It might seem crazy to suggest that either one of CBS's two long-running reality series doesn't work, but I'm sticking to my convictions. Survivor has lost the edge it had when it started, and it's no longer a show that works for me. On the other hand, The Amazing Race continues to set the industry bar high for quality reality (assuming you don't think that's an oxymoron). So, stacking them up, one versus the other, here's how The Amazing Race tops Survivor.
1. Production values
This is perhaps the most obvious advantage that The Amazing Race has over Survivor. The look of the Race is spectacular, shooting in great locations and unusual locales every single week. Survivor is set in an unusual location, and there have been some magnificent scenes in the Amazon and the South Pacific, but once you're in the location, that's it; you're there. Compare that to The Amazing Race and there's no comparison. In the past two weeks of the current edition, competitors on TAR have been in Siberia, one of the world's coldest and most remote places on the map, as well as the slums of India. And it's not just going to the typical spots in these places either. The producers are creative, building challenges that really take into account where these contestants are and the people and culture around them. Once the teams on Survivor make camp, inevitably the location becomes a bore. The night-time filming just looks creepy, with shiny eyes and hard to discern faces, and viewers can feel as anxious for the 39 days to end as the players.
2. Personal dynamics
Reality television has a tendency -- heck, it might be a requirement -- to bring out the worst in people. What do we learn about human interaction on Survivor? Pre-judging people, scheming, backstabbing and playing the angles. It's a game that encourages you to lie and cheat (falsifying immunity idols) and only trust yourself. Not very nice qualities in the real world. On The Amazing Race, however, the whole point of the competition is to succeed as a team. Yes, there are elements of TAR that are similar to Survivor -- teams forming alliances, some lying to get ahead, even using the roadblocks to slow another pair down -- but there seems to be more respect and regard for your fellow teams. I've seen more real bonding on TAR than Survivor. In fact, the worst seasons of Survivor have occurred when the alliances were too strong, like the Cook Island year, when one person (Yul) had a really tight group. He was supported all the way through; he dominated the challenges, and he won with ease.
3. Fun, fun, fun
Initially, Survivor seemed like something fun. You go to an exotic locale where you camp out with strangers, face challenges and if you are not voted off, you can win $1 million dollars. However, over time, the outwitting, outlasting and outplaying has become really hard to watch, as is seeing normally robust, healthy people waste away as they're starved over nearly 40 days in primitive conditions. Is that supposed to be fun? The teams on Amazing Race are treated much, much better. There are mandatory rest periods. Nobody has to survive on only rice and water. The teams don't have it easy; I mean, they have to lug their backpacks and be responsible for their money and passports, but there's something more civilized about TAR. It really does look like a fun and exciting race around the world.
4. Identification
With reality shows like Survivor and The Amazing Race, you can't help but wonder what it would be like to be one of the players. Watching Survivor makes you glad you're not there. As the days drag on, everyone looks bedraggled and emaciated, not to mention dirty and gross. You can only imagine the stink on the team that doesn't win the Dove soap reward challenge. Any show that makes me wonder what it would be like to be so hungry that I'd eat bugs and leaves has to be labeled a turn off. And you would think by now that nobody would go on Survivor without knowing how to start a fire without a match. That would be the first task I mastered. On Amazing Race, I get to imagine what it would be like to hang-glide over the Alps. I'm scared of heights, so that kind of leap would be frightening, but since I'm just watching it on TV -- guess what? -- I get a vicarious thrill.
5. Do you want to wallow or do you want to soar?
As the editions of Survivor have unfolded, the show has become more base. Many of the challenges have become excuses for bikini clad women to fight in the mud. This year, in Brazil, they presented some kind of pseudo basketball game in the water which seemed to have nothing whatsoever to do with the traditions of Brazil. And why all the physical scratching and clawing? Survivor's best challenges are those involving endurance, balance, mental acuity, and puzzle solving. Ladies do not participate in hand to hand battle in the real world, especially in two-piece bathing suits with their breasts popping out. The Amazing Race generally avoids having the teams go at it like professional wrestlers. It aims for higher quality (although stripping down to undies to run in Russia was gratuitous). TAR tries to appeal to our higher angels, like taking the participants to places where they can see how other people live. Last week, when Luke and Margie saw the slum conditions in India, they were moved to tears. The Amazing Race offers subtle reminders that we should appreciate what we have.
