The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: Casey Buck on August 07, 2009, 05:29:07 PM
-
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_DdCesRwa_w0/Slvn...ce+is+right.jpg (http://\"http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_DdCesRwa_w0/SlvntdwuXFI/AAAAAAAAAI4/AA1bEWpy7ZA/s1600-h/josh+and+jimmy+price+is+right.jpg\")
-
Damn that's one fugly mess. Too many florescent colors IMO
-
I like them. That's a nice shade of green, the background is pretty nice and the silver is still good looking. I'm sure it will look great in HD. The card holders on the sides are slick, too. The photograph may not do them justice, though. This color may look blah in a blurry, average photograph but it could very well jump out at me when it's shown on my HDTV. It sort of reminds me of a combination of the squares on the Family Feud '94 set and dividers at my old orthodontist's office.
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'222316\' date=\'Aug 7 2009, 05:34 PM\']Damn that's one fugly mess. Too many florescent colors IMO[/quote]
Part of me thinks that's the instamatic-camera, blurry picture. There's another pic on Drew's Twitter that looks better and has slightly different colors (which begs the question- do those colors change?)
Still not sold on the podia though.
-
The podia look like upside-down pyramids, so maybe Sony made them a deal for some set pieces when their show didn't get picked up.
/joking
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'222322\' date=\'Aug 7 2009, 06:30 PM\']The podia look like upside-down pyramids...[/quote]
They look like coffins to me.
-
I like the backdrop, but I can't stand the podiums. They're that same horrendous shade of green that (IMO) really made the Infamous Purple Wheel ugly.
-
The backdrop looks OK(if it weren't for the fuzziness of the picture, I would've given it nice compliments). Not really a big fan of green, but it'll grow on me. The glittery silver really stands out here. If I see it on HDTV, it would look more elaborate.
-
They're a bit too two-dimensional, but OK otherwise.
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'222316\' date=\'Aug 7 2009, 04:34 PM\']Damn that's one fugly mess. Too many florescent colors IMO[/quote]
Correct. The colors don't look good on TPIR, they don't look good on television, they don't look good anywhere on earth. Drew's remarks about pushing for better Showcase prizes would then to push the show away from campiness. This awful sets only sucks it back. They'd be better off with the original brown set than this--at least that looked good at the time.
-
[quote name=\'Neumms\' post=\'222379\' date=\'Aug 9 2009, 06:04 PM\']Correct. The colors don't look good on TPIR, they don't look good on television, they don't look good anywhere on earth.[/quote]
Funny, I really don't have a problem with it.
/The Showcase set: Serious Business
-
Is that a five-digit display area or six?
-
[quote name=\'Don Howard\' post=\'222383\' date=\'Aug 9 2009, 06:36 PM\']Is that a five-digit display area or six?[/quote]
I am almost 100% certain that it's a flatscreen monitor (since the combined area of the readout and the Showcase name readout comes WAY too close to a 16x9 aspect ratio for me to think it's mere coincidence), and so I would think it's whatever it needs to be.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'222390\' date=\'Aug 9 2009, 09:18 PM\'][quote name=\'Don Howard\' post=\'222383\' date=\'Aug 9 2009, 06:36 PM\']Is that a five-digit display area or six?[/quote]
I am almost 100% certain that it's a flatscreen monitor (since the combined area of the readout and the Showcase name readout comes WAY too close to a 16x9 aspect ratio for me to think it's mere coincidence), and so I would think it's whatever it needs to be.
[/quote]
To add - it's probably a monitor and the cabinet's modded so you don't need that middle part - just get your output (via Flash?) in the areas you need them.
Let's hope that they don't have to go six figures, but all one would need to do is go to a condensed version of the font and it's done.
-
[quote name=\'TeppanYaki\' post=\'222394\' date=\'Aug 9 2009, 10:36 PM\']Let's hope that they don't have to go six figures[/quote]Primetime specials and Million Dollar Spectaculars say yo!
