|
STAC Goat posted:It just didn't make much sense for Baylor and Jaclyn to willingly sacrifice themselves, In her exit press Jaclyn seemed to indicate that she was on board with this plan and was okay with the idea of her being voted out at Final Five (because she thought this plan going through would guarantee a Jon win) since the guys liked Jon so much more than her.
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 00:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 22:13 |
|
|
I haven't gotten a chance to check out any exit interviews yet, but do I suspect they'll help answer some of these questions. What I can say is that my thought when Jon first brought this up in his exit interview is that it sounded like something Jon believed but didn't make much sense. If Jon believed it than presumably Jaclyn was at least passively on board. If Jon and Missy were as close as suggested than she may be passively on board too, especially since she's on the positive end of it. But Baylor didn't seem to be on board and with that I assume there's some problem Missy has (Baylor after all said that keeping Jon in hurt them when convincing Missy to vote him out) and obviously Natalie wasn't with it unless we assume she was lying about considering bringing Keith to the end or Missy/Baylor. So if Jaclyn sounded kind of ok with it I'm not super surprised. I do think it was probably discussed. I just think it was obviously going to break down when Baylor or Jaclyn got close enough to the end to ask "Why am I giving my spot away?" or when Missy, Jon, or Natalie get to the point where they are counting jury votes (which is what seemed to happen with Natalie). Jon was just playing very over confidently so I think it bought too hard into it. And with him Jaclyn probably came like usual. But who knows? It's all kind of a mystery right now unless Missy, Baylor, and Nat have said more.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 00:16
|
|
|
Jaclyn sounded entirely on board with it, and I think Missy was also. But it's like any alliance or plan, several of the people may be in on it but some may harbor misgivings and just be faking it. Natalie and Baylor were faking their agreement, but the deal still happened.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 01:25
|
|
|
Yeah I'm sure the Final 3 deal existed in the sense that they agreed to it, but clearly Natalie was never on board and Missy and Baylor were eventually persuaded otherwise. I also think that when Jon got voted out the deal was off, and I'm surprised people think otherwise. The Final 5 Tribal Council will be one amazing acting job by all five of them if everyone was in agreement to get rid of Baylor. Anyway, I'm not surprised we never saw the Final 3 and wouldn't be surprised if it is why Jeff seems very lukewarm about ever doing another BvW season. People realized that could happen way back before the first BvW started. There's a reason conspiring to share the prize is one of the only things not allowed on this show: it leads to really obvious strategies that are really boring to watch play out, like agreeing to step aside at the end. With a BvW you have this problem built-in from the start since obviously 90% of the couples are splitting the prize (excepting weird uncle/niece pairs like Gervase last season), and it's kind of a miracle this problem didn't pop up the first time. As for why Natalie wanted to get Baylor out at Final 5, another factor is that in a Final 4 of Baylor/Missy/Keith/Natalie, if Keith wins Immunity again than Natalie is 100% out of the game, which is definitely not true for a Final 4 of Jaclyn/Missy/Keith/Natalie.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 03:12
|
|
|
The idea of two players colluding doesn't bother me much. Sure, two people may have shared interest in winning enough for one to throw it but the idea that five of them did is just weird and goofy (which is why I'm having such a hard time believing it even though it probably did exist in some form). And I don't think it messed anything up this season. For all the speculation I thought the Final Six or Eight was the most interesting and hard to guess part of the game that salvaged it. Maybe that's all because Natalie turned it on its ear but it seemed to work out. I'd be ok with a third BvW but if they did it I think they'd have to go back to 1 and do half returning players. They could just ask all former Survivors if they have a loved one who wants to play with them, collect all the info, do the auditions, and decide if they have 8-10 interesting newbies who go with 8-10 interesting vets. Then maybe mix up the tribes from the start so the Favorites/Vets don't have such an advantage like they always seem to. But the idea should probably be shopped for awhile now. I think they went back to the well too soon and this season tarnished the idea. I think they might be going back to the three tribe culture battle thing a little early too but at least that's more random. For 31 and 32 they're probably due for another Fans vs Favorities or All Stars or something and they should have enough interesting newbies from the last few years to do a good new one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 04:43
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:The problem is that every couple in the end will be the same, a tight pair of 2 people that will never betray each other (if you tell me about Ciara voting her mother out, GTFO, they both agreed that that would be the best move going forward) and not individual players. Let's hope for next season to be a return to greatness and not One World(s apart). Absolutely agree on the Luara & Ciera situation, that move has been blown out of all proportion and was purely a pragmatic 'pile-on' vote by Ciera after she and her mom talked it through and realised it was a done deal. Certainly not the shocking twist/ruthless play it's hyped up as. I was annoyed that Rob C played into that in his interview with the two of them last week, really don't like Luara as a guest as her opinion of her game is so much higher than reality. Ciera is ok I guess but Hayden definitely stood out as the best player of that group. I was pretty confused as to why Natalie wouldn't go to F3 with Missy & Baylor for an easy 8-0-0 but if she was genuinely worried about a backstab from them then I guess it was the right move, although it all relied on Jaclyn not smartening up. Reeds speech was glorious, can definitely see that he's a stage performer. Was completely unnecessary and mean, but still it was entertaining. I was glad he didn't apologise at the reunion, as he quite rightly said he was talking purely about Missy on Survivor, it's not his fault that she decided to wilfuly ignore that and play upon the literalness of her being a former stepmother. That's a dishonest interpretation and she knows it, and the fact that she didn't attempt to rebut any point Reed raised confirmed to me that he was largely on the mark. Leery of next year's theme, but then these types of 'categorisation' seasons tend to have a mix up very early and the original premise is mostly ignored by everyone but Probst. I feel like an All Stars season would've been appropriate for s30 but oh well..
