The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

Survivor Samoa

THANKS GODDDDDDDDDDDDDDD


I"'m soooo happy NATALIE WON !!
That's just awesome

too bad she won't be on season 20 again.

So yeah that was overall one of the best season for me, a good finale, and a good reunion.

Russell looked LOST and so sad that was funny.
Sad for Mick tho
 
^God Russell is such an asshole.

I'm so glad that there are sensible people in this forum (and the TWOP forums too) who can see past Russell's BS. Because 90% of the comments on ew.com are "Russell should have won! Worst jury ever! The jury is so bitter! Everyone in the jury is a loser! blah blah blah!"

We've endured 19 seasons of Survivor and people act like they've never seen bitter jury members until now. They're probably the same people who looooved Rupert.
 
YeahWhatever said:
^God Russell is such an asshole.

I'm so glad that there are sensible people in this forum (and the TWOP forums too) who can see past Russell's BS. Because 90% of the comments on ew.com are "Russell should have won! Worst jury ever! The jury is so bitter! Everyone in the jury is a loser! blah blah blah!"

We've endured 19 seasons of Survivor and people act like they've never seen bitter jury members until now. They're probably the same people who looooved Rupert.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind that most those comments are Russel himself. ;) You're right though. It's sad so many people fail to credit the girl who actually made teh evictions possible ismply because Probst and his crew tried to make Russel beyong amazing. Nothing Russel can ever do will make him the winner though. And that is extremely fulfilling to me.
 
Ekim22 said:



That's awesome
Click to expand...

God I wish they showed more of her. She is just so damn adorable. Not to mention that Russel reveals how fucking stupid it is by, even after losing because his lack of social game, laughs at her for saying it's a social game. Moron.
 
I loved this season! I wished Mick would have won though. But I loved Nat.
 
Russell is still whining about the jury being "bitter"? And he is the bitter loser. So what if the jury was bitter against him? That is part of the game which the player must take into account with their strategy. He cries that Natalie says it is a social game. But he still fails to see that it is also more than just a game where you can lie and bully your way into the final 3.

He just set another Survivor record. He is the most disgruntled loser in Survivor history.
 
Russell: "Let's re-name it the social game."

What a moron. Survivor is a game of social strategy. It ALWAYS HAS BEEN. What does he not get about that? Just like Jeff Probst, Russell managed to watch every single season of Survivor and still has no clue about the game he claims to love.

Good for Natalie for not taking his shit. I'm glad she kicked his ass in the finale and holy cow, it wasn't even close! 7 votes to 2 (and one of those was Shambo who presence should never count). Ah yes, that's the stuff!
 
The video i posted is so damn funny...
they still fighting at the end when the call is over thats just too awesome

I m glad she won, so he shut the fuck up
 
Poor Mick got no votes.

John and Shambo voted for Russell and the rest went for Natalie.
 
It's true that most of us here -- and at places like TWOP -- saw through the Russell Show, the bluster, the self-promotion and the Probst-promotion -- to realize that his gameplay wasn't all that, and that he certainly wasn't robbed because his game contained a fundamental weakness (ie lack of self-awareness and likability) but unfortunately the mainstream has bought the "Russell was the best player of all time and wiz robbed!" angle. And they're far more noticeable than we are (the blowhards at EW et al); I just hope this irrational outrage doesn't result in CBS and the producers tinkering with the game format (letting America cast a vote etc). It's bad enough they created this stupid sporadic F3 solely to gerrymander players who would ordinarily be targeted for elimination into the finals, not to mention this stupid Player of the Season Prize. I wouldn't want them to think that the social aspect of the game -- and specifically the unpredictability of jury votes -- is a flaw they now have to fix.
 
Sgt Pepper said:
It's true that most of us here -- and at places like TWOP -- saw through the Russell Show, the bluster, the self-promotion and the Probst-promotion -- to realize that his gameplay wasn't all that, and that he certainly wasn't robbed because his game contained a fundamental weakness (ie lack of self-awareness and likability) but unfortunately the mainstream has bought the "Russell was the best player of all time and wiz robbed!" angle. And they're far more noticeable than we are (the blowhards at EW et al); I just hope this irrational outrage doesn't result in CBS and the producers tinkering with the game format (letting America cast a vote etc). It's bad enough they created this stupid sporadic F3 solely to gerrymander players who would ordinarily be targeted for elimination into the finals, not to mention this stupid Player of the Season Prize. I wouldn't want them to think that the social aspect of the game -- and specifically the unpredictability of jury votes -- is a flaw they now have to fix.
Click to expand...

