Survivor UK (Back after over 20 years away!) (1 Viewer)

They were on those pegs for over five hours?!

HOW? And imagine how bored out of their fucking minds the crew and Joel Dommett must have been just stood there watching that.
 
Almost as bored as the average Survivor viewer week in week out, I expect
 
Christopher interrogating Lei and coming for Joel's job in an unlikely follow up series.
 
16 hours of my life, that.

Happy enough with a Matty win though
 
Watching this is so frustrating. I could believe it if you told me that someone pulled Leilani and Hannah aside after the last tribal and told them how the game works for the first time.
 
I was a little confused by Doug's question to Christopher at the end there. Was he inviting Christopher to take credit for getting into Matty's head as a way of demonstrating a strong game?
 
A Lolly Dolly Christmas said:
I was a little confused by Doug's question to Christopher at the end there. Was he inviting Christopher to take credit for getting into Matty's head as a way of demonstrating a strong game?
Click to expand...

Yes, then the "I heard all I need to", when neither Christopher or Matty said very much.

I did wonder whether Doug would vote for Christopher, though this was one of those cases when they gave it away showing them putting pen to paper.
 
That was a really disappointing final. Survivor UK should be renamed from Survivor: Outwit, Outplay, Outlast to Survivor UK: Rainbows, friendship, puppy dogs and integrity.
 
What an awful awful final tribal. I thought Chris at least would own it better - but unfortunately that jury were so so bitter that he was never going to win them round and I think he sensed that and gave it up a bit.

I’m ok with a Matty win but Chris was easily the more deserving - he just assumed that this jury would understand the game better (and really only Ashleigh did).

But really none of the three of them were able to defend their games AT ALL.

Something tells me that had she made the final over Leilani, Hannah actually would have won, astonishingly. She’d definitely have Peg and Lee’s votes for starters.
 
cwej said:
I’m ok with a Matty win but Chris was easily the more deserving - he just assumed that this jury would understand the game better (and really only Ashleigh did).
Click to expand...
That brings me back to Doug's question to Christopher though - was he actually inviting him to take credit for getting into Matty's head, indicating that if Chris had owned it, he'd have voted for him?

I do wonder if there was some big Chris drama that was edited out which the show suffered without. And did Lee actually say he wanted an all male alliance or not? I don't remember if it was that explicit.

Either way, it's disappointing, but not unsurprising that players who largely didn't understand the game when they were actively playing it, then also made for a poor jury.
 
I saw a twitter quote of Lee saying 'i want to protect all the men', then Hannah saying 'I'm hearing rumours of Lee only wanting the men to survive'... but I don't know HOW explicit it was.

I did think they brought some good drama on the jury though. Tinuke was definitely serving some serious face throughout. :D
 
cwej said:
I saw a twitter quote of Lee saying 'i want to protect all the men', then Hannah saying 'I'm hearing rumours of Lee only wanting the men to survive'... but I don't know HOW explicit it was.

I did think they brought some good drama on the jury though. Tinuke was definitely serving some serious face throughout. :D
Click to expand...


And someone found another clip! I’m pretty sure there was more .. whether he explicitly said it or not, Chris clearly knew Lee was targeting the women (Hannah aside) first.

Honestly this result was expected based on everything we had seen from this bunch of dumb arses! Cannot respect the jury and if the survivor reboot is one and done it’s absolutely on the producers for picking such a woeful cast who didn’t understand the game.
 
I think it might have JUST done enough to scrape a second season... But not sure. They did a terrible job of casting both players and host, really bad marketing for it... and the editing of the show (music, pacing, balance of story vs challenges vs strategy) was terrible too.

As annoying as I find Chris, I do think he pretty much saved this season for me.
 
cwej said:
I think it might have JUST done enough to scrape a second season... But not sure.
Click to expand...
It's had THREE CHANCES to be a hit in this country and flopped each time. After Strictly each week it drove away 4-5 million viewers without fail, getting an audience around half of what the post-Strictly shows normally get. It does not appear to have 'blown up on iPlayer', and the only people I've seen talking about it are on here, where little of that chat is positive

Had it opened big and tailed off I think they'd be wise to give it another go, but it flopped out of the gate so I think it's fair to say the interest in Survivor as a mainstream tv hit in this country just IS NOT THERE. (As the wise prophet Finn foresaw :disco:)

If it comes back it will be for one of two reasons:
- A W1A type twist where they accidentally agreed to a two-series deal.
- If, of the tiny audience it was getting, a significant chunk were young people, and/or from an audience who don't come to the BBC as much. But they'd still need to retool the show for a different timeslot/TX pattern away from in the prime post-Strictly real estate.
 
Last edited:
There's relatively very little about it on twitter as well. I don't get the sense that there has been any real appetite for it.

If it was performing particularly well on iPlayer (although it certainly hasn't been in the 7 day window), then I imagine the BBC would be heralding it through social media - but I've seen nothing.

I do think it's possible that the BBC committed to more than one season, but outside of that, I don't see a second one happening, sadly. It's a significant flop by pretty much any measure. Well, unless you're comparing it to Mamma Mia! I Have A Dream.

And if for whatever reason it does come back, I agree with Finn entirely about retooling. Even if everything we've highlighted about it was corrected, I don't think it would have thrived in that timeslot.

Now my only concern is that Gladiators may do even worse. Although I'd hope that would do better out of the gate because at least it has been a successful, proven format in the UK.
 
Gladiators feels more nostalgic to people here than Survivor for obvious reasons. But I See it having a good first episode then a drop off straight away.

I think the initial set up is a lot of the cost of Survivor - they’d likely do the next season in exactly the same place and using some of the same challenges (both of which are actually a mistake in terms of increasing audience interest) to save on costs. So I think they’ll do one more season. I don’t think I’m being over-optimistic there, I just think they’ve put a lot of investment into this and might push for one more go.
 
Haven't some of the Australian series been filmed back to back more or less, presumably to save $? Or at the very least I'm sure some seasons have been filmed before the previous one was broadcast.
 
A Lolly Dolly Christmas said:
Haven't some of the Australian series been filmed back to back more or less, presumably to save $? Or at the very least I'm sure some seasons have been filmed before the previous one was broadcast.
Click to expand...
They filmed an all stars season immediately after a normal season. That’s been it.
I’m quite surprised all the survivors don’t all save money by using the same locations one after each other.
 
Lee said:
They filmed an all stars season immediately after a normal season. That’s been it.
I’m quite surprised all the survivors don’t all save money by using the same locations one after each other.
Click to expand...
And that explained why that All Stars had the winner it did. As much as I admired their game, there's no way they would have won had the other contestants known what they were capable of. Not that I was mad at it. In fact I may watch that season again over Christmas.
 
having just gotten over halfway Australia season 3, I can see what you all mean

Tactics galore and such evil plots. Love it
 
Last edited:
I am not sure I’ve ever seen a company be so noncommittal in their opening of applications to the point of actually saying ‘potential second series’… very odd! Will apply though seeing as it’s there. 👍🏼
 
Joel Dommett has teased some ‘big changes’. Well could those changes start with a new host??
 
Oh no

Still can't believe I wasted SIXTEEN HOURS of my WORTHLESS LIFE waiting for this show to get good. And all I got was 90s popstar Leilani in a thong :(
 
Who would make a good replacement for Joel?

Stacey Dooley? Simon Reeve?
 
I having painful Survivor withdrawal pains

I’ve ran out of Australian survivor to watch and it’s changed my life
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top Bottom