I didn't care for were the two mini games in the first hour of the season. That's one thing I hated about EoE and IoI. There were too many mini games aside from the main game. And the rules for the risk/protect your vote thing were confusing.
One thing that was interesting was they waited until the vote to give JD and Xander their advantages. That eliminates the ability for the other players to search their bags immediately when they come back.
Players I like so far: Ricard, Shan, Naseer
I also live Voce more than I thought I would. He's been fun so far.
Overall, I'm really happy with the first episode. It's just great to have new Survivor again!
And before we continue on, I told you some of my winner picks flop (Sara), but Ricard is still hanging on!
Overall, I really enjoyed this episode. I loved getting the backstory of players. Anything to increase storytelling through the players' eyes is a plus. I thought the characters were fun. My favorite part of the episode was Shan's adorable villainous hum. And then the show played it a couple times after that. I was literally laughing out loud. It may be my favorite Survivor "funny" moment since Mike White was stumbling around the beach with a glass of wine.
I also enjoyed seeing a little bit of the behind-the-scenes stuff. The crew deserves so much credit for everything they do. I don't need to see it all the time, but I enjoyed it here. I also found Jeff breaking the fourth wall pretty funny. I think too much of it could become annoying, but after such a long layoff, it was carefree fun.
The one thing I didn't care for were the two mini games in the first hour of the season. That's one thing I hated about EoE and IoI. There were too many mini games aside from the main game. And the rules for the risk/protect your vote thing were confusing.
One thing that was interesting was they waited until the vote to give JD and Xander their advantages. That eliminates the ability for the other players to search their bags immediately when they come back.
Players I like so far: Ricard, Shan, Naseer
I also live Voce more than I thought I would. He's been fun so far.
Overall, I'm really happy with the first episode. It's just great to have new Survivor again!
ajrwdwgirl
Premium Member
I like some of the new twists but the mini-game thing was a little dull. I agree that the villainous hum is amusing. I think this season will be fun.
Wendy Pleakley
Well-Known Member
This was a lot of fun, and it seems like a great cast of characters. There's a lot to unpack.
I love the diversity. Here they put a group of people together representing a lot of communities, and it kind of felt like it was just people. For a show that brands itself a social experiment they kind of showed that race and gender and sexuality don't have to be divisive and shouldn't be the driving force behind how people relate to one another. I recently re-watched Season 4 and the only two black people on the beach had a strong bond, because they had a unique life experience compared to everyone else, and much was made of whether or not they were a default alliance, which wasn't fair to them. When you have a more diverse group like this you don't necessarily get that type of scenario.
It did kind of crack me up when Ricardo mentioned he has a husband. Who is transgender. Who is pregnant. That's wonderful of course, but it just felt bemusing to have this trifecta of diversity pop up.
Jeff's gotten some slack online for being so heavy handed with changing language to be more inclusive. One argument is that he should just stop saying "come on in guys" and not bring it up, as it can feel a bit self indulgent. On the other hand, he has a platform and an audience and he wants to explain why some of our common sayings evolve.
Breaking the fourth wall? Yeah, it's fine. I could have done without it again right at tribal council but whatever. Did it feel a little pretentious to wax poetic about how important Survivor is? Sure, but we're still watching, so he's not wrong.
The biggest debate might be one that's been going on for quite some time with Survivor. How much influence should the show exert, versus just letting people play the game. Right from the start we have a scenario that separates 2 people from their tribe for hours and hours. We have a scenario where one person goes away and is put in an almost no win scenario. As they said, come back with nothing and people automatically speculate that you won something for yourself at the expense of the tribe. You can be 100% honest in that situation and still suffer for it.
Lots of interesting characters and lots of interesting dynamics behind the votes. Someone being accuse of "playing like it's 2000" was funny, and accurate. You don't tell people you're gunning for them, that often backfires. Are we still penalizing someone for not solving the puzzle first?
I love the diversity. Here they put a group of people together representing a lot of communities, and it kind of felt like it was just people. For a show that brands itself a social experiment they kind of showed that race and gender and sexuality don't have to be divisive and shouldn't be the driving force behind how people relate to one another. I recently re-watched Season 4 and the only two black people on the beach had a strong bond, because they had a unique life experience compared to everyone else, and much was made of whether or not they were a default alliance, which wasn't fair to them. When you have a more diverse group like this you don't necessarily get that type of scenario.
It did kind of crack me up when Ricardo mentioned he has a husband. Who is transgender. Who is pregnant. That's wonderful of course, but it just felt bemusing to have this trifecta of diversity pop up.
Jeff's gotten some slack online for being so heavy handed with changing language to be more inclusive. One argument is that he should just stop saying "come on in guys" and not bring it up, as it can feel a bit self indulgent. On the other hand, he has a platform and an audience and he wants to explain why some of our common sayings evolve.
Breaking the fourth wall? Yeah, it's fine. I could have done without it again right at tribal council but whatever. Did it feel a little pretentious to wax poetic about how important Survivor is? Sure, but we're still watching, so he's not wrong.
The biggest debate might be one that's been going on for quite some time with Survivor. How much influence should the show exert, versus just letting people play the game. Right from the start we have a scenario that separates 2 people from their tribe for hours and hours. We have a scenario where one person goes away and is put in an almost no win scenario. As they said, come back with nothing and people automatically speculate that you won something for yourself at the expense of the tribe. You can be 100% honest in that situation and still suffer for it.
Lots of interesting characters and lots of interesting dynamics behind the votes. Someone being accuse of "playing like it's 2000" was funny, and accurate. You don't tell people you're gunning for them, that often backfires. Are we still penalizing someone for not solving the puzzle first?
dmw
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
I really think that change ("come on in" vs "come on in, guys") is stupid. The term "you guys" or just "guys" is pure west coast vernacular, just as "y'all" or "all y'all" is in the South. If this season (or the show) continues with with pushing social issues instead of game play, I'll stop watching.
/soapbox mode off
(edited after the fact to remove personal and political opinions)
My thought is, if it makes even one person (whether it be castaway, production, or viewer) feel more comfortable and included, then it's worth it. Dropping one word really isn't that big of a deal. Yes, it's different, but hearing "come on in, guys" is not the reason I watch Survivor. There are plenty of other Survivor catchphrases that have more impact than that one anyway.
But your opinion is valid, too. I'm not trying to change your mind. Just offering my take on the situation.
Now if they take away "the tribe has spoken", then I will be upset.
Wendy Pleakley
Well-Known Member
The irony is, the people saying "Jeff shouldn't have made a big deal about it" are are having an extremely vocal meltdown over a TV show daring to express a viewpoint that doesn't match their own. I agree that it's about making some people feel inclusive, and that's a good thing. I would have never found it to be an issue personally, but it's not about me.
I think the international RHAP podcast had the perfect assessment of the change:
They noted that while it's a positive change that sends a message about inclusivity, it is being turned into a big deal by people upset by it, overshadowing the rest of the show.
Their main point though, which was spot on, that Jeff should not have put it to the castaways. Make the change? Sure. Explain to the viewers why? Sure.
However, it was unfair to force contestants to take a stand when they're playing a game of strategy. It forces people to take a stand on something that could impact their social game, and that's unfair, especially when Jeff had clearly already made his mind up before he even asked.