My 12 year old started watching survivor with us a couple of seasons ago. She loved it.

I'm signing up to CBS all access watch some of the older seasons.

To be honest, I don't think she'll watch the low def seasons.

Which ones would you guys want to rewatch?

Started watching few years back with the wife. She's watched since the beginning. Started season 1 on amazon prime when all this started, but couldn't push through.

The ringer had a bunch of stuff ahead of this season. One was a ranking of all 40 seasons, but it had several different lists of stuff like top 5-7 seasons to watch if you've never seen the show and want to understand the eras/strategy changes, but others were like the 4 or 5 most entertaining seasons, or ones to skip, etc.

A couple of years ago, me and my 12yo daughter watched all seasons in 6 months, between amazon prime and cbs all access.

Her favorites, 8 and 16

http://www.purplerockpodcast.com/survivor-season-rankings-spoiler-free-summaries-2/


Pro tip, she has probably played Roblox on computer. They have two survivor games on there that are really good, and mimic the show (including the music, probst, the chalenges etc)

And you gotta watch the OG season 1 for prosperity

Tabasco said:

---

A couple of years ago, me and my 12yo daughter watched all seasons in 6 months, between amazon prime and cbs all access.

Her favorites, 8 and 16

http://www.purplerockpodcast.com/survivor-season-rankings-spoiler-free-summaries-2/


Pro tip, she has probably played Roblox on computer. They have two survivor games on there that are really good, and mimic the show (including the music, probst, the chalenges etc)

---

16 had an amazing cast. We were watching survivor highlights and every scene had people I recognized.

Foxymophandlemama said:

---

Tabasco said:

---

A couple of years ago, me and my 12yo daughter watched all seasons in 6 months, between amazon prime and cbs all access.

Her favorites, 8 and 16

http://www.purplerockpodcast.com/survivor-season-rankings-spoiler-free-summaries-2/


Pro tip, she has probably played Roblox on computer. They have two survivor games on there that are really good, and mimic the show (including the music, probst, the chalenges etc)

---

16 had an amazing cast. We were watching survivor highlights and every scene had people I recognized.

---

Probably my favorite. Such a great cast and string of epic blindsides.

Plus Parvarti

Not reading the comments because I'm catching up on S40. I got my wife hooked on Survivor unexpectedly a couple years ago and we watched all the seasons required for S40.

I'd recommend the Purple Rock podcast's spoiler-free rankings. They even tell you ones to avoid for spoilers.

Good ones to start with:
- Cook Islands (personal favorite)
- Micronesia
- China
- Philippines
- Millennials vs Gen X
- David vs Goliath


They rank season 1 pretty high but it was the toughest one for us to get through. It's just not the same show back in 2000. Season 2 is strong though.

Google Dalton Ross on EW.com. he is their beat writer for the show and every year updates his list of seasons from top to bottom.

I don't know how you can not like season 1. It's a classic unlike anything that came before it.

The standard def, poor sound quality, and knowing how it has evolved are kinda killer too.

Does anyone know if the Australian Survivor seasons(not season 2 US version) is available to stream anywhere?

So I decided to go with Season 16, Fan vs Favorites.

My daughters best friends grand uncle is Chet. One of the worst challenge players ever to play the game.

I remember watching this years ago and thinking he was a total waste. It's interesting to see her perspective since it's her friends grandmothers brother.

Posterity?

We just finished watching season 28 and we enjoyed it a lot. We decided on that season bc my wife found it on several top 5 lists. Looking for the next old season to watch now. I really liked Yul on Season 40, maybe we'll watch his season.

We started watching Survivor around season 34 I think. Millennials vs Gen X.

Yul's season ended up having a LOT of big players who would return a lot, and was surprisingly good despite the idiotic race war concept.

Willy Wonka said:

---

Posterity?

---

Yes, sorry. It was the springboard. A good season, but low def and bare bones. But I think younger generations should see it just for context and what started it all.

On Season 20 Heroes vs Villians. It's a shame Russell never won.

Still annoyed they formed the jury before the merge.

Really not fair to the other tribe.

Kellso said:

---

Superblood Wolfmoon said:

---

On Season 20 Heroes vs Villians. It's a shame Russell never won.

---

No its not.

Russell could teach a master class on how NOT to win Survivor.
Survivor has always been about politics.

If you talk chit, and touchdown spike on all the people that you vote out......don't be surprised if they don't vote for you at the end.

I will say this...Russel was great television.

---

First of 5 voted into the Hall of Fame. Only non winner in those 5.

At year 15, he was voted 2nd best player.

1 of 8 players To ever make it to 2 finals.

He deserved to win his first season and it was 100% bitter jury. Outwit, Outplay, Outlast.

