Survivor: Heroes vs. Villains (Premieres February 11)

[MNNHFLTX]

Well, I was kind of ticked that the show went into overtime (or it appeared to do so, based on the fact that my DVR cut out just as everyone was getting ready to vote). But after searching the internet, I was quite amazed to find out that Sandra won. I really did think that Parvati was going to win, but it was okay that Sandra did. I didn't get to see it, but for two Survivors in a row, it was worth it to know that Russell playing the game cut-throat does not necessarily translate into a win. Not that the other two were innocent, but compared to Russell they were.

[Disney4us2]

Well, I was kind of ticked that the show went into overtime (or it appeared to do so, based on the fact that my DVR cut out just as everyone was getting ready to vote). But after searching the internet, I was quite amazed to find out that Sandra won. I really did think that Parvati was going to win, but it was okay that Sandra did. I didn't get to see it, but for two Survivors in a row, it was worth it to know that Russell playing the game cut-throat does not necessarily translate into a win. Not that the other two were innocent, but compared to Russell they were.

Watching it now... jury questions. Now I can really enjoy seeing Russell's loss. Just didn't like him.

[DizneyRox]

So, who's a bigger sore loser, Russell or those two from Amazing Race!?

[Ian]

Russell really is a sore loser. Not as bad as the two from TAR, but a very close second.

I mean the guy just doesn't get it! He just refuses to acknowledge that there's a social aspect to this game. I did think, though, that his point about really only playing once was somewhat valid. I presume (although I don't know for certain) that he didn't know the result of his first season before he played Heroes vs. Villains, so he probably would have tailored his game a bit this time around had he known how the first one turned out.

He is a great Survivor, no doubt. One of the best. But if he plays again he has to take the jury into account and remember he needs to leave some people on there who would actually vote for him.

Boston Rob gets my vote for guy who ran his mouth with nothing to back it up. He was going to "kick Russell's behind all over the island" if they played again?? Rob, please ... the thing to do there was be gracious and admit that Russell beat you. Maybe a little, "Hopefully I'd get him next time" at the end, but the only behind that got kicked was yours Rob.

Parv should have won. Sandra is the most overrated two-time winner in history. I actually have no clue how she's won twice. As Russell pointed out, she's terrible in challenges, abrasive, and her big claim to fame from a strategy standpoint was that "she kept trying to get Russell out but failed." I'm disappointed in the jury for once again seeming to vote based on who they like more instead of who deserves to win.

Then again, if they voted on who deserved the win most Russell would be a two-time winner, not Sandra.

[SBETigg]

Sandra won a jury over twice. Even if she did it as a lesser of evils, it's something. The social aspect of the game is too great to overlook. Staying under the radar isn't a favorite strategy of mine, but it's definitely a strategy. Plus, she made that connection with the jury that Parvati and Russell failed to make. And now the jury can see that she had a strategy to get rid of Russell if only they had gotten on board with her.

Parvati was pretty close, but she failed to make a strong closing argument on her own behalf. That whole "Russell was my dog" argument just sunk her with some of the jury. It put her game play into question along with his. She could have owned her strategy without making it sound like she employed him as an attack dog, which just tied her to the nasty side of Russell that wasn't getting any votes. Knowing how to make those closing arguments is a key part of Survivor. Russell still hasn't caught on to it, and wants to change the rules to win instead of learning how to work an end game. But you're right- he didn't know the final vote outcome of his first game while he was out playing his second. They were filming seasons back to back. I hope they don't bring any of these people back again. Enough with the All-Stars.

If Survivor wants to change anything, I would like to see it go back to the basics and eliminate immunity idols. Russell wants to think he's all strategy, but he wouldn't have made it to the end in either game if Survivor was still old school, no hidden bonus idols. Nicaragua looks promising-- at least some new scenery!

[Ian]

Two points ... one, I need to give Sherri props because she clearly had a better read on how this was going to go than I did. I really thought this jury, being made up entirely of former players, would give Russell the money.

I'm always amazed (although I shouldn't be after seeing it so many times) at how bitter these juries get. The hypocrasy is unbelieveable. Everyone gets on their high horse at the end about how "they'd never compromise themselves or their ethics for the sake of the game" when more than half of them lied, cheated, and stole just as much as the people they're criticizing at the final tribal council!

I'll give Rupert credit ... at least he admitted that she didn't play a cleaner game than Russell did. He said something like , "I admit it ... I lied, I cheated, I stole."

I also find it sort of odd that people defended Amanda's stealing of the clue from Danielle, but then have a problem with the way Russell played the game.

[SBETigg]

Ian, I think it's the bully tactics that people are against, not the actual strategy involved. People have lied. People have done what we might normally say was underhanded. Amanda didn't really steal the clue since Danielle just left it lying on the floor, but okay, people have stolen. It's all good by Survivor standards. But when you bully and threaten the people you expect to vote for you in the end, it's not a wise strategy. I don't think people are reacting to Russell's other strategic moves. Outplayed is outplayed. But they're reacting to his ego and the bullying/threats. That's just not cool. You're not going to bully and threaten me, insult me, make fun of me, and then convince me to give you a million dollars for it. I don't care if you did outlast me by being sneaky or clever. That's what the jury is reacting to when they refuse to vote for him. It's hard to respect the play when it's delivered with that kind of contempt.

[Ian]

FIrst off, I really don't see Russell as a bully. He's brash and arrogant, but a bully? Not in my opinion.

You want a bully? Look at the Heroes side for a minute. James is the biggest bully to ever play this game, yet Amanda defends him right up to the end.

I think the bottom line has nothing to do with bullying (trust me ... most of these people are type A's and Alpha Males ... they've done plenty of bullying in their day). I think it's just that he's arrogant and annoying, so they don't like him and don't want to give him the money.

Which, at the end of the day, amounts to the same thing. He's not a good social game player.

[SBETigg]

Which, at the end of the day, amounts to the same thing. He's not a good social game player.

I do think he bullied, and more than James, though James did as well and I didn't like him for it either. His threats against anyone who would go against him? Bullying. The whole "you vote with me, or else" tactic, never one that I like to see. But in the end, we're agreed that he's just not playing a good social game.

And I also agree with you about how petty and silly the jury can be in rehashing it, as if they conveniently forget how they weren't exactly honorable at all times. Coach is one of the biggest ones for that. But I enjoyed watching Coach this time around. I love the Ponderosa scenes at the CBS website and how different the players can be once they're out of the game.

[MNNHFLTX]

Sandra won a jury over twice. Even if she did it as a lesser of evils, it's something. The social aspect of the game is too great to overlook. Staying under the radar isn't a favorite strategy of mine, but it's definitely a strategy. Plus, she made that connection with the jury that Parvati and Russell failed to make. And now the jury can see that she had a strategy to get rid of Russell if only they had gotten on board with her.

I agree. The argument that I'm hearing all over the internet and TV coverage today of those saying that Russell should have won is silly, IMO. The fact that the jury did not vote for him means that he did something wrong. To get to the final three twice and lose the jury vote means that his strategy was not the right one to ensure a win. I give him kudos for sticking to his game plan, but to think that a bunch of people are going to altruistically vote for you because you schemed, lied, double-crossed and schmoozed better than they did is to not understand human nature.

I hope they don't bring any of these people back again. Enough with the All-Stars.

Same here, I'm ready for some new faces. Especially Russell. And not that this has any impact on the game, but I've always doubted his claim that he is a millionaire. He is from Dayton, just 17 or so miles east of where I live. It is out in the sticks and not a very wealthy area. If he was really sitting on all that money, there are a lot of other areas in and around Houston where the property values would hold up his investment better.

[Ian]

It's funny how different my opinion of some of these people was this time around.

For example:

Colby - I guess age caught up with him, but he was a bitter disappointment this season. His heart just never seemed to be in it.

Coach - Honestly, I disliked him as much as anyone on his own season, but this year he came off very different. I view him now as a complex, interesting guy now as opposed to the arrogant jerk I saw last time around. I think he's eccentric, yeah, but he seems like a really good guy at heart.

James - I was never a big fan, but he alienated me even more this season. You can say Russell bullied people, but he never physically intimidated people the way James did. I thought his play was disgusting and I was glad to see him go.

Rupert - I loved the guy his first season (as did most people), but this year I dunno ... something about him seemed a little different. Maybe I just overlooked it the first time around, but he came off as a little whiny and self-centered this time. I wasn't as much of a fan.

Jerri - I was firmly on the villain bandwagon with her, but she grew on me this season. She played a good game and came really close to winning the million.

J.T. - I loved this guy the first time around, but he really played sloppy this season. He deserved to win the Dumbest Move In Survivor History award!

[laprana]

I'm really glad Sandra won, or maybe I should say I'm glad Russell didn't win. I hated that he won the $100,000 from the audience vote, but whatever. I admit that Russell is a good player when it comes to strategy and thinking ahead, but he's just such an egomanic. I think it's bordering on mental illness, maybe narcissism? Whatever he is, he's a bully and a jerk and I'm glad he didn't get one single vote from the jury! He just doesn't get that people don't like to be treated like dirt and perhaps that's what made them give their votes to someone else. And he made that clear at the reunion show when he kept saying to Jeff over and over that he didn't care about the social aspect of the game. I loved how Jeff didn't let him rattle on and on about how he didn't win because the game is flawed. Wrong, Russell, you didn't win because your gameplay is flawed.

I was glad to see JT being a good sport about his dumb move, which is now "officially" the dumbest move ever in Survivor history. He took it all in stride and was able to laugh at himself after the fact.

Ahhhhh...can't wait for Survivor Nicaragua!

[d_m_n_n]

Well, Sandra winning...eh, whatever. She did make a good case that she got there without an alliance and without a idol.

Parvati...I'm glad she lost! I've seen enough of her to last a lifetime.

Russell...Wow...he still doesn't get after the second final vote there is a social aspect. But once again, in his defense, there was only 10 days between filmings. I'm sure he thought he had his first season wrapped up and used the same tactics for the second season. But after not getting a vote the second time, you would think he would stop and wonder if he really should have been nicer to those he puts on the jury. I would LOVE to see how he is in real-life!!! I bet he is much different!!!

[thrillme]

It's funny how in tribal council things can switch. I think Rupert "sealed the deal" for Sandra. He said "you tried to warn us about Russell but we didn't listen, it's our own fault we're all sitting in the jury now". Oooohh..I really think that did it. They went in pretty evenly...now there were more heros sitting on the jury than there were Villians...in addition...a couple of those "heros" were part of Sandra's original Villians alliance.

Part of Sandra's strategy is a good "real world" strategy that so many people tend to forget..."know when to keep your mout shut".

I was really thinking Parv was going to take this...but...she advertised her reliance on "Russell" too much then Rupert...oooff. She still took a good number of the votes.

Russell, Russell, Russell...HOPEFULLY we'll see an "All Stars" a couple of years from now...I have a feeling you'll be invited back because you are quite a character..."troll-ish" YES...but a character. It's going to be REALLY hard for you this time because THIS time the players are going to KNOW you. Will you learn? OR will you be the FIRST one out?

I LOVE Survivor...I really do. I LOVE Jeff...every season I hold my breath hoping they'll be another. I'm glad we have two more seasons in the works. I really don't want it to end. I'd love to see my son on it someday.

[Disneypixie513]

Well, I thought Parvati was going to win. I was ecstatic she didn't because I despise her. I didn't care that Sandra won, since it means Parv didn't. That being said, what is wrong with that jury?! They can't take emotions out of being voted out? Um that's part of the game genious. I was rooting for Russel since the merge. It bugged me that the jury forgot the motto of Survivor "Outwit, outplay, outlast." Did Russel not do that or did I miss someting. Did the make to "Don't tick anyone off and be everyone's friend"? To me he played the game. I'm just sorry that the people on the jury were too boo-hoo to see that.
I am glad he won the $100,000 though.

[Ian]

I agree. The argument that I'm hearing all over the internet and TV coverage today of those saying that Russell should have won is silly, IMO. The fact that the jury did not vote for him means that he did something wrong. To get to the final three twice and lose the jury vote means that his strategy was not the right one to ensure a win.

Oh yeah, I totally agree. Even though I'm a Russell fan to some degree, you can't discount the social aspect of the game and hey ... regardless of who I think should have won, the winner is the winner. The game and the result speaks for itself.

Same here, I'm ready for some new faces. Especially Russell. And not that this has any impact on the game, but I've always doubted his claim that he is a millionaire. He is from Dayton, just 17 or so miles east of where I live. It is out in the sticks and not a very wealthy area. If he was really sitting on all that money, there are a lot of other areas in and around Houston where the property values would hold up his investment better.

If you listened to his story when he told it, I think he was broke like 3 years ago. He's very new money, so that could be why he lives in an area like that.

[Ian]

Well, Sandra winning...eh, whatever. She did make a good case that she got there without an alliance and without a idol.

I actually thought that was a really weak argument. To me having no alliance and never winning immunity means you don't deserve to win, because you played a poor game.

I honestly can't figure what the jury saw in her unless it truly was a lesser of three evils kind of thing. And if that's the case, that's lame. Parv should have won if they really didn't like Russell that much.

I would LOVE to see how he is in real-life!!! I bet he is much different!!!

I wouldn't bet on that ... if memory serves he was recently arrested for shoving an 18 year female heckler to the ground.

[pixiesmimi]

Especially Russell. And not that this has any impact on the game, but I've always doubted his claim that he is a millionaire. He is from Dayton, just 17 or so miles east of where I live. It is out in the sticks and not a very wealthy area. If he was really sitting on all that money, there are a lot of other areas in and around Houston where the property values would hold up his investment better.

I have been wondering from last season if he really was a millionaire. He doesn't look like an oil baron, which is what he said he was. If he was a millionaire, whether new or not, wouldn't he get his teeth fixed? Can't make a very good business impression with his looks or attitude about everything. And his wife looked like a biker chick in the last finale. If they filmed these back to back and he didn't know the outcome to the last one when he started this one, did they film the two finales back to back? How did they do that? They are supposed to be live. So if they were live, then he would have had to know how it came out. Would they take him out of this game to do the finale of the last one? This is all just strange and I don't understand it. Hard to realize that some of these people had not seen him before and knew how he played. I just couldn't figure out how they could take his bullying and threatening and not get rid of him to prove a point instead of following him like puppy dogs. I couldn't wait to see his face when he got NO votes what so ever. If he was so good, you would have thought he would have gotten at least one vote. I didn't think Sandra deserved to win but I was so glad that neither Russell nor Parvati won.

[Ian]

IIf he was so good, you would have thought he would have gotten at least one vote.

I think it's worth noting at least that America has chosen him as the best each season he played.

That can mean one of two things ... either he's the beneficiary of favorable editing (unlikely since he's clearly portrayed as a "villain") or that, when personal feelings are taken out of the equation, Russell is the best player.

The fact that Russell, a guy that America would normally love to hate, has won the popular vote not once but twice, says a lot to me about the way impartial observers view his gameplay.

[MNNHFLTX]

The fact that Russell, a guy that America would normally love to hate, has won the popular vote not once but twice, says a lot to me about the way impartial observers view his gameplay.

That, or maybe he was just the most entertaining person in the game.