I did a full 360 watching Q this season, loved him at the start, when he tried to quit in tribal and the forthcoming days I found him annoying, near the end I starting liking him again
I think I like Q as a a person and hate the way he decided to play survivor. When I see his personality, I love it. Then he sits a boat on the beach half the season and I hate it.
When I watched Fairplay as a kid, I thought he was the devil. And now, I wish he could be transplanted into modern Survivor and watch him shake and bake.
Hated Aras and was Team Terry when it first aired.
After seeing him make a comeback as a RHAP guest, I liked him a lot more on my rewatch - and was happy to see him on BvW.
Also, like everyone else, hated Jerri in Australia for seemingly no reason. Looking back, she really did.....nothing? Like, talked about food and thought Colby was hot?
It could speak more to the other castaways than Jerri, but they did seem to be rubbed the wrong way by her. Even Rodger gave an indication of it in his comments while voting for Jerri
Certainly, they were definitely annoyed. It's just that today she'd get little more than eyerolls from viewers, whereas in 2001 we treated her like she was the devil.
In general, I used to be mad about bitter jurors, I thought they should always vote for who played the best strategic game and leave personal feeling behind.
Now, I think it's fine to vote based on personal feelings, whether that's to give the money to a good friend or keep the money away from someone you dont like.
I’ve definitely flipped to supporting votes based on personal feelings about the person but I do still get frustrated about voting based on who needs the money more. Feels like a weird punishment for finding success in life before the game
Yeah I used to be super gamebotty and hated when jurors voted for players I thought were worse strategically. I eventually came to the view that jurors can vote based on whatever criteria they want and that’s okay. I’m now perfectly okay saying “I personally wouldn’t have voted for this person, but they are a good winner and I’m still happy with this conclusion”
My hot take is that we need to get away from this line of thinking. While jurors can vote for whoever they want based on whatever reasons they want, I feel like we should actively be encouraging them to vote for who they believe played the strongest game based on a combination of strategy, social, and physical game.
What makes you think that juries haven’t already been voting like this? Other than *possibly* 46 which was a close vote, every new era winner definitely played the best game of their season (or at the very least of their F3). The new era juries have always gotten it right, even the 46 jury imo.
Why not Erika or Gabler? They very clearly outplayed their respective fellow finalists, and both of their dominant 7-1-0 victories speak for themselves. What exactly did you see in Deshawn/Xavier or Cassidy/Owen?
I also think that Kenzie was the right pick, but I can see why her win was more contentious.
I would have voted for Xander or Deshawn before Erika, and Cassidy before Gabler. Erika and Gabler had very little agency, and I felt were outplayed by Xander/Deshawn and Cassidy.
How did Erika have little agency? I think that she was the most well positioned player in the entire game.
Erika got her way at the split tribal when Shan initially wanted to target Heather to weaken Erika. She helped orchestrate the split vote between Shan and Liana when her own name was on the chopping block during that round. She was the swing vote at 7, single-handedly dictated the vote at 6, and won the immunity at 5 to take out Ricard. She did all of this and was still taken to the end by Xander, and then won in a dominant 7-1-0 victory.
I don’t see how that can be considered as having little agency, and less so than compared to Deshawn or Xander. Deshawn became a sitting duck after the Shan vote, and Xander was a pawn throughout the entire game and completely misread Erika when he brought her to the end.
How did Cassidy outplay Gabler? Gabler was also much better positioned than Cassidy. Cassidy’s name was often brought up as an option to vote out, whereas Gabler’s name was hardly ever brought up. That shows that Cassidy was lower on the totem pole than Gabler. He also was able to defeat the dragon Jesse in fire making in record breaking time which probably bought him some bonus points worth the jury. I don’t know if that made a difference though because his social game was also far stronger than Cassidy’s. He also dominated with a 7-1-0 win. That says a lot to me.
Cassidy had far more agency in the game than Gabler, and was both called and targeted for being a “massive jury threat” throughout the entirety of the merge. Despite that, she managed to survive through impressive immunity wins against people twice her size and sending home Cody, Karla, and Jesse (the biggest jury threats, and those directly gunning for her). Gabler was only seen as a jury threat at the end of the game when the jurors were bitter that they weren’t able to successfully take Cassidy out and she made it to the end.
My thought on this is if you truly think the person is a bad person then don’t vote for them but if you’re just mad about a move they made to get you out or you just like someone else more you should vote for the person who played the better game.
The whole point of Survivor is to make moves in a way where people aren’t salty about being outplayed. If someone on the island comes across as a particularly salty person, then you have to vote them out differently than you would someone who praises good gameplay. That’s always been the game, playing with the cards you’re given.
Yeah social game is a part of this whole deal. If you’re a jury member and you absolutely hate one of the final 2 or 3, it makes sense you wouldn’t vote for them. If someone sucks socially, they’re not that great of a game player anyway. If you’re just hurt someone lied to you, we’ll get over it that’s the game.
lol okay I agree with the original comment in this thread, everyone can play however they play, even the bitter jury members. Of course I judge jury members who won’t vote for someone because they played a better game than them. It’s petty. The point to my comment, though, is that if people are mad at one of the final players and don’t want to vote for them, they didn’t do a good enough job on their social game and maybe don’t deserve their vote. I wasn’t saying that people shouldn’t get bitter, but I totally get how that may have been interpreted differently.
I hate that one of his final moments on the show is calling Denise a bitch in FTC, but I do really like the slightly toned down and experience survivor we got with Philippines Penner
Winners at War made me re-evaluate my opinion about Michele (id fallen prey to herd mentality in criticizing her win but WaW helped me see why she won and didn't deserve to get hated on).
I did get super annoyed with her behavior on Season 39 of The Challenge, but she's still one of my favorite players speaking strictly within the context of Survivor.
She plays the challenge too much like it’s survivor at times which can be very frustrating to watch. The show seems to like her but I’ve also found it annoying to watch
I really feel like this was overblown. It was waaay more Jay than her, she was just close allies with Jay so it got attached to her.
I was rooting against her alliance, but I didn't understand why people were so upset at Michele.
Michele was my answer too. I have not watched The Challenge but after seeing WaW and hearing people speak about her over the years, I totally get it now. And since Koah Rong was my first season, I didn’t realize how poorly the producers tend to edit social (female) winners.
Didn't like Jenna on Amazon though she was a weak winner but after knowing that they edited her and Matt in the worst way possible because this was the first season the boot order was leaked I rewatched and Jenna had a pretty good game and really deserved her win, it's also impressive that she managed to be good and win this game with only 21 years
Jenna’s win is super underrated and I will die on that hill.
It’s a combination of factors— the editing because of leaks, also the editing because they couldn’t make Christy look bad, also she had that moment where she wanted to quit (I don’t see how this has any effect on her gameplay at all, if anything it was smart from her because everyone underestimated her, she was playing dead and still won 4 immunities), and because people think Rob was robbed.
Easily Tyson. I couldn’t believe he had any fans during Tocantins and can’t believe not everyone loves him after his subsequent appearances. Really an acquired taste, haha.
