Author |
Message |
Essence
Member
01-12-2002
| Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - 8:15 am
I found this over at Survivor Fever. Be warned it is kind of long... Carl tends to be a bit wordy, and Brian... well if someone can explain to me what he is talking about, I would appreciate it . Survivors Rate the All Stars (SurvivorFever.net 4.8.04) As the All Stars edition of Survivor approaches the midpoint of the series this week, SurvivorFever.net checked in with a panel of past Survivor alumni and picked their brains about the All Star game and player strategies. Survivor Alumni participants: Survivor Thailand's champion, Brian Heidik, Survivor Panama's champion, Sandra Diaz-Twine along with Kelly Wigelsworth (Survivor 1: Borneo), Jeff Varner (Survivor 2: Australia), Carl Bilancione, Frank Garrison, and Lindsey Richter Voreis (Survivor 3: Africa), Clay Jordan (Survivor 5: Thailand), and Tammy Leitner (Survivor 4: Marquesas).
1- Are you watching Survivor: All Stars and on a scale of 1-5 how do you rate this season? Is it a success or a bomb? How does it compare to other seasons? Brian Heidik: Of course! You can enjoy my grading system in my National Enquirer article every week! Otherwise, I do not make a business of the trivial. Just as some can make a tale out of anything, so others can make a business of everything: they always speak importantly, they take all things seriously, making of everything either a case, or a mystery. By means the worst rule in life, to let things rest. It is SURVIVOR, the grandfather of reality shows, it's great!!! Carl Bilancione: Yes, I am watching the All-stars. In fact I give my commentary every Friday morning live on Magic 107.7 the #1 radio station in Orlando. The show is definitely a success. If 5 is the highest rating then I'll give it a 5. I feel it's right up there with the 1st show and Australia. Clay Jordan: Yes I am watching the All Stars and on a scale of 1-5, I rate this season a 3. I do feel the season is a success. To compare the All Stars season to the other seasons is impossible. The concept of Survivor 1-7 was with 16 strangers. The All Stars began with 18 friends with a common bond. The rules of the game to Outwit, Outplay and Outlast are much easier to accomplish with a stranger who knows nothing about your character and game strategy/history. Frank Garrison: Yes I am watching the All-Stars and I rate this show 2.5 to 3. It stands alone from other seasons for one reason and one only! TWO People QUIT! Jeff Varner: I’d rate it a 2.5. I would not consider it a bomb as the numbers are averaging about 20 million and that’s no bomb. But I do consider it one of the least compelling seasons to date. It’s too predictable and the contestants are being too careful to create the "right" image. This could be editing, but it appears there are several people coasting, not really playing at all. If you had told me that there would be a "pagonging" going on in All-Star before it started, I would have said you were lying. I would have thought we’d see more strategy from "the best of the best." The producers applied a format designed for strangers to a group of people who know each other intimately. For me, it doesn’t work. I also think the Rob/Amber relationship is a repellant, more than a hook. It’s cheesy. But I love Survivor, greatly respect Mark Burnett and can’t wait to see strangers play this game again. Kelly Wigelsworth: No I am not watching the All-Star show (I have never watched any of them, not even my own season) Lindsey Richter Voreis: 5, total success. I think it is brilliant. There is high drama, energy, tension between people who know each other or have dated. It's a different game. Mark Burnett is a genius. Sandra Diaz-Twine: Before this past Thursday's episode I would have said a 1 since it hasn't been exciting, but now I'm hoping there will be a lot of drama between, Lex, Amber, Rob and Alicia so if I can, could I give Thursday's episode a 4.... Tammy Leitner: The last couple episodes have been compelling now that strategy and backstabbing are back to being a part of the game. Two people quitting really put a damper on the season early on. No Tribal Council really changes the dramatic arc of the show. Because of that, I'd give it a 3 out of 5, but hopefully the show will continue to improve, no one else will quit, and the show will raise itself to a 5. 