web counter
 

Hanging on in Quiet Desperation is the American Way

By Cindy Davis | Posted Under Trade News | Comments (27)

russellrob.jpg

I don’t watch many reality shows, but there are a few to whom I’ve been loyal for quite some time: “Survivor”, “The Amazing Race” (which has mostly turned into a snoozefest), “Project Runway” and more recently “Top Chef”. Regardless of how interested you are in cooking or fashion and besides the intellectual and physical aspects of a competition, there are certainly people who make one season more watchable than another. For me, I don’t think anything will ever top the first season of “Survivor”, nor will I find a winner more clever (up to the point of his victory) than Richard Hatch. That mofo hit the island and directed his “Survivor” win and he did it before anyone else made a blueprint or laid out the unwritten laws that so many future participants seem to forget. (Seriously people, if you’re going on a reality show that has this many seasons, watch them and don’t make the same dumb mistakes.)

Since then, “Survivor” has persisted twenty seasons, some better than others because of location or personalities. (In an odd aside, if there’s no beach around, the show becomes exceedingly boring.) Over the years, a few popular/enduring characters have emerged (Rupert, Boston Rob, Ozzy, Johnny Fairplay, Elizabeth, Colby, Russell) and “Survivor” has found ways to bring some of them back, including “All-Star” seasons. It is understandable that CBS sees these people as profitable commodities, but when people are appearing a third and fourth time, one has to wonder where the show is going.

As is customary, at the finale of “Survivor: Nicaragua” host Jeff Probst announced some of the details of the 22nd season, “Survivor: Redemption Island”. It already sounded stupid; the Redemption Island being a new twist whereby voted off players get a second chance. I dislike second chances in a competition - if you lose, you lose. Regardless, this upcoming season allows a voted off tribe member to be shipped to said Redemption Island where the person will carry on surviving (albeit alone) until the next person is evicted from the game (well, not really). That next person will arrive at Redemption Island where he/she will square off in competition with the first evictee; the winner will remain and the loser will finally, truly be out of competition. Then, at certain times during the 39 days, whomever is on Redemption Island will have a chance to rejoin the main game players and carry on as if never voted out. Call me a cynic but I’m thinking that person should just be voted out again at the first opportunity, if you’re out, you should stay out.

Now you’d think all that nonsense would be enough for Mark Burnett or CBS or whomever thinks up these stupid twists, but you’d be wrong. Not content jumping just one shark, “Survivor: Redemption Island” is going to fill the waters and take a giant flying leap, hoping not to painfully flop on its big, fat belly. Yesterday it was announced that “Heroes vs. Villains” rivals (Boston) Rob Mariano and Russell Hantz would be returning for their fourth and third seasons, respectively. As much as I’ve enjoyed these polarizing characters, new seasons of “Survivor” are not where they belong. Hell, if they had to be brought into the mix, just send them off to Redemption Island where they can entertain the evictees with their own version of The Ultimate Fighter. These are two of the most egotistical, smack-talkingest, nimrods you’ve ever seen. Do they make for compelling television? Sure. But at this point, bringing them on just turns “Survivor” into a mockery of itself.

To the other 16 castmembers, I have one piece of advice (though if I had to guess, I’d say producers will ensure this doesn’t happen): vote those dipsticks off first. As I mentioned, unless you were picked for sheer stupidity, you must have seen previous seasons and you must know what these two are about. You know that Russell is a crafty, little dude who can find an immunity idol hidden up another player’s ass. You know that Rob can manipulate a fellow team member to vote out her own mother. If you have any intention whatsoever of winning the game, send Russell and Rob to Redemption Island so they can have it out once and for all and make that sweet man love that thus far has eluded them. Then the rest of you can get on with the game, the person who rode someone’s coattails can slip under the radar to win, and Probst can announce “Survivor: Don’t Worry About Being Voted Off, It Doesn’t Count, You Can Come Back in Five Minutes and We Hid a Bucket of Kentucky Fried Chicken in Your Backpack”.









