The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

In this review I will first look at the show itself and then at the possibility that, when this review is written (April 2017, halfway into Season 1) the first series has, perhaps unintentionally, become a social metaphor for things actually happening. Those reading this review in the future -- they say the IMDb database will outlive everyone currently alive on the planet at this time -- might want to refresh their early history of the 21st century.1. The show.As far as these unique, reality-TV hybrids go, this one (to borrow a phrase from the other side of the Pond), is a corker. The concept is clever as heck. A bunch of strangers with an odd mix of skills have to survive on a literal "deserted island" which, depending on your POV, could be Heaven or Hell.(Notice for example how, in the first season, the young lady with the screen subtitle "21 year old Organic Farmer" seems to be almost on vacation, wears a bikini most of the time in spite of the "bugs," and more often than not the others have stop their drama and go looking for her, only to find her sunbathing on a tree branch!) There are two "hooks." The first, which is obvious, is that you can buy "overpriced" survival stuff out of your ongoing winnings as a reward for reaching "benchmarks." The second hook, not so obvious but far more interesting, is that, you are supposed to make decisions and achieve these benchmarks AS A GROUP -- a concept, it soon becomes clear, that goes against tens of thousands of years of Human Nature.2. The Social Metaphor.In 2017, our society is having some issues with traditional political demographics. I believe that intentionally or unintentionally this show has become a metaphor for those issues.Almost from the first episode, the group ultimately fragments into two smaller groups, one with four people (the majority) and one with two (the outliers). Significantly, the two outliers are the strongest individuals in the group, physically. This smaller group includes the aforementioned tough-as-nails female "organic farmer" and an ex-military guy with a friendly personality who gives the impression he could survive a nuclear war if he really had to.(If you were an odds-maker, all else being equal, you would bet on the two outliers as the most likely to make it to the finish.) Almost immediately, the majority creates a "narrative" that they have the right to use their majority status to make decisions on the money ... even though the Rules make it clear that money belongs to EVERYONE, at least in theory. This creates major resentment among the two stronger, tougher, outliers. The "liberal majority" also convince themselves they are acting honourably, spending the money on camping gear and food FOR THEMSELVES, even as the two outliers are forced to sleep in the wild, without protection from the elements. Which includes brutal, nightly, rainstorms.Notwithstanding the self-delusion, this turns out to clearly be a false narrative, and as the "Liberal Democracy" implodes, the two outliers ("populists" in my example) gradually take control of the game, bringing to the fore deep-seated resentments about what became of THEIR money during the time when the majority treated themselves like royalty.***Addendum**** Putting this in the review for the historical record because I believe episode 1.8 will be taught at university some day. Remember, the guys behind these reality shows get "big bucks" for anticipating every possible outcome when they make the RULES. That said, don't think they anticipated that, of the 4 remaining players, the two charged with carrying the accumulated prize money from target to target would "blackmail" the other two by threatening to destroy the cash they had won so far unless the other two agreed to group-buy food and a tent for them. The other two hold their ground and FOR THE FIRST TIME IN THE HISTORY OF TV GAME SHOWS, the other two make good on their threat, start a fire, and burn 10s of 1000s of dollars. Not making this up. Some day there will be a course on "snowflakes" with a "sense of entitlement." Professors teaching Game Theory now have their perfect textbook example of LOSE-LOSE. The two money-burners may be psychologically scarred for life. And somewhere deep in Hollywood, an exec is being called out, "HEY WHY DIDN'T YOU ANTICIPATE THAT?"