-
[quote name=\'TeppanYaki\' post=\'222394\' date=\'Aug 9 2009, 10:36 PM\'][quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'222390\' date=\'Aug 9 2009, 09:18 PM\'][quote name=\'Don Howard\' post=\'222383\' date=\'Aug 9 2009, 06:36 PM\']Is that a five-digit display area or six?[/quote]
I am almost 100% certain that it's a flatscreen monitor (since the combined area of the readout and the Showcase name readout comes WAY too close to a 16x9 aspect ratio for me to think it's mere coincidence), and so I would think it's whatever it needs to be.
[/quote]
To add - it's probably a monitor and the cabinet's modded so you don't need that middle part - just get your output (via Flash?) in the areas you need them.
Let's hope that they don't have to go six figures, but all one would need to do is go to a condensed version of the font and it's done.
[/quote]
it is one screen divided by the podium sections. i went to the show about a month ago and they were still working out the bugs. instead of numbers and letters appearing in the appropriate sections, a windows screen appeared with a mouse pointer moving all about. i'm really unimpressed with the changes.
-
And that's why you test the software (http://\"http://i399.photobucket.com/albums/pp78/visualbasicwizard/funny%20images/Stopdown.jpg\") before you go live with it.
-
[quote name=\'visualbasicwizard\' post=\'222413\' date=\'Aug 9 2009, 11:39 PM\']And that's why you test the software (http://\"http://i399.photobucket.com/albums/pp78/visualbasicwizard/funny%20images/Stopdown.jpg\") before you go live with it.[/quote]
Bonus points for bothering to Photoshop the name of the app into the error message.
-
The hard part was Photshopping the task bar, not that you can see the detail anyway.
-
[quote name=\'visualbasicwizard\' post=\'222413\' date=\'Aug 10 2009, 01:39 AM\']And that's why you test the software (http://\"http://i399.photobucket.com/albums/pp78/visualbasicwizard/funny%20images/Stopdown.jpg\") before you go live with it.[/quote]
can you say, video amplifier?
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'222380\' date=\'Aug 9 2009, 08:22 PM\'][quote name=\'Neumms\' post=\'222379\' date=\'Aug 9 2009, 06:04 PM\']Correct. The colors don't look good on TPIR, they don't look good on television, they don't look good anywhere on earth.[/quote]
Funny, I really don't have a problem with it.
/The Showcase set: Serious Business
[/quote]
Ha! Where's Mean Bob when we need him? I can't help it--I see this and think "The Magnificent Marble Machine" looked more stylish.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'222380\' date=\'Aug 9 2009, 09:22 PM\'][quote name=\'Neumms\' post=\'222379\' date=\'Aug 9 2009, 06:04 PM\']Correct. The colors don't look good on TPIR, they don't look good on television, they don't look good anywhere on earth.[/quote]
Funny, I really don't have a problem with it.
/The Showcase set: Serious Business
[/quote]
I like the checkerboard pattern, and like the pyramids as podia. But the Day-Glo Barney and Baby Bop colors are distracting IMO. And like others noted, it'll prolly look fine on a TV set, but I think one color scheme or the other should be a little more subtle.
Looking at it again, the fuschia squares remind me of the "glowing" red pyramids from the 80s version, when the lights dimmed during the Winner's Circle. THAT would be a sweet effect.
-
Well, we finally got a picture of the whole lot lit-up, and I must say
(http://s3.amazonaws.com/twitpic/photos/large/24020861.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=0ZRYP5X5F6FSMBCCSE82&Expires=1251128787&Signature=WgkjizTLZ1sF45LfCx4hL8Kwpo8%3D)
Pretty cute stuff there.
-
[quote name=\'Lirodon\' post=\'223969\' date=\'Aug 24 2009, 11:30 AM\']Well, we finally got a picture of the whole lot lit-up, and I must say
(http://s3.amazonaws.com/twitpic/photos/large/24020861.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=0ZRYP5X5F6FSMBCCSE82&Expires=1251128787&Signature=WgkjizTLZ1sF45LfCx4hL8Kwpo8%3D)
Pretty cute stuff there.[/quote]
Aside from the fact that we don't allow images on our board (which Lirodon probably didn't realize), this link appears to be broken. Anybody who can clean it up or pass on to us a new one would be appreciated.