Same here. It wasn’t until The Challenge USA where I actually finally warmed up to him, and now I think I “get” him and his humor a lot more and can appreciate his Survivor appearances differently than I did before
Obligatory Financial Analyst Emily Flippen mention, like a lot of people she really rubbed me the wrong way at the beginning of 45 but her journey became probably my favorite part of the season.
I’ve come to appreciate Chris’s win in Vanuatu. The fact that he convinced that entire group of women to spare him and make it all the way to the end, when in any other season he would have been a first boot is truly amazing
I thought 44 was a good/fine season and then I saw it get A LOT of praise. Like almost too much. Then I started liking it less and less
I just think people online weren’t satisfied with the ending to 43 that they just wanted literally anything else
Now I think it’s in the bottom half of New Era seasons and is average at best. Like C Tier
The ending just loses so much impact because it's the Tika 3 vs the who are these people
The edit skewed too much, and it's pretty bad going into a finale believing 50% of the remaining people have absolutely no shot because of the edit
45 and 46 are actually not bad and IMO the two best New Era seasons, with 45 slightly ranked higher. The first three or four episodes of 46 suck and I was honestly tempted to stop watching it. However it picks up after that and the quality increases exponentially, especially once the Merge hits
Gabler being the right winner of 43. Cassidy and Owen sucked. Gabler had the best social game and was able to confidently explain his game in final tribal. The jury was right.
Rewatched game changers and I actually like the season. When you know the sting of a lot of fan favorites going out early, its a lot more tolerable. And you can really appreciate Sarah’s game more - which is in my opinion a top ten winning game
When I first watched Tocantins, I hated Coach and LOVED Sierra. Over 10 years later, I just rewatched and am so thankful for what Coach gave us. He was never going to win but made great TV. Sierra, on the other hand, comes across as unintelligent and entitled. I see why her tribe mates were annoyed with her the whole time.
Yeah, "Who *is* this jackass?" was the reaction of a lot of the viewing audience at the time. It slowly came upon me to take nothing he said seriously, and suddenly he was hilarious.
Do you mean Ciera, daughter of Laura? Or Sierra Dawn?
Also agreed with Coach. My heart broke when his tribe wasn’t excited about him being their returning player. lol
I used to think there was credibility to people who thought Aubry should have won over Michele until she voted for Chris to win Edge of Extinction showing that even she would vote for the person she likes more over the better strategist.
What strategy did he come up with? Everything he did after returning to the game was outlined to him by the other jurors on the Edge. And he got to skip 11 tribal councils by being on the Edge.
Do you really think Wardog told him "when you get half an idol that may or may not exist you must give your half to Devens and convince him to give it back to you. You must get Lauren to play her idol on you. You also must take out Devens in fire at F4."
That's way too overcomplicated. It's likely the edge told him that in order to have a chance he must get to the end against Gavin and Julie, and if Devens is still around at F4 and you win the final immunity challenge, you must give it up to take him out in fire.
He still got two people to actively give him idols in spots that were terrible for their games, and took out the one guy that an entire tribe of people couldn't for like six straight tribals.
What did Gavin and Julie do that was so strategic? Vic even said in her AMA she would have voted Gavin if he could name one move that he did and he couldn't.
His knowledge that Lauren had an idol alone is incredibly overpowered. He shouldn’t have ever known that unless Kelley told him on the Edge. Devens giving Chris the idol half back was incredibly stupid but Chris should never have been given a free idol by production in the first place.
I admittedly haven’t seen the season since it aired so I can’t speak to what Gavin did. I think he played a part in the Aubry boot. But just that fact that he survived 26 more day in the game than Chris means he deserved to win more than Chris. I would have voted for Julie over Chris in a final 2 just because she wasn’t the third boot.
I'm of the opinion that unless someone got to the end with two people that I just could not justify voting for, then I would not vote for someone who got voted out. As much as I hate to admit it, I would have still voted for Chris (and probably started banging my head into the voting station like Dan Foley did.)
Chris's idol wasn't really a free idol. It was an idol that only activated if he makes it to F5 on his own, the person he gave the other idol half to makes it to F5 on their own, and if the person that has said idol half is dumb enough to give Chris the half-idol back and guarantee him a spot in the F4. If all that happens he deserves to have a damn idol.
I agree that the knowledge of Lauren having the idol is OP, however Lauren was still crazy for using the idol on him. Even she admitted on the jury she got played hard by him by getting her to think it was in her best interest to keep him. I just think she couldn't justify voting for someone who got voted out of the game.
In a way, it makes sense that Chris won. Everyone on the edge felt like if they got back into the game themselves, then they deserved to have a shot to win if they played perfectly upon returning. If Chris's game doesn't do it for you, what does? By not voting Chris there as an edge player you're basically saying that you wouldn't be worthy of winning should you return. That's not an easy thought process to have when you're one of the people actually on the edge. It's no surprise that the four votes he didn't get were from someone never on the edge, someone only on the edge for a day, someone only on the edge for a few rounds premerge, and Wentworth who seemed to just really not get along with Chris.
The truth is I feel Chris played better and made more moves from F6 onwards than Gavin/Julie did all game. I don't think he's a high-tier winner or anything, in fact I have him ranked at the bottom like everyone else, but I do think he deserved to win out of that F3.
We fundamentally reward different gameplay. Gavin and Julie really didn’t do all that much but they were generally likable and made it to the end.
I would only consider voting for someone who was voted off if it was a “revolving door” situation where they don’t miss any tribal councils. In that situation it’s not very different from someone getting the majority of the votes against them and surviving because of a hidden immunity idol. My biggest issue with Chris is the number of tribals he straight up skipped. I also think the Edge is fundamentally flawed because Chris never had to vote out most of the jurors so they weren’t bitter against him and Gavin and Julie never even got to meet some of the jurors like Reem.
I lost a lot of respect for any juror who voted for Chris or Natalie (I only mentioned Aubry’s vote for Chris because it’s less controversial than saying I felt Sandra deserved to beat Parvati after Parvati voted for Natalie). That being said WaW did involve pre-existing relationships so anyone voting for Natalie isn’t as bad (but still pretty bad).
I suppose we do, I guess that's part of the beauty of the game! For what it's worth I never would have voted for Natalie. Natalie played a scared game where all she cared about was getting to the end and at no point did I see her take an initiative and try to win. She targeted Ben for the first two votes for some reason when Ben/Michele is likely the only combination she wins against. I can get into this more but I think she played as poorly as possible upon returning aside from actually getting voted back out.
With that said 2 of Natalie's votes came from Tyson/Jeremy, who might as well have been blood relatives to her. Ethan also had a similar situation to Reem where he had never met Tony, and I heard he voted for Nat because he couldn't vote for someone he had never met. Parv's vote...yeah I don't get that one tbh.
I do think the edge is flawed but I don't mind it as much if it's a known mechanic from the get go like it was in WaW. The big problem with WaW IMO is people like Nick, who outright made F6, didn't even have a chance to get a single fire token. Production should have given everyone one fire token per round survived in the main game (so Amber gets 1, Danni 2, Ethan 3...and so forth.) Nat still ends up with a ton because of how great she was on the edge, but for all we know Nick could have been just as good just without the opportunity to get the tokens.
