Survivor Finale

Discussion in 'Now Playing - TV Show Talk' started by IJustLikeTivo, Dec 20, 2009.

  1. Dec 21, 2009 #41 of 342
    TomK

    TomK Active Member

    2,748
    12
    May 22, 2001
    Huntsville,...

    Advertisements

    Erik practically proposed to and voted for the person who voted him out? WTF. Didn't he condemn Russell for playing a dirtty game?
     
  2. Dec 21, 2009 #42 of 342
    Philosofy

    Philosofy Super Duper Member

    7,712
    409
    Feb 21, 2000
    Valparaiso,...
    That vote wasn't a travesty at all: it just revealed a critical flaw in Russell's game play. He used and abused people, laughed at them getting voted out, and spit on their graves. But they weren't dead. They had one last chance to stick it to him, and they did. His arrogance, and his assumptions that people would reward his cunning and forgive his duplicitness were wrong. Perhaps a different jury would vote differently, but Russell gave no reasons to vote for him other than the ones HE thought were worthy. None of the jury identified with him.
     
  3. Dec 21, 2009 #43 of 342
    bryhamm

    bryhamm randomize

    4,768
    352
    Jun 30, 2004
    St Louis area
    For the most part I agree with this. But it seems that Nat won not for something she actually did, but won because people didn't want to give it to Russell. That doesn't feel like she "earned" it, which is why it has a bit of a bad taste in my mouth. Russell's play reminded me so much of Hatch, and I was glad when Hatch was named the winner.

    I am curious if any of the jury members were swayed by Erik's speech. I am thinking no. I think the women on the jury minus Shambo already decided to give it to Nat, so that was 3 votes. Jaison was pissed at Russel, so that was a 4th vote. Shambo we knew would vote for Russell. Erik's vote surprised me. I thought he would have given it to Russell. I do wonder who the other person to vote for Russell. Probably John. Which means likely that Dave and Brett voted Natalie as well.
     
  4. Dec 21, 2009 #44 of 342
    bleen

    bleen Protein from the Sea

    147
    0
    Aug 9, 2008
    Caldwell, NJ
    I think Russell's downfall was being a little too specific in mentioning virtually person by person how he outwitted & outplayed each of them. Any chance of them forgiving & forgetting was certainly lost then & there. Plus as someone else mentioned he should have played up finding the HII's as a sign of his superior gameplay that wouldn't have been so directly confrontational.

    Conversely (and despite the sentiments of many on here), Natalie in fact made one of the best strategy moves in getting Galu to turn on Erik, but saved that tidbit for the reunion when all was said & done, not dredging it up during Final Tribal where it could go either way as a sign of great gameplay or get Erik & others against her.
     
  5. Dec 21, 2009 #45 of 342
    stalemate

    stalemate McGruber

    10,759
    22
    Aug 21, 2005
    Little Rock, AR

    Advertisements

    This was a great move of hers and was critical to the downfall of Galu. She did mention it at the Final Tribal, but only when asked what moves she made, not as part of her opening statement.
     
  6. Dec 21, 2009 #46 of 342
    tetspa

    tetspa New Member

    200
    0
    Mar 17, 2005
    I am trying hard (and it really is hard) to accept that the vote was anything other than a galu jury determined not to award the player that beat them like the idiots they were.

    Russell should have given a better opening speech...something to the effect of "I came to the merge behind 8-4...I did what I had to do. I cut deals with anybody and everybody and scrambled to keep our heads above water. It was only a game...and I played the game to the best of my abilities. I found idols with no clues...I got Galu players to jump over and vote with us. It was not personal...just my trying to play the game. Regardless of who you vote for, I hope you accept that if any of you Galu went into a merge behind 8-4, 1) you would have probably done the same, and 2) you would have hoped beyond hope to have a player like me as one of the 4 to help you survive. Regardless of your personal feelings, I hope you take you job seriously as a juror and vote for the best player.
     
  7. Dec 21, 2009 #47 of 342
    stalemate

    stalemate McGruber

    10,759
    22
    Aug 21, 2005
    Little Rock, AR
    Yeah, after he intentionally weakened his own tribe pre-merge. If he hadn't been such an ass even within his own tribe early, he might have made a much different path for himself.
     
  8. Dec 21, 2009 #48 of 342
    Jody164

    Jody164 New Member

    16
    0
    Mar 2, 2003
    West Texas
    This was the worst Jury vote since Colby lost. This and another All Star season spells "Jump the Shark"
     
  9. Dec 21, 2009 #49 of 342
    AJRitz

    AJRitz Princess Anti-Santa

    11,764
    2
    Mar 25, 2002
    Overland...
    This.

