Alright I have a question on the subject for those who claim that Survivor's editing, character development, storylines, and so on have changed. I
actually agree that it has, but my ideas are a big different on how. I've heard some input from various individuals, but we might as well have a thread
devoted on it, since it's a subject that seems to pop up a lot. I was reading Thailandsurvivor's thread and it inspired a lot of questions, but I
didn't want to take his thread too off topic discussing it
(1) Storylines
First, I have a question on what the producers meant by adding in "storylines" post-Thailand. I'm curious as to whether they were specific in what they meant, if anyone has the source of when they said this, or if people are speculating on what they said and coming up with their own theories
Then, it'd be cool to hear what everyone thinks the producers meant by that, since everyone has a different idea of what a "storyline" constitutes. There does seem to be a big group of people here who think they have the definitive answer, so it'd be useful to see if we could lay out exactly what that means
Personally, I haven't seen any real difference in "storylines" based on how I define it. The only real difference to me is less of a focus on the survival aspect or mundane thoughts on random topics versus a larger focus on strategy later on
I HAVE seen differences in editing and production though, which brings us to the next topic
(2) Editing & Production
I'd say the main difference I've seen personally over time are:
(1) Increases of the use of certain types of music to create certain feelings in the viewers. This would be 1 of the biggest differences to me, given that Borneo had no music at times. I'd imagine this is also likely just because it was new and they were on a different budget. Borneo has the more documentary feel mostly because of the lack of background music IMO. Music = Manipulation
(2) The increase of videography techniques from Borneo onwards
A. In Borneo, there's obviously less fancy video work. It's the camera pointing at the contestant as they give a confessional. You'd sort of feel like anybody just took their camcorder out and was taping somebody live. Hence the "documentary feel"
B. As you progress through the seasons, I'd imagine there's more focusing on specific facial expressions to capture an emotion or paint a character. I haven't studied it closely, but I'm guessing this is where the whole "storyline" thing comes into play
C. Later seasons have more aerial shots, close-ups, back-ups, spinning helicopter shots, etc.
D. Edgic and the intro spoiler people have had the theory that the editors specifically place spoiler edits into the show, whether it be placement in the opening line-up, specific catch-phrases or "themes" said in episode 1, a certain degree of visibility during the show, etc.
E. There's probably more, so let's add that to the list if you have ideas
(3) Character Development
Everyone has a different idea of what this means. A lot of people feel like earlier seasons had more "development". To me, there was a stylistic change in the development (i.e. camplife confessionals versus strategic ones), but not necessarily in quantity. As I define it, "character development" constitutes visibility or air-time. This is where edgic is most useful in my opinion. Even if you are giving a confessional about an event and simply reporting, or being shown doing something in a challenge, that is "development". If you are shown on camera, you are influencing the audience in some way. Whether you are not impressing them, whether you're intriguing them, etc. So, I would like this thread to track differences in:
(1) The amount of visibility or development each individual has had
(2) The type of visibility or development each individual has had. An issue I have with edgic, is the discussion of "tone". Tone requires a judgment from the audience, and ultimately, that judgment is going to based on subjective biases. Unless the editors themselves tell us what they meant by an edit, we won't know, and at best we can only "speculate". Rather than rate somebody N or P, I'd find it more useful to analyze what type of development they're getting. Are they developing themselves? Evoking some emotion? Simply reporting on an event? And so on
(1) Storylines
First, I have a question on what the producers meant by adding in "storylines" post-Thailand. I'm curious as to whether they were specific in what they meant, if anyone has the source of when they said this, or if people are speculating on what they said and coming up with their own theories
Then, it'd be cool to hear what everyone thinks the producers meant by that, since everyone has a different idea of what a "storyline" constitutes. There does seem to be a big group of people here who think they have the definitive answer, so it'd be useful to see if we could lay out exactly what that means
Personally, I haven't seen any real difference in "storylines" based on how I define it. The only real difference to me is less of a focus on the survival aspect or mundane thoughts on random topics versus a larger focus on strategy later on
I HAVE seen differences in editing and production though, which brings us to the next topic
(2) Editing & Production
I'd say the main difference I've seen personally over time are:
(1) Increases of the use of certain types of music to create certain feelings in the viewers. This would be 1 of the biggest differences to me, given that Borneo had no music at times. I'd imagine this is also likely just because it was new and they were on a different budget. Borneo has the more documentary feel mostly because of the lack of background music IMO. Music = Manipulation
(2) The increase of videography techniques from Borneo onwards
A. In Borneo, there's obviously less fancy video work. It's the camera pointing at the contestant as they give a confessional. You'd sort of feel like anybody just took their camcorder out and was taping somebody live. Hence the "documentary feel"
B. As you progress through the seasons, I'd imagine there's more focusing on specific facial expressions to capture an emotion or paint a character. I haven't studied it closely, but I'm guessing this is where the whole "storyline" thing comes into play
C. Later seasons have more aerial shots, close-ups, back-ups, spinning helicopter shots, etc.
D. Edgic and the intro spoiler people have had the theory that the editors specifically place spoiler edits into the show, whether it be placement in the opening line-up, specific catch-phrases or "themes" said in episode 1, a certain degree of visibility during the show, etc.
E. There's probably more, so let's add that to the list if you have ideas
(3) Character Development
Everyone has a different idea of what this means. A lot of people feel like earlier seasons had more "development". To me, there was a stylistic change in the development (i.e. camplife confessionals versus strategic ones), but not necessarily in quantity. As I define it, "character development" constitutes visibility or air-time. This is where edgic is most useful in my opinion. Even if you are giving a confessional about an event and simply reporting, or being shown doing something in a challenge, that is "development". If you are shown on camera, you are influencing the audience in some way. Whether you are not impressing them, whether you're intriguing them, etc. So, I would like this thread to track differences in:
(1) The amount of visibility or development each individual has had
(2) The type of visibility or development each individual has had. An issue I have with edgic, is the discussion of "tone". Tone requires a judgment from the audience, and ultimately, that judgment is going to based on subjective biases. Unless the editors themselves tell us what they meant by an edit, we won't know, and at best we can only "speculate". Rather than rate somebody N or P, I'd find it more useful to analyze what type of development they're getting. Are they developing themselves? Evoking some emotion? Simply reporting on an event? And so on