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance

← The Dilemma Review | Mashed Potato | The Green Hornet Review | You'll Believe a Man Can ... Do Stuff →









Comments

My understanding is that Rob and Russell can't be voted off before the merge. Which will make this season a monumental struggle for me. I loathe Russell so much that every minute watching him is a struggle. (Rob's okay, but he's had his chance.)

Posted by: Todd at January 14, 2011 5:05 PM

I haven't watched in a long time (I quit right after the original all-star match), but in my opinion Rob Cesternino played the greatest game of Survivor that I saw. Sure, he didn't win, but the way the game works the final winner is often an arbitrary thing that leaves one of the more unwitting (and less hated) bystanders the victor. Mariano's claim to fame was partially due to getting his all-star tribe to gang up on Cesternino and vote him out quickly.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at January 14, 2011 5:12 PM

I'm sleepy and I thought the title read:

Survivor: MILF Island

Posted by: BWeaves at January 14, 2011 5:30 PM

I only clicked on this for the title. Thanks for the Pink Floyd mention.
"Time"-Dark Side of The Moon

Posted by: Ally at January 14, 2011 5:49 PM

Yeah, before Probst explained the Redemption Island twist, there were rumors that Russel and Rob have irrevocable immunity until the merge. However, that means that once the tribes merge, they have to vote out one, then the other. They won't. I mean, what happened at the last All Stars? Oh yeah. Idiots that played the game before let Sandra win by being a total non-entity again. The fans will be too starstruck to go against Rob and Russel, and the loner who says "vote them out" will be booted for heresy.

Posted by: Robert at January 14, 2011 5:52 PM

You know that Russell is a crafty, little dude who can find an immunity idol hidden up another player’s ass.

.... I've never watched Survivor. Did that literally happen?

Posted by: Anna von Beav at January 14, 2011 6:08 PM

For starters, let me just say that seeing Survivor talk on Pajiba is just weird. Can someone do re-caps during the season? I've a feeling Pajiba commentary on this will be needed.

Once I heard the "Redemption Island" idea, I thought it would be interesting if they were able to lure back a number of last and second-to-last placers, in order to redeem themselves. Then I heard what it actually was, and I thought, well, that could still be done... It would just make the redemption literal, as well as metaphorical.

Then I heard rumors about Boston Rob and Russel. I think I actually groaned. I like them for selfish TV audience reasons, but I'm sick of them at this point. And when I saw the first 16 cast members, and that two were still going to be announced, I knew they had to be BR and Hantz. Why else would they hold back those two unless we'd already seen them? Most survivor rumors that find their way to the mainstream (i.e., EW.com) tend to be true, but I was hoping this time they weren't. Giving them irrevocable immunity to the merge is utter bullshit.

Fuck. I'm still gonna watch.

Robert: I hope you're right. And then they'd be on the jury (or, maybe just one), and we'd finally get to see if they would vote how they say others should vote. Not that I really care, but it's always fun to mock hypocrites.

Posted by: RobP at January 14, 2011 6:14 PM

Oh, and I agree that Richard Hatch is still the best player. He created the fundamentals to achieve victory, and every player who's gotten to the final two (or three, ugh) has followed the trail he blazed. Or, they followed Kelly Wigglesworth (yes, I kind of hate myself for knowing these names) to be coattail rider who shows up physically in the last minute. Too many juries, in my opinion, give that second option way too much credit.

Posted by: RobP at January 14, 2011 6:17 PM

Hatch was o.k., but his victory in that first season came against contestants that for the most part really had no idea what they were doing and didn't seem very motivated to probe the strategy or very simple mathematics involved. There's no excuse for a group of five letting a group of four pick them off one by one.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at January 14, 2011 6:37 PM

Russell did the same thing a few seasons ago, against players who knew exactly what he was doing. He inevitably lost because no one liked or respected him. Hatch did the brilliant thing of being disliked but respected. For me, that's the masterstroke.

