With Survivor Rolling In The US, BBC Decided To Reboot It For The UK, But It Did Not Go As Planned

Jeff Probst on Survivor: Worlds Apart
(Image credit: CBS)

Survivor may not be as popular with audiences in The United States as it was during its first season, when the finale was watched by more than fifty million viewers, but for nearly twenty-five years, the show has shown remarkable staying power and lasting popularity. It still routinely ranks among the top thirty shows across all of television, and judging by recent Emmy nominations, fan excitement and CBS committing to a "year long celebration" for the 50th season, you could make a strong case that the beloved reality competition show is as healthy as it’s been in a long time. Unfortunately, over in The UK, things aren’t going quite so well.

Reportedly wanting to capitalize on the success of The Traitors by rolling out another extravagant reality competition show, BBC One commissioned a “renaissance” season of Survivor. The popular broadcaster reportedly spent nearly $40M on a hundred odd staffers and hundreds of locals to shoot a full season over 34 days in the Dominican Republic. It also advertised the show quite extensively ahead of its premiere last October, but British fans once again showed they really weren’t interested.

Or at least they probably weren’t interested enough. The relaunch averaged 2.7M viewers, which is perfectly fine for a BBC One show but not so much when you consider all the variables here. First, it was obviously extremely expensive to produce. Second, it ran on Saturday and Sunday evenings immediately after Strictly Come Dancing, which brought in more than 8.5M viewers per episode. Third, it was advertised heavily by BBC in the hopes that the show could really put up a big number.

BBC hasn’t announced what’s going on with possible future seasons of the show yet, but according to The Daily Mail, it has been “put out of its misery.” All efforts to cast a second season have been stopped, and the staffers working on the show have reportedly been moved onto other projects. For all intents and purposes, it seems to be cancelled, just as the original was so many years go.

Survivor took much of the world by storm in the early 2000s. For a time, it became the single biggest weekly show in The United States, and more than fifty versions flourished around the world. British fans got their own taste with an iteration from ITV in 2001, but the ratings were never better than mediocre. It got a second season in 2002, but it was quickly cancelled because the high production price tag just wasn’t worth the modest returns.

Over the years, hardcore British fans have found ways to watch Survivor in other territories, but as this reboot proved, those diehards will likely always be in the minority in The UK. Exactly why still remains an open question. Some point to British fans supposedly having a distaste for people who play in too cutthroat of a manner on reality shows. Some point to the number of popular reality shows involving celebrities and the lack of celebrities here. Others say the producers just never quite got the format right. Whatever the reason, Survivor is now 0 for 2 in The UK, and it seems very unlikely it’ll get a third chance anytime soon.

Editor In Chief

Mack Rawden is the Editor-In-Chief of CinemaBlend. He first started working at the publication as a writer back in 2007 and has held various jobs at the site in the time since including Managing Editor, Pop Culture Editor and Staff Writer. He now splits his time between working on CinemaBlend’s user experience, helping to plan the site’s editorial direction and writing passionate articles about niche entertainment topics he’s into. He graduated from Indiana University with a degree in English (go Hoosiers!) and has been interviewed and quoted in a variety of publications including Digiday. Enthusiastic about Clue, case-of-the-week mysteries, a great wrestling promo and cookies at Disney World. Less enthusiastic about the pricing structure of cable, loud noises and Tuesdays.