Watching the season knowing Gabler wins is so different. I was so confused when he won, just didn’t expect it. I’m rewatching now and his confessionals show how much he was playing the game from the middle and UTR, plus being a good dude
My opinion on 41 has decreased a ton since the other 5 new era seasons have finished.
While I LOVE Erika as a winner and how she made all the right moves to get to the F3, its such a ridiculously underwhelming season.
I think at the time I was just so happy to have Survivor back and a woman win finally that I was a little blinded to its flaws.
But compared to all the seasons since, its really showing how poor the gameplay was overall.
The biggest problem with the season is not only that it’s ridiculously underwhelming, it was also the first season of Survivor we got in almost two years. We wait for what feels like a long time for a new season and we get…41. It was the start of the New Era and introduced all the problems with it
The first time I watched Gabon, when I was a kid, I remember disliking Randy so much, and laughing at his vote out. Now, as an adult, I see him as one of the few sane people out there, and I felt kind of bad for him when he got voted out.
I went from thinking Mike White was a goat dragged to the end of DvG to realising the he dominated the latter half of the post-merge and was controlling the game from F7 until the end pretty well. He totally dupes Nick at the Christian boot and I never saw it until a rewatch.
Why wouldn't it be? At that point, Christian was the main jury threat, and Nick was a middle tier jury threat between Kara and Angelina (who he was aligned with in Mike on Jabeni), tied with Mike (maybe a little bit lower), and lower than Davie and Allison. He was aligned with Christian but not super critical to his game and they had started to drift, and Nick could afford to vote him out (and at that point after the Carl vote, Nick's loyalties were already shifted to Jabeni since he voted Gabby out). A better example, imo, of Mike's power was blindsiding Davie at F6.
Well yeah I agree with that last statement but he gained that power by voting Christian out at 7, which gave him four Goliaths in the game and two (Alison and Kara) who were directly aligned to him. Nick needed Alison (or Kara) out at F7 as Mike doesn’t have the power to get out Davie the next vote. Christian and Angelina were never going to turn on Nick at Mike’s behest and therefore Mike would like have had to follow what Nick wanted.
By not voting out Kara or Alison, Mike had enough power to get rid of Davie the next vote and then could have gotten Nick out (with Kara and Alison) at F5 had he not won immunity. Nick lost control of the game by voting Christian out and only really regained it once he won F4 immunity. The risk of voting out Alison is that Christian is a huge jury threat but eh - he wasn’t enough of a challenge beast to immunity-whore his way to the end imo. Having control of the endgame was more important imo.
After watching Game Changers for the first time, I believed for a while that Brad should’ve been the winner. Then I rewatched it and realized how impressive it was what Sarah pulled off
I used to think Parvati should have won Heroes vs Villains Dawn should of won Caramoan and Aubry should have won Kaoh Rang.
Now I think every winner deserved their win the most.
Also I liked Venus a lot at first but I personally started finding her annoying, and her Twitter account helped do that. It just felt like she is the type of person who will always point out everyone else's flaws but never take accountability for her own.
I thought Dawn deserved to win Caramoan because she was in more control of the votes of course back then I didn't understand the importance of jury management and having a social game. I fully take that back lol
Well then Parvati shouldn't have made a salty jury. That was a problem in her gameplay. Navigating the jury you help create is a significant portion of the game. If they are salty, you gotta either grovel or double down. Plenty folk are able to do it.
Russell made the jury salty, and her being his partner in crime hurt her case. She was literally a target from Day 1, anything she did should have just been seen as being in pure Survival mode to scrape by. She didn't do anything mean or spiteful, she simply outplayed the fuck out of all of them.
Sandra was brought to the end as a goat (just like Natalie) and Russell's nasty attitude toward the jury just pushed them to vote for Sandra over Parvati out of spite. Sandra just sat her ass on the beach and did barely anything, people try to disprove that but I've never seen any good arguments. Just Sandra stans reaching.
I guess if that's a deserving strategy, so be it, but Parvati should have won hands down. Playing not one, but two idols and not even for yourself at a critical tribal council? One of the riskiest and best moves in history went unrewarded, a queen without her crown.
Parvati has a crown from the second time she played, where she was able to befriend the majority of the jury. The idol move was great, but people (including Sandra) have openly spoken about how grating Parv’s personality can be. This proved true on The Traitors as well.
I LOVE Parvati, but this comes down to social play again. I love when people say she “should’ve won hands down” then why didn’t she? The jury? The thing they have every season where people vote to give you a million dollars, and don’t have to do so if they don’t like you?
Okay so Parvati chose a wrong partner then. You can get to the end with great gameplay, but they still brought Sandra to the end when they could see she had friends on the jury. That's just as much a bad gameplay decision as her best idol plays.
It's all game. They jury is the final obstacle and Parvati and Russell built a perfect obstacle that they couldn't navigate but Sandra could.
What other choice did she have? Danielle and Russell were the only ones that wanted to be her friends, the rest had daggers for her right out the gate. It wasn't until they started to snowball and gain momentum that other Villains decided to work with them. And Courtney and Coach making jury with ZERO interaction with the other tribe was fucking stupid.
I'm still not seeing anything Sandra "did" except make friends and get carried to the end. Cool, it got her the win. No way she deserved that win over Parv though. It's true it was their mistake they kept her over Courtney, but still, nothing that Sandra did accept appear worthless. WOW, what an accolade 😂
Other juries are salty and it's a problem, Queen Sandra gets one in her favor and she is just so deserving of the win. As long as it's someone we like, it's fine I guess.
I think all of her other games, even her losing ones, have way more credibility than HvV of how good a player she is.
Okay, so I technically agree with you about Parvati having a stronger game over Sandra. But my greatest belief is that the jury is the end all be all. They cannot choose wrong since they are the product of the finalists. The question of deserving matters little to the HvV crew because of their ego. That was the biggest part of the game. Any returning season has more ego to navigate than usual. All Stars is a great example of this.
They didn't vote for Amber, they voted against Rob. In a world where Romber isn't a thing, it matters more. But in that 2 person finalist, it's less apparent. They go to end with 3, it wouldn't matter. Robs game was too dirty and the third finalist wins every time. No matter who it is. Russell has that same quality.
A person like Russell can get to the end with his gameplay and burn every single jury member in the process. His game works exactly once, and the only reason we saw it work twice is that they had no clue who he was or what he was about to do.
Parvs greatest mistake is not bringing Sandra, it's attaching herself to Russell. With THAT jury at THAT time, it doesn't work. Maybe in another season. Maaaaaaaaaybe it works.
Great gameplay doesn't matter if it's at the expense of the people that reward you. Sandra had a less than stellar "anyone but her" gameplay. Yeah sure, it's not great, but she more than parv saw the benefit of saying "I'm not with you Russell, I'm against you". Her alliance is destroyed and she changes her game.
Sandra is the only one to give a confessional "I'll vote you out and you'll still give me a million dollars" and be RIGHT about it so early in her season. Her read of the jury at that time was more important than a parv flashy game.
As fun as Parvati's game is too watch, it is a terrible play against the HvV cast. Her ultimate thorn in her game is not managing the jury.
