Survivor: Brains, Beauty Bronze

[Guri]

I also want to add what Woo said about how he felt trapped like a foreign exchange student in a crazy family was HILARIOUS!


As for Kass - I dislike Tony more than her. He is NOT playing the game well because he is disliked. The social game is as important for winning at the end, if not more, as finding immunity idols.

 

[Brent M]

I can't see how anyone on the jury would vote for Kass either as she's screwed over just as many of them, if not more, than Tony. I don't think either Kass or Tony could get enough jury votes to win so my money is on Spencer.

 

[Art Andrews]

Well it is about darn time that the person who PLAYED THE GAME was rewarded instead of spurned by a bunch of bitter losers. I would have been happy with either winning, but I like that the best player won.

 

[Guri]

So with hardly even trying and no real power to his argument, Woo was making some real progress as the entire jury began to fully comprehend Tony's awful swearing on those he loves with every intention of or lame excuses for breaking those promises. Tony was outed for the creep that he was - using his personal life in a way that nobody else did or would; disgusting everyone because it is not respectable at all. For turning on EVERY single one of those who were loyal to him without batting an eye.

And then Spencer has to give the whole 'the social game and playing with integrity doesn't matter' speech. What a tool. Seriously - I think Spencer was the most bitter one out there and wanted Tony to win to punish everyone else for not giving it to him. And yet Spencer did not play the way Tony did!! If he thinks Tony's way of playing is so admirable and worthy, why did HE not swear on all that he loved constantly? Why did HE not turn on every single one of his team mates?

Some people get upset with hypocrites who say people should be good and then are bad, but Spencer is one of the rare examples of someone who champions the awful behavior of someone else and yet would never do it himself.

The only reason why Survivor is watchable is because people still play like Spencer and Woo and Cochran and all the others who can get far in the game without being obnoxious and stomach turning reprehensible. But now, Spencer's argument and the jury going along with it will bring to the surface the worst of the worst kinds of people and their argument will be 'it's the game and I deserve to win if it works and gets me to the end'.

I feel more sick about Tony's win than I have anyone's. But it goes to show you why those people are on the jury, they are all gullible... you know, it sort of reminds me of the state of America right now; smart, mostly decent people giving all the power and ultimately billions of dollars to horrible people and then being resigned to argue that they must deserve it because they are so good at lying.

Social experiment indeed... reflection of U.S. politics as well.

 

[dbuck]

Some people get upset with hypocrites who say people should be good and then are bad, but Spencer is one of the rare examples of someone who champions the awful behavior of someone else and yet would never do it himself.

I think Spencer sees value in both styles. He plays his own game based on his personality as Tony did with his. Spencer played from behind most of the time, perhaps his style might have been different, Tony played from strength and used his paranoia effectively to keep himself sharp.
Tony had issues (Kass would have, too) getting enough people on the jury to champion him after being shown the door. Tony was losing to Woo, a weenie game player who sat back and road Tony's coat tails the entire way until Spencer convinced the jury that a bitter vote by them was not true to the game. And it's true. Survivor isn't about being nice, or honorable, it's about manipulating other people AND getting them to reward you for doing so. Russell Hantz never owned his game, Tony was also failing to do so. If at any time they had stood up at the final tribal and said, "damn straight I voted you guys out. You were threats and I am playing to win. Who I am standing here before you is not who I am at home or how I treat my family or friends, this is a game. I'm sorry if you took it personally but the point of this game is to be the last person standing, not to be the prettiest, or the smartest, or the most deserving. If our situations was reversed I'd vote for the person who played the game the best."
Instead they snivel for some form of forgiveness in front of a bunch of bitter people trying to convince them that they DID play with honor when it's an unnecessary aspect of the game. You CAN play with honor, you'll just be at the hotel pretty quickly.
There have been 28 seasons of Survivor, I'm still surprised jury members can be as bitter as they appear during the final tribal, months later on the reunion show they usually have more perspective. I wonder how it would be if the final vote wasn't held until the reunion show after everyone had the chance to watch the show week after week, rather than in their exhausted and uninformed state on the island.

 

[Guri]

Yeah, we've had the whole, "Is the social game part of the game" argument too many times in this thread so I'm not going to touch it. I stand by what I said... it's how I see the game, though I know accept it's not how everyone sees the game.... including Spencer.

My one hope is that people who play this game will stop being so ridiculously gullible and start voting off those who swear on relatives and back stab alliance members. Until that happens, this game will just continue to bring out the worst in people.

Interesting how loyal, kind and trusting people are the ones who most enable the worst of the worst. (In the real world too) I guess that's where the wise words come from: Be as shrewd as snakes but innocent as doves. On Survivor we get too many stupid doves and guilty snakes.

 

[R.P. McMurphy]

For me, there's no question Tony deserved to win way more than Woo did. It seems that I'm in the majority who would have preferred seeing Spencer bring it home. I think the earlier point is right on, Spencer was playing in scramble mode the whole game while Tony was playing from strength. Who knows how Spencer's game would have changed had the Brain tribe been able to get their act together sooner.

I hate to say it but Kass gained some traction with me last night. She made a lot of moves for self-preservation but it wasn't enough at the end. In some ways, I was hoping to see her in the final two solely to hear her opening statement and her responses to questions posed of her. I wanted to see her courtroom experience on display in that situation.

I did not like Spencer addressing the jury. I did like seeing Trish's passion.

Thought it was a great season and I prefer the final two at the end as opposed to the final three.

So Blood vs. Water is back next season with a cast of all new players. Looking forward to it.

