~ SURVIVOR Samoa ~ Season 19 ~

[Jennasis]

Yes I alluded to this earlier. The reason is that Natalie had an angel face and a sweet southern charm about her. They liked her, especially the 3 headed monster (Laura, Kelly, Monica).

Actually, it was the green-eyed monster.

 

[dejr_8]

What seems to separate this season from others is that the best player/most controversial/biggest villain/how ever you want to describe Russell made it to the end and the LOST.

Someone brought up Terry. Image the outrage if Terry had made it to the finals and lost. That would have been a major upset. Terry was by far the most deserving player in his season but didn't make it to the finals. As a fan of Terry that is something you can live with. The rule is always to try and take out the best player and Terry was taken out by that rule.

But making it to the finals and losing to an inferior player is what makes this season different.

 

[luvmy3]

What seems to separate this season from others is that the best player/most controversial/biggest villain/how ever you want to describe Russell made it to the end and the LOST.

Someone brought up Terry. Image the outrage if Terry had made it to the finals and lost. That would have been a major upset. Terry was by far the most deserving player in his season but didn't make it to the finals. As a fan of Terry that is something you can live with. The rule is always to try and take out the best player and Terry was taken out by that rule.

But making it to the finals and losing to an inferior player is what makes this season different.

I think you are right and I honestly thought they were all stupid for not getting rid of Russell before. He was so cocky he would have never seen it coming. I think this season will change how the *villians* are going to play from now on, they will have to take into account how they treat people along the way just in case they do make it to the finals. Should be interesting from now on (after this next one anyway)

 

[dejr_8]

I think you are right and I honestly thought they were all stupid for not getting rid of Russell before. He was so cocky he would have never seen it coming. I think this season will change how the *villians* are going to play from now on, they will have to take into account how they treat people along the way just in case they do make it to the finals. Should be interesting from now on (after this next one anyway)

They had so many chances including the votes that took out Jaison and Brett.

 

[dejr_8]

Wouldn't Russell have been a GREAT jury member. Can you imagine his comment/question...

 

[luvmy3]

They had so many chances including the votes that took out Jaison and Brett.

I know! I haven't been a Russell fan from the beginning and I was sure he was going to win and everytime they didn't vote for him I thought "well you're digging your own grave". I can't say I'm disappointed in the outcome though

 

[Metro West]

Maybe the thread should be shut down, or closed. Every person has a right to their opinion and no one should agree on anyone elses opinion, just because they say so.

And I'm not saying they can't...I guess I'm not understanding what you're saying.

 

[Kirby]

Someone asked why maybe Mick wasn't considered as good a player as Natalie because he also rode Russell's coat tails. It could be because he was Foa Foa's leader and couldn't rally them enough to win challenges when before the merge. I think that the jury took that into consideration and even one of them called him on it. He was a fairly blah person.

Survivor 19 would have been a fairly boring season without Russell. Dangerous Dave, Laura, Yasmine and Ben? would have had to step up to the plate without Russell to keep us awake.

 

[Metro West]

Shouldn't be shut down at all, nothing has gotten out of hand.

 

[SeaSpray]

I think it was cruel for him that CBS interviewed them together, it wasn't fair for Natalie either. It was her moment, she was receiving her price and all that tv stuff, and for Russ it was cruel because they all knew how painful it would be for him not to be the winner, the star, the sole survivor, and they knew he wouldn't just sit there and say nothing.

I agree! I didn't like how BOTH of them looked so uncomfortable. Natalie did win, and I think that CBS really didn't allow her the proper "glory" that usually comes with that. Since I do like Russell (I like him as a character, by the way. LOL), I didn't like that they kept having him in the spotlight, even though he didn't win.

I'd forgotten about that. Great point. A big deal was made of Johnny Fairplay's dead grandmother. Why was this massive lie ignored?





What is this workd coming to when we start making actors and athletes role models, instead of the people who really deserve it? Military, policeman, firemen, educators, medical professionals, people who put their lives on the line every day or who persevere through education and intelligence, not because they can hit a ball far or look good on TV. This is such a pet peeve of mine, more so with the media avalanche following the death of michael Jackson and the recent Tiger Woods fiasco.