2- Do you feel that the season of Survivor in which you appeared was adequately represented by contestants in All Stars? Brian Heidik: I never talk about myself. For you either praise, which is vanity, or you reproach, which is poor spirit, in both instances evincing a guilty heart in the speaker, which gives pain to the listener: if it is to be avoided in private life, it is to be shunned even more in public office, where you speak to the crowd, and where you at once pass as a fool if you but give the semblance of it. Hope you enjoyed Survivor Thailand, thank you... Carl Bilancione: Lex I feel has been a good representation of Survivor Africa but Ethan and Big Tom no! Lex knows how to play the game and make decisions. Tom and Ethan just go with the flow. (just like Africa). Clay Jordan: Absolutely Not! Season "5" Thailand was the worst adequately represented. There were 16 contestants and I can think of 15 others that would have better represented the season. Frank Garrison: Lex is doing a fine job. Tom is still riding on the wings of another player and Pretty boy is still a piece of furniture, eye-candy role, and GONE! Jeff Varner: Oh yeah…..I think the Outback season is "over" represented in this show. There were five people from my season and that’s too many. We did earn the highest ratings of any Survivor and the popularity with the overall S2 cast was high in comparison to other shows. So I don’t think it’s surprising to see S2 so well represented. But five out of 18 is too many from our show. Kelly Wigelsworth: It seems like they have more people from my show than the others...no I don't think my show was adequately represented because I am not there Lindsey Richter Voreis: YES! Big Tom deserved another shot because he's Big Tom and he's cool. Lex got a little screwed his first go-around, so he deserved another shot and I love him and want him to win! Ethan is adorable. You can't get away from him. He's loveable, yet aggressive, yet a vulnerable at times. He's great. I like Ethan! Sandra Diaz-Twine: Yes, I'm glad Rupert was selected, I did get a call to see if I was interested in perhaps going back but I was sick and felt it was too soon, and after watching the 1st two episodes I know I made the right decision. Tammy Leitner: Both Boston Rob and Kathy were great TV on Marquesas. I would have liked to see Sean out there, not only to add some more diversity to the cast, but because he's so damned funny. And Paschal deserved another shot after the purple rock fiasco. 3- When you first learned which cast members were chosen, what was your reaction? Any surprises about who was there and who wasn't included? What other contestants would you like to have seen on All Stars? Brian Heidik: Never the cheap rival. Every effort to outshine an opponent lowers the standing, for competition resorts at once to mudslinging, in order to attack. There are few who carry on war in fair fashion, for rivalry lays bare the flaws which courtesy has covered over: many lived in honor, as long as they had no emulators. Carl Bilancione: I was shocked that I was not asked. Boston Rob, give me a break. As far as bringing in SOME winners it did not sit right with me. Mark Burnett, the creative genius that he is, stacked one tribe and doomed the other two. One tribe not to have a winner gives it an advantage because they can concentrate on the game. The other two tribes always have in the back of their minds that if they lose a challenge a winner is going to be voted out. Psychologically, that scenario affected the play. I was surprised that Jenna was asked because she won due to sympathy from her cast members due to her mother's illness. I felt that she didn't play the game that well to warrant winning (remember she asked to be voted out). To go back and play knowing her mother's terminal illness is not something I would have done and then quitting I feel was a waste of a spot. This is not the ALLSTARS but the Lucky Stars because you were fortunate to get a second chance to be part of an AMAZING experience. Jenna, I feel was picked because she posed for Playboy and is eye candy; exactly what TV ratings want!! Hunter would have been a better choice and/or Gretchen. The General was also a better player that surprised me that was not picked and Clarence from my show. Also, What about SURVIVOR FRANK? I was also surprised that Shii Ann was asked; what are her strengths; her whining drives me nuts. Colleen, Elizabeth, and Kelly (Africa) would have been far more entertaining. Whew; you got me on my soap box. Clay Jordan: Shock! I was surprised about who was there and who was not included. I would like to have seen Pascal, Neleh, Mike S., Helen, and of course myself. Frank Garrison: I was happy for the majority of them. Still surprised winners were chosen, YES, I know its the All-Stars, but, they were all immediate targets. I think the game dynamics would have been better with non-winners, those so close to the taste of one-million. No Shii Ann, like pretty-boy, boring! That guy who danced with an elephant, and not afraid to speak his mind, now that's who should have been there!!! Jeff Varner: I was shocked to see Amber’s name on the list. I was also a bit miffed at Shii Ann, as well as previous winners. Previous winners should have been