-
Done. (http://\"http://voices.washingtonpost.com/soccerinsider/2009/08/post_4.html?wprss=soccerinsider\")
Like the LCDs and the back squares (really reminds me of Jeopardy's grid set), but I really don't like the lecterns.
-
Nice. The checkerboard looks really nice with the colors, and the lime green no longer burns my retinas. :-) The checkerboard now reminds me even more of the 80s Pyramid set during the Winners Circle.
Now to see some digits on these scoreboards...
-
Is the red folding chair part of the new set?
-
[quote name=\'Neumms\' post=\'222423\' date=\'Aug 10 2009, 09:43 AM\'][quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'222380\' date=\'Aug 9 2009, 08:22 PM\'][quote name=\'Neumms\' post=\'222379\' date=\'Aug 9 2009, 06:04 PM\']Correct. The colors don't look good on TPIR, they don't look good on television, they don't look good anywhere on earth.[/quote]
Funny, I really don't have a problem with it.
/The Showcase set: Serious Business
[/quote]
Ha! Where's Mean Bob when we need him?
[/quote]
Sorry...I don't have Mean Bob. Will this do (http://\"http://www.qwizx.com/shh/tpir_sb.jpg\")?
-
[quote name=\'Neumms\' post=\'222423\' date=\'Aug 10 2009, 08:43 AM\']Ha! Where's Mean Bob when we need him?[/quote]
I assume you were asking for this?: http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a357/JRa...rkerserious.jpg (http://\"http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a357/JRaygor/barkerserious.jpg\") :)
-
[quote name=\'J.R.\' post=\'224013\' date=\'Aug 24 2009, 05:47 PM\'][quote name=\'Neumms\' post=\'222423\' date=\'Aug 10 2009, 08:43 AM\']Ha! Where's Mean Bob when we need him?[/quote]
I assume you were asking for this?: http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a357/JRa...rkerserious.jpg (http://\"http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a357/JRaygor/barkerserious.jpg\") :)
[/quote]
Is your Mean Bob of any relation to this one (http://\"http://catdog1st.tripod.com/pics/16MeanBob2.jpg\")?
-
[quote name=\'rollercoaster87\' post=\'224027\' date=\'Aug 24 2009, 09:43 PM\']Is your Mean Bob of any relation to this one (http://\"http://www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/Network/4364/pics1/16MeanBob2.jpg\")?[/quote]
I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought of that. :)
-
Here's a wide shot of the new turntable area. (http://\"http://twitpic.com/eav0s\")
-
All i can say is TPIR is making up for staying with the same set for 20+ years albeit different colour schemes. And here's $100,000,000 Pyramid going the other way... they've gone the cheap warehouse look, now back to the 80s look with a bit modern feel. Hopefully TPIR will follow suit, something tells me not though.
Game shows don't have to look like the 70s, but they don't have to look stereotypical retro cheesy. The set is slowly going to the side of a stereotypical game show spoof set.
I used to watch Price cause it felt like though it was a fun show, it had a bit of class to it.. not too stale just classy. Now its a fun house with announcer optional basically saying "its a car" or... "its a jar of almonds". Before there was a point cause the company would get a plug but nothing now.
There are still people out there that like that kinda stuff. I like cheese on my pizza, not on tv. Guess that's why we have a need for GSN and classic shows.
Just my lil opinion.
Mark
-
[quote name=\'Argo\' post=\'224066\' date=\'Aug 25 2009, 11:28 AM\']Game shows don't have to look like the 70s, but they don't have to look stereotypical retro cheesy. The set is slowly going to the side of a stereotypical game show spoof set.
I used to watch Price cause it felt like though it was a fun show, it had a bit of class to it.. not too stale just classy. Now its a fun house with announcer optional basically saying "its a car" or... "its a jar of almonds".[/quote]
Amen, brother. TPIR was charmingly retro when Barker was around because it simply hadn't changed--it didn't try to be retro, it really was around that long. I don't mind that they're making changes, but they shouldn't camp it up. They should look to how "Wheel of Fortune" maintains an iconic look yet updates it so it doesn't become dated. (Not that TPIR's wheel needs to have 15¢ brought to us by a surf shop.)