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 08:34
|
|
|
One thing the B v W avoided was a boring post-merge pagonging. Note on Jaclyn: in some ways she was similar to another pageant woman, Amanda Kimmel. Okay at challenges (Amanda was much better), decent social game but lacking the 'killer instinct' or ability to turn off one's empathy, see the big picture and do what's necessary to eliminate your rivals. Nothing at all wrong with being a genuinely nice person who wants to be liked - except it won't help you win at Survivor. On to next season! We already had a reality show of White Collar vs Blue Collar vs No Collar, it was called Utopia! I think it will be entertaining since appointing people to those categories is going to have them playing into the stereotyped roles. I'm going to be on Team Free Spirits, I identify with that group and think they'll be the most fun to watch, man. Binary Logic fucked around with this message at 11:42 on Dec 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 11:31
|
|
|
I'm much more excited about starting with three tribes. For some reason I just tend to enjoy that set-up much more, as it allows for me to remember the cast much more quickly. As for Jaclyn, I would've loved to see how she'd play the game without Jon in tow.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 12:05
|
|
|
 Kind of interesting how Jeff disliked the Blood vs Water theme this time around, but it took someone whose opinion he respected groaning at the prospect of another Redemption Island to finally convince him that it was a The BvW premise has its flaws (Julie never would've made the show if not for Rocker), but I'd take that any day over the format-wrecking, tension-destroying Redemption Island gimmick.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 12:40
|
|
Ghostpilot posted:
They said before this season was changed to Heroes Arena that they would only do Redemption Island in a BvW season. With BvW probably done we will never see RI again.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 14:03
|
|
|
I don't think Redemption Island is a good gimmick, but I DO like having an event to start each episode out. Without it, you essentially watch paint dry until the immunity challenge for something to impact the game.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 22:04
|
|
|
I finally got around to watching the finale after a lovely week.... Love or hate Reed's speech, I'm astonished no one else noted the greatest thing of this entire season: Smug Jeff turning to see Missy's reaction. I need to find a gif of that. Someone here please have it somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 02:51
|
|
|
quote:"Probst also teases that the White/Blue/No Collar designations will not be the only new twist in Survivor: Worlds Apart. “We have a new advantage in the game,” he says. “Something we’ve toyed with for a long time and decided to do it this year, and it plays out great. I’ll leave it at that for now.” I'm interested in what this is, although he probably said something similar before Nicaragua about the Medallion of Power.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 04:02
|
|
|
Is there an easy youtube channel of ponderosa? I always wait to watch it until after the season, and CBS's site is invariably loving awful.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 05:04
|
|
|
IRQ posted:Is there an easy youtube channel of ponderosa? I always wait to watch it until after the season, and CBS's site is invariably loving awful. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLWwZ4u5_J1L9giQrMkL9BYsGP_HRV2zGJ
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 05:34
|
|
|
Red_Museum posted:I'm interested in what this is, although he probably said something similar before Nicaragua about the Medallion of Power. Reverse Exile Island, you get to go live in a hotel for two days but you can't participate in the next immunity challenge. Tyler Perry Medallion of Power. Non-immunity idol, cancels the effect of the immunity necklace. Fake Idol, it doesn't do anything but it looks real.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 13:34
|
|
|
It's going to be something that messes with the votes (double your vote? nullify someone's vote? cast a vote at another tribe's TC?) and it's gonna be awful.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 15:20
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:It's going to be something that messes with the votes (double your vote? nullify someone's vote? cast a vote at another tribe's TC?) and it's gonna be awful. Timed idols? You may only use the idol for next tribal? Forces players to make big moves with them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 16:23
|
|
|
Nexal posted:Timed idols? You may only use the idol for next tribal? Forces players to make big moves with them. Winning tribe gets to choose which losing tribe has to feed and house Rupert at their camp until the next challenge? Timed idols actually doesn't sound like a terrible idea.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 23:37
|
|
|
Hidden Immunity Idols are great when used sparingly - they promote blindsides and secrecy. Things tend to go to hell when Survivor introduces too many and you end up with near half of the players protected. Something to cancel a HII certainly wouldn't be too bad, though I hope it wouldn't also cancel out challenge-won immunity necklaces too. Unfortunately I can already see the "NO ONE IS SAFE MUAHAHAHA" promos.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 23:49
