Extracted

The first episode with the 18 year old was hard to watch he was awful! The premise of the show is great but I think you have to vet these people better the dad was definitely enabling his son and it put a negative light on the show having them on it. The way he spoke to his parents and threatened them to push the button to extract was absolutely crazy and it really sucks that they were allowed to push the button and get him out especially since his mom made sure he had everything he needed in his crate and he still chose to speak to them the way he did and then hug them when they bring him back.

The other show that came out in groups surviving in Alaska was better... These guys moreso just sit around and do nothing... Your in the wild so you need to be foraging, looking for food etc.. helps with supply drops but then it's not really survival with help.. but puts a tweak on it with the HQ etc. I would've thought they would have all gone and moved around and formed bonds with the other contestants which would help boost morale a bit more for them. Good thought for a reality show even though I hardly watch any (only ones like this are decent) but good effort to all those who participated in it.

The Fox Television Network has done some extremely unethical things to obtain high ratings for its programs, but this show takes the bialy. Extracted is a new low, even for Fox. It has contestants get their loved ones to risk their very lives in the wilderness all for a quarter of a million dollars. It shows how greed can kill and brake up families. I shudder to imagine what would happen if they offered a full million dollars. This is why I rate this horrible show a zero. It reminds me why I hate reality tv shows so much and why I never watch them. Sooner or later, one of the contestants will get killed trying to do one of those dangerous stunts.

I cannot believe that this many people have never watched Survivor. #1 Fire (fire gives you safe water), #2 Shelter, off the ground, you need a roof, #3 Food...you don't always have to cook it. I am not one of those people. But if water is abundant, Fire, Shelter, Food. Your food can be worms, insects, reptiles, fish much of this you can eat raw. But if you have #1 Fire you don't need to worry about raw. Fire gives you warmth, safe water and safe food. Survivor has been on for like 24 years... These kinds of things should be common knowledge by now. I mean did they specifically choose people who had never watched it???

I've watched survival shows like Alone and Survivor that follow a similar premise to this series, where people go live out in the wild and battle the elements with the additional element of challenges to earn rewards. I would say that compared to Survivor the challenges the producers came up with were very lackluster and unimaginative. In terms of the survival element, it was clear that some of these people had no clue how to survive in the wild (which I guess is a selling point for the show, but in a show centered around survival in the wild you would expect contestants to have some basic skills here).

There's a bit too much drama in the HQ for my likings, one contestant was doing extremely well surviving in the wild but got extracted because his fiance had her feelings hurt by the other contestants. However, even ignoring all these shortcomings it was watchable until the abysmal finale which was rigged so that a certain contestant could win. This contestant was about to be medically extracted but then they suddenly got a "final challenge" the next day. Furthermore the crux of the final challenge was guessing a 5 letter password the families at HQ had set. This contestant just so happened to have a 5 letter nickname that they went by. This resulted in the contestant immediately guessing the password whereas the other 3 contestants probably guessed their passwords for another 30 minutes.

So this begs the question, did the producers decide to end the show early to let this contestant win as opposed to getting medically extracted the next day? If it was their plan all along to have this kind of ending then my issue is false advertising on the premise of the show. I was lead to believe this show would be similar to Alone where the deciding factor on who wins is who can survive the longest in the wild. If the premise is "you guys need to survive to day X" and then you'll compete in a final challenge then that should be made clear to the contestants.

Surviving to day X versus surviving until all your opponents quit require two completely different strategies. In seasons of Alone where the goal was to survive to day 100, all contestants started the show with this knowledge and could plan accordingly. If instead you're targeting a certain number of players until the final challenge then again make this clear to the players. If I'm an experienced survivalist I might not want to take my chances on a 1 in 4 crap shoot to win the game after going X days starving myself in the wild.