-
[quote name=\'Argo\' post=\'224066\' date=\'Aug 25 2009, 09:28 AM\']There are still people out there that like that kinda stuff. I like cheese on my pizza, not on tv. Guess that's why we have a need for GSN and classic shows.[/quote]
So, my question is...do you still watch, or are you going to vote with your remote?
-
[quote name=\'Neumms\' post=\'224071\' date=\'Aug 25 2009, 11:42 AM\']Amen, brother. TPIR was charmingly retro when Barker was around because it simply hadn't changed--it didn't try to be retro, it really was around that long. I don't mind that they're making changes, but they shouldn't camp it up. They should look to how "Wheel of Fortune" maintains an iconic look yet updates it so it doesn't become dated.[/quote]
Why shouldn't they camp it up? Obviously, what had worked for them the previous 35 years went out the door right behind Bob, so maybe it's better to make a clean break and full-on embrace the camp as opposed to trying to grasp whatever vestiges of 'classic' they can mold around Drew.
As long as the core of the show remains intact (by which I mean One-Bids, pricing games, Big Wheel, and Showcases), the rest of it's just a matter of taste.
Like the old adage goes, 'Adapt or die'.
(I say this as someone who misses the classic as much as you do, but realizes it's just not feasible to keep that going in 2009. Thank goodness 2009 also allows you to YouTube/DVR/whatever nostalgia to your heart's content, if that's what you want.)
-
[quote name=\'Mr. Armadillo\' post=\'224079\' date=\'Aug 25 2009, 02:34 PM\']I say this as someone who misses the classic as much as you do, but realizes it's just not feasible to keep that going in 2009.[/quote]
You seriously think it's not feasible, and not just a by-product of having Doofus McGoofus running the place?
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'224087\' date=\'Aug 25 2009, 12:58 PM\']You seriously think it's not feasible, and not just a by-product of having Doofus McGoofus running the place?[/quote]
Would he have said it if he didn't?
/gotta put together that zombie Photoshop
//chaaaaaaaaaange
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'224087\' date=\'Aug 25 2009, 02:58 PM\']You seriously think it's not feasible, and not just a by-product of having Doofus McGoofus running the place?[/quote]
So now we've resorted to name calling? Does Drew Carey really disgust people this deeply?
Man alive, I'm not saying Drew is worthy of an Emmy or anything, but sheesh, some people around here really need to cut this guy some slack once in a while.
-
I thought the final Barker set was fine. It was retro, but somewhat contemporary.
I'm not of the camp that will refuse to watch on GP, but I'm over the retro movement (here and in general). The Carey set and graphics are looking more and more like the infomercials I see for those Dean Martin Show DVDs (less now that they dropped the hypocycloids). It's not enough to turn me away from the show, but I think it looks chintzy. It's almost like they want to be contemporary but keep a wink-and-a-nod to 1974, which IMO, clashes.
/Feud and New Pyramid do (did) a good job balancing the two
//Ohh New Pyramid what could have been...
-
[quote name=\'Argo\' post=\'224066\' date=\'Aug 25 2009, 11:28 AM\']They should look to how "Wheel of Fortune" maintains an iconic look yet updates it so it doesn't become dated.[/quote]
You're joking, right?
-
[quote name=\'J.R.\' post=\'224092\' date=\'Aug 25 2009, 01:43 PM\'][quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'224087\' date=\'Aug 25 2009, 02:58 PM\']You seriously think it's not feasible, and not just a by-product of having Doofus McGoofus running the place?[/quote]
So now we've resorted to name calling? Does Drew Carey really disgust people this deeply?[/quote]
Our of our mods called Drew that very name, not once (http://\"http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=17835&view=findpost&p=213310\"), not twice (http://\"http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=18133&view=findpost&p=217691\"), but three times (http://\"http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=18456&st=0&p=221678&#entry221678\").
