Survivor S39: Island of the Idols

[PUSH]

I still think it's interesting that the producers must be telling players not to reveal Rob and Sandra to anyone that hasn't been to the Island of the Idols thus far. Vince basically said as much when Rob asked him about it during the RHAP exit interview. I wonder if they will ultimately reveal Rob and Sandra to the cast at some point and have them sit out in front of the cast.

I know production told reporters during pre-season press that players would be free to tell the truth, but I am pretty sure that was false. That's my biggest beef with production interfering with the game this season because they are forcing players to lie.

I just hope Rob and Sandra don't become part of the jury.

 

[SAV]

Last season was horrible with the least deserving winner in the show's history.

Vecepia didn't win last season, she won in Season 4. And Natalie didn't win last season either(We all know Russell should have won that season).

 

[PUSH]

Vecepia didn't win last season, she won in Season 4. And Natalie didn't win last season either(We all know Russell should have won that season).

I think Chris is probably a better player than Vecepia and Natalie, but I think Vecepia and Natalie are more deserving winners since they lasted the whole time. Chris was a 3rd boot. He didn't deserve to even have a chance of winning.

 

[PUSH]

The thing I love most about Rob's podcasts is not the takes on the current season, but learning more from players' past seasons. This week I learned that Kass was never totally sold on going back for Second Chances. She said she regrets not telling Jeff to have T-Bird take her place when the cast was revealed at the Worlds Apart finale.

I also learned from Ciera that John and Candace were not supposed to be on BvW in 27. It was supposed to be RC and her dad, but they were out literally minutes before the game started, although she couldn't remember why.

These little tibits are so interesting to me. If Survivor historian was a job, that would be my dream job.

 

[artvandelay]

The thing I love most about Rob's podcasts is not the takes on the current season, but learning more from players' past seasons. This week I learned that Kass was never totally sold on going back for Second Chances. She said she regrets not telling Jeff to have T-Bird take her place when the cast was revealed at the Worlds Apart finale.

I also learned from Ciera that John and Candace were not supposed to be on BvW in 27. It was supposed to be RC and her dad, but they were out literally minutes before the game started, although she couldn't remember why.

These little tibits are so interesting to me. If Survivor historian was a job, that would be my dream job.

I think RC’s dad had a medical issue. Also, Davy from David v Goliath was a last minute addition when someone else dropped out at the last second.

 

[PUSH]

I think RC’s dad had a medical issue. Also, Davy from David v Goliath was a last minute addition when someone else dropped out at the last second.

Natalie Anderson was supposed to be on Game Changers, but she had a medical issue that pulled her. I also can't remember who it was who was saying this, but they made the trip for Heroes vs Villains, but were not put into the game. I think Danielle took her place.

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

Vecepia didn't win last season, she won in Season 4. And Natalie didn't win last season either(We all know Russell should have won that season).

I think Chris is probably a better player than Vecepia and Natalie, but I think Vecepia and Natalie are more deserving winners since they lasted the whole time. Chris was a 3rd boot. He didn't deserve to even have a chance of winning.

At the risk of rehashing the past, it's interesting to look at who is a "deserving" winner and who isn't.

With Chris, my complaints are directed towards the show. They created a scenario where someone can live with the jury, and doesn't face any animosity because he didn't vote most of the jurors out. Was it a satisfying result? No. Did he deserve to win? Yes. Given the rules of the season, he had the game that should win. The way to win that season was ultimately to come back from EoE at the last minute, which he did.

Russell remains one of the best strategic players, his ability to get to the end was unmatched. What he failed to do, was understand that winning Survivor isn't about who outlasts and outplays, it's about who can make it to the end and convince the jury to vote for them. He failed to play in a way that people would be willing to award him the prize. His failure to understand a basic concept of Survivor is why he deserved to lose.

 

[PUSH]

At the risk of rehashing the past, it's interesting to look at who is a "deserving" winner and who isn't.

With Chris, my complaints are directed towards the show. They created a scenario where someone can live with the jury, and doesn't face any animosity because he didn't vote most of the jurors out. Was it a satisfying result? No. Did he deserve to win? Yes. Given the rules of the season, he had the game that should win. The way to win that season was ultimately to come back from EoE at the last minute, which he did.

Russell remains one of the best strategic players, his ability to get to the end was unmatched. What he failed to do, was understand that winning Survivor isn't about who outlasts and outplays, it's about who can make it to the end and convince the jury to vote for them. He failed to play in a way that people would be willing to award him the prize. His failure to understand a basic concept of Survivor is why he deserved to lose.

