I’ll stay away from spoilers for last night’s Survivor: Heroes vs. Villains and, thus, avoid having to review the episode. (Highlight: watching a chairbound James gradually become Harvey Fierstein as he shouted himself hoarse in the immunity challenge.) A few questions instead:
* Which hero is still heroic? How many villains still seem more villainous?
* Is it heroic to keep someone in the game because they’re the stronger competitor? Is it villainous to vote someone out because that’ll make you more likely to win?
* Can someone explain the hype for Russell as Greatest Player Ever? I watched most of last season. Yeah, he did a good job. But I just don’t see the argument that he invented some amazing, unprecedented way of playing. He made a lot of alliances. And I still maintain that going out and finding hidden immunity idols without clues, while cool, was more exploiting poor game design than any particular brilliant rethinking of the game. But maybe there’s something I’m honestly missing, so explain it to me.