• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Survivor: The 25th Season

The latest season debuted this evening and I have to say as a long-time 'Survivor' viewer I was very disappointed. Here are some reasons why:

1. Instead of the earlier seasons which focused more on the people versus nature it has now become nothing more than a verbal contest of personalities. Not very interesting especially when you know the survivors are only three days into the game and cannot possibly have their mates and opponents solved.

2. The average age of the contestants this year seems much older than in past seasons and that will not bode well for continued viewership of the younger demos. Being an old fart myself I don't mind but the show was clearly designed to have mostly 20-something hot-bodies running around in bikinis and that isn't likely to happen in the colder rain forests of the Philippines with wrinkled veterans.

3. The first immunity challenge tonight was yet another run-and-fetch-it then put-the-puzzle-together. The last few seasons have been all about this same type of challenge with only minor twists.

4. We learned virtually nothing about any of the participants except the former child TV star, the former baseball player and the former Survivor participants (3 of them). The show did not generate any interest on my part because I knew so little about each person.

5. The show was an unusual 90 minutes but there was nothing but filler in that additional half-hour. Just the usual standing around the fire and discussing what failed and who was going to get the boot. We had all witnessed the challenge just a few minutes prior. We knew who was going to get tossed.

I'll probably give it another one or two shots but it is definitely off my "must see" list. Nothing lasts forever but it doesn't appear the producers are even trying any longer.
 
While it's nice those former contestants come back for this season, there seems to be an over-reliance for certain popular players to appear again and again on the show, just to keep ratings and discussion going.

The live reunion has gotten worse with more screen time to those who had people talking and a handful getting little to no chance on speaking. I miss the excitement of the first season where the winner was revealed on the island instead of a studio.

I think Survivor appears to be coasting more often than when it started. Personally, I think it should be one season a year instead of two. It can keep the show fresh without getting tired, though it is starting to go in that direction.

Still, the new season just premiered. It might get better towards the finale. I have a feeling some of the other contestants will figure out who Lisa Whelchel is when they see her face. Could they also sing "The Facts of Life" theme song? ;D
 
Couldn't get into "Survivor" 25-years ago and I still balk today. The "people vs nature" appeal might have swayed me, had it not bowed to a darker, "people vs people" angle. Tensions, particularly the sexual type, between contestants, and even within so-called alliances, have become the hook for the most addicted followers of this reality soap opera. It's like watching a galadiator movie. Or professional wrestling.
 
"Couldn't get into 'Survivor' 25 years ago, and I still balk today."

Heh, I couldn't even get into it when it premiered 12 years ago!

"The show was generally considered a failure in the ratings and it only ran for two series before being axed. Many viewers in Britain believed it was a knock-off of American excesses, and turned away." [Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivor_(UK_TV_series)]

If true (consider the source), then the Brits had the right idea. Too bad it couldn't have worked out like that on this side of the Atlantic. In fact, I'm completely surprised "Survivor" has survived as long as it has, for how devoid of marginally interesting content it is. I suppose people will watch anything when they're desperate enough.
 
landtuna said:
2. The average age of the contestants this year seems much older than in past seasons and that will not bode well for continued viewership of the younger demos. Being an old fart myself I don't mind but the show was clearly designed to have mostly 20-something hot-bodies running around in bikinis and that isn't likely to happen in the colder rain forests of the Philippines with wrinkled veterans.

There might be a few more older players this year that previously, but there are about seven contestants under 30 in the case, the youngest being 20-year-old former Miss Teen Utah Angie Layton (who definitely qualifies as one of those "20-something hot-bodies in bikinis" (http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20354695_20622229_21202106,00.html) as with fellow ex-beauty queen 22-year-old Katie Hanson (http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20354695_20622229_21202099,00.html), if you see the promotional photos for this season's cast; sidebar: I'm sheepishly willing to admit, Angie was what piqued my interest in actually watching the show for more than just a minute or two of an episode). I did find it interesting also that The Facts of Life's Lisa Whelchel decided to be a contestant on the show this season (only because I watched that show in reruns during its relatively short run on Nick at Nite around the time Survivor started).

landtuna said:
4. We learned virtually nothing about any of the participants except the former child TV star, the former baseball player and the former Survivor participants (3 of them). The show did not generate any interest on my part because I knew so little about each person.