Agreed. I think all winners are deserving and all jurors have the right to vote for whoever they want. Every season is different, as there are no rules or guidelines for how players play and the jurors vote.

I was on on EoE, but there were two clear groups. Those who had spent time on EoE and those those didn't. The jury was split almost evenly down those lines. I feel like EoE was almost two separate games, with one winner for both of them. It felt unfair and violated what Survivor is at its core, IMO. That's why I have an asterisk next to Chris' win in my brain. I totally see why some wouldn't vote Gavin. Had he won, he would probably be one of the bottom tier winners. He wasn't a great player. He outlasted, but I didn't see much outwit or outplay. But from my couch, I would have voted for him because I valued his play more than what happened to Chris. But I never lived on the EoE or played on that season, so I don't know what it was like, and my opinion doesn't really matter.

Again, this is simply my opinion, and it is okay for others to view it differently. That's the great part about Survivor is that everyone has a different take on the way it should be set up and played. That's a major reason it has stayed so relevant and is heading into its 40th season and 20th year.

 

[PUSH]

Speaking of tiers for winners, here are my tiers based solely on the season they won (not ranked within the tiers):

Elite (Top Tier)
Parvati
Rob
Kim
Tony

Very Good (2nd best tier)
Richard
Tom
Yul
Todd
Cochran
Tyson
Jeremy
Wendell
Natalie Anderson

Good (3rd best tier)
Chris Daugherty
Brian
Earl
JT
Sarah
Nick

Average (4th best tier)
Tina
Ethan
Amber
Danni
Aras
Sandra (Heroes vs Villains)
Sophie
Denise
Mike
Adam
Ben

Below Average (5th best tier)
Jenna
Bob
Sandra (Pearl Islands)
Michele
Chris Underwood

Bottom (Lowest tier)
Vecepia
Natalie White
"Fabio"

 

[PUSH]

This episode feels pretty gross. My heart breaks for Kellee and Janet. As I'm writing this we don't know the outcome of the 2nd vote, but I hope it's not Janet. I am not a woman, but I feel like tonight's episode surpasses gameplay. Dan should have been pulled. Missy and Elizabeth should have never played with this issue. It is not a game. So many women have been victims to this behavior, and what Missy and Elizabeth have done is give Dan an out for his actions.

That's all I'll say about tonight's episode.

 

[Watchers]

 

[flynnibus]

Russell remains one of the best strategic players, his ability to get to the end was unmatched. What he failed to do, was understand that winning Survivor isn't about who outlasts and outplays, it's about who can make it to the end and convince the jury to vote for them. He failed to play in a way that people would be willing to award him the prize. His failure to understand a basic concept of Survivor is why he deserved to lose.

One can argue that what motivates people to vote is not a “basic concept” of survivor. Russell knew he needed votes... he just thought people would respect his game play and mastery over others (like richard hatch as well...).. where as CONVENTION has settled that the jury is so emotional time and time again that you need to not just beat people... but convince them they like you... to get your votes.

Thats not a construct of the game... thats simply reality in our all-hugs world that most people can’t separate the game play from their emotions. Russell failed to bend to that...

 

[flynnibus]

i was completely confused by how survivor handled this topic. They put up those messages sayingnthey talked to everyone and specifically talked to dan 1:1 and warned him during the first episode. Then in the second episode... janet talks to Dan and he acts like hes never heard of this topic at all...

And all the women throw janet under the bus for addressing the topic to dan??

And then in tribal, they totally let people railroad her? They did janet dirty.... and for all their talk about supporting women, feeling supported etc... they let Dan go on and on and doubt what the producers flat out knew to be true in terms of comments made, and conversation s had. That was f’d up

If they felt as strong as they let things get hyped to be... they should have stepped in when people apparently started making it part of the game and then they televised it. Apparently they didnt have a problem letting Dan get a rep on TV for weeks as being a creeper... but when it all comes to being in the open they let the whistleblower get railroaded and left hanging high and dry? Total betrayal.

I didnt like jamal that much in the game... but he had some intelligent comments at tribal. I thin survivor producers failed kelli, dan, and janet. I wouldnt be suprised if there are lawsuits from Dan later.

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

This episode feels pretty gross. My heart breaks for Kellee and Janet. As I'm writing this we don't know the outcome of the 2nd vote, but I hope it's not Janet. I am not a woman, but I feel like tonight's episode surpasses gameplay. Dan should have been pulled. Missy and Elizabeth should have never played with this issue. It is not a game. So many women have been victims to this behavior, and what Missy and Elizabeth have done is give Dan an out for his actions.

