moefan-11168 Am I the only one who is frustrated beyond measure by this, and other Reality TV's pension for bring back old contestants rather than new ones? They try to create drama by re-purposing the same ingredients into a new product by changing the theme. Old vs Young. Men vs Women. Villains vs Heroes. But it is just the same old stuff over and over again. How hard can it be to find new contestants to bring new life to the show? I've seen Boston Rob, Rupert and Amanda at least three times each, maybe more. It's gotta so bad I no longer watch.Survivor obviously isn't alone. Many Reality TV series now do the same thing, especially The Bachelor and it's spin-offs. Do you really think I wanted to watch Nick Viall come back for a third time after being sent home by Andi and Kaitlyn in previous shows? Instead, I simply stopped watching. It's like the producers are paralyzed with fear that if they change something the entire house is going to fall down. And fall it will if they don't start to bring fresh faces in.

calvinnme ...or at least the end of television as we once knew it. It was all such a simple yet diabolical plan. Get a group of random people together, divide them into two "tribes" and pit each of them against each other, collectively and individually for a great sum of money. Maybe they were eccentric and weird before, maybe not. But tell them one hundred million people are watching and they WILL become eccentric and weird so they can claim their 15 minutes of fame as well as all of the money.The awful truth is people will lie, cheat, and steal when you give them a great enough reward (the cash) with great enough hardships - no shelter, not enough food, harsh weather. This ain't Gilligan's Island my friends.I've told you how this was such a simple plan. Now I will tell you how it was diabolical. It destroyed television as we had known it since its inception. It got huge ratings, partly because of the spectacle, partly because the audience became attached to "the islanders", and partly because people could feel better about themselves because each of us felt we would never sink so low.Networks figured out that no longer do you need paid actors or writers or art design. Just find some random group of awful people in normal situations or normal people in awful situations and watch the feeding frenzy. And then it spread from the networks to cable. A&E, which once aired "Breakfast with the Arts" now shows stuff like Duck Dynasty, Dog The Bounty Hunter, and Hoarders. The Discovery Channel? Gone was investigative reporter Bill Kurtis and Walking With Dinosaurs, in with "Naked and Afraid" and "Moonshiners".As for soap operas? Not exactly the apex of quality television, yet a guilty pleasure for quite a few, even myself in my college years. But it was scripted and required paid actors. Why pay Susan Lucci to act like a hideous human being into her 60's on "All My Children" when you can get some Bridezilla to act like a rutting pig for free? So one by one the soap operas fell, until only a handful still exist.Why my rating of 4? I'd give it a 10 for being a milestone in television history, although it's a bad milestone. I give it a one for having any redeeming value whatsoever. I'll give it another one for influencing television for the worse - it's an absolute miracle that something as good and as original as Big Bang Theory could take root and thrive in this environment. 12/3 = 4 which is my rating.Coming soon - my review of "Walking Dead", where Survivor finally becomes scripted.

egardiner1211 Survivor was my favorite t.v show, but now it really went downhill. I liked the seasons that had a good cast ( China, Cook islands, and Palau) and the seasons where the winner was the person who deserved it( Yul, Tom, Rich Hatch, and Boston Rob). However when I watch survivor now and see that there are absolutely no strategic plays or players and the cast for the show is really boring ( or the good players are voted out first). I will continue watching the show but they really need to make a good season soon or the show might get cancelled.My advice for the people making this show is to pick people who actually know this game and will play it hard and not people like Chet, who are not strategic and o nothing for the tribe.

Barbara Sprague Can you PLEASE stop letting the little troll Russel come back?! i mean really there's people out there that need the money and hes just a back stabbing son of a...you know. Yeah, i know other people stab each other in the back but COME ON!! do you really need to let a parasite back almost every freaking season?! PLEASE next time PLEASEE pick somebody else and not Russel ( the fat troll ) he DOES NOT deserve to be there, he doesn't need the money, he doesn't need anything but a swift kick in the rear. BUT other then the little black hearted troll, i LOVE this show especially the challenges and the scenery, I'm not going to be watching Redemption island, sorry i know it looks like a good season ( Personally i'm rooting for Boston rob ) next time please don't EVER let the troll come back, how about letting people on the show that have a lot of debt or need the money to get by their bills?. Yes there must be a villain, Naonka proved that last season, but in every season there's a villain that steps up ( unfortunately ) Russell's had his turn why does he get to have second chances when other people need this more? YES i know this like a duel between Boston rob and Russel.