In many ways, attempting to understand and predict how any
season of Survivor is going to shape
up is more difficult for the viewer than for the actual players.
Aside from the fact that we are not starving, freezing, and/or
getting eaten by howler monkeys, our ability to obtain a firm grasp upon the
game is at the mercy of the editing team.
Last week, for example, the show did everything in its power
to make it appear that Baylor or Missy was going home.
Missy was shown to be a small-brained gluttonous shrew single-handedly
drove up the price of rice on the commodities market by 3 cents a pound.
 |
| Jeff arrives on the beach with Missy's daily rice ration |
Baylor was a snippy and snide little brat with nary a nice
thing to say about anyone.
In contrast, Kelley (who winded up getting her torch snuffed)
was portrayed as reasonable, likable, and wise; cautioning he father to mellow
out about how Misty the Rice Monster was going to ensure the starvation of the
entire tribe.
Prior to tribal council, Jon and Miss Michigan have a tender,
heartfelt discussion with Dale and Kelley that oozes with understanding and camaraderie. In contrast, discussions with Mother Rice and
Baylor were awkward, short, and bitchy in kind of middle-school way.
The normally interrogative Jeff Probst just kind of
pussy-footed around the vote and did nothing to alter the illusion presented to
us by the editors.
Here is the dilemma faced by viewers who enjoy the show most
by placing themselves within the game so that they can play along with the
villains and Heroes:
1)
Do
you watch the show carefully and attempt to derive as much information as you
can from interviews, interaction, and body language?
Or
2)
Do
you spend the episode trying to figure out in what way the editing team is
attempting to mislead you in order to drum up non-existent drama?
Too often of
late, it has been the latter.
If the wind
is blowing a specific direction and everyone knows it, then show us what the
players see so that we can place ourselves in their shoes! Creative editing in this manner almost makes
the show seem scripted.
People don’t
watch Survivor to be shocked. We tune
into Game of Thrones for that. We watch it to revel in the politics, laugh
at the buffoonery of the players, and to watch people far better looking than
ourselves traipse around in swimwear.
Above all, we
want to feel like we can participate. Show us what is going on and allow us to draw
our own conclusions much like the real players do. It lets us feel like we are playing without
having to eat Yak balls or Hippo cheeks.
In addition
to the selective editing for dramatic purposes, there are 2 other trends of
which I am certain that savvy viewers have observed.
These are the
“We didn’t interview them so they are not going home edit” and the “winner’s
edit”.
I may not be
able to tell you who’s going home after viewing the first 20-30 minutes of the
episode but I sure as hell can tell you who isn’t. No matter how boring you are, if you don’t get
an interview, you are safe.
A couple
seasons back, they had this incredibly boring racecar chick on the show that
never said or did anything that could be viewed as sentient. For over a month, I kept forgetting she was
even on the show. One day she turns up
in a candid interview like she was photo-bombing or something. I leaned over to my wife and said, “She’s
going home tonight.”
Bam. Gone.
 |
| Do you remember this lady? Me neither. They only talked to her the day she got whacked. |
It pains me
that I am spending more time interpreting the intentions of the editing team
than I am analyzing the qualities of the plans and actions of the players.
The “Winner’s
Edit” is, if anything, even more troublesome.
Some time
back, I began to notice that certain players were getting incredibly friendly treatment
at the hands of the editing crew. It
meant 1 of 2 things generally.
1)
The
contestant in question was going to go very far in the game.
2)
The
contestant in question had pictures of the crew abusing native children and
pistol-whipping endangered monkeys.
Take Cochran,
for example. Every time he opened his
mouth the first time on the show he was portrayed as a naïve Poindexter with
the social skills of a drunken Raiders fan.
You knew he was toast.
From the very
first interview on his next go, Cochran had morphed into a divine mix of Mr.
Miyagi and Winston Churchill. Once he
survived the first couple weeks, it was clear he was going to be a force.
In
retrospect, Tony the corrupt cop from last season also got “The Winner’s Edit”. In most cases, contestants who act like
buttholes are portrayed as such by the editing crew. Inevitably, they suffer an ignominious end
shortly after the process begins.
 |
| Drew started acting like a Jackwagon and was immediately portrayed as a Jackwagon |
Tony, on the
other hand, was a total DB to people, lied about almost every conceivable
issue, and was still portrayed as a
hardworking and lovable character who was saving the show from the mediocrity
of the other contestants.
So who is
getting the love this season you ask? 3
players jump out as getting a favorable edit given what they have (or have not)
done.
a)
Josh—Every time the show cuts to Josh he is spouting
off an incredibly insightful bit of strategy or a magnificently astute
observation about one of the other players.
He’s not a challenge beast and certainly hasn’t taken the game over like
a Tony or Boston Rob but is still getting tons of camera love. Josh is getting the “Cochran Edit”.
b)
Jeremy—The excitable fireman is always proffered
the opportunity to pontificate on the idiocy of his comrades. The cameras will catch one of the other
contestants doing or saying something offensive, unwise, or just plain stupid
and then cut to Jeremy so that he can say all of the things that the viewer is
thinking but would never say if we were in the game. Jeremy is getting the “Tyson Edit”.
c)
Jon—Mr. Miss Michigan has been enjoying the kid glove
treatment by the crew. He has made dubious
alliances (Drew), hatched ridiculous or counterproductive plans (vote off
singles), and cost his team their fishing gear by losing their flint. However, unlike most contestants who might
pull such boners, Jon’s interviews and cuts show him as an astute student of
the human condition who honorably owns up to his mistakes and acknowledges the
fine moves of his peers. Jon is getting
the “Malcolm Edit.”
I am willing
to bet that 2 of the top 5 are listed above and that every one of these guys
makes the jury.
Of course, if I discover
photos online of endangered monkeys getting pistol-whipped by people in CBS
gear I will issue a contraction next week