reserved for an All-Star that was all their own. It won’t be long before there are enough of them to do it, so to throw them in the mix (as the show has evidenced) was a bad idea. They basically agreed to get voted off quickly when they signed up. I think the All-Star did a disservice to them. Sean Rector was a must-have. Little savvy Neleh would have eaten Amber alive. Fairplay would’ve been a great partner/enemy of Mariano---there are several people that would have made this a better show. Kelly Wigelsworth: Obviously I would have like to see myself there...I don't think the winners should have been invited back...that's not really fair...honestly I was surprised about the cast...I thought there would be more exciting cast members chosen... Lindsey Richter Voreis: I expected most of them. I was surprised about Shii Ann. I can't elaborate on her, I just don't enjoy watching her on TV. She's probably a nice person. Sandra Diaz-Twine: I think its a pretty good cast overall, before I was a Rupert fan I was a Mariano fan, and they are both in All-Stars...so I'm pretty happy. Tammy Leitner: There really weren't any surprises. All 112 past cast members could make a case about why they should be on all-stars. That said, I was surprised most that Michael Skupin and Brian Heidik weren't included. And I may be in the minority, but I think all the winners should have been there. How can they not be all-stars? They won. And if you're trying to find the best of the best, you have to have the winners. So I would have liked to see all the winners out there. I would not have objected to Sean, Robb Z, the General, Gretchen, Kelly G, Helen, Deena or Christy making the cut. 4- Who are your favorite characters (contestants) on Survivor All-Stars and why? Brian Heidik: They should all soak up the moment, and enjoy. Carl Bilancione: Favorites on the Allstars; Amber: subtle innocence makes her a player yet she is very smart and can use her charm to work Boston Rob (and she's beautiful). Kathy: integrity, smart, never offends anyone and is constantly thinking and just a joy to watch play the game. Lex: he's a player but not arrogant. He is playing the game; not coasting. He makes decisions and knows why he is there; not to make friends but to win. I did enjoy Richard who was very entertaining but doomed because he was a winner. Do you think the others want a millionaire winning again? Colby also was an excellent choice because he plays the game and his strength doomed him. Clay Jordan: Each player in Survivor All Stars is a friend, I cannot put one friend above another, I like them all. Frank Garrison: Rudy (no need to explain, salute to all our Veterans), Lex, Tom, Jerri, and Alicia. Four out of Five will stand up and speak. Jeff Varner: Alicia—she don’t play, she’s hot and the "best" representative of African-American women on reality TV, in my opinion. She might be edited a little "angrily," but for the most part I love watching her. She’ll tell you straight up that you’re an idiot—"no, YOU wanna get more rocks!" In a game where most are afraid to speak, I love it! Lex—the only real strategist we’ve seen thus far. His decisions and choices may come back to haunt him, but he’s one of the few that have made a sincerely strategic move. Kelly Wigelsworth: Lex, Jenna because they are my friends...and Big Tom because I think he's funny and nice. Lindsey Richter Voreis: Well, they aren't characters to me. They are people. They are characters until you know them personally. I want Lex to win. It's as simple as that. As far as drama within the people, the emotion, the conflicts and the heartbreaks between the friends out there is REAL. Jerri and Lex are close friends, Ethan and Lex are close friends. That's not easy to do to a good friend. The first time around they were just people vying for a mil. Now they simply cannot avoid personal feelings getting involved. There is no way around it. The characters are gone on this survivor. These are now people. Sandra Diaz-Twine: Rupert because he is one of my dearest friends, and Rob Mariano, because when I first applied for Survivor I mentioned that my mouth was a lot like Mariano's, that the darndest things would come out of it once in a while... Tammy Leitner: Love him or hate him, Boston Rob makes great TV. Rupert is a great character. Big Tom is great comic relief. Alicia and Lex are tough competitors. And Jenna Lewis is a fun person. 5- Of any of the remaining contestants... who is playing the best game? Who is playing the worst game? Brian Heidik: Lex comes to mind right away with his business decisions and Rob is enjoying his pie and eating it too at this point, therefore he is telling it how it is out there and has a lot of confidence to go with his arrogance. Kathy is somewhat depressing to watch, again, at the same time the silent catfight between Jerri and Shii Ann was somewhat amusing. Carl Bilancione: Amber is playing the best game right now. She's keeping the focus on Boston Rob yet she is manipulating him and the women players. Tom is lost; he's not making decisions. He's riding coattails so I expect he is doomed. He needs to develop a plan and work it; he's relying on others; BIG MISTAKE!! Clay Jordan: Of the remaining contestants I feel that Big Tom, Rob, and Lex are playing a great game. Amber seems to be doing well on the challenges. she does what needs to be done without going overboard...plays the middle and plays it well. Shii Ann is playing the worst game, I think Colby answered that question for all of us. Frank Garrison: Those will say Amber. Yes, I agree that she will go a long way, but it's the pretty-boy game, the piece of furniture, not the way I would like to see the winners of any Survivor. She better hope Rob keeps her under his wing. The worst game would have to be Kathy, a blind man could see thru this picture. Jeff Varner: I think that Jenna Lewis is playing the best game so far. I’m thinking she might be a good bet for a winner. The worst player is obviously someone already voted out or they’d be there still. Kelly Wigelsworth: I don't have any clue who is left I just hope Lex and Jenna are still there...I could care less how anyone plays the game Lindsey Richter Voreis: Lex is doing pretty well. I just hope his leadership doesn't bring him down. I hope he stays under the radar if there is a merge and doesn't have a big fat target on his back. It's a game that you simply cannot predict, so I really can't go down that road. I think Lex is playing well and I hope he ends well. Kathy is looking pretty good too... Who knows... Sandra Diaz-Twine: I think Mariano is playing a good game, he's in control of his entire tribe, although I don't agree with everything he does or says he's still doing a good job, and he will go far... Tammy Leitner: I think Kathy is playing a smart game. She learned the first time around not to make waves and put a target on her back early. She's hanging back, not making enemies and I hope she sticks around. Lex is playing so hard, I worry that it's going to come back and bite him. It might have been a mistake to get rid of Ethan because they were good buds and Ethan would always have a bigger target on his back than Lex. And if it was a Lex-Ethan final 2, no way would Ethan beat him. 6- What is the best way to play against competitors who know your previous strategy/history? Are too many players hiding under the radar? Brian Heidik: There is no such thing in All-Stars, one must create something new, no one has... flying under the radar means not contributing or doing nothing, this time around. Carl Bilancione: When you have the reputation of being a strong player you immediately have a target on you; so what do you do? Indecision can hurt you, you can coast for a while until you can align with someone in the same position, or you can just flat out play. There are too many variables to have an exact formula. I think that you must try to develop alliances fast and be able to flip at a moment's notice. Being a previous winner you are doomed from the start as we now have seen. Once again; Lady Luck will be a determining factor. I guess it is important for your fellow cast to really like you so you can advance far and by then you might be in charge of the game. Examples; Amber, Kathy, and Lex. I don't think too many are playing under the radar; you can run but you can't hide!! (Rob) Clay Jordan: Hard question to answer! Could there be another All Stars? I don't know, but I sure would hate to reveal any strategy that I would have, that would be a strike against me, if for some reason I might be chosen. There are too many players flying under the radar possibly just trying to make it to the merge. I do feel that after the merge the real deceit and lying to outwit, outplay, and outlast will be more evident and force those flying under the radar out. Frank Garrison: First of all, the majority try to fly under the radar, but sooner or later, the YOU appears! When conditions physically and mentally deteriorate, you're going to show up. Unless, you're like Ethan or Amber, followers! You were there at day one. Play and be yourself! Then when they least expect it, spring on them! Jeff Varner: You can better handle a competitor when you know their strategies, as well as your own. You have to figure out the moves they may make and tailor your delivery accordingly. We don’t see a lot of that so far. We mostly see people hiding out. I’m not sure if it’s in the game play or the editing, but it’s obvious to me that a certain level of "protection" is going on. That being said, it’s tough to call who’s under the radar, really. Too many people are playing safely. Kelly Wigelsworth: All you can do is be you and take it in stride...over planning is a bad strategy I think... Lindsey Richter Voreis: Oh, there is no answer to that question. There is no right or wrong way to play this game. It's circumstances, luck and smarts. I think everyone is paying close attention to their behavior and playing it safe. Sandra Diaz-Twine: No I think none of the remaining all-stars want to make the same mistakes as before that's why a lot are more hush, hush, with the exception of Mariano and Alicia, they tell it like it is no matter what. Regardless of strategy I believe the game of Survivor to be 95% luck and 5% strategy.... Tammy Leitner: I don't think there's any way to counter your past history. That's just baggage that you can't get rid of. I don't think there are too many players flying under the radar. But I worry that there are too many players playing NOT to lose, instead of playing to win. I think Boston Rob is the only one playing full out for the win. 7- Since the Survivor series began several castaways have "at times" wanted to quit the show yet it was not until Survivor: Pearl Islands when Osten Taylor actually quit the game. Then, in the current All Stars edition two players actually quit the game. Is the game becoming just too harsh... do you have an opinion why players are quitting and is this new trend ruining the "Survivor franchise". Brian Heidik: My thought is it takes great skill to manage luck, at times through push, for luck has moments and moods: even though they are hard to recognize, so irregular is her course. Let him who finds her propitious, strike, for luck loves the bold; as gallantry loves the young. But let him who meets her otherwise do nothing, let him retire or quit: lest to the bad luck prevailing there be invited more from afar. Carl Bilancione: Quitting is for losers and people with different agendas. Jenna had no true motivation for playing; she won Amazon, she posed for Playboy, the money is in the bank so TV exposure was just another platform. She should not have been there; period!!!! Susan, what a disgrace!! She knew she could not win so why not find a way to be remembered and Poor Richard gave her the venue she needed. People always remember the worse and once again she provided it. The game is not too harsh; Africa still remains the toughest place and yet NO ONE quit. I think too many people are hoping that their 15 minutes of fame will bring stardom and if you don't have something to fall back on then you are in for a rude awakening. The game should be played for one reason; TO WIN!!! Survivor is starting to take a little downward spiral with this type of play; yet it is still the best of the REALITY GENRE ! Clay Jordan: When Jenna had to make an adult decision to leave the game because of a gut feeling about her mom I say, "Way to Go Jenna". She had 8 days with her mom! The other two that quit, I don't understand. I do not think that the contestants quit because the game is becoming too harsh. The spears and other food reward challenges that are present now actually make the game easier. I do not have an opinion on why players are quitting and hope that it will not hurt the Survivor Franchise. I know I would never quit unless my health was so bad that CBS demanded I leave or a situation like Jenna's faced me. I love the game of "Survivor". Frank Garrison: I'm the wrong person to be asked this question, there's not enough space on the internet to respond! Short and Sweet, Survivor Frank style. I'm an American, Americans do not quit! period. Deep within my gut, this and only this, is the reason I will never recognize this as the Survivor All-Stars. Jeff Varner: It’s all in the casting. Regarding All-Star, Mark Burnett stated that casting choices were made based on events going on in people’s personal lives, thus no Skupin. Then why Morasca? She should have been home with her mother, period. When you cast someone whose heart is just not in it, for whatever reason, you open the door to walk-outs. Survivor is a tough situation that you have to decide you’re up for. If there’s any doubt, then that doubt could cause you to walk when it gets tough. I think it’s a casting issue. People who quit or whose heart isn’t in it should never have been cast. Kelly Wigelsworth: We were told we could leave at anytime on my show too...I almost quit...it just depends on the person...some people can take it some people can't...as for ALL-Stars...they have already been through it so I am sure they don't feel a compelling need to stay when it gets tough.... Lindsey Richter Voreis: First of all the Survivor franchise is made and established and will always be top of it's game. I believe Mark Burnett and CBS will know when to pull the plug. BUT, I do believe it's getting harsher. They won't let anyone die, they're not that dumb, but they do want to make them suffer. I think too many people thought the game wasn't real and it's getting more and more obvious that it IS. They made this one especially harsh because they needed to keep these guys guessing. I think the quitting on this particular installment was with good reason. Emotions run higher than ANYONE could POSSIBLY imagine until they are out there themselves. It's harsh out there. Sandra Diaz-Twine: Osten was not in his element and chose his health over the game. Jenna made the right choice in leaving she felt inside something was not right and I'm glad she got to spend time with her mom, and as for Sue I think after what happened that she was not able to focus on the game anymore and so she decided to go...I don't blame her one bit and I also don't think it's a trend... Tammy Leitner: No way is it too harsh. Look at all the food they have access to. I think it's disrespectful to quit the game. Thousands of people would kill for a chance to play Survivor and to quit is a slap in the face to those people, as well as to fans of the show. That said, I'm not in Jenna Morasca's shoes or Sue's shoes, so I can't judge them. But in terms of Osten, he's a wuss. And let's hope they don't ever cast another Osten on the show. 8- The rules for the game are given to the contestants and now in the All-Stars edition, it seems that some contestants are taking even greater risks, including lying in an unprecedented manner in order to gain some kind of an advantage and attempt to remain longer in the game. What is your opinion on these techniques which may be "morally unsavory" but are within the rules of the game? Brian Heidik: Do not be held a cheat, even though it is impossible to live today without being one. Better prudent, than crafty: to be smooth in your way is to please everybody, but not everybody of your own house. To have the name of a man who knows what should be done, is honorable, and inspires trust, but to have that of being a sham, is disreputable, and engenders mistrust. Carl Bilancione: I don't like the outright deceit. Johnny Fairplay was absolutely deplorable!! He set the standard for all time low and that's probably why he was not asked to be on the All-Stars. I feel that if you put together a group that got voted out early who did not have a chance to show their true strengths and personalities yet were likeable we would have a great show. Morals on Survivor; you need people with them first. There were some on this show; Rudy, Kathy, etc.. you get the picture. We have to remember that outrageous behavior gets a lot of attention and make no mistake this show showcases it. Clay Jordan: The rules of the game to outwit, outlast, outplay, to deceive, to lie to work your way to the top are sometimes unsavory but within the rules of the game and an acceptable technique in my opinion. I do feel these rules should only be used to get to the top "inside of the game" and not be used in a fashion that would effect someone's life "outside of the game." Frank Garrison: As long as that flag is red, white and blue, those players can choose the road to follow. It's my job to weed out the excess baggage! Jeff Varner: Some people will always operate outside the moral safe-zone. It’s not just a Survivor issue. Reality TV should be a mirror held up to our society. And I don’t know about you, but I work and live around a ton of immoral folk! It will never surprise me to see these tactics on Survivor. I’m actually surprised it’s taken so long to surface. Kelly Wigelsworth: Everyone and anyone who has played the game has lied through their teeth at some point...so it's not like lying is a new thing...I don't really know too many players who have said to someone to their face "yeah...I'm gonna vote for you tonight". Lindsey Richter Voreis: It's one of those games. You choose how you want to behave. People lie and cheat all the time in real life... I think morals are an opinion anyway, so if you think it's the way to play, play it that way. Who cares. This society is too judgmental and needs to mellow out. It's a game, it's entertainment, it's nothing personal. Sandra Diaz-Twine: In order to get far in Survivor you do have to lie and you better be a damn good liar if you ever plan on applying for the show, there is no way to play this game without being deceitful...lie or don't apply. Tammy Leitner: Hey, the reason Vecepia got my vote and Neleh didn't was because Vecepia showed me that she would do ANYTHING to win. That's the game. That's Survivor. That's the Outwit part. And if you're not prepared to do that in some capacity, you're not going to win. 9- We have had many game play twists in previous Survivor shows including: player swaps, tribal realignments, withholding survival food and equipment, methods of choosing tribal players, fake merges, single gender tribes, player thefts, "ghost tribes" returning to play the game, and delayed tribal merges and now starting the game with 3 tribes. What is your opinion on any of these variations/manipulations in the show? Brian Heidik: Improvisation is an acquired art. Carl Bilancione: I love the fact that Mark Burnett keeps coming up with different twists; if he doesn't you would have a boring predictable game and ratings would slip. I wish I could have come back and competed once I had left the game. The unexpected makes the game that much more worth watching and challenging. Clay Jordan: In the game of Survivor you can expect the unexpected. Creative game twists and their timing of change is what has captured the American audience and keeps them watching. Each play twist keeps not only the audience on their toes, but also the Survivor contestant that thinks he knows the game. To quote Jeff Probst, "If you think you know the game of Survivor, Think again." Frank Garrison: Our swap still stands as number one. No one saw it coming. Change is good for this game, it keeps people on their toes and interesting for the viewers. Our society is funny that way, in that we hate change, but get bored easily. Jeff Varner: These aren’t manipulations, in my opinion. These are twists that are needed to keep the experience fresh for the audience and players. To keep it alive, shows will have to continually push this envelope. I look forward to seeing what the producers come up with in the future. As for All-Star, the twists, so far (through E9), haven’t been that interesting. Kelly Wigelsworth: They have to do something to keep it interesting...it seemed like they were following the same formula for every show and I hear it was getting old... Lindsey Richter Voreis: Brilliant. It's all brilliant. Why would you want to watch something you can predict time and time again? With Survivor, you truly don't know what you're going to get next. Neither to the players, which adds to the drama and the appeal. It's just perfect. Sandra Diaz-Twine: I love that Survivor keeps re-inventing itself. That's why the fans don't go away, its exciting to see new twists. Tammy Leitner: The show would be boring if it played out the same way every time. It would become too predictable. So it's good for the game and good for the show to change and evolve and grow. 10- How do you feel about the prevalence of nudity on Survivor? Is nudity degrading the series? Should contestants be required to wear clothing or at least during the challenges? Brian Heidik: Fly be free! Carl Bilancione: Nudity; we don't need it and I was surprised that Mark Burnett put up with it with Richard. You want nudity, watch HBO or some other channel but during prime time family hour get rid of it!!! Maybe Mark and CBS are getting blinded by success and losing the true meaning of the game. You can't control what level players are willing to stoop to, however Mark does have this creative tool called editing which he does use to his advantage so why not do it there? In closing; when you have 20 million viewers and remain a top show in the ratings, success can and will blind you. I just hope that Mark will be able to bring some integrity back to the game and truly make it a game that you have to use survival skills and outwit and outplay the others. I still like the show and hope it continues for a long time!! Clay Jordan: There are very few clothes worn to begin with and plenty of skin to be seen without taking off clothes. I don't understand taking off your clothes during a challenge with no gain for you or your tribe. Nudity was overdone by Richard Hatch and by some guys that took off their clothes to push a cannon through the jungle. Is nudity degrading the series, I don't know, is nudity degrading the individual, possibly. Survivor is a family show and captures all age groups. I would hate for the nudity to get totally out of hand and lose those avid fans from every age group. Frank Garrison: I have three out of four daughters that love the show. I would like to see it kept under control to a point. Hatch is just an exhibitionist! Survivor needs to maintain it balance, still showing the complex human element, but not forgetting the raw instinct to live. First to Fight! Jeff Varner: Bring it! The more skin the better, for me! Contestants should never be required to wear clothing in that situation if they’d rather not. It’s an individual choice that a reality show would welcome, not stifle. But I do believe that if the contestants are required to participate in an activity that requires physical contact of any kind, clothing should be required. Kelly Wigelsworth: People have always been getting naked on the show...they just want more attention and more camera time...the sad thing is is now it's a TV show and people want to use it to get discovered and it shows and it is really fake...my show we didn't know it was really going to be a hit on TV so we were just being ourselves...now people will do anything to get more camera time... Lindsey Richter Voreis: Again, people do what they choose to do. If it offends another player, it should be addressed and a compromise should be made. If it offends the public, well, what are you going to do? TV is about ratings; people are still watching, so they're still airing the nudity. If they blur it out and don't break any guidelines, who cares if people are getting naked. It's their body. Sandra Diaz-Twine: All contestants should always wear their clothes during challenges, I want to be able to watch the TV screen with my children...they also luv survivor.. Tammy Leitner: It's not just Survivor. It's all of reality TV. Look at the Real World and High School Reunion. Everybody is trying to top the previously most outrageous reality TV performance. But I'll tell you this: The people who go on a national TV show and strip, aren't there to win. They're there to say, "Look at me. I want to be a star." They're not competitors, they're wannabe TV stars whose egos are out of control. So I think it's up to the casting people to find people who want to compete, not people who just want their 15 minutes of shame. Contributors: BlindFreddy, jessiek, RWilkes, Zinc survivor interviews
|
Tishala
Member
08-01-2000
| Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - 11:14 am
OK I just want someone to translate Brian for me. He sounds like a Timothy Leary experiment gone bad. Very bad.
|
Crossfire
Member
08-07-2001
| Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - 11:19 am
Glad it was not just me then. 
|
1kid4us
Member
07-30-2002
| Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - 12:02 pm
I think he only answered one question with an answer that i understood. Otherwise I think he was talking just to hear himself talk. I mean it's very obvious, even in his answers it was something that had to do with himself. I also think he was trying to quote greater people, and he was doing it with an axe. 
|
Rupertbear
Member
09-19-2003
| Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - 12:08 pm
I think he was just trippin' on some really bad acid 
|
Landi
Member
07-29-2002
| Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - 12:30 pm
and ya wonder why mark burnett decided NOT to let brian play again??? the guy is a loon!
|
Seamonkey
Member
09-07-2000
| Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - 3:04 pm
I thought Brian was smoking something funny and for most of his answers used a random answer generator of some sort. Like put one word of the question in and produce some gobbledegook..
|
Luvmyjrt
Member
09-18-2003
| Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - 4:00 pm
I think little Brian got a new Thesaurus for his birthday and spent many hours huddled under his covers with a flashlight to come up with those answers!
|
Hippyt
Member
09-10-2001
| Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - 4:05 pm
Brian Heidik: My thought is it takes great skill to manage luck, at times through push, for luck has moments and moods: even though they are hard to recognize, so irregular is her course. Let him who finds her propitious, strike, for luck loves the bold; as gallantry loves the young. But let him who meets her otherwise do nothing, let him retire or quit: lest to the bad luck prevailing there be invited more from afar. What the HELL does that mean?
|
Catfat
Member
02-27-2002
| Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - 5:10 pm
Essence, thanks for posting this. Interesting reading all the answers. However, Brian seemed to be answering some other questions, none of his answers made any sense. Was he just quoting from some old journals of his or something? What a smart-aleck.
|
Knightpatti
Member
12-06-2001
| Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - 5:21 pm
Surely, he did not talk like that in Survivor to his mates! What a bore! I would have voted him out first.
|
Beachcomber
Member
08-26-2003
| Wednesday, April 14, 2004 - 6:36 pm
Earth to Brian!!! Put down the philosophy books, put down the doobie, and relearn how to speak coherently 
|
Kep421
Member
08-11-2001
| Thursday, April 15, 2004 - 8:48 am
Brian is talking coherently....for the 13th century!!! Sounds to me like he was trying to sound Shakespearian...and failing miserably. Poor, Poor Brian...someone should loan that guy a clue...
|
Serate
Member
08-21-2001
| Thursday, April 15, 2004 - 9:53 am
Maybe Brian wanted people to BEG that he get paid to translate what he said. He's only in it for the money, and the only understandable statement he made referenced to the job he does get paid for. That being said...I didn't like him in Thailand, I don't like him now.
|
|