|
|
|
Joose Caboose posted:Winning tribe gets to choose which losing tribe has to feed and house Rupert at their camp until the next challenge? Losing tribe has to live in Rupert's underground nightmare shelter from All Stars
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 00:20
|
|
|
Narcissus1916 posted:Hidden Immunity Idols are great when used sparingly - they promote blindsides and secrecy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 00:37
|
|
|
Piell posted:Fake Idol, it doesn't do anything but it looks real. Fake Idol with a Fake Paper Description AND a Fake Clue that you can do whatever you want with. That could be more fun to watch.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 01:13
|
|
|
Juanito posted:Challenge-won immunity necklaces seem sacred to me. I honestly can't see Survivor producers making GBS threads on the game that bad. This is a show that arbitrarily brought back two people who had been voted out in that very season.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 02:12
|
|
|
I won't consider this season officially over until I see a supercut of Alec's open mouth stare.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 19:39
|
|
|
I'm just going to go to Survivor Sucks and try to find gifs of that, I'm sure it's been compiled already. In the meantime:  
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 19:44
|
|
|
Josh is doing an AMA on reddit right now. This was really interesting:Josh posted:I addressed Missy and basically told her that I wouldn't be voting for her because I protected her loved one when she was on the other tribe and then she turned around and treated my loved one horribly. The comments she made to Reed and I (obviously that did not get shown) were awful and vile. She attacked our sexuality and our christianity on multiple occasions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 21:04
|
|
|
That AMA reveals that Missy was pretty much a terrible person and got edited to not look so bad. Makes me appreciate Reed's speech that much more.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 21:31
|
|
|
Juanito posted:That AMA reveals that Missy was pretty much a terrible person and got edited to not look so bad. Makes me appreciate Reed's speech that much more. I'm not surprised. The reactions she was getting were wildly disproportionate if there wasn't more going on than was shown. Seems more likely she was saying all sorts of awful crap than everyone else on the island suddenly disliking her for no reason. Interesting AMA, thanks for posting it Evil Trout.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 21:50
|
|
|
How is Josh still pretending that he was a positive asset for Baylor's game though
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
Yeah, his story would seem more reliable if it wasn't framed with that thing that never made any sense to me. The Baylor thing makes Josh sound deluded and like he can't really see beyond his perspective. So that doesn't speak well for "Missy was terrible to my boyfriend." Now if Jeremy or someone else says it? Then that will lend some credibility to it. But Josh hurt his credibility with that Baylor thing. I mean, even Reed said "Missy's a good person, I was just talking about her game." So Josh now saying "actually she was a horrible person who said nasty things about homosexuality and religion" seems to run counter to that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 22:39
|
|
|
Whenever I see people call them super fans in the bios of cast it gives me a headache cause watching 2-3 seasons of this is not making you a super fan. Next season they are getting some monster fans of the show that have taught survivor classes, have survivor parking, someone who wrote an article during HvV season before it aired that Colby is just a Burnett crush pick for the season and he brings nothing to the table, a dude who drives RV across USA to get on every audition. I thought the cagayan had some fans of the show Spencer, Tasha and Trish just to name few so I wouldn't call next season total crap shoot based on the cast yet. Also another bartender incoming let's hope it's a little brighter than ben.... Nexal fucked around with this message at 01:39 on Dec 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 01:33
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:Yeah, his story would seem more reliable if it wasn't framed with that thing that never made any sense to me. The Baylor thing makes Josh sound deluded and like he can't really see beyond his perspective. So that doesn't speak well for "Missy was terrible to my boyfriend." Yeah, I agree. Also, if Missy was saying nasty stuff like that I don't see them editing it all out, especially on a season like this last one that didn't have any clear villains or as much drama.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 03:03
|
|
|