    Russell got exactly what he played for. He was an obnoxious bully. That got him into the last three. But it couldn't get him a win.
     
  10. Dec 21, 2009 #50 of 342
    SnakeEyes

    SnakeEyes Active Member

    1,371
    12
    Dec 26, 2000
    Another All Star's for Season 20 isn't bad. Nothing wrong with voting for Tina. That was Colby's fault. The worst was Vecepia and Sandra Diaz Twine
     
  11. Dec 21, 2009 #51 of 342
    MonsterJoe

    MonsterJoe Travels for Food

    18,544
    1,090
    Feb 19, 2003
    Central MA
    obviously the point of the game is to win, lol. maybe poor choice of words on my part, but you don't really believe the game isn't set up to instigate this type of game play, do you?


    From the last Probst blog:
    http://popwatch.ew.com/2009/12/18/jeff-probst-blogs-survivor-samoa-episode-14/#more-42979

    he didn't get the jury votes, and didn't win. That much is irrefutable. what I see most people arguing here is that the jury was a bunch of morons with a chip on their should who don't understand how the show intends the game to be played..it's not even a Survivor thing....it's a reality show thing. It's just common knowledge at this point.

    People saying Russel didn't play the social game aren't thinking it through. His moves wouldn't have been possible had he not. He played socially enough to get people to vote how he wanted. It wasn't until they were voted out themselves that they had a problem with it.

    Lucky for Natalie she was able to keep her hands clean for the majority of the show. I wouldn't turn down the 1 million dollars or anything, but I'm sure even she knows she shouldn't have won.
     
  12. Dec 21, 2009 #52 of 342
    SoakinginSoap

    SoakinginSoap New Member

    67
    0
    Aug 11, 2006
    This just about sums it up for me to! I have watched every episode of Survivor and this had to be the shocker of all time. My husband, who only watched three or four episodes here and there, because I was watching it, even thought from what he saw, that Russell should have won.

    I am not a fan of Russell. I despised him from day one. But Survivor is about outwit, outlast, outplay. NO ONE came close to out maneuvering Russell.

    I come here after every episode and read these messages. There was a discussion by many people on how they felt that the jurors would get it right and vote for the person that outwitted everyone else. That they would not let emotions get in the way. I didn't agree because I know how strong human emotions are, if they think they have been wronged. Sanity does not set in because the hurt is raw. IMO, Laura was a very bitter person and helped persuaded the juror. Erik sounded like a lunatic to me.

    Talking about ungratefulness. Jaison, Natalie and Mitch would have been long gone if it had not been for Russell paving the way for them to stay. No way wouldn't Galu have eaten them alive if Russell had not made the moves that he made. The only person that truly appreciated that effort was Shambo.

    Another thing, they should show, who voted for whom. Someone said it was 7 for Natalie and 2 for Russell. I must have missed this because they did not call out 7 votes. I heard 5 and 2. Would love to know exactly who voted for whom.

    Natalie floated and I hope this is not the way future episodes are going to turn out.

    I am not making light of any situation but after the votes came through that Natalie had won, the outcry of the OJ verdict came to mind.

    I hated Russell but he deserved the million dollars and I would not have had any problem writing his name down.
     
  13. Dec 21, 2009 #53 of 342
    justapixel

    justapixel Domestic Extremist Staff Member

    27,357
    77
    Sep 27, 2001
    The Nanny State
    So disappointed. Russell should have won that money - NOBODY has ever played the game like him.

    Idiot voters. Once again, a weak hanger-on won. I will never understand the human race, equating people who cling to power as equal to those who create power.

    :thumbsdown: :thumbsdown: :thumbsdown:
     
  14. Dec 21, 2009 #54 of 342
    SoakinginSoap

    SoakinginSoap New Member

    67
    0
    Aug 11, 2006
    Well said!
     
  15. Dec 21, 2009 #55 of 342
    Knives of Ice

    Knives of Ice New Member

    170
    0
    Nov 8, 2006
    just proves once again how insanely dumb people on reality shows are for the most part. SURVIVOR IS A GAME. why these people vote personally just seems insane. Russell was the clear winner, he played the best game in survivor history. he was robbed. robbed.
     
  16. Dec 21, 2009 #56 of 342
    USAFSSO

    USAFSSO Member

    839
    0
    Aug 23, 2005
    Las Cruces, NM
    This is the reason why I haven't watched the last 12 seasons of this show.
     
