Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'TV Shows' started by Patrick Sun, Jan 11, 2013.
Shamar is not getting a good edit at all.
The object of this game is to win. In order to win, you need to NOT PISS YOUR OWN TEAM OFF. Russell, and apparently, some members of this discussion, have never grasped this fact. The whole point of "Survivor" is to get votes at the end. If you've never won, you are NOT great. IMNSHO, that's why Sandra is the greatest player ever. 2 games, 2 wins. Rob's a close second, followed by Yul, Parvati and Hatch. To me, these ALL put Russell to shame, whether we're talking about "Outwit", "Outplay" or "Outlast". I'd also have a LARGE group of players ahead of Hantz, including Tina, Ethan, Ozzy, Yau-Man, Amber, Jenna, Chris, Brian.......and we're STILL only talking about winners. I won't even go into non-winners names, but many of them were better than Russel at this game. Just remember, biggest ego does NOT mean best player.
He's getting the typical Burnett edit of being the lazy and volatile black man. Not saying he isn't, but it's amazing that 99% of the black men they cast fit this mold, either through editing or temperament. At one point, I thought one of the Cool Kids was going to call him "shiftless". It was quite uncomfortable.
Allie's biggest mistake was the inability to do the math. 4 out of 10 is not majority! Why did she think hanging out in a tight group of 4 douchebags was going to help her get to the merge? Sleeping on the beach separate from the tribe? Mishegoss!
My wife thinks Sherri looks like Sandra Bullock. If Sandra Bullock had a ton of plastic surgery, then yes. Sort of a Sandra Bullock, Jocelyn Wildenstein hybrid. Also, she's the puppet master of the Fans tribe.
Holy shit, I really though Malcolm was going to choke in the challenge LIKE HE ALWAYS DOES. He might be the biggest choker in Survivor history. Luckily for him, Phillip stepped in a hit the last ring.
Shamar admitted to spending 19 hours on his ass. Not really something that can be attributed to an edit. Screaming shut up at your tribe members is also an interesting strategy, but I guess that is just the edit as well...? As soon as I saw Malcolm lining up for tossing the rings I was predicting a come from behind victory for the fans. Luckily even Malcolm knew he was done and Phillip pulled it off.
Chris, I don't think you read what I wrote thoroughly enough. I am not claiming that Shemar's depiction is merely a trick of editing. It was more a commentary on how they cast the same black man type in Burnett productions all the time. BTW, the music cues tricked me in the immunity challenge. It kept sounding like the music was crescendoing (a sign that the challenge was about to be won), but it kept going back to before finally hitting the coda when Phillip hit the final ring. There were four or five false endings there.
I suppose I did focus too much on your first sentence:
Also, when I say he is getting that "edit:", I am not claiming that they are editing Shemar to look bad in a false manner, but rather that they are following a template of how he is presented.
It took Rob four or was it five attempts to finally win, seems kind of a reach to call him the second greatest player ever. He certainly was one of the more entertaining characters ever but if he was so great he would have won more than just once. By the time he did win it the other Survivors that season were so star struck from all his reality show appearances, (he had been on Race two times, his own realty show for a season and had his wedding televised on CBS), that they worshiped the guy.
I'm late to the thread.
Yeah. This was a really big stretch on their part...to have Probst in his scripted segments constantly referring to the 'age-old feud" between Phillip and Fransesca. Honestly. She has never made it past the premiere episode of a season. How much of a 'feud" could the two of them have?
I've said it a million times. The beauty of Survivor is in the natural interest created by throwing interesting people together into an unnatural situation. They do NOT need to try and manufacture drama in that way. Same thing with the concept of Redemption Island. Just an unnecessary contrivance on top of the already basic contrivance of the show. It muddies the waters by adding too many layers. Keep it simple.
I consider Amber's win to be part Robs win also. But what makes Rob really great is that he got BETTER, not worse. The more players knew about him, the better he played.
Great quote, Mike. This almost exactly states my thoughts, too.
I'm surprised that I'm the only one seeing the maturation in Cochrane. I think the guy has outgrown a LOT of his nebbishness. Yes, he got a bad deal with the sunburn early in the season but that's really not his fault. Look, when Brandon is treating him as an equal at worst and a mentor to get strategy from, you know he has earned a few players respect.
I think Cochran's got some game in him, for sure.
But, I don't think Brandon coming to him for counsel means much. Brandon is about as immature and squirrelly as a player can get. He was an emotional wreck in his last season. That seems to have carried over into this season. Huge mood swings. And what's he got stuck in his ear?
She does! When she was talking with Shamar it looked like a scene from "The Blind Side." So far Brenda doesn't seem to be giving the producers very much usable footage, which bodes well for her game, as I think she may be the smartest player out there. I'd love to see her win.
Winning cannot be the only measuring stick by which Survivor play is judged. Can you honestly say that Vecepia or Aras or freakin' Fabio are better players than Jonathan Penner or Russell or any number of much smarter players who were eliminated? If the standard is outwit, outplay and outlast, Russell did all three in his first season (I think making it to final tribal council qualifies as 'outlast,' but your mileage may vary). However, this is not a game with an objective scoring system - your fate is determined completely by a jury that should, in a perfect world, respect superior gameplay enough to reward it. Of course, they are under no obligation to do so, which is now Natalie won that season. I'd have to agree with Sandra, Parvati and Hatch among the game's best players ever, but I'd also put Russell and Amanda in there, and I think if Kim Spradlin comes back, she would have a good shot to join those ranks as well.
While winning certainly is not the only characteristic when I judge which players I enjoy/hate watching, when we start to discuss "greatest" or "best", I feel winning has to be the first consideration.
John and Dave, the reason you are going around in circles is because there are no rules in Survivor for picking a winner. The jury is not obligated to vote for the best player or the player they like best. They are merely required to vote for one of the two or three players left standing. Go back to season 1 or 2, and you'll remember one of the jury members making his vote by asking the final two to pick a number between one and ten and closest to what was in his head got his vote. It's been awhile, but if I remember correctly, that vote was the tie breaker. If the game rules allow there to be NO CRITERIA when making a vote, how can we decide definitively who is the best player? Our opinions are colored by what WE like in a player, probably very similar to that of a jury. It's obvious that certain players go far in the game and affect the outcome and it is easy to say they are better than the players we forget easily for having no impact. But to choose between the top 5 objectively? Impossible. I think Russell could have won with a different jury playing his same game style. We'll probably never find out since his style is no longer original. The first two times he played, his teammates didn't know what to expect, now, his game play looks cartoonish because he can't surprise anyone. Same for all of the "undeserving" winners like Tina, Vecepia, et al. They wouldn't have won with a different jury. Maybe you can say that they had a hand in picking the jury so a winner is deserving, but I think there are too many other pieces in motion to give a winner that much credit. Keep discussing who is the best if you must, but to me it's a matter of opinion. There is no right or wrong way to play the game.
Geez, can't stand Shamar at all.
The fans strike me as complete idiots. I cannot believe there is any movement to just keep Shamar around.
At the end you gotta sit next to someone.
The 4 person couples alliance was much more of a threat than Shamar. They were a strong 4 with two strong guys and two women who looked like they could be athletes, plus they had an idol. First priority for the other fans who were comprised of oddballs and subject to fracture because of Shamar was to take out the "cool kids." Not to mention, the vote split, which was well calculated. They had just enough votes to cause the three way tie that results in two of the cool kids not being eligible to vote in the second vote and ensuring a majority to take out the player they wanted. They could not have afforded to wait another week or they would have lost the numbers to counter the HII.