Yes, it's just another wilderness survival reality show, right? But then, not really. Seeing the initial ten contestants, it's clear that many will drop out quickly, and they did. It is not until later episodes when the stress and stubborn egos take over to create an interesting scenario of self destruction. All the common aspects are here to see. The eager drinking of dangerous raw surface water. The reluctance to construct shelter. The tendency to sit idle and ignore the needs of basic sustenance. Only two of the contestants have the skills to meet the challenges to any degree, much to the dislike of all the others. They then become targets of attacks and bullying.The twist on this is the volume of genuine currency to burden contestants as they must carry it, but also entice them to spend it on frivolities for highly inflated costs. The eventual result is quite amusing as a group of angry and wasteful individuals abuse and deprive other contestants as they see high levels of waste as necessity. As with all bullies, the levels of arrogance and denial reach the standard heights as the larger group behaves like nothing more than a street gang of thugs.Then the fun begins. Losing members, which included the leading thug that orchestrated the abuse, the group of bullies is forced to even ground with their two victims. As turnabout is fair play, the bullies then suffer the consequences and the expected tantrums are the result, even to the point of destroying $60,000+ in cash. At this point, I have yet to see the ending of this. The former bullies appear eager to destroy an incredible windfall to merely coddle their crippled egos as they display their intense emotional personal challenges, and an incredible level of denial.

from the 1st episode, I wanted Gina to go home crying over messy makeup and lack of everything else to survive in a place like that. It's unbelievable that she made it to the 7th episode. If she wins any money in season one, I will never watch this show again if there's a season 2 or more after that. I cant even imagine her making it past day 3 on that island by herself, let alone making it this far even with everyone else. And the guy that left because he didn't like being wet all the time. Ummmmm yeah kinda stupid reason to leave a lot of money just because you might be rained on for 40 days of your life. Try dropping Paris Hilton on that island with no money, no other people, and no pizza, even for 24 hours and see what happens... that would be more fun to watch :) Dropping a dumb cocktail waitress that complains about her mom's horrible apartment because she's been raised by Kim Kardashian, and she makes it through most of the 1st season ? .... I'm seeing this show getting trashed before it even gets started lolI like that they put people on the show that would never be able to make it, but the least likely to make it being in the last 4 of them is really annoying.

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.