I completely agree, and certainly wouldn't want to see a public vote influence the game (although I don't think that is an immediate potential problem), but from a tv exec point of view, I suppose they have the problem that the 'best' strategy of any given season isn't necessarily the most 'entertaining' for viewers, especially casual viewers who may not be as much of a fan of the game itself as long term diehards.

I mean, I am one of those who are totally of the opinion that Natalie genuinely did play a far superior game to Russell, who had all the subtlety of Joan Rivers with a mega-phone, but you can't deny that he was more entertaining whilst he failed than just hours on end of Natalie being nice, even if half the time you did just hope he fell off a cliff. But that's what kept people watching, and with that in mind, it was inevitable that some people THOUGHT he was robbed... Plus, it serves them extremely well to have him promoted to fuck, since he's back next season!
 
I think Natalie is a sweet girl and I enjoyed watching her; I found her entertaining even without her getting the OTT "mastermind" blowhard edit, and the editors should have not have hidden her (or, you know, anybody on Galu who wasn't named "Shambo") so much in favor of giving 75% of every episode to the same guy. As Natalie would say, oh my word that's a lot of Russell.

However, the editing does make sense in retrospect - they had to build up Russell a lot (though not to the extent that they did in the final product) so that things would be fucking hilarious when he lost to his underestimated "longer-haired dumbass blonde" alliance mate. The finale saved the entire season. If Russell won and Mick, Nat and Jaison just let him ride to the finals like a pack of idiots, it would have been infuriating. What I didn't realize, though, is that Natalie and Mick were likely aware that Russell had a shitty social game and Galu were the kind of people that would vote against a guy who was perceived as the better strategist.

So, instead, we saw Russell think that he could bulldoze his way to the finals without regard to all of the people that got burned along the way. He thought he was in a good position because he brought along Natalie, whom he perceived as a jury goat, but the poetic justice is that Natalie likely realized that she could hide behind Russell, let him treat people like shit and then she could use him as a jury goat instead.

The best part?
Russell's going to do the same thing in Heroes vs. Villains. I have no doubts that he'll be ripped apart in the finals and one of Sandra or Parv will become the first person to win Survivor a second time.

Justice at its finest.
 
Aratron said:
How do you know that?
Click to expand...

Because both Probst and Russell continuously show -- via their uninsightful comments and their inability to correctly process what transpired -- that they don't understand that Survivor is PRIMARILY (not tangentially) a game of social strategy. Probst especially has been annoying about this for years, favoring big manly men who win challenges and/or players who make "bold" moves (even if those moves lack benefit or efficacy). And he doesn't just favor them, he actively inserts himself into the game and tries to manipulate the outcome in favor of these chosen ones. It's his worst quality as a host.

And Russell's constant bitching over losing, and his responses to Natalie show that he's no better; he really thinks "star of the show" (a producer's conceit) and "best player" are always one and the same.
 
TeatimeForLoser said:
I mean, I am one of those who are totally of the opinion that Natalie genuinely did play a far superior game to Russell, who had all the subtlety of Joan Rivers with a mega-phone,
Click to expand...

Exactly.

TeatimeForLoser said:
but you can't deny that he was more entertaining
Click to expand...

See, I didn't find him entertaining AT ALL. Not once, not ever, not even a little. I realize this is completely subjective, but I just couldn't stand him and not in an entertaining pop-culture "love to hate him" kind of way. I just plain hated him, and I wanted him off my screen.
 
Sgt Pepper said:
Exactly.



See, I didn't find him entertaining AT ALL. Not once, not ever, not even a little. I realize this is completely subjective, but I just couldn't stand him and not in an entertaining pop-culture "love to hate him" kind of way. I just plain hated him, and I wanted him off my screen.
Click to expand...

No, I actually agree with you, but I meant in terms of the average viewer, I guess. Certainly Russell's game was easier to advertise, hype-up, or whatever than Natalie's, even if she played better, and deserved the win!
 
It will be Hilarious if Russell makes it to the end and loses again next season, and preferably to another woman. I don't think he wins next season because of his reactions at the finale, he looked like he was putting all of his hopes on this win because he didn't win next season.
 
Much as I thought Russel sucked, if I was on the jury, I just don't know who I would have voted for. That is, until Erik's speech. He actually made me think about Natalie's game in a way that I hadn't considered before. Before his speech, I thought, how could I vote for her when she didn't even play the game really? Yeah, but look at it from a different perspective, and you could say that Russell played very poorly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top