Sorry, I'll get down from my soapbox now.



Look at this thread as evidence. Go back to the posts around the first couple of episodes. They were close to 100% anti-Russell. As the game developed, many of us (myself included) did a 180 and started to appreciate him for the game he was playing, even though we still didn't like him.



That's just an absurd analysis. Half of the jury were women. I firmly believe it's as Jeff said, they voted against Russell more than they voted for Natalie.

I agree with all of this.

Katrina: I think that CBS may have ignored that subject because they didn't want to offend anyone by bringing up such a sensitive subject. Then again, why did they show us that scene in the first place?

For the record, I saw nothing wrong with Johnny Fairplay lying about his grandmother; he KNEW his grandmother would get a kick out of it and not be offended. This is the GAME of Survivor; why on earth do some viewers expect the players to not lie, backstab, etc??

Leads me to your next point: That's partly what's wrong with the world today, people looking in the wrong direction for role models. Personally I look ONE place for role models: the bible (not to turn this religious!).

Add DH and I to the list of people who also did a 180. LOL

To be the "BEST" player, yes you do need to lie, back-stab, and sabotage. And Russell was upfront that this would be his strategy from the beginning. So if this strategy isn't valid, should Survivor only invite sweet, polite, and honest people into the sow?

The show wouldn't have lasted after the first season if they only cast sweet, polite people! As for me, I don't lie about *anything*, but when I watch Survivor, I realize that I'm watching a game, and the people within the game realize that as well. And that's why I always am surprised when people who get voted out act so shocked at the deception of their fellow cast-mates. LOL

OK-I just need to jump in and ask a question for the Natalie supporters: Mick played the same game as Natalie (riding along on Russell's coattails), and he actually WON a competition (Natalie never won anything), and came very close to winning quite a few. Why didn't he deserve to win over Natalie? Most of you think Natalie deserved to win, but considering she never won a competition I would say Mick was more deserving than her. I was really shocked that Mick didn't get one vote.

Personally I think Russell was robbed. Usually the juries look past most of the personal stuff and try to vote for the best player (Evil Dick winning BB is the best example of that, even though I HATED him!). I am still shocked.

I keep wondering this about Mick, too!!

Yes I alluded to this earlier. The reason is that Natalie had an angel face and a sweet southern charm about her. They liked her, especially the 3 headed monster (Laura, Kelly, Monica).

I realize disliked those 3 women. Usually I'm a big fan of the strong women each season, but I just didn't like most of what I saw about them.

I think you are right and I honestly thought they were all stupid for not getting rid of Russell before. He was so cocky he would have never seen it coming. I think this season will change how the *villians* are going to play from now on, they will have to take into account how they treat people along the way just in case they do make it to the finals. Should be interesting from now on (after this next one anyway)

I think it'll be a different game now that we've all seen Russell play. Like him, love him, or hate him, he PLAYED very well and was interesting to watch AND took his outnumbered remnant of a tribe all the way to the end!!

Wouldn't Russell have been a GREAT jury member. Can you imagine his comment/question...

Would've probably been fun to see Russell question a different final 3.

 

[SeaSpray]

Someone asked why maybe Mick wasn't considered as good a player as Natalie because he also rode Russell's coat tails. It could be because he was Foa Foa's leader and couldn't rally them enough to win challenges when before the merge. I think that the jury took that into consideration and even one of them called him on it. He was a fairly blah person.

Survivor 19 would have been a fairly boring season without Russell. Dangerous Dave, Laura, Yasmine and Ben? would have had to step up to the plate without Russell to keep us awake.

All good points! I think that CBS really played up Russell because first of all he was extremely interesting and very good at the game, and secondly, everyone else was fairly boring. LOL

 

[goofy's friends]

Why didn't they get to plead their case one more time at the end? Haven't they been able to do that before? I believe that Erik swayed all those votes with his speech and wish that Russell had been allowed to answer to that. It might have changed some minds.......maybe not, but possible.

 

[crazee4mickey]

I was a Russell fan from the very first episode when I came on the boards and said he'd done more in the first pisode then all the other seasons combined Can honestly say not many agreed with my enthusiasm but that changed as people realized how good he really was!

