-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Survivor S39: Island of the Idols
- Thread starter PUSH
- Start date
Wow. I don't even have anything to say about the first 55 minutes of the episode. The last 5 is the shocking part. I knew the merge couldn't have been the last moment with Dan based on how it ended. It's another gut-wrenching feeling. Assumptions are Dan inappropriately touched someone on the crew, whether it be a camera person, medical, producer, etc.
Gordon Holmes said he reached out to Survivor and/or Jeff, but Survivor has no statement at this time, and Jeff will not be doing any additional press.
Sickening.
Gordon Holmes said he reached out to Survivor and/or Jeff, but Survivor has no statement at this time, and Jeff will not be doing any additional press.
Sickening.
artvandelay
Well-Known Member
Dalton Ross interviewed Jeff and he would not answer questions about what happened with Dan. Dalton also ranked this as the worst season ever.
People reported that the incident happened after the immunity challenge, BEFORE THE VOTE, and it involved a member of production while getting on the boat. It was not filmed, but at least one other contestant saw it happen.
So why on earth was he not kicked off before the vote? Elaine should still be there.
So why on earth was he not kicked off before the vote? Elaine should still be there.
People reported that he touched a female crew member's leg. Dan claimed he lost his balance getting on the boat, but production disagreed. After consulting with their legal team, Survivor decided to remove Dan from the game. Dan vehemently disagreed with his removal.
It is widely assumed that there are ongoing lawsuits, which is why Survivor, CBS, and Jeff have not been able to comment. It is also probably why many contestants have not done exit press, and why Aaron likely did email press, but nothing else. He probably had to get it run by the lawyers first.
From Dan's perspective, I can't imagine he would have much pull in lawsuits. He did sign up for a TV show in which they film your entire life on the island and have every right to show anything. It has to be in the contract he signed that they can do that. The questions are them pulling him from the game. I would assume Survivor has language in their contracts saying you can get pulled for any reason, but obviously I have no proof to back that up.
Perhaps there are lawsuits from Kellee and/or the crew member.
From Dan's perspective, I can't imagine he would have much pull in lawsuits. He did sign up for a TV show in which they film your entire life on the island and have every right to show anything. It has to be in the contract he signed that they can do that. The questions are them pulling him from the game. I would assume Survivor has language in their contracts saying you can get pulled for any reason, but obviously I have no proof to back that up.
Perhaps there are lawsuits from Kellee and/or the crew member.
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
I have a general feeling that the footage gathered about Dan was all very in retrospect. Kellee was taken seriously by the producer talking to her, but the evidence was probably gathered remotely from the actual timeframe. (There'd be hundred of thousands of hours of footage to comb through).
That's partially why that episode in particular felt so weird. It laid out a trial against Dan - knowing what was coming - without seemingly logical follow through in the moment of the episode. Jeff likely was operating on bad info (and Missy and Elizabeth very much up-sold that they lied).
Fast forward to the lot of them sitting in Jury, probably more discussions occurred with Production. Then an incident occurs with production and the consequences are finally followed through with.
I think the problem is they should have held back 'the evidence' for this episode. Instead they really sold a narrative of inaction. Maybe more truthful, but a bad look.
That's partially why that episode in particular felt so weird. It laid out a trial against Dan - knowing what was coming - without seemingly logical follow through in the moment of the episode. Jeff likely was operating on bad info (and Missy and Elizabeth very much up-sold that they lied).
Fast forward to the lot of them sitting in Jury, probably more discussions occurred with Production. Then an incident occurs with production and the consequences are finally followed through with.
I think the problem is they should have held back 'the evidence' for this episode. Instead they really sold a narrative of inaction. Maybe more truthful, but a bad look.
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
It's all too bad, this season is a mess. Island of the Idols feels horribly disconnected and not something 'earned'. I understand the careful decision between not having Rob/Sandra basically being "Producers controlling the game". But it would be more interesting if they at least had a jury vote or something. The 'surprise we were watching tribal!' twist seems pointless. Their presence is also a bit pointless this many years into the show. If they want higher level game players, just cast for it.
I do love, that this seems like one of the rare female led season (from idols to immunity)...
Then there is the whole vilanization of half the cast and a general apathety towards another quarter.
Janet and Kellee should be brought back and the rest of this years cast can be mostly forgotten about.
I do love, that this seems like one of the rare female led season (from idols to immunity)...
