Watching the Survivor: Heroes vs. Villains finale the other night, I was struck with how much of this show we’ve seen over the years.  Our household hasn’t missed a single episode of its 300 plus run and while the Survivor franchise remains ever the fascinating anthropological study, I can’t help but think there are some interesting curve balls they could throw into the mix.

They’ve done some neat stuff in the past like castaways, three tribes etc., but Russell hit on something in the reunion special this time, mainly the results need to be refined.  Does Survivor still reward the best player, or has the culture of 10 years of broadcasting changed the player’s expectations so much, that the outcome has become more chance than skill?  I think there are a few ways we could bring the level of competition up and get that title of sole survivor into the hands of the most deserving player.

 Here’s what I would do to change Survivor.

1.  Bring it back to two Finalists!

This three finalist thing is a cheat and it doesn’t work.  The NFL doesn’t have two teams in the Super Bowl right?  Two combatants, head to head, battling for the title, that is where it began and that is where it should return.

2.  Refine the Q &A

This is easily the most boring part of any Survivor finale.  For every Sue Hawk calling you a snake in the road, there is an equal amount of inane chatter and grandstanding from people who are essentially a bunch of sore losers.  It never fails to amaze me how these people who remain so interesting and compelling during their time as Survivors, suddenly turn into the teacher from Ferris Bueller, putting me to sleep with their droning on and on about how awesome they are and how awful everyone else is.  An eloquent display is the exception, not the rule.

Here’s what you do: each jury member is allowed to ask one question of one of the finalists.  Done.  And it has to be a question, no more of this statement B.S. attacking someone’s character.  Just one, thoughtful inquiry of one finalist and we move on.  This is not The Jerry Springer Show, you want to sling mud, well, that brings me to my next suggestion…

3. Deliberate

This is a jury, so let’s treat them like a jury.  After the Q & A is done, lead them off into a secure tiki room and show them talking about everything that just happened.  If you want to call someone an a-hole, that is the time when you can influence your peers.  Give them a 20 minute time limit, a couple beverages from the sponsors, and then send them back out to vote.  Meanwhile, you can have a camera trained on the nervous finalists sitting back at tribal hopefully spearing each other with criticism.  There, I just increased your drama quotient by 40%.

4.  Keep score

I know Russell really wants the public to be in on the decision, but I agree with Probst, that’s another show.  But there is no reason you couldn’t use the existing structure of Survivor to reward the competitors for all their hard work and success in the final vote.  Think about it, if Parvati had gotten an extra vote in the finals because of all her challenge wins, it could’ve been a different outcome.  Sandra won nothing, and was rewarded for it.  That has to really piss some people off and is not exactly a good reflection on the nature of the competition.  Imagine if a team lost every game in their season, only to be awarded the championship?  Seems weird right?  Whoever wins the most challenges gets an extra vote.  If you win 10 or more, you get another vote.  And hey, if you win none, how about you lose a vote?!

5. Let the fallen speak!

Especially in this season’s “all star” format, it would be interesting to take those voted out immediately aside and say “who would you give a million dollars too?”  That’s eight people with a chance to have their say.  Chances are, the person they vote for won’t even make it into the final, but what if they do?  What if three people said Russell and two said Sandra?  Russell has the most, so give him an extra vote.

6.  One word: Winter

I know gentleman, we all love seeing girls in bikinis and I am sure the site of James shirtless has no ill side effects amongst women, but what happens when bitter enemies are forced to huddle together for warmth in the night?  What happens when it snows?  I’m sure the medical necessities of survival probably make this financially prohibitive, but still, you could stick them up in Alaska in a temperate climate and get some very interesting results.

7. Finally, no one leaves

Instead of putting up those cast away in a cushy hotel off to the side, make them stay out there and compete.  They take part in immunity challenges and if they win, no one gets immunity!  Maybe they snake away the food you so desperately desire?  It also forces the social game into overdrive if the people you betrayed are suddenly out there with nothing to lose and nothing to gain.  It would be anarchy.  There you go, just do it for one season an call it Survivor: Anarchy!!

Clearly an insane success story, Survivor doesn’t meed to listen to any of these suggestions, but as a fan, I’d love to see something more Earth shattering happen to these people to break up the monotony of the “walk of the fallen” or whatever they call it.