"Is it time to revamp this show?" - Reality TV World Message Board Forums

Reality TV World Message Board Forums PLEASE NOTE: The Reality TV World Message Boards are filled with desperate attention-seekers pretending to be one big happy PG/PG13-rated family. Don't be fooled. Trying to get everyone to agree with you is like herding cats, but intolerance for other viewpoints is NOT welcome and respect for other posters IS required at all times. Jump in and play, and you'll soon find out how easy it is to fit in, but save your drama for your mama. All members are encouraged to read the complete guidelines. As entertainment critic Roger Ebert once said, "If you disagree with something I write, tell me so, argue with me, correct me--but don't tell me to shut up. That's not the American way."

"Is it time to revamp this show?"

Conferences Survivor Fanatic Forum (Protected)
Email this topic to a friend Printer-friendly version of this topic Bookmark this topic (Registered users only)		Previous Topic \| Next Topic
Original message

garcor 432 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Daytime Soap Guest Star"	12-15-08, 09:43 PM (EST)
"Is it time to revamp this show?"
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.
Alert	Edit \| Reply \| Reply With Quote \| Top

Table of Contents

Lobby | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

Messages in this topic

Snidget 43862 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
12-16-08, 06:33 AM (EST)

1. "RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"

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.

Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

mindy23 1319 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Beef Jerky Spokesperson"
12-16-08, 09:18 AM (EST)

2. "RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"

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...

Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LFJ 363 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Cooking Show Host"
12-16-08, 06:03 PM (EST)

4. "RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"

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.

Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

smokedog 1885 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"
12-16-08, 05:21 PM (EST)

3. "RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"

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.

Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Corvis 3116 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Car Show Celebrity"
12-17-08, 05:45 PM (EST)

5. "RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"

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!

Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

garcor 432 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Daytime Soap Guest Star"
12-17-08, 06:56 PM (EST)

6. "RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"

That would be good. No one would believe it. They would be awaiting a game twist all the way to final TC.

Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Sunny_Bunny 5581 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
12-27-08, 12:42 PM (EST)

9. "RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"

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.

Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

jbug 16685 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
12-18-08, 10:11 AM (EST)

7. "RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"

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!

Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

MPVLOST 169 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Blistex Spokesperson"
12-18-08, 12:45 PM (EST)

8. "RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"

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?

Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Snidget 43862 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
12-27-08, 12:54 PM (EST)

10. "RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"

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.

Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Aruba 1891 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"
12-27-08, 02:07 PM (EST)

11. "RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"

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.

Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Karchita 4469 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Jerry Springer Show Guest"
01-09-09, 12:29 PM (EST)

12. "RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"

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.

Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

sol 219 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Network TV Show Guest Star"
01-11-09, 01:40 PM (EST)

13. "RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"

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.

Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

PsychoKitty 678 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator"
01-11-09, 08:14 PM (EST)

14. "RE: Is it time to revamp this show?"

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

Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Lock | Archive | Remove

Lobby | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -

about this site • advertise on this site • contact us • privacy policy •