Little lengthy, enjoy, sorry.
Green Coffee said
Thanks for the mention. I'll credit CL "thinking like a detective" for showing me the way, and my analogy is treating Survivor like a book. How do you make the ending exciting, full os fireworks, and yet end each chapter with something that keeps the pages turning. That's what this show does. Each vote out ends a chapter trying to make you immedately want to turn to the next one. And in the end, the clues along the way should come together to make the ending a heightened experience. That's not the logic of how the game was played or who the players really were, that is the logic of the edit, why the show was shown that way instead of another way.
If the end is all about Russell, making the Final 3 (or 2, but I look at the jury and possibilities and feel they want a F3 unless circumstances prevent it, I thought they could have one last year), with what I saw now, it could be a simple referrendum about him. Meaning, "Given the final TC and who loses, how would they have edited it?"
The surprise is Russell making it far, even though I think we've seen that for a long time. It's no surprise that the Final TC's they disowned the runner up, and didn't coronate the winner, are Allstars, Guatemala, and Gabon. (You could somewhat argue Fiji, but I don't want to rewatch that one right now, either!) Allstars, Guat and Gabon all were focused on dramatic personal comments made to a player who got to the end, and lost, and the winner was not the player who's gameplay merited much discussion. Bob actually commented on his lack of strategy, which was the edit he got, while Sugar's sourness was the story. Steph overdid her paranoia letting Danni skate to a win. Amber simply wasn't Rob, and was rewarded on that, not out of respect for her.
If I put Mick or Jaison at the Final with Russell and either Natlie or Shambo (as I see Foa dominating the endgame and indeed, sticking together), Russell gets brickbats for being too out there. Natalie will be seen as a pawn. Shambo as a clusterfuck, though a "dumb girl" but one closer to Betsy than Natalie is. Both girls "dumbness" has been reinforced. (I am perversly hoping Shambo wins, for my first gut reaction's sake, but alas...). The other Foa man simply came far.
I favor Mick there. He told us in episode 1, if Ben wants to lead, let him. He's letting Russell take command, in what will help them succeed and yet burn Russell in the end. He avoided any Probst comment about poor leadership (and I can't believe Probst never mentioned it). Laying back is his game. If that's how he rode a path to a win, that's the story they have to try to sell. So I won't be gung ho on sweating here.
I never did feel Jaison's numbers were bad. The content of quitting was. Would it have been beaten into us so often if he won? In the end, I say no. Redemptions come close, but never quite win, do they?
I will also add, I adhered to Partordice's goal of picking the winner by the end of episode 5, which was traditionally right befor ethe merge. Post merge will tear at your sould and fool you, challenge you, and destroy your mind. But I look at Fiji (okay, I peeked at it) and remember that despite the early jury starting at twelve, the merge came about late, when the game "really started" after Michelle's ouster. I was surprised Mick wasn't a target for a boot at all. But if he wasn't, it's hard to create it here. We'll see.
Will watch again before ranking, of course. But as ToneDog, my advice is Erik and Laura (the condescending leader and the SPV'ed bitch) are easily N, Russell's spirit can't be denied but still the knucklehead comment was inserted, and I have to think about CP for John and Natalie. Can I give Russell a V of 8?
Michael
Green Coffee said
One thing that interests me with Russell is the "work backwards" idea I think OTH proposes. Given the final TC and who wins, how would they have edited it? If Russell somehow wins, how would they have edited him, logically? "The most evil bastard who ever played somehow outschemes everyone just like he said despite being such a dick" is about all they COULD have done with Russell. Otherwise he would be among the most UTR winners ever - it seems damn near every confessional (and we've seen lots) is strategery with a few hateful barbs thrown in. Besides, he's got all the doubt in the world built in - not only is he without numbers, but COME ON! How could this evil jerk win anyway!?
Thanks for the mention. I'll credit CL "thinking like a detective" for showing me the way, and my analogy is treating Survivor like a book. How do you make the ending exciting, full os fireworks, and yet end each chapter with something that keeps the pages turning. That's what this show does. Each vote out ends a chapter trying to make you immedately want to turn to the next one. And in the end, the clues along the way should come together to make the ending a heightened experience. That's not the logic of how the game was played or who the players really were, that is the logic of the edit, why the show was shown that way instead of another way.
If the end is all about Russell, making the Final 3 (or 2, but I look at the jury and possibilities and feel they want a F3 unless circumstances prevent it, I thought they could have one last year), with what I saw now, it could be a simple referrendum about him. Meaning, "Given the final TC and who loses, how would they have edited it?"
The surprise is Russell making it far, even though I think we've seen that for a long time. It's no surprise that the Final TC's they disowned the runner up, and didn't coronate the winner, are Allstars, Guatemala, and Gabon. (You could somewhat argue Fiji, but I don't want to rewatch that one right now, either!) Allstars, Guat and Gabon all were focused on dramatic personal comments made to a player who got to the end, and lost, and the winner was not the player who's gameplay merited much discussion. Bob actually commented on his lack of strategy, which was the edit he got, while Sugar's sourness was the story. Steph overdid her paranoia letting Danni skate to a win. Amber simply wasn't Rob, and was rewarded on that, not out of respect for her.
If I put Mick or Jaison at the Final with Russell and either Natlie or Shambo (as I see Foa dominating the endgame and indeed, sticking together), Russell gets brickbats for being too out there. Natalie will be seen as a pawn. Shambo as a clusterfuck, though a "dumb girl" but one closer to Betsy than Natalie is. Both girls "dumbness" has been reinforced. (I am perversly hoping Shambo wins, for my first gut reaction's sake, but alas...). The other Foa man simply came far.
I favor Mick there. He told us in episode 1, if Ben wants to lead, let him. He's letting Russell take command, in what will help them succeed and yet burn Russell in the end. He avoided any Probst comment about poor leadership (and I can't believe Probst never mentioned it). Laying back is his game. If that's how he rode a path to a win, that's the story they have to try to sell. So I won't be gung ho on sweating here.
I never did feel Jaison's numbers were bad. The content of quitting was. Would it have been beaten into us so often if he won? In the end, I say no. Redemptions come close, but never quite win, do they?
I will also add, I adhered to Partordice's goal of picking the winner by the end of episode 5, which was traditionally right befor ethe merge. Post merge will tear at your sould and fool you, challenge you, and destroy your mind. But I look at Fiji (okay, I peeked at it) and remember that despite the early jury starting at twelve, the merge came about late, when the game "really started" after Michelle's ouster. I was surprised Mick wasn't a target for a boot at all. But if he wasn't, it's hard to create it here. We'll see.
Will watch again before ranking, of course. But as ToneDog, my advice is Erik and Laura (the condescending leader and the SPV'ed bitch) are easily N, Russell's spirit can't be denied but still the knucklehead comment was inserted, and I have to think about CP for John and Natalie. Can I give Russell a V of 8?
Michael