The focus on Lisa "Blair" Whelchel, major leaguer Jeff Kent and the three ex-contestants was what I found to be the major flaw in how CBS promoted the Phillipines season. There are other people in the cast besides those five, but I never once saw any promos for the season premiere that mentioned any of them. In fact, the first time the home audience gets to see and get introduced to them was in the episode! The promotional aspect of the season was way too one-sided in such a way that it might have made viewers either question or even forget that there are other contestants this season.

I also found it odd that almost everybody got introduced to the audience in the first hour of the program, with one exception. The aforementioned Angie I don't even think got her "introduction" piece or even spoke until about an hour and 13 minutes into the show (I'm not sure about the "spoke" part being that far in since I went back and forth between Survivor and The X Factor, it could have been a little earlier though not in the first hour), and I think they still didn't introduce all the players. I get that there are 18 people in this season's cast, but when introducing the contestants, you got to introduce them over a shorter amount of time (the first 45 minutes to one hour of the premiere) then shift the focus to the gameplay.

Darth_vader said:
"Couldn't get into 'Survivor' 25 years ago, and I still balk today."

Heh, I couldn't even get into it when it premiered 12 years ago!

I can see where the confusion lies, the show's had so many seasons that feels like its been on 25 years, only because CBS runs the show during the fall and during midseason. That factor is why Jeff Probst doing a talk show and Survivor at the same time this year seems odd in hindsight, given that Survivor films in places hundreds of miles away from the U.S., meaning that Jeff has do to a lot of flying back and forth from the Los Angeles (where the show is filmed) and to wherever that particular season of Survivor is filmed (though Jeff probably did that before his talk show came along). Of course, how I believe Probst balances doing the two shows at once is just my assumption, I don't know if that's correct or not.
 
tmanokc said:
....the show's had so many seasons that feels like its been on 25 years, only because CBS runs the show during the fall and during midseason. That factor is why Jeff Probst doing a talk show and Survivor at the same time this year seems odd in hindsight, given that Survivor films in places hundreds of miles away from the U.S., meaning that Jeff has do to a lot of flying back and forth from the Los Angeles (where the show is filmed) and to wherever that particular season of Survivor is filmed (though Jeff probably did that before his talk show came along). Of course, how I believe Probst balances doing the two shows at once is just my assumption, I don't know if that's correct or not.

The current Survivor was taped beginning in late March (there was a profile on Lisa Whelchel that cited that her divorce was finalized in March, less than 2 weeks before she went to film -- which could explain some of the emotional instability that the show alluded to in the promos for next week). Their 39 days were up before last season's finale aired in late May. I don't know for sure about this year, but I recall that the producers had decided to film the "second season" almost iimmediately after the other, ostensibly to save expenses. If so, then it was likely filmed in June-July and will air in January 2013.

I suppose it's possible that Jeffy's new show has led them to wait to film the February 2013 edition. Then again, that would require him to start filming no later than mid-November. Sweeps end unusually early this year, so he could have some pre-taped shows and depart the USA to film 39 days before XMAS (for a February debut)
 
landtuna said:
The focus on Lisa "Blair" Whelchel, major leaguer Jeff Kent and the three ex-contestants was what I found to be the major flaw in how CBS promoted the Phillipines season. There are other people in the cast besides those five, but I never once saw any promos for the season premiere that mentioned any of them. ...

Neither did I. Look at it this way: Celebrities are like fishing worms - they're bait on the hook. But you're right. What makes "Survivor" Survivor is/are the civilian unknowns. Get compelling characters (like Rupert or Russell), and you don't need "names".

tmanokc said:
I can see where the confusion lies, the show's had so many seasons that feels like its been on 25 years, only because CBS runs the show during the fall and during midseason. ...

This mislabeling of the term "Season" bugs me. Let's straighten this out. Survivor is in its 25th CYCLE or SERIES. Season by proper definition is September to September (or Emmys to Emmys). Therefore, Survivor is now in its 13th (or is it 14th?) Season.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom