Yuku free message boards

scepticA wrote:

---

Don't take this personally, Kitty Pride:

Ami was P because we saw her being the one favorite who actually saw the fans as more than sitting ducks. She talked about them and tried to work with them like real players who deserved a chance. When she got booted, we were supposed to feel sorry for her because the recap said she HAD been loyal to the favorites, yet they were going to get rid of her anyway over Erik.

She was also virtually ignored. She said a couple of semi-nice things about the fans, and was caught BS'ing in her departure TC

That Ami was ignored at the beginning is irrelevant - that worked against her from an Edgic perspective, but it just doesn't have much effect on her overall edit. "Semi-nice" is nice spin from you, but it doesn't reflect the overwhelmingly positive edit Ami got in the episodes when she attempted to side with the fans, including an episode where the editors went out of their way to make all the other favorites on the tribe look mean and arrogant in contrast. Her boot episode sparked controversy over tone, but it really was a positive edit even then despite that we were also meant to excuse Erik for selling her out. The machete scene was great TV, but it had no emphasized tone despite the efforts of some to include some. (OTH's revelation about how he came to do Edgic reveals a lot about why he may be so anti-Ami, even without realizing it.) Ami's story was that she tried to help out the fans and got burned by it - that's a positive story. There was no "being caught BSing" per the editing. She called Amanda and Cirie on expecting her not to deal with the fans when she hadn't been given any place in the alliance. They agreed to give her such a place, and Ami was resolved to stick with them (per the editing), but Ozzy refused to accept the deal, and she was dumped in favor of Erik. (I'd agree that in reality, her actions were probably much less positive in nature, but that isn't the way they were edited.)


Yau was P because he was the same happy guy from Fiji in episode 1 and he went out positively at the end of episode 3 (Hugging Ami and telling her not to cry).

Yau was essentially toneless and nearly invisible - UTR P is possible, but he was a non-entity.

Not that it makes much difference, but if he had a tone, it was positive, particularly given Kathy's gushing about him.

Tracy was P because she was the underdog of the fans that was editted for us to root for her, even though she came up short.

Okay - 1 for 3.

Erik was P (OTTP) because of how his naivete was portrayed up until his final episode. He was the male underdog that was just a genuinely nice guy and got tricked by the mean and nasty women.
Yup.

Kathy was P because even though she quit, she was handled with a large pair of kid gloves. She was made to look like a very nice person who just couldn't hack it anymore.
At best she was Mixed. She started whining on Day 0.5 about how haaaaarrrrrd it is, how it rains longer than the 3 minutes you see on TV, that those cartoon Charmin bears don't come out every 12 minutes and give them toilet paper, that they can't order Domino's, that Oh My God this is a game, and that she lost her Vulcan Mind Lock with her family. She was perhaps the least prepared player in Survivor history, and she was supposed to be a fan. She couldn't hack it from the moment she was picked. It's not like we saw her be plucky and work through her worries. She was a wreck from the get-go.

I agree with sceptic on this one - I never found Kathy all that sympathetic a character.

Mikey & Joel were clearly N for being rude and obnoxious jerks.
Joel - definitely. Mikey was less so.

Less so, perhaps, which is why I had Mikey at MORN. There was less emphasis against him, but in the end, both were portrayed as deserving their boots.

Parvati was clearly N given the way the jury reacted to her, not to mention the constant comments throughout the season that made her look immature and undeserving (I still think she got thrown under the bus by the editors).
She definitely had N parts. I'm torn on this one.

She definitely had N editing, and she had no P editing. What's to be torn about?

Ozzy was N because he was arrogant and jerky.
He also was good-humored about Erik, was actually hurt by the blindside. But N fits.

The good humor regarding Erik as well as some insights early on is what saves Ozzy from an overall OTT. He was N through and through over the course of the series.

Natalie was N because while one episode of OTT does not make a player OTT overall, the NN plus the later MORN rating are enough to remind us that she's evil.
She was N because she wanted to be N. She was a cartoon caricature who said ridiculous OTT things with the plain desire to be OTTN.

Perhaps, but in the end, she just isn't that memorable. Reaction to Natalie: Who? Oh, that really nasty girl! I'd still say UTRN.