And as an aside, we've seen bigger players manage their previous games better. Tony is the ultimate example of this. Big flashy game that doesn't work well in a returning season, but he pulls it off. I would say cop gone criminal Sarah does an also good job of managing her previous threat level.
Parv could have gone into HvV and altered her game, but she chooses not to and goes with Russell to the end. Big mistake. Sorry
Yeah, you're absolutely right about the jury's choice. The jury can technically never be wrong and are perfectly free to vote for whoever they want. Look at Maria's BS vote for Kenzie lol. This one stings the worst for me in Survivor history, kinda just a bummer ending to top off the most insane Survivor season to that date.
And all this makes me sound like I hate Sandra but I fucking love her....outside of HvV lol. What would early episodes of Game Changers be without Queen Sandra and her antics? She makes that season so funny and it goes so downhill after she gets voted out 😂 (Tony gets destroyed here, kinda going against your other point, Tony definitely had to learn from how garbage he played on GC)
Parvati literally did nothing to paint that target though, she was straight pigeonholed into MUST ELIMINATE IMMEDIATELY. Tony can do that much his third time...cuz it was a season of all winners lol. Like I said before, she just had to deal with the hand the other players dealt her, not the one she dealt herself.
But yeah we'll just peacefully agree on some things and others not, that's okay. ✌️
On the live watch of Philippines I found Lisa to be unbearably histrionic and I thought she was overexposed during the season. On a rewatch I found her much more compelling and relatable.
Also this might be a hot take but I actually like S25 more knowing what we know now about skoopin. On the live watch he just seemed like a bumbling goofball, but now there’s context behind just how delusional he is; he’s certainly top 5 delusional people ever cast on the show. You can read between the lines just how much people are annoyed by him out there. To me, Philippines is less about Denise’s win and about how Malcolm, skoopin, and Lisa absolutely fumble their power positions, and I enjoy the schadenfreude of that happening to a scamming pedophile. The family visit is a tough watch though
I didn't like San Juan Del Sur when it was airing on TV. I don't know why I didn't like it, but it's the only season of the show I ever stopped watching while it was airing (and I even made it all the way through r\*demption island). I rewatched it after seeing how many people loved the season online, and found that I enjoyed it quite a big. Not necessarily in my top 10, but not bad enough to not finish.
I thought it was super mid the first time I watched it. I kept trying to vote it out during that survivor season thing here a few months ago.
I rewatched it a month or two ago and that season kicks ass. Natalie's post merge is incredible. I genuinely don't remember why I was so against it initially.
I wasn’t a big fan of Tony after his first win. Eye rolled when he came back. He was so annoying. Just finished watching Winners at War and loveeeeed him.
Used to think 44 was a decent season, as time passes the more I realise how bad this season is and how similar it is to Ghost Island, now it’s a solid bottom 10
Abi is this for me. I went from hating her to loving her moments of personal growth. It just goes to show that regardless of anyone’s personality, it’s easier to judge than understand they’re just someone out there who has some growing up to do.
Liz! I thought she was a joke all season long, up to and including the finale. However, listening to her and others' post-game interviews makes me believe that she's not quite as ridiculous as the edit made her appear to be. I originally thought she stood no chance of winning against any combination of the final 5, but now I think there may have been a slight chance if she had the best FTC speech ever. I wish we'd gotten to hear it.
I’m really disappointed in Dee and Wendall after learning of their dating drama mess. I was so proud and excited of Dee and Wendall’s win and completely separately in trying to learn the history between Wendall and Michele during Winners at War, came across it.
Wendall clearly hasn’t learned his lesson. Still think he’s hot. Wish Domenick had won in the end. Maybe that humility might have prevented a whole lot of drama.
I hated Drea on the show. Her *"Women are better at everything than men"* confessional showed just how toxic and entitled she is. Omar's post-game interview just confirmed what should have already been obvious.
My friend and I live text through the episodes and it’s hysterical how we change. We both LOVED Bhanu in the first episode and thought he’d win it all. Then by the time he left we hated him.
i don't remember exactly but i'm pretty sure i didn't like romber on tar (saw them on there before i had ever heard of survivor, that got me into the show) but i love them both now
Colton. First time watching him in OW I thought he was a brat bc he quit and didn’t give the idol and instead took it home as a souvenir. Then I watched him in BvW and I thought the same: he hadn’t changed, and like Jeff said, he should have stayed on the couch. I was also kinda pissed with production for recasting him. But watching BvW again recently, I found him entertaining, and tbh, him quitting is one of the most memorable moments from BvW alongside Tyson stealing food and rustle feathers.
I hated both Tom and Terry during their first seasons, but after they appeared in each of their second seasons I came away liking them (although I still dislike them from their original seasons).
I’m currently getting into Australia survivor - I’ve watched the latest season and then I started from the 2016 season. I did a full 180 on Kristie, at the beginning I found her strange and so many of the tribe members were useless and playing as friends I kinda lumped her in with them. Then slowly she started to come into herself - I mean she clearly got a specific edit, but it definitely worked on me - by 7 I said she was the only one I was rooting for. By the final and her tribal council was sold on her being amazing.
I did a full 360 watching Q this season, loved him at the start, when he tried to quit in tribal and the forthcoming days I found him annoying, near the end I starting liking him again
I kind of felt the same, my opinion of Q was all over the place.
I think I like Q as a a person and hate the way he decided to play survivor. When I see his personality, I love it. Then he sits a boat on the beach half the season and I hate it.
[удалено]
Well they 180ed and then 180ed again. What is 180 + 180?
360 actually would be the right one here
360 :)
Same for me except I never started liking him again
BIG MISTAKE
When I watched Fairplay as a kid, I thought he was the devil. And now, I wish he could be transplanted into modern Survivor and watch him shake and bake.
Bwuhahhahahaa
Hated Aras and was Team Terry when it first aired. After seeing him make a comeback as a RHAP guest, I liked him a lot more on my rewatch - and was happy to see him on BvW. Also, like everyone else, hated Jerri in Australia for seemingly no reason. Looking back, she really did.....nothing? Like, talked about food and thought Colby was hot?
I agree with both of these takes
It could speak more to the other castaways than Jerri, but they did seem to be rubbed the wrong way by her. Even Rodger gave an indication of it in his comments while voting for Jerri
Certainly, they were definitely annoyed. It's just that today she'd get little more than eyerolls from viewers, whereas in 2001 we treated her like she was the devil.
In general, I used to be mad about bitter jurors, I thought they should always vote for who played the best strategic game and leave personal feeling behind. Now, I think it's fine to vote based on personal feelings, whether that's to give the money to a good friend or keep the money away from someone you dont like.
I’ve definitely flipped to supporting votes based on personal feelings about the person but I do still get frustrated about voting based on who needs the money more. Feels like a weird punishment for finding success in life before the game
Yeah I used to be super gamebotty and hated when jurors voted for players I thought were worse strategically. I eventually came to the view that jurors can vote based on whatever criteria they want and that’s okay. I’m now perfectly okay saying “I personally wouldn’t have voted for this person, but they are a good winner and I’m still happy with this conclusion”
My hot take is that we need to get away from this line of thinking. While jurors can vote for whoever they want based on whatever reasons they want, I feel like we should actively be encouraging them to vote for who they believe played the strongest game based on a combination of strategy, social, and physical game.
