Did you miss the part where Michelle admitted not being in on Scotts blindside?Okay, but why didn't we see that, then?
Not responding to the rest of your questions because you clearly seem to be some obvious things.
Did you miss the part where Michelle admitted not being in on Scotts blindside?Okay, but why didn't we see that, then?
But why would that happen this season if not even Samoa Russel Hantz could get the same treatment?
Has there been a season that Jeff was super-stoked for in advance that DIDN'T have a male winner? I mean, he's pretty predictable.Scot/Jason wanted her out, the Brains wanted Aubry to stay.
lol @ the "Jeff loves the season - Male Winner!" comments...which are probably true.
So glad Michelle won. Proves the winners edit thing is bullshit.
Even such a massively popular, seemingly dominating player as Samoa Russell got a logical edit showing why he lost, and Natalie White received a logical edit showing why she won.I don't know what you mean? Russell Hantz is loved by the crew for the spectacle he will get a majority of the edit no matter what he does on a season.
Has there been a season that Jeff was super-stoked for in advance that DIDN'T have a male winner? I mean, he's pretty predictable.
Even such a massively popular, seemingly dominating player as Samoa Russell got a logical edit showing why he lost, and Natalie White received a logical edit showing why she won.
Aubry got no logical edit showing why she lost, and Michele got no logical edit showing why she won.
Even such a massively popular, seemingly dominating player as Samoa Russell got a logical edit showing why he lost, and Natalie White received a logical edit showing why she won.
Aubry got no logical edit showing why she lost, and Michele got no logical edit showing why she won.
Uh, I definitely think Survivor would have preferred Russell winning Samoa.But that's kind of what I mean though, as much as they love Russell they also love the reason for him losing. As far as we can speculate they don't seem to like Michelle winning and didn't really care to show why she won.
That's everything wrong with this season in a nutshell. Going into the finale, I would've ranked it as one of the better seasons. Now there's an argument for it being one of the worst. This is, like, WWE-level lazy storytelling, where things happen for no reason and you're left wondering why you even watch.
Uh, I definitely think Survivor would have preferred Russell winning Samoa.
That's everything wrong with this season in a nutshell. Going into the finale, I would've ranked it as one of the better seasons. Now there's an argument for it being one of the worst. This is, like, WWE-level lazy storytelling, where things happen for no reason and you're left wondering why you even watch.
It's the first season where I've ever felt physically ill reacting to an ending. (This is by the edit's design, btw.)Its the worst season ever because I didnt get why some jury members voted a certain way.
The hyperbole is just too much.
Uh, I definitely think Survivor would have preferred Russell winning Samoa.
I'm telling you, he took the cheque back.I'm betting this is a season where Jeff just blasted the contestants while the cameras were off. Maybe even multiple times.
Undertaker won at Wrestlemania but Shane is still running RAW. What's up with that?That's everything wrong with this season in a nutshell. Going into the finale, I would've ranked it as one of the better seasons. Now there's an argument for it being one of the worst. This is, like, WWE-level lazy storytelling, where things happen for no reason and you're left wondering why you even watch.
Like, Russell was a monstrous asshole out there. There's a basic level of social management that he never had over either S29 or S30 that led to his result happening twice in a row.They may have but what I mean is that they absolutely love to get up at the finale and talk non stop about jury management and excuse bitter juries. Russell was basically the defacto jury killer and he's the poster child for their reasoning. Theyre fine letting him be the face of the season and still being able to tought their perfect system.
That's a poor comparison. At the time, people would have loved Kelly beating Rich. In hindsight the show wouldn't have lasted as long as it did if that happened, but at the time Rich was the vile, despicable cheater who had ruined the show.It's the first season where I've ever felt physically ill reacting to an ending. (This is by the edit's design, btw.)
This is like Kelly beating Rich in S1. How different would the show have been?
Oh, I meant more "god how fucked would the show have been if that had happened?"That's a poor comparison. At the time, people would have loved Kelly beating Rich. In hindsight the show wouldn't have lasted as long as it did if that happened, but at the time Rich was the vile, despicable cheater who had ruined the show.
This is more like, once again, if Jenna beat Rob in a Final 2 in The Amazon.
I mean if you want to see what Survivor looks like if Kelly beats Rich, apparently the French version, Koh-Lanta, is literally that.Oh, I meant more "god how fucked would the show have been if that had happened?"
Like, Russell was a monstrous asshole out there. There's a basic level of social management that he never had over either S29 or S30 that led to his result happening twice in a row.
Michelle winning was pretty obvious to me from weeks back, and I warned you all lol. She was shown quietly maneuvering her way out of danger, constantly got irrelevant confessionals despite not being much involved in what was going on....I think that fierce tribal council where she successfully fought off Tai's attempt to target her probably impressed the hell out of the jury, as did her strong finish. Aubry would have been a better winner for this season, but I have no problem with a low key social player with 4 individual challenge wins who keeps her cool and wiggles out of danger and ends up the winner.