-
[quote name=\'Casey Buck\' post=\'224097\' date=\'Aug 25 2009, 05:12 PM\']Our of our mods called Drew that very name, not once (http://\"http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=17835&view=findpost&p=213310\"), not twice (http://\"http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=18133&view=findpost&p=217691\"), but three times (http://\"http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=18456&view=findpost&p=221678http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=18456&view=findpost&p=221678\").[/quote]That doesn't make it right. I don't like Barker's actions off-screen but I'm not going around calling him Assgrab McBoobtoucher.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'224091\' date=\'Aug 25 2009, 03:42 PM\']/gotta put together that zombie Photoshop
//chaaaaaaaaaange[/quote]E for Effort? (http://\"http://pylps.elitepalaces.com/pocketchangeisbad.JPG\")
[quote name=\'chad1m\']That doesn't make it right. I don't like Barker's actions off-screen but I'm not going around calling him Assgrab McBoobtoucher.[/quote]I don't think Casey was trying to justify it. He was merely saying there was a precedent; one made by a moderator. And, if you believe in leading by example...
-
[quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'224098\' date=\'Aug 25 2009, 04:19 PM\']McBoobtoucher.[/quote]
Approves. (http://\"http://www.lislelibrary.org/lld/AK_sep_ronald.jpg\")
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'224087\' date=\'Aug 25 2009, 03:58 PM\'][quote name=\'Mr. Armadillo\' post=\'224079\' date=\'Aug 25 2009, 02:34 PM\']I say this as someone who misses the classic as much as you do, but realizes it's just not feasible to keep that going in 2009.[/quote]
You seriously think it's not feasible, and not just a by-product of having Doofus McGoofus running the place?
[/quote]
I don't know if feasible is the right word. Maybe palatable. I imagine they don't want to be seen as an "old" or "dated" show, what with the electromechanical games and 20-year-old, wholly non-HD worthy sets but are afraid to go all the way into the 21st century and fading into the sea of modernness. So they compromise. Not that it's necessarily bad. DiPirro is the only one who does it consistently well, right now. My problem, as usual with a Christensen-Dukes set, is that terrible color choices were made. It's not pastel-period bad, but still...it could be a LOT better.
And I'm fairly glad with Drew's more casual approach to the show, but I wish he'd take the bones of the show more seriously. I understand that time constraints probably make him rush a bit more than he'd like, but I still think he could do a better job of inserting. I like that an "outsider" has claws into the show, though. It makes the production feel less formulaic to me.
-
[quote name=\'CarShark\' post=\'224101\' date=\'Aug 25 2009, 05:51 PM\']And I'm fairly glad with Drew's more casual approach to the show, but I wish he'd take the bones of the show more seriously. I understand that time constraints probably make him rush a bit more than he'd like,[/quote]
I still don't get where people come up with this. Drew does not rush. He takes as long as he wants to do whatever he wants to do, and if the show runs long because of it, they just have to start editing things. I've heard repeatedly over the last two years that Make Your Move and Ten Chances in particular regularly have the living daylights chopped out of them because Drew refuses to tell anyone that they're taking too long to make a decision.
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'224111\' date=\'Aug 25 2009, 08:44 PM\']I've heard repeatedly over the last two years that Make Your Move and Ten Chances in particular regularly have the living daylights chopped out of them because Drew refuses to tell anyone that they're taking too long to make a decision.[/quote]
And I still don't understand why this is a big deal. Millionaire did this for years and no one complained, and as long as it doesn't affect the outcome of the game, what's the difference?
Tyshaun
-
[quote name=\'tyshaun1\' post=\'224115\' date=\'Aug 25 2009, 09:24 PM\'][quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'224111\' date=\'Aug 25 2009, 08:44 PM\']I've heard repeatedly over the last two years that Make Your Move and Ten Chances in particular regularly have the living daylights chopped out of them because Drew refuses to tell anyone that they're taking too long to make a decision.[/quote]
And I still don't understand why this is a big deal. Millionaire did this for years and no one complained, and as long as it doesn't affect the outcome of the game, what's the difference?
Tyshaun
[/quote]
A lot of PiR purists argue that such editing takes away from that spontaneous quality of the show. Which it sorta does.
-
[quote name=\'DoorNumberFour\' post=\'224118\' date=\'Aug 25 2009, 09:41 PM\']A lot of PiR purists argue that such editing takes away from that spontaneous quality of the show. Which it sorta does.[/quote]
Yeah, I guess we all miss Bob Barker telling contestants, "Hurry up! Quit stalling! You're gonna lose your turn!". Good times.
Tyshaun
-
[quote name=\'tyshaun1\' post=\'224115\' date=\'Aug 25 2009, 09:24 PM\']And I still don't understand why this is a big deal. Millionaire did this for years and no one complained, and as long as it doesn't affect the outcome of the game, what's the difference?[/quote]
I can't put my finger on the exact reason, but I'm not a fan. It goes against the live feel of the show. TPIR is the last bastion of the "old" way of doing a game show. To encourage edits would be losing that. It also shows a lack of control on Drew's part that he can't dictate the pace of his own show. Sure, you want the contestants to be comfortable, but they also shouldn't take 2 minutes to make a simple decision. It's not "unfair" to impose time limits. Granny may be sweet, but she gets roughly the same time as everybody else on Family Feud (and a short strike buzzer from Richard Dawson). Heck, it's a game show. The whole idea is nerve wracking, tension-filled. If the contestants can dictate the show like that, then every game would be Plinko or something.
To compare it to Millionaire - those people were playing for life changing sums of money. TPIR contestants are dwelling over the price of designer perfume and laser tag guns.
-Jason
-
It also shows a lack of control on Drew's part that he can't dictate the pace of his own show.
Can you say "No live broadcasting chops"?
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'224111\' date=\'Aug 25 2009, 08:44 PM\']I still don't get where people come up with this. Drew does not rush. He takes as long as he wants to do whatever he wants to do, and if the show runs long because of it, they just have to start editing things. I've heard repeatedly over the last two years that Make Your Move and Ten Chances in particular regularly have the living daylights chopped out of them because Drew refuses to tell anyone that they're taking too long to make a decision.[/quote]
That part I know about. But when I'm watching the show, it seems to me like he's self-editing his conversations with the contestants and going through the motions in an effort to save time, like Barker did in his later years.
I also don't mind the editing, if done well, because I join Tyshaun in not finding Barker crabbily barking "Hurry UP! This is only an hour show!" to be good television. If it means that longer games like Ten Chances and Temptation actually get to fit in more line-ups and get played more often, then so be it. If the show loses any more time to commercials, as I think it will, judicious edits will be even more welcome.
-
As far as edits go, Price just doesn't "feel" the same. If the edits are barely (if at all) noticeable, then no problem. But I've always cringed at a "choppy" edit. More and more commercial time leaving less and less time for games to be played (or interaction with the contestants) is slowly killing the show. Barker was able to adjust on the fly. (Heck, even Rayburn on Match Game, Dawson on Feud, Ludden on Password Plus, Combs on Feud, Clark on Pyramid, etc. were able to hurry things along when necessary.) However, if Drew cannot work within the confines of an ever-shrinking time budget, then the show is going to feel even less like TPIR and more like a rush job. I've never like the "welcometothepriceisrighthereisthefirstitemupfobids" tactic when Barker did it either. I chalked it up to "that's just the way it is now". Keeping the "live to tape" aspect of the show retains its fun and spontaneity in the same way that live radio is much more fun to listen to than voice-tracking. I got out of radio right before "jock-in-the-box" was employed at our station due to budget restraints.
Secondly, those showcase podiums are ugly and look cheap. I'll withhold further judgement until I can see them in action during the new season. Also, I realize that the turntable seems to appear "smaller than normal" in HD, but that pic makes it appear even smaller. Again, it'll be interesting how the entire production comes off on tv.