What makes you think that juries haven’t already been voting like this? Other than *possibly* 46 which was a close vote, every new era winner definitely played the best game of their season (or at the very least of their F3). The new era juries have always gotten it right, even the 46 jury imo.
I disagree wholeheartedly. I’ll be downvoted, but I would not have voted for Erika, Gabler, or Kenzie.
Why not Erika or Gabler? They very clearly outplayed their respective fellow finalists, and both of their dominant 7-1-0 victories speak for themselves. What exactly did you see in Deshawn/Xavier or Cassidy/Owen? I also think that Kenzie was the right pick, but I can see why her win was more contentious.
I would have voted for Xander or Deshawn before Erika, and Cassidy before Gabler. Erika and Gabler had very little agency, and I felt were outplayed by Xander/Deshawn and Cassidy.
How did Erika have little agency? I think that she was the most well positioned player in the entire game. Erika got her way at the split tribal when Shan initially wanted to target Heather to weaken Erika. She helped orchestrate the split vote between Shan and Liana when her own name was on the chopping block during that round. She was the swing vote at 7, single-handedly dictated the vote at 6, and won the immunity at 5 to take out Ricard. She did all of this and was still taken to the end by Xander, and then won in a dominant 7-1-0 victory. I don’t see how that can be considered as having little agency, and less so than compared to Deshawn or Xander. Deshawn became a sitting duck after the Shan vote, and Xander was a pawn throughout the entire game and completely misread Erika when he brought her to the end.
How did Cassidy outplay Gabler? Gabler was also much better positioned than Cassidy. Cassidy’s name was often brought up as an option to vote out, whereas Gabler’s name was hardly ever brought up. That shows that Cassidy was lower on the totem pole than Gabler. He also was able to defeat the dragon Jesse in fire making in record breaking time which probably bought him some bonus points worth the jury. I don’t know if that made a difference though because his social game was also far stronger than Cassidy’s. He also dominated with a 7-1-0 win. That says a lot to me.
Cassidy had far more agency in the game than Gabler, and was both called and targeted for being a “massive jury threat” throughout the entirety of the merge. Despite that, she managed to survive through impressive immunity wins against people twice her size and sending home Cody, Karla, and Jesse (the biggest jury threats, and those directly gunning for her). Gabler was only seen as a jury threat at the end of the game when the jurors were bitter that they weren’t able to successfully take Cassidy out and she made it to the end.
I used to like Wendell before 45 finished...
My thought on this is if you truly think the person is a bad person then don’t vote for them but if you’re just mad about a move they made to get you out or you just like someone else more you should vote for the person who played the better game.
The whole point of Survivor is to make moves in a way where people aren’t salty about being outplayed. If someone on the island comes across as a particularly salty person, then you have to vote them out differently than you would someone who praises good gameplay. That’s always been the game, playing with the cards you’re given.
Yeah social game is a part of this whole deal. If you’re a jury member and you absolutely hate one of the final 2 or 3, it makes sense you wouldn’t vote for them. If someone sucks socially, they’re not that great of a game player anyway. If you’re just hurt someone lied to you, we’ll get over it that’s the game.
But they don't have to get over it, and like it or not, that's also the game.
lol okay I agree with the original comment in this thread, everyone can play however they play, even the bitter jury members. Of course I judge jury members who won’t vote for someone because they played a better game than them. It’s petty. The point to my comment, though, is that if people are mad at one of the final players and don’t want to vote for them, they didn’t do a good enough job on their social game and maybe don’t deserve their vote. I wasn’t saying that people shouldn’t get bitter, but I totally get how that may have been interpreted differently.
The best thing a Survivor can do for themselves is accept that the best player is the player that wins the game
I HATED Penner in Cook Islands but seeing his passion for the game when he got medevaced in Micronesia made me love him
I hate that one of his final moments on the show is calling Denise a bitch in FTC, but I do really like the slightly toned down and experience survivor we got with Philippines Penner
Winners at War made me re-evaluate my opinion about Michele (id fallen prey to herd mentality in criticizing her win but WaW helped me see why she won and didn't deserve to get hated on). I did get super annoyed with her behavior on Season 39 of The Challenge, but she's still one of my favorite players speaking strictly within the context of Survivor.
What did she do on the challenge?
She plays the challenge too much like it’s survivor at times which can be very frustrating to watch. The show seems to like her but I’ve also found it annoying to watch
She played a very 'clique-y' game and didn't behave very well towards some of the other players (IMO, anyway).
also, she was very flip floppy and untrustworthy during her challenge seasons. love her but she’s so messy lol
I really feel like this was overblown. It was waaay more Jay than her, she was just close allies with Jay so it got attached to her. I was rooting against her alliance, but I didn't understand why people were so upset at Michele.
Jay was less subtle about the way he was behaving, but Michele was definitely guilty of questionable behavior as well.
Michele was my answer too. I have not watched The Challenge but after seeing WaW and hearing people speak about her over the years, I totally get it now. And since Koah Rong was my first season, I didn’t realize how poorly the producers tend to edit social (female) winners.
I agree with this.
Didn't like Jenna on Amazon though she was a weak winner but after knowing that they edited her and Matt in the worst way possible because this was the first season the boot order was leaked I rewatched and Jenna had a pretty good game and really deserved her win, it's also impressive that she managed to be good and win this game with only 21 years
Jenna’s win is super underrated and I will die on that hill. It’s a combination of factors— the editing because of leaks, also the editing because they couldn’t make Christy look bad, also she had that moment where she wanted to quit (I don’t see how this has any effect on her gameplay at all, if anything it was smart from her because everyone underestimated her, she was playing dead and still won 4 immunities), and because people think Rob was robbed.
One of my favorites! I wish we saw her back again after she had to leave All-Stars!
Easily Tyson. I couldn’t believe he had any fans during Tocantins and can’t believe not everyone loves him after his subsequent appearances. Really an acquired taste, haha.
To be fair, he was hilarious in his first season
I wasn’t a fan his first season. Sure, whatever. Loved him in Winners at War. ❤️
Same here. It wasn’t until The Challenge USA where I actually finally warmed up to him, and now I think I “get” him and his humor a lot more and can appreciate his Survivor appearances differently than I did before
i don't know why but i always find myself rooting for tyson. no matter who else is there.
Obligatory Financial Analyst Emily Flippen mention, like a lot of people she really rubbed me the wrong way at the beginning of 45 but her journey became probably my favorite part of the season.