Maybe me being more of a BB fan is why I still love this season. I could care less about the stories or the winner (most the time), it was fun as hell to watch.
Foreign versions have had winner fuckery all over the place w/ people being punished for playing.I mean if you want to see what Survivor looks like if Kelly beats Rich, apparently the French version, Koh-Lanta, is literally that.
Beauty always goes with the jock, always. It’s just the way of the world. The Beauties don’t date the brainiacs. They’re at the dance with us and we’re just shoving-- shoving geeks in lockers right now. Sorry, Brain. We want to go after Neal, but we believe he’s holding the idol, so we take out someone that they never see coming, Aubry.
For me, having a winner who makes sense is probably the most important thing. I'll defend One World because of Kim playing so perfectly, and I kept watching Worlds Apart just because I wanted to see Mike win out over the most obnoxious group of contestants ever, but this...I don't know. I don't know that I'd go as far as kirblar and say that I feel physically ill or anything, but I can say that it's the first time where I've ever watched a finale and not been excited for the next season to start.
I mean, literally the only people who would actually believe this are people who thought Michele had the winner's edit.I think the FTC performance by Michelle really had an impact on some of the jurors. Out of all 3, Michelle showed more passion, authenticity, and confidence in the way she played the game.
I mean, it literally looks like this is the reason Michele won.Full quote from Jasonin Ep7-That + his exit quote - brings to mind the "....life is unfair....." coda from MITM.
Michelle winning was pretty obvious to me from weeks back, and I warned you all lol. She was shown quietly maneuvering her way out of danger, constantly got irrelevant confessionals despite not being much involved in what was going on....I think that fierce tribal council where she successfully fought off Tai's attempt to target her probably impressed the hell out of the jury, as did her strong finish. Aubry would have been a better winner for this season, but I have no problem with a low key social player with 4 individual challenge wins who keeps her cool and wiggles out of danger and ends up the winner.
Bu bu bu the editing! Why didnt they show something twice so that I would "get it".I think the FTC performance by Michelle really had an impact on some of the jurors. Out of all 3, Michelle showed more passion, authenticity, and confidence in the way she played the game. Combine that with not pissing off any of the jury members and having played a strong social game and you have yourselves a winner.
Foreign versions have had winner fuckery all over the place w/ people being punished for playing.
Full quote from Jasonin Ep7-
That + his exit quote - brings to mind the "....life is unfair....." coda from MITM.
edit: BBB is so done as a theme after this.
Literally the entire extent of Michele's "winner edit" was "boy this seemingly completely unimportant person keeps getting confessionals about random shit"
Literally the entire extent of Michele's "winner edit" was "boy this seemingly completely unimportant person keeps getting confessionals about random shit"
Pretty much.Maybe I was just too in the tank for Aubry this season, but it's just weird seeing them pump her up as this dominant force just to let her lose decisively in the finals. At least with past fan faves like Kathy or Rob C., they got whacked at Final 3 and it makes sense (even if it's sad). This feels like Survivor jerking us around a little.
They did do it on purpose to elicit exactly that reaction.The editors propped up Aubry way too much. Unless they did it on purpose to make the audience angry that a "boring" social player won instead of a strategist. Trying to persuade new contestants to play a certain way over another.
So:
Nick: demeans Michele all game, tells her at FTC that she's dumb. Votes for Michele.
Jason: has no relationship with Michele and gets backstabbed by her. Shows respect for Aubry's competitiveness. Votes Michele.
Scot: gets backstabbed by Michele and gives her no real credit. Praises Aubry. Votes Michele.
The votes are not earned by the edit. We needed to see why those three voted for Michele to understand this result.
Julia and Cydney's votes can be understood. The dude bro trio's can't be. Why did they vote for Michele?
That's what the edit failed in telling us. If Aubry was to lose, why didn't we see what caused it?
It makes no sense because Aubry got her strongest episode yet during the finale. And Michele practically had her weakest (well, comparative to only having 3 people there for 80% of it).It honestly feels like there was some sort of miscommunication behind the scenes and all the editors thought Aubry was the winner and Michelle was runner up and then after they finished the entire season they found out it was the opposite but it was too late to fix it. Obviously that's ridiculous, but something was going on here to make the editors severely overemphasize Aubry's game and not do much of anything with Michelle's game.
Well this Sia part seems very random, I'm so confused
Yay to giving money to a charity for animals but it's so strange lol
Now Drew Carey? Price is Right ratings down?
Recently yeah. She's very self conscious about her appearanceI think it surprised everyone. I really don't follow Sia but does she hide her face like that all the time? Just curious
Recently yeah. She's very self conscious about her appearance
Wonder if she'll do promo work for the Australian version they're relaunching.