In fairness, I missed most of All Stars, so I've only heardtell of Cesternino's greatness.

Posted by: RobP at January 14, 2011 6:54 PM

There's some talk that BRob is being groomed to take the reins from Probst sometime soon. If Probst is losing interest (and after last season, who could blame him?), I hope they find a new host, but I'm not sure BRob is the guy. I find him very self-conscious. Probst works in the role because he's blandly unchangeable -- he hits his marks week after week, season after season, and never plays to an audience larger than the castaways themselves. If, as should happen, they tab a former contestant as heir to Probst, I think Colby would be a better choice.

Posted by: sansho1 at January 14, 2011 7:14 PM

Darthcorleone is correct, Rob Cesterino played the best game ever. My wife still says she doesn't feel the need to try out for Survivor because he played the perfect game.

I still respond, "Yeah, but we could use a shot at a million bucks and I could use a month-long vacation from you."

Posted by: icecreammang at January 14, 2011 7:30 PM

According to all reports, the immunity rumors are just that - neither Russell nor Rob will have any special immunity.

Posted by: Cindy at January 14, 2011 7:52 PM

Darth, regardless of the stupidity of his fellow players, Richard walked in the door with a plan and he carried it out. You have to give him credit for that.

Posted by: Cindy at January 14, 2011 7:56 PM

I'll give Hatch credit, sure. I just thought the entire season one - while extremely entertaining - really didn't scratch the surface on the intricacies of the game. That's why I can't call him the best player ever: he proved himself in an environment that wasn't fully Survivor-aware.

On top of that, I believe that if Kelly had simply crafted her argument differently, she could have swayed that jury. If she focused on her winning the immunity challenges (a very impressive streak of hers at the end) as opposed to trying to remind the jury how much they hated Richard, she could have won. It would have convinced me at least.

I can't remember his name (Greg?), but one of the guys flipped a coin and based his decision to vote for Richard on that. It was a 4-3 vote, so Richard's brilliance was really at the complete mercy of fate. That jury was just a bitter group of individuals (with the exception of Rudy) who hated choosing the lesser of two evils.

Cesternino bombed out quickly in the All-Stars. It was the Amazon season (which Jenna won) in which he manipulated everyone from start to finish, and more impressively he did it without ruffling feathers for the most part, as he constantly shifted the players in the dominant voting bloc to his advantage. His undoing was the endurance immunity challenge that knocked him out when there were three contestants left.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at January 14, 2011 8:59 PM

I think it was Sean - he did something with the alphabet. But I can't give Kelly credit because she made the fatal decision to take Richard to the final two.

Posted by: Cindy at January 14, 2011 9:08 PM

It was a tough call, but in my opinion it's reasonable that she would have lost to Rudy worse than she lost to Richard. Rudy was likable, and those bitter folks would have had no problems giving him the money. Richard would have voted for Rudy, and angry Susan certainly wouldn't have changed her vote, even without the elegant justification of her "snakes and rats" speech.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at January 14, 2011 9:37 PM

Oh, it was "guess a number between 1 and 10."

Posted by: DarthCorleone at January 14, 2011 9:38 PM

I don't know that I agree.

I still love that speech. I also really wish people would for who played the game best rather than allowing their bitterness to vote for people who did nothing to win. Be mad, but vote for the person who played his/her heart out.

Posted by: Cindy at January 14, 2011 9:42 PM

The time is gone,
The song is over,
Thought I'd something more to say

Posted by: John G. at January 15, 2011 12:01 AM

BREATHE REPRISE

Home, home again
I like to be here when I can
And when I come home cold and tired
It’s good to warm my bones beside the fire
Far away across the field
The tolling of the iron bell
Calls the faithful to their knees
To hear the softly spoken magic spells.