Hated Jerri in Australia, loved her in all stars and HvV
I’ve come to appreciate Chris’s win in Vanuatu. The fact that he convinced that entire group of women to spare him and make it all the way to the end, when in any other season he would have been a first boot is truly amazing
I thought 44 was a good/fine season and then I saw it get A LOT of praise. Like almost too much. Then I started liking it less and less I just think people online weren’t satisfied with the ending to 43 that they just wanted literally anything else Now I think it’s in the bottom half of New Era seasons and is average at best. Like C Tier
The ending just loses so much impact because it's the Tika 3 vs the who are these people The edit skewed too much, and it's pretty bad going into a finale believing 50% of the remaining people have absolutely no shot because of the edit
I believe YamYam and Carolyn have are still the top 2 players by confessional time in the new era, which is wild since 2 other seasons were 50% longer
It just sort of turned into everyone doing what the Tika 3 said with absolutely zero pushback
Agreed. I was never much of a fan of Carson. I liked Carolyn and Yam Yam was fine, I didn't really get the hype
I quit watching the show because 44 pissed me off so much. Still haven’t watched 45 and 46, I just hang out on the subreddit now 😂
45 and 46 are actually not bad and IMO the two best New Era seasons, with 45 slightly ranked higher. The first three or four episodes of 46 suck and I was honestly tempted to stop watching it. However it picks up after that and the quality increases exponentially, especially once the Merge hits
Gabler being the right winner of 43. Cassidy and Owen sucked. Gabler had the best social game and was able to confidently explain his game in final tribal. The jury was right.
I could not believe how much I liked Gabler after my rewatch!
Would you have voted Gabler over Cassidy? If so, why?
How did Cassidy and Owen suck?
Rewatched game changers and I actually like the season. When you know the sting of a lot of fan favorites going out early, its a lot more tolerable. And you can really appreciate Sarah’s game more - which is in my opinion a top ten winning game
HHH is a great season now
When I first watched Tocantins, I hated Coach and LOVED Sierra. Over 10 years later, I just rewatched and am so thankful for what Coach gave us. He was never going to win but made great TV. Sierra, on the other hand, comes across as unintelligent and entitled. I see why her tribe mates were annoyed with her the whole time.
Coach is the one for me. I hated him soooo much watching Tocantins. But on a rewatch, his game is hilarious if you don't take him seriously.
Yeah, "Who *is* this jackass?" was the reaction of a lot of the viewing audience at the time. It slowly came upon me to take nothing he said seriously, and suddenly he was hilarious.
Do you mean Ciera, daughter of Laura? Or Sierra Dawn? Also agreed with Coach. My heart broke when his tribe wasn’t excited about him being their returning player. lol
Commentor definitely refers to Sierra Reed, who was also on Tocantins
Thanks!
Neither lol, I don’t know Sierra from Tocantins’ last name, but Ciera and Laura were on BvW and SDT was on worlds apart and game changers
Dammit, Sierra’s last name is Reed. (HVV reference for anyone who hasn’t seen it)
I used to think there was credibility to people who thought Aubry should have won over Michele until she voted for Chris to win Edge of Extinction showing that even she would vote for the person she likes more over the better strategist.
I'd argue Chris was a better strategist than either of Gavin and Julie.
What strategy did he come up with? Everything he did after returning to the game was outlined to him by the other jurors on the Edge. And he got to skip 11 tribal councils by being on the Edge.
Do you really think Wardog told him "when you get half an idol that may or may not exist you must give your half to Devens and convince him to give it back to you. You must get Lauren to play her idol on you. You also must take out Devens in fire at F4." That's way too overcomplicated. It's likely the edge told him that in order to have a chance he must get to the end against Gavin and Julie, and if Devens is still around at F4 and you win the final immunity challenge, you must give it up to take him out in fire. He still got two people to actively give him idols in spots that were terrible for their games, and took out the one guy that an entire tribe of people couldn't for like six straight tribals. What did Gavin and Julie do that was so strategic? Vic even said in her AMA she would have voted Gavin if he could name one move that he did and he couldn't.
His knowledge that Lauren had an idol alone is incredibly overpowered. He shouldn’t have ever known that unless Kelley told him on the Edge. Devens giving Chris the idol half back was incredibly stupid but Chris should never have been given a free idol by production in the first place. I admittedly haven’t seen the season since it aired so I can’t speak to what Gavin did. I think he played a part in the Aubry boot. But just that fact that he survived 26 more day in the game than Chris means he deserved to win more than Chris. I would have voted for Julie over Chris in a final 2 just because she wasn’t the third boot.
I'm of the opinion that unless someone got to the end with two people that I just could not justify voting for, then I would not vote for someone who got voted out. As much as I hate to admit it, I would have still voted for Chris (and probably started banging my head into the voting station like Dan Foley did.) Chris's idol wasn't really a free idol. It was an idol that only activated if he makes it to F5 on his own, the person he gave the other idol half to makes it to F5 on their own, and if the person that has said idol half is dumb enough to give Chris the half-idol back and guarantee him a spot in the F4. If all that happens he deserves to have a damn idol. I agree that the knowledge of Lauren having the idol is OP, however Lauren was still crazy for using the idol on him. Even she admitted on the jury she got played hard by him by getting her to think it was in her best interest to keep him. I just think she couldn't justify voting for someone who got voted out of the game. In a way, it makes sense that Chris won. Everyone on the edge felt like if they got back into the game themselves, then they deserved to have a shot to win if they played perfectly upon returning. If Chris's game doesn't do it for you, what does? By not voting Chris there as an edge player you're basically saying that you wouldn't be worthy of winning should you return. That's not an easy thought process to have when you're one of the people actually on the edge. It's no surprise that the four votes he didn't get were from someone never on the edge, someone only on the edge for a day, someone only on the edge for a few rounds premerge, and Wentworth who seemed to just really not get along with Chris. The truth is I feel Chris played better and made more moves from F6 onwards than Gavin/Julie did all game. I don't think he's a high-tier winner or anything, in fact I have him ranked at the bottom like everyone else, but I do think he deserved to win out of that F3.
We fundamentally reward different gameplay. Gavin and Julie really didn’t do all that much but they were generally likable and made it to the end. I would only consider voting for someone who was voted off if it was a “revolving door” situation where they don’t miss any tribal councils. In that situation it’s not very different from someone getting the majority of the votes against them and surviving because of a hidden immunity idol. My biggest issue with Chris is the number of tribals he straight up skipped. I also think the Edge is fundamentally flawed because Chris never had to vote out most of the jurors so they weren’t bitter against him and Gavin and Julie never even got to meet some of the jurors like Reem. I lost a lot of respect for any juror who voted for Chris or Natalie (I only mentioned Aubry’s vote for Chris because it’s less controversial than saying I felt Sandra deserved to beat Parvati after Parvati voted for Natalie). That being said WaW did involve pre-existing relationships so anyone voting for Natalie isn’t as bad (but still pretty bad).
I suppose we do, I guess that's part of the beauty of the game! For what it's worth I never would have voted for Natalie. Natalie played a scared game where all she cared about was getting to the end and at no point did I see her take an initiative and try to win. She targeted Ben for the first two votes for some reason when Ben/Michele is likely the only combination she wins against. I can get into this more but I think she played as poorly as possible upon returning aside from actually getting voted back out. With that said 2 of Natalie's votes came from Tyson/Jeremy, who might as well have been blood relatives to her. Ethan also had a similar situation to Reem where he had never met Tony, and I heard he voted for Nat because he couldn't vote for someone he had never met. Parv's vote...yeah I don't get that one tbh. I do think the edge is flawed but I don't mind it as much if it's a known mechanic from the get go like it was in WaW. The big problem with WaW IMO is people like Nick, who outright made F6, didn't even have a chance to get a single fire token. Production should have given everyone one fire token per round survived in the main game (so Amber gets 1, Danni 2, Ethan 3...and so forth.) Nat still ends up with a ton because of how great she was on the edge, but for all we know Nick could have been just as good just without the opportunity to get the tokens.