Then there is the whole vilanization of half the cast and a general apathety towards another quarter.
Janet and Kellee should be brought back and the rest of this years cast can be mostly forgotten about.
flynnibus
Premium Member
Lawsuits are public court records once filed - Hollywood reporters would have picked up on it as they monitor all court filings.. just like most news does around the country.
The lawsuit wouldn't be about being pulled from the game.. the lawsuit would likely be a defamation type.
Dalton Ross ranked this season as the worst season ever. His reasoning is Survivor is supposed to be fun, and this season is not that. I agree with him. It was very promising in the pre-merge. One of the best pre-merges ever. It all went downhill post-merge. Obviously with Dan, but also just a lack of interesting strategic gameplay. I feel like the strategists were voted out early with Jason, Kellee, Missy, etc. It left us with some good characters in Noura, Karishma, Elaine, and Dean, but fell flat with strategy. Does anyone really feel like any of the remaining players would be great winners? I don't. Nobody has really done anything memorable. Janet would be a great winner from a moral perspective (and she is the only remaining player that I want to win), but she has not done much strategizing. She's very old-school and alliance focused. Loyal to a fault. Her win would end the season on a positive note, but it's still not enough to turn this season around.
I am not a lawyer, but I can't see defamation holding up. I would imagine Survivor and CBS has something like that worded into the contract so they can't be sued for it. After all, it is a TV show where you are filmed nearly 24/7, and they have the right to show any moment of your day. Castaways have to agree to that before going onto the island. But again, I'm not a lawyer. Just my perspective as a fan of the game.
GenerationX
Well-Known Member
Other than Rob and Sandra, the second half of this season is a dumpster fire.
Wendy Pleakley
Well-Known Member
I don't see why Dan would be successful with a defamation lawsuit. It's all on tape.
Is there anything to suggest he's been portrayed unfairly?
Is there anything to suggest he's been portrayed unfairly?
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
I agree, Dan actually had a 'good edit' literally outside of the episode it was raised. He then proceeded to have a good edit and the show basically ignored the accusations (it was more about Janet than Dan).
There was very little commentary provided by the show or producers outside of two factually benign title cards.
The broadcast was almost certainly scrubbed by lawyers and I doubt their contract would afford any sort of guarantee about a players implicit completion or participating in all aspects of the game at their discretion. I'm sure legally at any time for no reason at all the producers could remove someone from the game.
He's basically a paid actor.
I guess in the end at least Survivor did something (however late). Big Brother really fumbled the ball.
There was very little commentary provided by the show or producers outside of two factually benign title cards.
The broadcast was almost certainly scrubbed by lawyers and I doubt their contract would afford any sort of guarantee about a players implicit completion or participating in all aspects of the game at their discretion. I'm sure legally at any time for no reason at all the producers could remove someone from the game.
He's basically a paid actor.
I guess in the end at least Survivor did something (however late). Big Brother really fumbled the ball.
flynnibus
Premium Member
The issue is CBS controls what the public sees.. and clearly this has harmed his reputation and character. The argument would be around the representation of him vs the facts of the matter.
If he's been treated unfairly or not is unknown... but certainly what we saw when janet got roasted at tribal certainly shows alot of manipulation without transparency.
The guy's public image is ruined... he's not gonna rollover on that. If he's successful or not.. who knows.
Wendy Pleakley
Well-Known Member
I don't know, Survivor must have some strong contractual language about the fact that they will be airing a minuscule amount of the raw footage, in order to tell a story.
Just about every Survivor contestant has been edited to be a simple one-dimensional character. It has to be a condition of appearing on the show.
The inappropriate touching was caught on camera. The show has not fabricated anything. What's he going to sue for? The show airing footage when he agreed to be filmed 24/7 on an island?
He's refusing to comment publicly at the moment, whatever that implies.
Rob Cesternino made a good point about the lack of reaction from CBS, Survivor, and Jeff. He said that by admitting they handled/reacted poorly, it could open up the door for potential lawsuits against them. I hadn't thought of it that way. Kellee could sue if they admitted their wrongdoing. That's just evidence to help her case. Dan could sue based on that, too. Survivor has never really backed down from controversy with political and social issues. That's what the game is about. But lawsuits are one thing that can change that.
Smiley/OCD
Well-Known Member
Is it me or does it seem like Dan must have worked for or at least looked up to, Harvey Weinstein? Just sayin'...