  17. Dec 21, 2009 #57 of 342
    Einselen

    Einselen ɹǝsn pǝɹǝʇsıƃǝɹ

    14,601
    187
    Apr 25, 2006
    Watching the finale I was shocked. I then came to read this thread and I have quoted a lot as I think there is a lot of good discussion to have here about this finale.

    It is a game. Most times you will have to make deals, get your hands dirty somewhat and lie some to move forward. I really do believe there can and are two "Evil" Russells. There is survivor Russell and there is real life Russell. Monopoly is a game and I will maybe make trades that are not favorable to me in order to hurt some other player more then it will hurt me to complete that trade. It is all gameplay and people need to realize this and not take it personal.

    Granted I missed a good number of seasons in the middle, but I have to agree. I usually have a favorite in shows like this in who I want to win and sometimes they do and sometimes they don't, but this is the first time I really felt cheated in the outcome. Nat seems like a great person, but she didn't do much in this game besides not being Russell.

    I think Russell did all he could do and the jury is mostly bitter individuals who have no clue about Survivor. It would be very interesting to take all the past Survivors (or jury members from prev seasons) and have them vote who they think deserved to win this season. Yes I know these people personally played with Russell, etc. but I am fairly sure that many survivor contestants who did win didn't take the time to know their other contestants, they played the game, made deals, made some lies and moves and got to where they were.

    100% Agree with this one. I think Mick was almost more deserving then Nat to win but both of them came no where near Russell's playing and strategies. The jury didn't want to vote for Russell because they wanted to vote off pure emotion and not logically think it through (which is atypical) and so Nat was just in the right place at the right time. Sure may have been her strategy but most will agree that is a piss poor strategy that she got lucky with and it payed off this time.

    I was going to ask if a reality show in which the producers have no control of the outcome could "Jump the Shark" or not, but I do wonder if MB is wondering if this is the start of the end of Survivor.

    In Season 2 Colby's gameplay mistake was taking Tina to the finals. In S2 both were equal footing in how they played the game. No one person really outshine the other so it came down to who would get more jury votes. Colby was a nice guy and stuck to his word with Tina and unfortunately that cost him the game.

    ---------


    None related to any quotes above: I hope Russell doesn't beat himself up for not taking Shambo and Jaison to the final 3 as I think the game easily could have changed significantly if they voting order did not go down as it did. Sure if it was Shambo, Jaison and Russell in the final 3 Russell presumably would have won (notice that two jury members didn't vote) however it would have had to been Shambo, Jaison and Russell in the final 3 for that to happen. Russell could have been voted out before that time, we never know what could have happened.

    Also what this season reminds me of is a poker game. Here we have Russell who knows how to play, knows the strategies and makes all the right moves and then we have the other players who will call almost anything even if it is the worst possible move and just by dumb luck the donks win and beat the Pro. Here Russell had a bad beat and I don't blame him for looking so dang bummed during the finale.
     
  18. Dec 21, 2009 #58 of 342
    Kablemodem

    Kablemodem Get the ketchup.

    19,354
    42
    May 26, 2001
    Sherman...
    The jury was just as clueless in voting for the winner as they were in playing the game. If Galu had any intelligence at all the four Foa Foa would have been gone right away. They clearly had no concept of how the game was played and that same stupidity chose the wrong winner. Russel may have played too hard, but Natalie hardly played at all. Maybe her strategy got her to the final three, but so did Russel's. He deserved to win. Can you imagine how boring this show would be if everyone played Natalie's strategy? Can you imagine this jury playing Hide and Seek? They would all stand out in the open because it would be deceptive to hide. Maybe this jury vote was a product of the "no one is a loser" generation.

    And as far as Natalie orchestrating Eric getting voted out, I recall Russel saying something along the lines that he had his Foa Foa stirring things up so that Galu would vote off one of their own. She may have sold the deal, but it was Russel's strategy.
     
  19. Dec 21, 2009 #59 of 342
    JETarpon

    JETarpon Well-Known Member

    21,136
    607
    Jan 1, 2003
    907
    Russell should have stood up at final tribal and said "neither of these two would be here without me, but if I had had any other 2 people in my alliance, I'd still be here."
     
  20. Dec 21, 2009 #60 of 342
    Peter000

    Peter000 Well-Known Member TCF Club

    23,101
    1,373
    Apr 15, 2002
    Red Wing, MN
    I don't get why the heck Jaison, Mick & Natalie (and Brett) didn't vote out Russell when they had the chance after Brett won the first immunity. Russell was clearly the strongest player. They were all just so focused on getting rid of Brett.

    I guess in the end it was the right move for Natalie. But I was flabbergasted there wasn't even a HINT of discussion about getting rid of Russell.
     

Share This Page

spam firewall

Advertisements