 

[Art Andrews]

Well... you know from the get-go I am not going to agree with you on this, but... that is the genius of this show. It specifically is designed to make people talk and debate about these very concepts. I didn't think much of Spencer the entire game, but was really impressed, at the end, that he could stand up and convince an entire jury that Tony "played the game" and played it well. You may not like the game Tony played, but he DID play it well and I was glad to see him rewarded because (to me) it is hypocritical to have a game that is all about lying and cheating and then punish the person who lies and cheats the most at the end of the game, but again, that is the genius of this show; to create that dichotomy and keep us all guessing. My only regret is there wasn't a "Spencer" to stand up for Russell, who still is the greatest player to ever play the game.

So with hardly even trying and no real power to his argument, Woo was making some real progress as the entire jury began to fully comprehend Tony's awful swearing on those he loves with every intention of or lame excuses for breaking those promises. Tony was outed for the creep that he was - using his personal life in a way that nobody else did or would; disgusting everyone because it is not respectable at all. For turning on EVERY single one of those who were loyal to him without batting an eye.

And then Spencer has to give the whole 'the social game and playing with integrity doesn't matter' speech. What a tool. Seriously - I think Spencer was the most bitter one out there and wanted Tony to win to punish everyone else for not giving it to him. And yet Spencer did not play the way Tony did!! If he thinks Tony's way of playing is so admirable and worthy, why did HE not swear on all that he loved constantly? Why did HE not turn on every single one of his team mates?

Some people get upset with hypocrites who say people should be good and then are bad, but Spencer is one of the rare examples of someone who champions the awful behavior of someone else and yet would never do it himself.

The only reason why Survivor is watchable is because people still play like Spencer and Woo and Cochran and all the others who can get far in the game without being obnoxious and stomach turning reprehensible. But now, Spencer's argument and the jury going along with it will bring to the surface the worst of the worst kinds of people and their argument will be 'it's the game and I deserve to win if it works and gets me to the end'.

I feel more sick about Tony's win than I have anyone's. But it goes to show you why those people are on the jury, they are all gullible... you know, it sort of reminds me of the state of America right now; smart, mostly decent people giving all the power and ultimately billions of dollars to horrible people and then being resigned to argue that they must deserve it because they are so good at lying.

Social experiment indeed... reflection of U.S. politics as well.

 

[Laspector]

If this game ever turns to where the Russell Hantzs actually win, I will never watch again. I have never hated a man more in my life!!!!

 

[knightdriver2001]

I noticed that they didn't do the 100,000.00 second prize this season either.

 

[Guri]

If this game ever turns to where the Russell Hantzs actually win, I will never watch again. I have never hated a man more in my life!!!!

Did you not just watch? Tony was like Russel's derpy little brother.

 

[Laspector]

No, I did watch, in fact I've never missed an episode. As much as people dislike Tony, he is ***** compared to Russell. I admit I do not like Tony, but I do respect his playing of the game. Russell, I do not. Russell enjoyed being mean to people, Tony only did what he had to do.......

AGAIN, I do NOT like Tony, so please--no rants telling me how horrible he was--I agree with you. But he is a sweetheart compared to Russell.

 

[LZeitgeist]

I have to say, I really hate that Tony won. Woo tries to do the honorable thing and got shown that in today's world, honor gets you nothing.

Tony would get his backside handed to him by pretty much any other group of contestants... he lucked out this time.

So with hardly even trying and no real power to his argument, Woo was making some real progress as the entire jury began to fully comprehend Tony's awful swearing on those he loves with every intention of or lame excuses for breaking those promises. Tony was outed for the creep that he was - using his personal life in a way that nobody else did or would; disgusting everyone because it is not respectable at all. For turning on EVERY single one of those who were loyal to him without batting an eye.

And then Spencer has to give the whole 'the social game and playing with integrity doesn't matter' speech. What a tool. Seriously - I think Spencer was the most bitter one out there and wanted Tony to win to punish everyone else for not giving it to him. And yet Spencer did not play the way Tony did!! If he thinks Tony's way of playing is so admirable and worthy, why did HE not swear on all that he loved constantly? Why did HE not turn on every single one of his team mates?

Some people get upset with hypocrites who say people should be good and then are bad, but Spencer is one of the rare examples of someone who champions the awful behavior of someone else and yet would never do it himself.

The only reason why Survivor is watchable is because people still play like Spencer and Woo and Cochran and all the others who can get far in the game without being obnoxious and stomach turning reprehensible. But now, Spencer's argument and the jury going along with it will bring to the surface the worst of the worst kinds of people and their argument will be 'it's the game and I deserve to win if it works and gets me to the end'.

I feel more sick about Tony's win than I have anyone's. But it goes to show you why those people are on the jury, they are all gullible... you know, it sort of reminds me of the state of America right now; smart, mostly decent people giving all the power and ultimately billions of dollars to horrible people and then being resigned to argue that they must deserve it because they are so good at lying.

Social experiment indeed... reflection of U.S. politics as well.

 

[Laspector]

I'm beginning to think that one of the major flaws of this show is the Ponderosa. The jury stays there for days with nothing to do except talk about the game and the players. Jury members have the ability to sway other jury members. I think when you are voted off you should be isolated from the other jurors, only seeing them at tribal council. Before the final tribal council, they should have a jury conference to deliberate, then go straight to final council and vote.

 

[BenCozine]

If this game ever turns to where the Russell Hantzs actually win, I will never watch again. I have never hated a man more in my life!!!!

Great show, this season was very good, I could see Tony winning 100 miles away, and he is just as big a scum bag as Russell if not worse. 50% of the time a predator wins that show, you have to come to terms with that is what our society is.

Bottom line........Morgan McLeod