URL: http://community.realitytvworld.com/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/rtvw2/community/dcboard.cgi
Forum: DCForumID4
Thread Number: 4837
[ Go back to previous page ]
Original Message
"Is it time to revamp this show?"
Posted by garcor on 12-15-08 at 09:43 PM
As interesting as it was watching Sugar rearrange the game to suit her own likes or dislikes, is it a problem for Survivor that she was able to practically decide who would win without appearing to care if she won herself? Don't think it was anticipated that a player might do this. Is there a way to prevent this?

Another thing that might be worth changing. Jurors must ask actual questions at final TC. And they should be questions that have some relevance to how the finalists played the game; not angry rants like Corinne's at Sugar or her stupid questioning of Suzie - would you have your vocal cords removed. Perhaps they could make all players members of the jury, but only allow five or six to ask questions. Have everyone submit questions and choose the best for use at final TC.

Table of contents
Messages in this discussion
"RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"
Posted by Snidget on 12-16-08 at 06:33 AM
LAST EDITED ON 12-16-08 AT 06:34 AM (EST)

I disagree.

Part of what makes the show interesting for me is to see what people do with the opportunity.

How do you really decide who should be allowed to make a move in the game and what motivations are OK. I don't think you can outlaw I vote people out because I can't stand them anymore, and I don't think this is anything new. Maybe more than in other seasons, but often the boots are more about personality than game play.

I also don't like the idea of the producers picking and choosing what questions the jury gets to use. Why give them more power than they already have? I'd rather see a good rant and see what that reveals about the ranter than get pick a number questions.

Edited for clarity.

"RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"
Posted by mindy23 on 12-16-08 at 09:18 AM
As difficult and disguisting as it was for me to hear Corrine's rants to Susie and Sugar (actually made my stomach flop), I have to agree. Even Susan's rant to Richard and what's her name at the first FTC is what ultimately makes the show's finale worth watching, to me.

It gives us all a chance to see who that person on the jury really is, what he/she is thinking about being voted off, about the strategies the others used, whether they admire them or hate them, etc. In MY mind, this is where it all comes together and Survivor is finally clear and I can finish it with some closure on the past however many weeks I spent watching it. I know that sounds uber-psychotic, but that's all I got...



"RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"
Posted by LFJ on 12-16-08 at 06:03 PM
I totally agree. This is why they (attorneys) Wadir (spelling?) people in jury selection. They hire specialists to do it, so that no resentments or prjudices are hidden, and the vote can be calculated. I would bet a process similar to this goes on in the selection of the Survivors, and that the producers purposely pick potential "jurors" who are labile, just to add a little juice to the program.

"RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"
Posted by smokedog on 12-16-08 at 05:21 PM
This has kind of happened in the past. I remember in season 3 where Kim said she knew she would lose to either Ethan or Lex, so she chose Ethan as he was the one she'd rather give the money to.

As far as I'm concerned, if you want to go that far and give it away, that's your privelege.


"RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"
Posted by Corvis on 12-17-08 at 05:45 PM
If I were going to revamp the show, I'd do away with all twists and do it straight up like season one. Two tribes, merge at 10, final 2. Because no one would be expecting it, it'd be a great twist!

And bring back the luxury items!

"RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"
Posted by garcor on 12-17-08 at 06:56 PM
That would be good. No one would believe it. They would be awaiting a game twist all the way to final TC.
"RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"
Posted by Sunny_Bunny on 12-27-08 at 12:42 PM
I love the idea of going back to basics too! Waiting for a twist/reshuffle of tribes that never comes would make for some great implosions with tribe members who base their game on "once I'm out of this stupid tribe you are toast!"

I would include not giving food rewards every. single. RC. too.

My biggest re-vamp would also to STOP the practice of casting mostly eye candy/models/actors etc. Use real people again - they are just as interesting.


"RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"
Posted by jbug on 12-18-08 at 10:11 AM
I'd like to see it that way again too Corvis.
Sometimes I wonder how many different possible "plans" production has for various situations.
Marcus was taken out because of the switch up that was made in the tribes. Was there a plan in place to switch the tribes in the event one tribe was dominating the challenges?
If the tribes had been evenly winning the challenges is it possible that there might not have been a switch?

The players have to play against each other as well as against production.


Santa is shakin! bobblin! Thanks Tribe!

"RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"
Posted by MPVLOST on 12-18-08 at 12:45 PM
LAST EDITED ON 12-18-08 AT 12:46 PM (EST)

That would an awesome twist.

I'm pretty sure they still bring luxury items, but they're just not featured/talked about as much as in the early seasons.


Edited because my post didn't show up in the right place. I was replying to Corvis's post about going back to season 1 style. 2 tribes, Merge at 10, final 2.


-----------------------------------------
Have you ever imagined a world with no hypothetical situations?

"RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"
Posted by Snidget on 12-27-08 at 12:54 PM
I had thought once they started the whole "just the clothes on your back" thing they stopped having luxury items with them. They might still get to pack them, but often they don't get their luggage, other than maybe tennis shoes so they can safely run and stuff.
"RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"
Posted by Aruba on 12-27-08 at 02:07 PM
I believe you are correct, Snidget. Pearl Islands was the first season without luxury items when they started the show by telling all the castaways to jump off the ship with just the clothes on their backs. Osten had to hand over a bottle of champaign he brought with him. In retrospect, I wish everyone (with the exception of Ruppert) had brought a bowling ball as their luxury item so they would have sunk to the bottom of the ocean. They could have just given Ruppert the Million (which they essentially did the following season) and would have spared us that horrible season.

Back then I applauded that change. There were a few players whose luxury items provided an unfair advantage in the game IMO. The first notable one was Colby and his oversized Texas flag. Whether it was by design or chance, it was used as shelter (not that it helped his tribe who were beaten in most challenges.) When production saw what was happening they had them trade it for more rice. This was back in the "good old days" of Survivor when players REALLY had to survive as a result of food deprivation.

Another example was in Survivor 4 when Vecepia brought a pen and pad as her luxury item to use as a diary for her Survivor experience. This seemed OK...until the F4 IC was a contest on what you remembered during your time in the game. Vecepia was able to study her diary and won that challenge going away. I suspect production probably wasn't all that thrilled over that!

The biggest example of idiocy was when that moron Robbbbb brings a skateboard as his luxury item...on an island covered with sand???!!! Amazon was the last season with luxury items, but later that season, a fire destroyed the luxury items (many were personal with sentimental ties.) I think that was the straw that broke the camel's back.

All this being said, I have to admit that now I kinda miss it. It did tell a little bit about the contestants when you found out what they brought. I'd be OK if they brought this back as long as they screen the items carefully to ensure it does not provide an unfair advantage at camp or in a future challenge.

"RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"
Posted by Karchita on 01-09-09 at 12:29 PM
I agree about the luxury items. I would like to see them given to the cast sometime after the midpoint, so if there was a survival use for them, it wouldn't be available for the whole 39 days but we would still get to see what they chose and their reactions to receiving them unexpectedly.



"RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"
Posted by sol on 01-11-09 at 01:40 PM
I remember reading something that Clarence said after Africa about why he chose face paint as a luxury item. He said that the castaways give a list of items to the producers, and it is the producers that choose which of the luxury items they were allowed to take.

One might question why Clarence even included face paints on his list, or why Robbbbbbbbbbbb included a skate board, but they probably had something far more appropriate on that list as well.

"RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"
Posted by PsychoKitty on 01-11-09 at 08:14 PM
You are all making me laugh, remembering that total Bonehead Robbbbb - what a stupid choice!!!!! Quel goober Maybe it's like a teddy bear to him.

(

Not that I have an opinion one way or another ;)
Sigs by Cig