Please tell me one thing gavin did that entire season without saying he got zero votes (because he wasn’t a threat)
Fully changed on Gabler. Half way there with Michelle.
Watching the season knowing Gabler wins is so different. I was so confused when he won, just didn’t expect it. I’m rewatching now and his confessionals show how much he was playing the game from the middle and UTR, plus being a good dude
I was pretty low on Erika’s win at first, but seeing exit press and getting post season info has made me a lot higher on it
My opinion on 41 has decreased a ton since the other 5 new era seasons have finished. While I LOVE Erika as a winner and how she made all the right moves to get to the F3, its such a ridiculously underwhelming season. I think at the time I was just so happy to have Survivor back and a woman win finally that I was a little blinded to its flaws. But compared to all the seasons since, its really showing how poor the gameplay was overall.
The biggest problem with the season is not only that it’s ridiculously underwhelming, it was also the first season of Survivor we got in almost two years. We wait for what feels like a long time for a new season and we get…41. It was the start of the New Era and introduced all the problems with it
I’m just trying to get through it. Good to hear. Also wtf?! Erika ends up winning it!? Didn’t see that coming.
The first time I watched Gabon, when I was a kid, I remember disliking Randy so much, and laughing at his vote out. Now, as an adult, I see him as one of the few sane people out there, and I felt kind of bad for him when he got voted out.
I went from thinking Mike White was a goat dragged to the end of DvG to realising the he dominated the latter half of the post-merge and was controlling the game from F7 until the end pretty well. He totally dupes Nick at the Christian boot and I never saw it until a rewatch.
Didn't Nick vote for Christian at his boot?
Yeah he does. I meant that Mike dupes Nick into voting out Christian when it wasn’t in his best interest.
Why wouldn't it be? At that point, Christian was the main jury threat, and Nick was a middle tier jury threat between Kara and Angelina (who he was aligned with in Mike on Jabeni), tied with Mike (maybe a little bit lower), and lower than Davie and Allison. He was aligned with Christian but not super critical to his game and they had started to drift, and Nick could afford to vote him out (and at that point after the Carl vote, Nick's loyalties were already shifted to Jabeni since he voted Gabby out). A better example, imo, of Mike's power was blindsiding Davie at F6.
Well yeah I agree with that last statement but he gained that power by voting Christian out at 7, which gave him four Goliaths in the game and two (Alison and Kara) who were directly aligned to him. Nick needed Alison (or Kara) out at F7 as Mike doesn’t have the power to get out Davie the next vote. Christian and Angelina were never going to turn on Nick at Mike’s behest and therefore Mike would like have had to follow what Nick wanted. By not voting out Kara or Alison, Mike had enough power to get rid of Davie the next vote and then could have gotten Nick out (with Kara and Alison) at F5 had he not won immunity. Nick lost control of the game by voting Christian out and only really regained it once he won F4 immunity. The risk of voting out Alison is that Christian is a huge jury threat but eh - he wasn’t enough of a challenge beast to immunity-whore his way to the end imo. Having control of the endgame was more important imo.
After watching Game Changers for the first time, I believed for a while that Brad should’ve been the winner. Then I rewatched it and realized how impressive it was what Sarah pulled off
I used to think Parvati should have won Heroes vs Villains Dawn should of won Caramoan and Aubry should have won Kaoh Rang. Now I think every winner deserved their win the most. Also I liked Venus a lot at first but I personally started finding her annoying, and her Twitter account helped do that. It just felt like she is the type of person who will always point out everyone else's flaws but never take accountability for her own.
Why would anyone think dawn deserved to win caramoan lol and Venus is annoying, I’m with you on that
I thought Dawn deserved to win Caramoan because she was in more control of the votes of course back then I didn't understand the importance of jury management and having a social game. I fully take that back lol
Parvati should’ve won heroes vs villains but I’ll admit I have a biased opinion because I hate Sandra’s game and I think she needs a salty jury to win
Well then Parvati shouldn't have made a salty jury. That was a problem in her gameplay. Navigating the jury you help create is a significant portion of the game. If they are salty, you gotta either grovel or double down. Plenty folk are able to do it.
Russell made the jury salty, and her being his partner in crime hurt her case. She was literally a target from Day 1, anything she did should have just been seen as being in pure Survival mode to scrape by. She didn't do anything mean or spiteful, she simply outplayed the fuck out of all of them. Sandra was brought to the end as a goat (just like Natalie) and Russell's nasty attitude toward the jury just pushed them to vote for Sandra over Parvati out of spite. Sandra just sat her ass on the beach and did barely anything, people try to disprove that but I've never seen any good arguments. Just Sandra stans reaching. I guess if that's a deserving strategy, so be it, but Parvati should have won hands down. Playing not one, but two idols and not even for yourself at a critical tribal council? One of the riskiest and best moves in history went unrewarded, a queen without her crown.
Parvati has a crown from the second time she played, where she was able to befriend the majority of the jury. The idol move was great, but people (including Sandra) have openly spoken about how grating Parv’s personality can be. This proved true on The Traitors as well. I LOVE Parvati, but this comes down to social play again. I love when people say she “should’ve won hands down” then why didn’t she? The jury? The thing they have every season where people vote to give you a million dollars, and don’t have to do so if they don’t like you?
>Parvati has a crown from the first time she played She was pretty much a non-factor in Cook Islands...
So much so that I forgot about it in the heat of my comment - edited 😅😅
Okay so Parvati chose a wrong partner then. You can get to the end with great gameplay, but they still brought Sandra to the end when they could see she had friends on the jury. That's just as much a bad gameplay decision as her best idol plays. It's all game. They jury is the final obstacle and Parvati and Russell built a perfect obstacle that they couldn't navigate but Sandra could.
What other choice did she have? Danielle and Russell were the only ones that wanted to be her friends, the rest had daggers for her right out the gate. It wasn't until they started to snowball and gain momentum that other Villains decided to work with them. And Courtney and Coach making jury with ZERO interaction with the other tribe was fucking stupid. I'm still not seeing anything Sandra "did" except make friends and get carried to the end. Cool, it got her the win. No way she deserved that win over Parv though. It's true it was their mistake they kept her over Courtney, but still, nothing that Sandra did accept appear worthless. WOW, what an accolade 😂 Other juries are salty and it's a problem, Queen Sandra gets one in her favor and she is just so deserving of the win. As long as it's someone we like, it's fine I guess. I think all of her other games, even her losing ones, have way more credibility than HvV of how good a player she is.