Mike Henry and Daryl Hall on a Cleveland Show Thanksgiving
The TV Squad Podcast: The Prisoner, '80s TV, soap news and more
Let's talk about spoilers ...
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
3-24-2009 @ 10:35AM
Bill said...
You seem to miss the point about Survivor, it's not supposed to be easy or fun. The reason it's called 'Survivor' is because you are surviving within the confines of your tribe. Outlasting the other players. Braving the elements. Providing your own food when necessary, forming a little society with your tribemates. That is the biggest part of the game. With the Amazing Race the RACE is the game. There really isn't much more to it than racing to each location. Survivor is all about relationships and living with each other.
If one thing bugs me about a trend that is happening in reality shows, it's getting actors/models/quasi-celebs to be contestants. For example, on Survivor this season you have a Price is Right model and a grammy award nominated singer. On Amazing Race, you have a famous screenwriter who wrote the film 'School of Rock'. Let's get back to the days when reality shows made people famous and not vice-versa.
http://tvnewsandnotes.blogspot.com/
Reply
3-24-2009 @ 11:11AM
Angelo said...
Agreed.
3-24-2009 @ 7:30PM
Rico said...
I don't think she missed the point at all. The article is about which is a more entertaining show, which she even outlined for you. Seeing who survives out of those yahoos may be "interesting", but it doesn't make for a good show anymore. Personally, I stopped watching after the first season.
3-24-2009 @ 2:40PM
Bill said...
Rico, you stopped watching after the first season? So now we're in season 17 of Survivor, you haven't watched it in 16 seasons, yet you know it isn't interesting anymore?
3-24-2009 @ 7:33PM
Rico said...
Oh yeah. Did the same thing with Real World.
There are some concepts that, when introduced, are fleshed out as much as they're gonna get. You can spot 'em a mile away. My two cents, that's all.
3-24-2009 @ 10:41AM
Ben said...
Production values? Survivor is shot in HD. End of story.
Reply
3-24-2009 @ 1:07PM
Robert said...
Yup. I hate watching The Amazing Race since it's not shot in HD, but I do it anyways.
3-26-2009 @ 9:51AM
pauljtaylor said...
If you own a high-definition television, one of these shows is beautiful to look at, and one is painful to strain your eyes over.
You see a lot more "mud" on THE AMAZING RACE than on SURVIVOR... it's all up there on the screen.
Someone buy the production team a case of those $1000 HD camcorders!
3-24-2009 @ 11:34AM
Aaron said...
Couldn't disagree more! Survivor is far superior to the Amazing Race. Sure Survivor has lost a little of it edge but It is still the number 1 reality show on tv.
Reply
3-24-2009 @ 11:11AM
Harry said...
While the concept of Survivor has always intrigued me and has been fun to watch, in recent seasons it appears like they are just going through the motions, especially Jeff Probst. They have gone from being a show unlike any other to just another cliched game show, like Let's Make a Deal or The Price is Right. They may be reaching the end of the line as far as keeping things fresh.
You are right about the good points of TAR, the changing locales, the challenges and the pacing keep the show interesting.
Just comparing the two by how I watch them on the Tivo, I find my self skipping through a lot of Survivor itself, but only the commercials for TAR.
Reply
3-24-2009 @ 11:10AM
Ryan said...
I prefer Amazing Race by a large margin, but I think this post was a bit like comparing oranges and apples. Yes, both are reality shows on CBS. The similarity sorta ends there and it's not really fair to compare the two.
Both succeed in what they sought to do which are two very different things.
Reply
3-24-2009 @ 7:56PM
GL said...
I agree (though I prefer Survivor over TAR). The two are not similar and comparing them won't get you anywhere fun. They both work for what they are.
3-24-2009 @ 11:37AM
Dave said...
I can't stand the Amazing Race! It's all shouting, all the time. I know that Jeff shouts a bit during the competitions on Survivor, but mostly the show features normal talking voices. Why do American shows always try to drum up 'excitement' by featuring commentators shouting? Sports broadcasts here suck! I think that the reason that curling was so popular a few years back was that we were treated to the novelty of soto voce commentary. But I digress.
Reply
3-24-2009 @ 11:40AM
Dave said...
