1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Survivor 12-15-10

Discussion in 'TV Show Talk' started by spartanstew, Dec 16, 2010.

  1. spartanstew

    spartanstew Dry as a bone

    12,566
    61
    Nov 16, 2005
    Wylie, Texas
    Can't remember the last time I saw so many bad plays/decisions in one episode:

    1. It never occurred to the Alliance of three that the other three could vote against them and force a tie. They should have had a plan in place to prevent it (i.e. take Jane on the reward so she'd think she was the third, move the idols around, etc.)
    2. It never occurred to the other three that they could do it. Why wasn't Jane talking to Fabio and Dan ahead of time to get them to band together???
    3. Even after Jeff pointed out the logic, the other three still didn't do it. Jane said they should all vote for Holly during TC, but yet, NONE of them did.
    4. Neither Chase or Sash gave up their immunity to Holly. The other three had just talked about the fact that they couldn't vote for Chase and Sash and needed to vote for Holly. The smart thing to do would have been for one of them to give their Idol to her in case the other three got smart. But neither one did, and of course, it didn't matter, because there's not a brain left in the bunch.

    I would be shocked if any of the remaining contestants had an IQ over 100
     
  2. BattleScott

    BattleScott Hall Of Fame

    2,353
    7
    Aug 28, 2006
    That was just the producers and Probst trying to make a drama where there was none. The vote was 5-0 and everyone knew exactly how it was going down. Every week the engineering by the production makes the show less and less credible. That one was one of the worst, basically "advising" a group of contestants how they should be playing the game and how they should vote. The fact that the vote went down the way it did tells me the "alliances" really aren't what they have been portraying in the final editing. Maybe the contestants are getting smart enough to hide their "real" alliances from production. That would really piss friggin' Jeff Probst off...:lol:
     
  3. fluffybear

    fluffybear Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    7,316
    38
    Jun 19, 2004
    Peachtree...
    After seeing the final vote, I am thinking that they may have had to reshoot the TC (for whatever reason) but kept the original vote (which is the only fair thing to do). This would explain many things such as How Jeff could get away with trying to influence the vote & how the final vote turned out the way it did..
     
  4. Indiana627

    Indiana627 Hall Of Fame

    3,266
    4
    Nov 18, 2005
    Did anyone else notice that the reward Chase won with his family was day 33 and then it jumped to day 36 for the immunity challenge? Must have been because of the 2 quitters a couple weeks ago. Must have been a long 3 days with not much to do but sit around starve.
     
  5. subeluvr

    subeluvr Icon

    534
    0
    Jan 14, 2007
    I don't get why the two quitters get to sit on the jury.
    Why should they get a jury vote when they quit the game?

    You quit, you're gone.
     
  6. fluffybear

    fluffybear Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    7,316
    38
    Jun 19, 2004
    Peachtree...
    I have to agree. You quit, you get sent packin'

    The show has really declined over the last few years and this season has to be it's worst.
     
  7. Kentstater

    Kentstater Godfather

    441
    3
    Jun 18, 2004
    SE Michigan
    Combined, and throw in the Jury.
     
  8. sdicomp

    sdicomp Godfather

    318
    0
    Sep 12, 2006
    +1
     
  9. SPACEMAKER

    SPACEMAKER Freethinker

    3,183
    16
    Dec 11, 2007
    Mason, MI
    At the end of an episode a few weeks ago when they were doing previews for a future episode they showed Fabio talking to the camera while wearing the immunity necklace. Pretty big slip by CBS that week.
     
  10. SWORDFISH

    SWORDFISH Legend

    189
    0
    Apr 16, 2007

    Probst addressed this in an interview after the episode aired. He said that in Survivor: Palau, contestant Janu quit the game and was on the jury. Since they had set a precedent with her, they had to let the other two quitters stay as well, or possibly face legal issues. He also said that the issue will be addressed after the season and new language will be written into the Survivor contract.


    SF
     
  11. subeluvr

    subeluvr Icon

    534
    0
    Jan 14, 2007
    A loophole don't make it right or fair.

    Should have been addressed after Palau.
     
  12. fluffybear

    fluffybear Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    7,316
    38
    Jun 19, 2004
    Peachtree...
    Exactly! Producers should have known then that was not going to be an isolated incident.
     
  13. subeluvr

    subeluvr Icon

    534
    0
    Jan 14, 2007
    So, in this Survivor we have two players with no determination, no willpower, no drive, and one of them a thief, both who QUIT the game getting a vote each to determine who gets or doesn't get a million bucks?

    Way to go CBS... no more Survivor for me.
     
  14. dave29

    dave29 New Member

    5,945
    40
    Feb 18, 2007
    Definitely the worst year ever when it comes to strategies and playing smart. These people are a bunch of idiots.
     
  15. Scott Kocourek

    Scott Kocourek Well-Known Member

    9,491
    523
    Jun 13, 2009
    I doubt it would happen but I would like to see Jeff announce that the two quitters do not get a vote. This is a show that I never miss an episode of, I sure hope next season is better.

    I also kept asking myself, will Nay still be a PE teacher when this is over? I am not sure I'd want her to be my kids teacher.
     
  16. dave29

    dave29 New Member

    5,945
    40
    Feb 18, 2007

    I'm sure there are worse teachers in those LA schools. :lol:
     
  17. fluffybear

    fluffybear Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    7,316
    38
    Jun 19, 2004
    Peachtree...
    One would think there is legal issues with these getting a vote. In the event of a close final vote (will say 5-4 for fun) with these 2 siding for the winner, one might think the loser would be justified in filing a lawsuit? After all, the payday between Ultimate Survivor and 2nd place is quite a bit ($900,000 difference I believe).

    Who knows, this may be the first Survivor where the winner is selected by more then one jury ;)
     
  18. SWORDFISH

    SWORDFISH Legend

    189
    0
    Apr 16, 2007

    I agree with you. However, strictly from a legal standpoint, they made the correct decision since a precedent had already been set.





    SF
     
  19. wilbur_the_goose

    wilbur_the_goose Hall Of Fame

    4,493
    52
    Aug 16, 2006
    Survivor is like corporate America. It amazes me how many clueless folks run things in big companies.
     
  20. Lee L

    Lee L Hall Of Fame

    3,134
    0
    Aug 15, 2002
    Well, in all honesty, if you make it to the Jury, you have gone at least 20 days or so, so I can see how they might not think that too many people will have the wherewithall to get more than half way to the end and suddenly think they can't do it any more, so they probably thought Palau was a one off situation.
     

Share This Page