That's all I'll say about tonight's episode.

Yeah, it was really off putting the way physical harassment became a part of gameplay. It's reality TV, so it happens, and it was certainly interesting to watch, but it was unpleasant.

Off putting from the perspective of someone agreeing it happened, and calling Dan out for it on national television, only to say later she only said it as part of gameplay. That's potentially destroying someone's reputation and life, to sway a vote, if they didn't believe it happened.

It was also off putting (as noted above) how they made a point of stating Dan was warned, and even showed behind-the-scenes footage to illustrate the incidents, only to have Dan seem oblivious to it and Janet get attacked for her efforts to play the mother figure and protect others.

The whole thing felt gross. Comparatively speaking, the incident when Zeke was outed felt like a positive learning moment at the end, with a suitable result. This was unsettling, while admittedly making for one of the more compelling episodes of Survivor.

 

[GenerationX]

It was an ugly episode and probably the messiest in Survivor history. Everyone (with the notable exception of Janet) was tarnished. I hope this season can bounce back from this.

 

[PUSH]

Janet tweeted that not everything was shown, and that people came to her defense, especially Tommy. She asked for people to stop posting hateful comments towards anyone else.

Aaron posted apology videos on Twitter, and he seemed very sincere. Elizabeth posted an apology, but many fans did not take kindly to that. Same for Missy.

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

Janet tweeted that not everything was shown, and that people came to her defense, especially Tommy. She asked for people to stop posting hateful comments towards anyone else.

Aaron posted apology videos on Twitter, and he seemed very sincere. Elizabeth posted an apology, but many fans did not take kindly to that. Same for Missy.

The idea of going after these people in real life is insane to me. Yeah, people are understandably upset by some of what went down, but it's still a highly edited TV show. No one can possibly know the whole story. There's a way to discuss it without targeting the people directly.

I'm glad some people have apologized, but it's important to remember that these are everyday people trying to win a life changing million dollar prize.

People want them to put the game aside and vote in a moral way, but who am I or anyone to say they have to? Would I do the same under those conditions? At that moment in the game, Kellee is a threat and Dan is not. With the amount of money at stake, can we really expect people to stop and do the "right" thing? Even if one thinks they should have, that's easier to decide in hindsight.

It's also a mirror of society. How long did John Lasseter get away with his behaviour, because he was making a lot of money for people? He probably should have been let go far sooner, but people look the other way to a degree because it serves their interest. Same with Survivor, the moral choice wasn't the best gameplay choice for many of the players.

 

[flynnibus]

The idea of going after these people in real life is insane to me. Yeah, people are understandably upset by some of what went down, but it's still a highly edited TV show. No one can possibly know the whole story. There's a way to discuss it without targeting the people directly.

I'm glad some people have apologized, but it's important to remember that these are everyday people trying to win a life changing million dollar prize.

People want them to put the game aside and vote in a moral way, but who am I or anyone to say they have to? Would I do the same under those conditions? At that moment in the game, Kellee is a threat and Dan is not. With the amount of money at stake, can we really expect people to stop and do the "right" thing? Even if one thinks they should have, that's easier to decide in hindsight.

It's also a mirror of society. How long did John Lasseter get away with his behaviour, because he was making a lot of money for people? He probably should have been let go far sooner, but people look the other way to a degree because it serves their interest. Same with Survivor, the moral choice wasn't the best gameplay choice for many of the players.

In my view... the problem is the show through its edits and commentary essentially confirmed the behavior and problem... damning the guy... then, turn around and railroads the people who get exposed for trying to address it.

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

In my view... the problem is the show through its edits and commentary essentially confirmed the behavior and problem... damning the guy... then, turn around and railroads the people who get exposed for trying to address it.

I didn't think the show railroaded anyone. The producers don't interfere with the players and the game, beyond warning about behaviour that crossed a line physically.

 

[flynnibus]

I didn't think the show railroaded anyone. The producers don't interfere with the players and the game, beyond warning about behaviour that crossed a line physically.

Thats just it... in the game they simplified it to be part of the game... instead of treating it like they handled it outside the game. Thats how they screwed people. They essentially confirmed it in the publics eye... then let the sole person who stood up to the ideal they broadcast on tv... to be torn apart in the game because of information they intentionally withheld.

If it was a physical altercation, or similar they would intervene... but here they play a double standard of treating it as critical and a line that can not be crossed... then let players be steamrolled with lies about the very same “non negotiable” topic.

They did them wrong