Posted by: Ally at January 15, 2011 3:46 AM

I love it! Watching BRob and Russells giant ego's clash will be a hoot. Plus the wife hates Russell and loves BRob so she'll be hating/bitching from day one.

Posted by: logan at January 15, 2011 11:05 AM

Y'know, the more I think about it, it only makes sense if BRob and Russell are on opposite tribes at the beginning. Otherwise, they'll cannibalize their tribe just trying to eliminate each other. If the players are smart, no matter how the tribes shake out, they'll get rid of these two post-haste. But, I can't imagine the producers would let that happen. Nor would I be surprised if people are just that stupid and try to align with them. Stupid, stupid Survivors...

@Darth: Ah ha! I missed all of Amazon, as well as a couple other seasons around that time (I had a life for a brief period in the early Aughts), but I've heard it's one of the best seasons. I doubt I'll ever watch it, though. Watching old seasons of the show has always felt a little pointless to me.

And speaking of players who are good at shifting the voting bloc, both Sash and Chase were a little like that last season. Both were also kind of clueless about themselves, though. Fabio only won by a single vote, too, and two players who voted for Chase both said they only did so because they thought he wouldn't get any votes. So, between seasons 1 and 20, we went from flipping a coin and picking a number to pity votes. The argument about the other contestants in Hatch's season just don't hold that much water with me. Players do things all the damn time without thinking about the game itself, you make do with what you have. Hatch won, Cesternino didn't. Hatch wins.

Posted by: RobP at January 15, 2011 11:54 AM

“The Amazing Race” (which has mostly turned into a snoozefest)
---
Agree, there was really no one to root much for OR against in the most recent season.

On the plus side, I see there's going to be a sort of "AR" all-star runners-up season and, yippie-kai-ay, they're bringing the cowboys back. I, too, dislike the loser's bracket but we're going to make an exception here. Be interesting to see if anyone came up with any tactical changes from previous seasons, though the whole thing just seems like one enormously exhausting sprint. I wonder if you could commit to taking on the race at a leisurely pace, kind of strolling along and enjoying the scenery and stopping to have a beer occasionally, while just doing everything to ensure that you don't commit the fuck-ups the full-speed contestants seem prone to. All you have to do is not finish last in each episode, until you finally finish first.

Posted by: , at January 15, 2011 12:06 PM

Honestly, I'm with RobP. If you didn't win, there's a reason. If you got blindsided (as Cesternino did), then you weren't doing something right. What is honestly more disheartening, yet completely unsurprising, is the distinct lack of love for the females. Not sure why that is, but you can't deny someone like Parvati her due when it comes to a discussion of the best games played. There's a girl that did most of the things that other people have made it to the finals and lost for (as she did in HvsV), but she won her season, because back then players actually had an appreciation for the game itself. Yeah, she was ruthless and manipulative, but I never hear her name mentioned with those that fans of the show consider great. I didn't like her any more than the next person, but I definitely identified and appreciated the way she played the game.

Which brings us to Russell. What kills me, and what I cannot comprehend, is the inordinate amount of blind hate out there for him. How a person can like someone like Rob Mariano or Richard Hatch and NOT appreciate Russell's game is beyond me. It's not like his game is much different, and in fact, he's become an expert at using the game itself to his advantage, in markedly similar fashion to Hatch himself. So why the unrestrained hate???

Posted by: Smokin at January 15, 2011 12:13 PM

Smokin, I agree about Russell. He came in to play and play he did - all out. He had the brain to go looking for and find idols with no clues. Heck, even Probst will say he can't see how someone could be a fan of Survivor and not appreciate Russell as a player.

Posted by: Cindy at January 15, 2011 1:36 PM

Yeah, Russell is one of the best players the game has had, and in a just world he would have won his season.

I agree about Parvati, too, Smokin. She deservedly won Fans vs. Favorites, and should have won Heroes vs. Villains. She's definitely on the list of best players, and by far one of the best (well earned) winners.

Posted by: RobP at January 16, 2011 7:54 PM