I thought he played an extra-ordinary game and do believe it was a bitter jury who wouldn't give him the title he deserved.

Haven't read all the posts on season 20 but hope he's there and hope he realizes that most people do consider him the REAL winner of the game

 

[4greatboys]

OK-I just need to jump in and ask a question for the Natalie supporters: Mick played the same game as Natalie (riding along on Russell's coattails), and he actually WON a competition (Natalie never won anything), and came very close to winning quite a few. Why didn't he deserve to win over Natalie? Most of you think Natalie deserved to win, but considering she never won a competition I would say Mick was more deserving than her. I was really shocked that Mick didn't get one vote.

Personally I think Russell was robbed. Usually the juries look past most of the personal stuff and try to vote for the best player (Evil Dick winning BB is the best example of that, even though I HATED him!). I am still shocked.

I liked Mick and Natalie the whole season but neither did anything to win the million, IMO. Now I think Brett really showed up in the game the last few IC and kept himself in there when he had no one to depend on. I would rather he would have won than Natalie. He may have had more moves in the game but normally they don't show the winning team like they show the losing one.

 

[daughtersrus]

Yes but the problem is I'm in the majority. The majority of people felt as though Colby should have won and the majority now feel as though Russ should have won.

How exactly do you come to this conclusion?

The math is the 46% of America's vote that went to Russell as best player. That should be easy enough for you to figure out.

What about all of the people that watch the show but didn't vote?

 

[daughtersrus]

OK-I just need to jump in and ask a question for the Natalie supporters: Mick played the same game as Natalie (riding along on Russell's coattails), and he actually WON a competition (Natalie never won anything), and came very close to winning quite a few. Why didn't he deserve to win over Natalie? Most of you think Natalie deserved to win, but considering she never won a competition I would say Mick was more deserving than her. I was really shocked that Mick didn't get one vote.

Personally I think Russell was robbed. Usually the juries look past most of the personal stuff and try to vote for the best player (Evil Dick winning BB is the best example of that, even though I HATED him!). I am still shocked.

Even though I'm not a Natalie supporter, I'll answer. I'm not saying that any of them deserved to win over the others. They all had different strategies for playing the game. No one can say that one strategy is better then the next.

Was Russell entertaining? Heck yes but by the same token so were Coach and Shane but yet neither of them won.

The point is that the goal is to outwit, outlast and outplay and that is what they all did. They may not have all done it with the same strategy but the end result was that all three of them were sitting there in front of the jury at the end.

The jury decided that Natalie deserved the title and it's hers to keep.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

How exactly do you come to this conclusion?



What about all of the people that watch the show but didn't vote?

Those type of votings are statistically insignificant. The reason--individuals can vote multiple times including all the people that any survivor is related to or knows. The results will always be skewed, but it doesn't matter since it is a contest and not meant to have any statistical meaning.

I do believe that if one were to take a statistical sampling, you would find a more even split than what occurred on the show with the jury. Whether or not Russell would have a real majority is unknown.

 

[Stacerita]

I read something on another message board that was quoted from Natalie. She was asked did she think she deserved to win. She stated that there was only one thing anyone has to do to win, and that's get the most votes at the end. She did that.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

You don't vote, you don't count. Just like in a presidential election.

It is not one person one vote in any of these caller voting things anyway. So in the end, it is irrelevant and the vote isn't proof of much.

IMHO--the jury controls it and they can do whatever the heck they please. The justifications seem to be different each and every time depending on who is in the voting block, how ticked they are, and whether or not they can set personal feelings aside and vote who they feel truly won the game.

It also isn't necessarily a reflection of public sentiment.

 

[disneyworldluvr349]

Jeff Probst, the host of Survivor, also felt that Russell was robbed. So who am I going to trust more? A jury of 9 bitter people that Russell eliminated or America + Jeff?? Hmmmm...

Anyways, if you want to see what kind of a player Russell is, I suggest you wander on over to the spoilers thread if you dare.

Where might I find this spoilers thread? Or was that sarcasm. This thread is dripping in it....


Russell Hantz: Sole Survivor and Winner of Survivor Somoa.