Fairplay was M for obvious reasons.
Not obvious to me. Explain. I thought he was semi-N, but bordering on toneless. His was a "WTF are you doing here?" edit. He was also the person who handed Parv a huge pile of luck. She was almost certainly gone on the first TC, but JFP said to vote him out. He quit. Boooo.

That's the reality, but the editing gave him the faux excuse of "maturing", which we know in reality is probably BS, but on the show was portrayed as legitimate. Mixed fits.

Jonathan was M because of his mix of negative and super positive. One thing I have a problem with is the number of CPs Jonathan is getting. Other than the first two episodes, he was extremely oversimplified with unnecessary yelling at Cirie and taunting of the fans, yet he only got one OTT this season, when he was booted.
He was P. His argument with Cirie was 100% justified, and if you use the "lasting impression" view of these final non-edgic ratings, he was amazingly P. And his entire edit was both strategic and - at times - introspective.

It doesn't matter that his position was justified. His edit that episode portrayed him as extremely argumentative, and he came off badly. Fair or not, Cirie's charge that he was untrustworthy was never fully countered. Other than his exit, he was never really positively portrayed either. He's mixed though I certainly agree he was CP.

Cirie & Amanda were M because they had negative starts and a couple positive moments, but their roles in the black widow brigade were really downplayed.
Which is why Cirie could be P.

No. Cirie had minor negativity of her own, particularly early on in the show. And I don't recall any real P moments. Her edit was all about her next move, most of which were fairly neutral and some of which were negatively portrayed. (Only the Ozzy boot were we likely supposed to really be cheering.) Amanda, on the other hand, was portrayed sympathetically after Ozzy's boot and particularly when she turned the tables on Alexis. Sure, it was all a plot by the editors to make the eventual loser seem unbeatable, but that doesn't really detract from the edit she got.

Chet was M because even though we didn't like him, we were still rooting for him as an extension of underdog Tracy and Kathy.
Chet was N because he was edited (not based on reality, but EDITED) as a nothingburger who had an owwie on his widdle foot and wanted to leave, even though a superb backstab was in the offing. He was pitiful - at least in his edit. Why is he an extension of Tracy and Kathy(?) when Tracy BEGGED him to stay? An extension of Tracy would have the same game that she did. Chet couldn't even spell "game." (And yes, I know he was really busted up out there and it was, for all intents and purposes, a medical evac - and it sucks that Chet was edited so rottenly.)

I have to agree with sceptic here. To the extent we ever rooted for Chet to stay, it was for Tracy's benefit, not his own.


Jason was M because he had his idiocy, but we were also supposed to see him as naive and maybe a lovable doofus.
Jason was N because he was an idiot and there was nothing lovable about a guy who was such a jerk to his tribesmates. His N-ness was lessened in his penultimate episodes, but there was little P to replace it.

Except that the editors really toned down any negativity displayed by Jason. The scenes that condemn him were consigned to Insider alone, or what is more, the cutting room floor. We saw enough to see that he didn't get along with Tracy, Chet, and Kathy, but that's about it. Jason may have been extremely naive in believing in the fake idol, giving up at the immunity challenge, and not playing the real idol, but in each case, he was given the time to express why he'd make the moves he did (or in the case of the fake idol, credit Ozzy for playing him). If he was intended N, there was a lot more that could have been shown and some of the above that would not have been. He was Mixed.

Mary and Alexis were neutral because they had no tone whatsoever.'
Yup.

Eliza was neutral because we didn't really see things positively or negatively. She was basically just there.
Eliza was shown with tone in most of her episodes. Fear, worry, thoughtfulness, game play. Alexis was basically there. Eliza was always a presence. M is appropos.

We were always made aware of Eliza and her position, but there was never really any clear intent to root for or against her. Her time in the game came off fairly toneless, not even mixed.

James was neutral because he had no real moments of his own to push him positive or negative.
He had several moments, but they weren't big enough to push him in either way. His departure - his most moving moment - wasn't up to Jonathan's heroic PP departure for many reasons, including one that I don't think has been mentioned much here. Jonathan's departure affected other people's game. James' wasn't shown to be that huge - it didn't cause tremors and fractures among the remaining players.

He had his moments, but even those weren't toned especially or they reflected more upon others than upon himself. He was a basic supporting character throughout.