Man vs. Man vs. Wild

I recently have gotten caught up in the world of survival shows. It's probably because there is absolutely nothing else to watch on TV these days. Anyway, the question that inevitably surfaces in my mind is this... Who is better, Les (from Surviorman) or Bear (from Man vs. Wild)?

Bear has the cooler name, is willing to eat dead animals raw, urinates on his shirt and wears it, has a cool British accent and according to Wikipedia climbed Mount Everest at age 23. His show is definitely flashier, engaging even the most casual viewer. But at times, the show feels contrived, almost planned out to the last river Bear crosses or cliff he repels down. And who's to say that when the camera shuts off, he's not scarfing down a sandwich that was tucked away in the cameraman's pocket?

And while Les could also hide his own ham sandwiches, he has the "alone factor." He doesn't have a 2-man camera crew following him around all the time. The added element of loneliness alone could drive someone mad. And if he were to get into real (not made-for-TV) trouble, he doesn't have someone to go for help. While at any time either man could perish and die Steve-Irwin style, Les obviously runs the higher risk. And don't forget he can also play the crap out of a harmonica.

So if you were wondering who I prefer, Bear or Les, now you know. And you know you were wondering.


7/25/07 Update: My suspicions were correct! Bear is a fraud! Click here!