This show's concept is intriguing: drop 10 young people in an island with loads of money and gave them options to buy things at exorbitantly high price, and see what will happen. I have to say I am pretty entertained at the Lord-of-flies aspect of it.I like the show having only self-elimination, thus it tests the limit of each person, and also encourage team effort to work together. I had expected of something like "we have to united to survive 48 days in this island", but it turns out to be an endless bashing, whining, and sniping tribal affair. It's not ideal but quite realistic, given the tough circumstances. Some unfortunately ones did reach their limits and tap-out, and others were hanging on a thread, thinking about quitting all day long. At the same time they still managed to undermine others and push other's buttons. The miseries they suffered are below "naked and afraid" but much more than the over-rated "Survivors". Watching them moaning and complaining I cannot help but thinking I might do the same things myself if I were there. So for a reality show it's pretty good at dramas.What I don't like about the show is that the 10 competitors were all in their 20s or 30s, none of them were really familiar with living in the wild, and they made really bad choices. I am not talking about they buy things at a extremely high prices. I am talking about they made decision like 10-year-olds and none of them taking survival seriously. Even the eagle-scout person couldn't make a fire and later threw his shoe away, only forced to tap-out later due to his feet. All the decisions those guys made mostly were wrong and pathetic. After 18 days none of them ate any worms or caught anything to eat. Had not the show given them the option to buy super high price food and the so-call "temptation", all of them would have tap-out within 2 weeks.However, I still like the show a lot, because if there were someone like Bear Grylls in the show, they would not have suffered that much and bickered that much. This is the show that tells you what will really happen if you got into a sticky situation. People will bond into groups. Some will fight and hate each other. Some will commit stealing and some will hurt everyone's interest to get even.Therefore, this show is not for everyone, especially for the high-spirit and self-righteous folks, but it's definitely worth a try if you want to see the true nature of people.

I am an older reviewer who -- shockingly -- had never seen a reality show like this before, stumbled on it by accident, and got hooked.Over the years I have developed respect for the writers and thinkers who argue the entertainment of the time reflects the gestalt, the angst, of that time.Frankenstein was written at the turn of the 20th century when people were afraid of electricity, by the 1950s people were afraid of radiation and spacemen, by the 60s and 70s we were afraid of wealthy megalomaniacs trying to take over the world, and more recently we have been afraid of turning into unthinking, unfeeling zombies. IS IT JUST ME or, with hindsight, do these shifts seem somewhat prophetic? So they drop a bunch of kids with very limited survival skills on an island, give them a 'max' prize if they succeed, twist the rules so that "majority rules" and then ding them for every bad choice along the way?(In Marketing this is called a "self liquidating" campaign -- by the end of the show, there will be very little cash left, the kids will have worked basically for free, and the producers/sponsors will make out like bandits) Again I ask, given the current civil strife in the US -- today March 23 2017, financial guru Doug Casey remarked "What's going on in the US now is a culture clash. They don't just dislike each other and disagree on politics; they can no longer even have a conversation. They hate each other on a visceral gut level" -- so is it any wonder that, in short order, the group here is too busy fighting among themselves to even remember why they were on the island in the first place? The teaser at the open asks how much people will spend to "stay alive?" That is not what the show is about. The show is about the lengths people will go to feel good about who they think they are.Just like in real life.

We have watched a number of reality surviving game TV shows, some to name Naked and Afraid, Hunted, Survivor etc.This show is nothing like the others because there is no sense of danger, no bad choice besides using up money to buy stuff or voting against buying to screw over other people. All of the contestants are young pretty shallow stupid people (oldest is 24 I believe). Idiocy at its best. The only reason we are watching it is to see what stupid stuff they do next, to see them all fail. Honestly we are not rooting for anyone, we just want to see all of the contestants fail miserably, hoping they all get food poisoning (hardly an issue when they can order food dropped in).It is so bad, its like watching a slasher moving and actually wanting to see the killer take all of the actors out. In this case mother nature is the serial killer yet she has a hard time beating them when they have 1 million dollars to throw around on items. I won't even mention the fact that their though process is extremely idiotic, it makes no sense for people in their circumstances to behave like that unless it was all for the show.A lot of people watch extremely stupid shows so they keep making them.The idea is intriguing but the producers should have though out the rules of the game in much more detail. It also feels too scripted, why would you do that when having any kind of common sense you clearly could do this instead and be better off? Like I said, the other shows actually seem more natural (if they are or not), this seem fake.