Boy am I surprised. I agree with your premise, but you have the programs backwards. I was expecting someone to finally agree with me that TAR is a vastly overrated, poorly edited, boring program, and that Survivor is the only reality program that still brings it after all these years.
There are so many problems with TAR. Mandatory rest, yes, but there are far too many occasions where the teams end up bunching and then a team that had built a lead finds it gone. Too much of the time on the show is spent in airports or booking travel. We might as well watch the contestants balance their checkbooks. The biggest problem however, is Phil. Jeff Probst is an active participant in the show and helps it along. Survivor would collapse without him. Phil gives narration flatly, like he's reading the news. He has virtually no emotion. A fatal flaw in the show.
Survivor still keeps me interested after 17 seasons, TAR can't interest me for an entire episode.
Reply
3-24-2009 @ 12:28PM
Chris said...
I have to agree with most of the comments. While I enjoy the Amazing Race, it is almost too formulaic for me. The thing that really captures your attention on Survivor are the personal relationships and the skill with which people are now able to play the game. It isn't really about 'Surviving' anymore in the same sense that in the first few seasons they almost starved to death. Rather, it is about surviving the 'social game' either by being physically dominant or socially brilliant. I think there are many more levels of nuance to Survivor than there are to the Amazing Race. The worst part of the Amazing Race (and again, I love watching it) is how much effort they put into keeping the teams close together. I would like to see fewer bottlenecks (such as requirements for air travel, etc) that ensure that the racers catch up to one another during a leg of the race. I can't remember the name of it, but there was another race show that came on at about the same time as TAR and Survivor and they dropped contestants in the middle of no where and said the first team to (New York?) wins the prize. That was fantastic, I don't know why it didn't catch on.
Reply
3-27-2009 @ 11:25AM
sydzephyr said...
The show was called "Lost". I liked it too!!!
3-24-2009 @ 12:15PM
Tom Brady said...
I'm inclined to agree with Allison. While TAR isn't quite as sharp as it once was, the producers are doing a pretty good job changing up the locations and the challenges. They learn what works and what doesn't and improve each year. Survivor, on the other hand, has gotten to be something of a chore - granted, each season I say I'm not going to watch it, and each season it sucks me in. I've come up with a nice time-saver in the early part of each season, though, thanks to my Tivo: After the immunity challenge, I fast-forward to the reading of the votes. Because really - before the merge, there's so many players the only ones who are going to get a lot of screen time are the ones getting voted off, and the machinations get tedious.
And hey - if I miss anything interesting in the plotting and backstabbing, I can read about it the next day on TV Squad :-)
Reply
3-24-2009 @ 12:23PM
Joe said...
I am on the other side of the fence. I use to love Amazing Race yet do not any more. It feels like the same thing. I know you could say Survivor is too. But there has been new things thrown into Survivor that I in some ways like the new Survivor over the old way.
As for why I don't like Amazing Race as I did in the past is because you have seen those places before in past seasons of Amazing Race were as Survivor you are on a new part of the world that was not done before.
Plus I think you get to like more people in Survivor seeing as you pick a team you want to win were as in Amazing Race you only get to pick a team of two which if they get out bums you out.
Plus other stuff too. Though not to say Amazing Race is bad just I don't like watching is as I use too.
Reply
3-24-2009 @ 12:46PM
ebonydad said...
I use to be an avid Amazing Race watcher. When Survivor went HD, it made it significantly harder to watch The Amazing Race in SD. Then when The Amazing Race keeps on getting pushed out because some other event, and I miss part of the show on my DVR, I just have lost interest.
Once TAR goes HD, maybe I will watch again.
Reply
3-24-2009 @ 12:49PM
chrissthomas said...
Everyone is entitled to their opinion but it doesn't mean it has to be a good one or based on anything substantial. In this case your opinion sucks. Survivor has a much higher production value than the Amazing Race. Jeff Probst is a much better host that the no name drone who shows up once in a while on Amazing Race. There are no dynamics to Amazing Race. You go from one place to another. It is only entertaining to see how them make people look like idiots. Most of the game is pure luck on being in the right place at the right time. Survivor is much better in that there is actual strategy and you get to see the players try to implement it. The cool thing is that the same strategy never works twice because every group and dynamic is different. Survivor wins hands down in the reality category because it is more of a long term game show than reality dribble.
Reply