Plus its a season where John Rocker was cast and him saying bigoted things in the past and people being upset about it was showcased. So why protect Missy? They might have edited out. That's plausible. Maybe they wanted to protect a finalist or something since she'd never be voted out. But if they did than presumably some of the people on the island would have heard it and would feel compelled to say something. If not that means either its in Josh and Reed's heads, Missy somehow said it all privately, or everyone is a homophobe (and at least Jeremy has a gay brother and said how much he didn't care about that stuff so that seems unlikely). Plus if it did happen including it in the show would have made Reed's whole "wicked stepmother" speech make a whole lot more sense, so why wouldn't they do that? Jeff seemed to love Josh and Reed so if Reed actually had good cause to be that angry why hide it and then put him on the spot in the Reunion show to apologize? It just doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Mostly I just find Josh and Reed to be unreliable narrators, as I do a lot of Survivors. The whole "Baylor owes me because I protected her" when he lied to her and voted for her a couple of times, the Jaclyn "no one talked to me"/Reed saying "excuse me, I talked to you" as if that mattered if he didn't pick up on her issue with the rest of his alliance, and then the way Reed really talked up his game and didn't seem to think he did anything wrong post game while Jeremy said "Reed just doesn't get it". It doesn't mean they're not telling the truth, it just means I'd like to hear it from someone else before I condemn Missy on their word. Which is really probably a safe rule for all these stories from any castmate.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 03:17
|
|
|
Yeah, the entire AMA seemed to be crafted to paint Josh/Reed in the best possible light. Which is natural, of course, but stuff like Natalie openly contradicting what they had to say about Missy (and adding negative stuff about Josh/Reed) is handwaved away. A top comment says "Missy hated us for being gay Christians and told us so repeatedly," but when someone else asks what Missy did he says "Missy didn't like our lifestyle, and called Reed a liar, and she gave people in her alliance more rice." I don't really doubt that Missy said some bad stuff or that it was rooted in that, but it goes from specifically "She openly hates gay people" to "She doesn't like us because we're gay, and that caused her to say other bad stuff about us," which makes me want to hold out for more accounts. He legitimately says "Natalie is desperately looking for something wrong with our game to take heat off of her," which is the most insane thing anyone could possibly say about the winner and two early jury boots? e: There's also this element of "Missy was an awful, vile, hateful person to me and my boyfriend...but I'm sure she's great outside of the game!", which doesn't jibe at all. xbilkis fucked around with this message at 06:25 on Dec 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 06:05
|
|
|
Broadway theater actors going for maximum drama? What are the chances? This is Frankie Grande levels of spin control.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 07:51
|
|
|
Yeah this is some pretty ridiculous spin. I liked them both fine on the show but this is some pretty big self-aggrandizement. I especially liked when Josh was complaining about how his "rationale for his first three votes wasn't shown enough." Dude, you got more screentime and confessionals and opportunities to explain your strategy than anyone else did in the first half of the season. People were convinced that Josh was the winner because he was basically the only one who they allocated "explain your strategy to the camera" time to in the early episodes. Far better than a merge boot deserves. I also legitimately don't buy that 6 of the jurors reamed out Missy in the same way that Reed did but they chose not to show it. Why the hell would they not show it? Josh's reasoning is because Missy was a finalist or something, but that makes no sense, they show finalists getting piled on all the time. The editors should eat that poo poo up. So you're telling me that people like Alec and Wes directed scathing comments towards Missy but they chose to edit those out and only show the rambling, nonsensical part of their jury questions where they asked very basic questions? xbilkis posted:He legitimately says "Natalie is desperately looking for something wrong with our game to take heat off of her," which is the most insane thing anyone could possibly say about the winner and two early jury boots? In all fairness I'm pretty sure what he was trying to say was "Natalie is desperately looking for something wrong with our game to take heat off of MISSY," not take the heat off herself. In any case it's clear that Josh and Reed are going to spend the next 5 or so years of their lives anxiously waiting a "come back for an All Star season" call from Lynn Spillman that they will never actually get.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 09:25
|
|
|
Nexal posted:Whenever I see people call them super fans in the bios of cast it gives me a headache cause watching 2-3 seasons of this is not making you a super fan. What's Survivor parking
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 16:25
|
|
|
less laughter posted:What's Survivor parking 
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 17:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 22:13 |
|
|
Juanito posted:Rupert's latest business venture. It hasn't been as popular as he was hoping. At least he made a valiant effort.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 18:33
|
|