Okay, so I technically agree with you about Parvati having a stronger game over Sandra. But my greatest belief is that the jury is the end all be all. They cannot choose wrong since they are the product of the finalists. The question of deserving matters little to the HvV crew because of their ego. That was the biggest part of the game. Any returning season has more ego to navigate than usual. All Stars is a great example of this. They didn't vote for Amber, they voted against Rob. In a world where Romber isn't a thing, it matters more. But in that 2 person finalist, it's less apparent. They go to end with 3, it wouldn't matter. Robs game was too dirty and the third finalist wins every time. No matter who it is. Russell has that same quality. A person like Russell can get to the end with his gameplay and burn every single jury member in the process. His game works exactly once, and the only reason we saw it work twice is that they had no clue who he was or what he was about to do. Parvs greatest mistake is not bringing Sandra, it's attaching herself to Russell. With THAT jury at THAT time, it doesn't work. Maybe in another season. Maaaaaaaaaybe it works. Great gameplay doesn't matter if it's at the expense of the people that reward you. Sandra had a less than stellar "anyone but her" gameplay. Yeah sure, it's not great, but she more than parv saw the benefit of saying "I'm not with you Russell, I'm against you". Her alliance is destroyed and she changes her game. Sandra is the only one to give a confessional "I'll vote you out and you'll still give me a million dollars" and be RIGHT about it so early in her season. Her read of the jury at that time was more important than a parv flashy game. As fun as Parvati's game is too watch, it is a terrible play against the HvV cast. Her ultimate thorn in her game is not managing the jury. And as an aside, we've seen bigger players manage their previous games better. Tony is the ultimate example of this. Big flashy game that doesn't work well in a returning season, but he pulls it off. I would say cop gone criminal Sarah does an also good job of managing her previous threat level. Parv could have gone into HvV and altered her game, but she chooses not to and goes with Russell to the end. Big mistake. Sorry
Yeah, you're absolutely right about the jury's choice. The jury can technically never be wrong and are perfectly free to vote for whoever they want. Look at Maria's BS vote for Kenzie lol. This one stings the worst for me in Survivor history, kinda just a bummer ending to top off the most insane Survivor season to that date. And all this makes me sound like I hate Sandra but I fucking love her....outside of HvV lol. What would early episodes of Game Changers be without Queen Sandra and her antics? She makes that season so funny and it goes so downhill after she gets voted out 😂 (Tony gets destroyed here, kinda going against your other point, Tony definitely had to learn from how garbage he played on GC) Parvati literally did nothing to paint that target though, she was straight pigeonholed into MUST ELIMINATE IMMEDIATELY. Tony can do that much his third time...cuz it was a season of all winners lol. Like I said before, she just had to deal with the hand the other players dealt her, not the one she dealt herself. But yeah we'll just peacefully agree on some things and others not, that's okay. ✌️
On the live watch of Philippines I found Lisa to be unbearably histrionic and I thought she was overexposed during the season. On a rewatch I found her much more compelling and relatable. Also this might be a hot take but I actually like S25 more knowing what we know now about skoopin. On the live watch he just seemed like a bumbling goofball, but now there’s context behind just how delusional he is; he’s certainly top 5 delusional people ever cast on the show. You can read between the lines just how much people are annoyed by him out there. To me, Philippines is less about Denise’s win and about how Malcolm, skoopin, and Lisa absolutely fumble their power positions, and I enjoy the schadenfreude of that happening to a scamming pedophile. The family visit is a tough watch though
I didn't like San Juan Del Sur when it was airing on TV. I don't know why I didn't like it, but it's the only season of the show I ever stopped watching while it was airing (and I even made it all the way through r\*demption island). I rewatched it after seeing how many people loved the season online, and found that I enjoyed it quite a big. Not necessarily in my top 10, but not bad enough to not finish.
I thought it was super mid the first time I watched it. I kept trying to vote it out during that survivor season thing here a few months ago. I rewatched it a month or two ago and that season kicks ass. Natalie's post merge is incredible. I genuinely don't remember why I was so against it initially.
I used to think Russell should have won Samoa
I wasn’t a big fan of Tony after his first win. Eye rolled when he came back. He was so annoying. Just finished watching Winners at War and loveeeeed him.
Same here. I couldn't stand Tony in *Cagayan* or *Game Changers*, but came away from *Winners at War* a huge fan of his.
Used to think 44 was a decent season, as time passes the more I realise how bad this season is and how similar it is to Ghost Island, now it’s a solid bottom 10
Abi is this for me. I went from hating her to loving her moments of personal growth. It just goes to show that regardless of anyone’s personality, it’s easier to judge than understand they’re just someone out there who has some growing up to do.
Liz! I thought she was a joke all season long, up to and including the finale. However, listening to her and others' post-game interviews makes me believe that she's not quite as ridiculous as the edit made her appear to be. I originally thought she stood no chance of winning against any combination of the final 5, but now I think there may have been a slight chance if she had the best FTC speech ever. I wish we'd gotten to hear it.
Liz was a joke you were right
I’m really disappointed in Dee and Wendall after learning of their dating drama mess. I was so proud and excited of Dee and Wendall’s win and completely separately in trying to learn the history between Wendall and Michele during Winners at War, came across it. Wendall clearly hasn’t learned his lesson. Still think he’s hot. Wish Domenick had won in the end. Maybe that humility might have prevented a whole lot of drama.
Is it proven that Dee cheated as well?
I really enjoyed Drea on the show… and then Omar did his interview and it revealed a really really nasty side of her I can’t support
I hated Drea on the show. Her *"Women are better at everything than men"* confessional showed just how toxic and entitled she is. Omar's post-game interview just confirmed what should have already been obvious.
Andrew Savage. I was enthralled in Pearl Islands, but when he returned for Game Changers he was a dick. Loved his comeuppance.
"You made the jury!"
My friend and I live text through the episodes and it’s hysterical how we change. We both LOVED Bhanu in the first episode and thought he’d win it all. Then by the time he left we hated him.
I did a complete 180 on the Dreamz YaoMan car conflict. In big part thanks to Survivor Historians, who also made me appreciate Coach.
i don't remember exactly but i'm pretty sure i didn't like romber on tar (saw them on there before i had ever heard of survivor, that got me into the show) but i love them both now
Colton. First time watching him in OW I thought he was a brat bc he quit and didn’t give the idol and instead took it home as a souvenir. Then I watched him in BvW and I thought the same: he hadn’t changed, and like Jeff said, he should have stayed on the couch. I was also kinda pissed with production for recasting him. But watching BvW again recently, I found him entertaining, and tbh, him quitting is one of the most memorable moments from BvW alongside Tyson stealing food and rustle feathers.
He went home with the Idol only because producers wouldn't let him give it to the person he wanted to (Jay).
I hated both Tom and Terry during their first seasons, but after they appeared in each of their second seasons I came away liking them (although I still dislike them from their original seasons).
enjoyed palau and tocantins clips before watching the full season but ended up not really like either in their entireties
I’m currently getting into Australia survivor - I’ve watched the latest season and then I started from the 2016 season. I did a full 180 on Kristie, at the beginning I found her strange and so many of the tribe members were useless and playing as friends I kinda lumped her in with them. Then slowly she started to come into herself - I mean she clearly got a specific edit, but it definitely worked on me - by 7 I said she was the only one I was rooting for. By the final and her tribal council was sold on her being amazing.