We probably had this argument 10 years ago. Lol.

He likely goes first in heroes v villains if they'd seen his season. He had a MAJOR advantage over all other players in HvV.
He was a chaos agent, and made for good TV.
He did some things (like first to find an idol without clues) that have really shaped the modern game but "bitter jury" is what losers say. You can't win the game without people voting for you. That had been true for the nearly 10 years the show existed before he came along and is still true today. His game play (and he showed in subsequent non USA survivor seasons that he has only one kind of game play) is generally (but not always) unwinnable, sort of like how a challenge beast or a great fisherman (food provider), or the 'older mom' of the season can get very far but very rarely win.

I saw HvV before I saw Samoa. He really impressed during Samoa but he also dug his own grave. (IIRC) Before the final tribal he told Natalie and Mick how they'd be fighting for second place, how it'd be a blowout, etc. etc. etc. He was bragging about the votes he had in the bag.

It's funny because the game has been the same since S1 - a jury of your peers, that you voted off, will judge the winner.

The way that Russell plays - boasting, making a scene, calling people dumbasses to their face... it's what makes him great TV, but what kept him from being a champion. And it's essentially just ignoring the rules of the game.

There was a string of winners around that time where the winner was the person that least pissed everyone off.

Thankfully that has changed and a lot of the juries have looked past their butthurt.

I don't think that applies to the prior seasons at all actually. Cook Islands, Fiji, Micronesia, China, Tocachins all had really strong winners. (Not sure about Gabon, haven't seen it yet.) After all that was Samoa.

If anything, those seasons picked the strongest player in spite of personal feelings. I guess all Russell had to do is not do premature victory laps and he'd have won. (For the record I thought Russell deserved to win but he also deserved not to after the way he acted. For a game of social skills, he showed no self awareness down the stretch.)

Seasons after may have had a least-offensive trend going - maybe that started with Samoa? But even then, you had strong winners for seasons 22, 24, 25 and 26 I think.

Russell's first 2 seasons were definitely butthurt juries.

They all blend together to me.

Zero vote finalist in an all star season is not an upset jury.

expresswrittenconsent said:

---

Zero vote finalist in an all star season is not an upset jury.

---

How do you explain Parvatti not winning then?

expresswrittenconsent said:

---

He likely goes first in heroes v villains if they'd seen his season. He had a MAJOR advantage over all other players in HvV.
He was a chaos agent, and made for good TV.
He did some things (like first to find an idol without clues) that have really shaped the modern game but "bitter jury" is what losers say. You can't win the game without people voting for you. That had been true for the nearly 10 years the show existed before he came along and is still true today. His game play (and he showed in subsequent non USA survivor seasons that he has only one kind of game play) is generally (but not always) unwinnable, sort of like how a challenge beast or a great fisherman (food provider), or the 'older mom' of the season can get very far but very rarely win.

---

This right here.

I HATE the term "bitter jury". I've found that bitter jury is a term used by people when their favorite player does not win.

I actually liked old school survivor when people were free to vote for whoever the hell they wanted....without being told who was "supposed to win."

Probts always states that the goal of Survivor is to get the people that you voted out to give you the money at the Final Tribal Council.
Stacking the jury with your friends, alliance mates is how its always been won.

Its only recently with the 3 Finalist, Fire making, and long Final Tribal Councils that Survivor has taken on more of an athletic competition type of vibe at the Final s rather than pure politics.

I have no problem with someone not voting for Player X simply because they don't like him/Her, or voting for Player Y because that person is their friend.

and Yes....Russel Hantz had a huge advantage in Heroes Vs Villians because no one had seen him play.

Superblood Wolfmoon said:

---

expresswrittenconsent said:

---

Zero vote finalist in an all star season is not an upset jury.

---

How do you explain Parvatti not winning then?

---

Sandra had more allies on the jury. She was going up against two unlikable finalist, and won.
That is the Survivor I grew up. Which was to try and get as many people on the jury to vote for you at the end.


See...this is what I don't like about current Survivor.
Old School Survivor people were free to vote for whoever they wanted...but sometime (I think it coincides with Russell not winning) the game shifted that the player that was the most entertaining on TV "deserved" to win the game.

So.....when my favorite player does not win...then it must mean "bitter jury" .....when the truth is that Survivor has ALWAYS been about politics.

Sometimes your favorite politician, political party, or Survivor player does not win.

Russell was a 10/10 out of most categories of a Survivor player, but his social/political skills were ZERO.
Parvatti was attached to Russell in Heroes Vs Villains and got dragged down by him.

If Parvatti would have voted Russell off I bet she we have won Heroes vs Villians, but instead she tied her anchor to an extremely dis-likable player and paid the price.

Preach

What do you think of 2 members of the jury before the merge?