Chris
/Having fun with "quotation marks"
-
[quote name=\'gaubster2\' post=\'224134\' date=\'Aug 26 2009, 01:07 AM\']As far as edits go, Price just doesn't "feel" the same. If the edits are barely (if at all) noticeable, then no problem. But I've always cringed at a "choppy" edit. .... Keeping the "live to tape" aspect of the show retains its fun and spontaneity in the same way that live radio is much more fun to listen to than voice-tracking. I got out of radio right before "jock-in-the-box" was employed at our station due to budget restraints.[/quote]
I felt the same way about the later years of "Match Game". The choppy edits really took the fun out of watching, and especially playing along with, the show.
-
You know, speaking of editing, I don't believe Drew's willingness to let contestants take their sweet time is the whole issue.
There's a mentality held by younger & newer television producers that editing is the easy & cheap (relative to how much it used to be) way out. Older producers tend to try to get everything in one take, simply because they were raised at a time when editing was a relatively expensive, and time consuming, thing to do. Nowadays, a lot of shows are shot on digital tape, which is relatively easy to edit - not to mention the fact that you can do some rather professional editing with "consumer" software, which says something for the professional products that are out there.
Editing still isn't cheap, but it's cheaper and far easier than it once was, and as the older folks start to the leave (or get forced out of) the industry, we're going to see more of it.
-
What you said, and CBS seems willing to lavish almost unlimited sums of money on TPIR. $7 million emcee? No problem! Revamp the set? No problem! Designer prizes? No problem! Edit every show? No problem!
In the olden days game shows were done LIVE -- can you imagine that? The post budget was zero. As they ramped up to five shows per day, producers saw no reason to spend money to edit shows they used to be able to do live. That, and producers were loathe to keep the studio audience waiting while the production people did their thing.
At CBS TV City, all shows are recorded directly to disk. There is no tape involved.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'224196\' date=\'Aug 26 2009, 06:17 PM\']What you said, and CBS seems willing to lavish almost unlimited sums of money on TPIR. $7 million emcee? No problem! Revamp the set? No problem! Designer prizes? No problem! Edit every show? No problem!
In the olden days game shows were done LIVE -- can you imagine that? The post budget was zero. As they ramped up to five shows per day, producers saw no reason to spend money to edit shows they used to be able to do live. That, and producers were loathe to keep the studio audience waiting while the production people did their thing.
At CBS TV City, all shows are recorded directly to disk. There is no tape involved.[/quote]
I never followed how much Barker made doing Price. Is Drew making MORE than Bob was?
-
[quote name=\'gaubster2\' post=\'224203\' date=\'Aug 26 2009, 10:43 PM\']Is Drew making MORE than Bob was?[/quote]No. (http://\"http://jobs.aol.com/gallery/tv-salaries?photo=10\")
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'224196\' date=\'Aug 26 2009, 08:17 PM\']At CBS TV City, all shows are recorded directly to disk. There is no tape involved.[/quote]
Since that's the case, then it makes it even easier (and more tempting) to edit the show!
I mean, come on, the EP is allegedly ordering reshoots of small prizes because they have fingerprints on them. It's not like they're opening one of the doors and seeing a Ford Focus with bird crap all over it. What's next - handling prizes in a Class 1 clean room?
Call me crazy, but I recall hearing (on here, no less) about a taping of one particular game show -- I think it was Deal or No Deal -- that took in excess of 5 hours. If that doesn't prove there's an editing mentality amongst those in the industry now, I don't know what does!
And speaking of Drew's salary - anybody noticed he's getting paid as much as Maury Povich?
-
[quote name=\'Mr. Brown\' post=\'224215\' date=\'Aug 27 2009, 12:18 AM\']Call me crazy, but I recall hearing (on here, no less) about a taping of one particular game show -- I think it was Deal or No Deal -- that took in excess of 5 hours.[/quote]
Mr. Klauss to the white courtesy phone? Or was that someone else?
-
[quote name=\'JasonA1\' post=\'224127\' date=\'Aug 25 2009, 11:25 PM\']I can't put my finger on the exact reason, but I'm not a fan. It goes against the live feel of the show.[/quote]
That's the key. I know that Mr. Goodson had a standing rule that the shows should feel live. Now, we all know old man Goodson didn't really know anything about game show production...so his ideas can't be taken as gospel -- right?
[quote name=\'gaubster2\' post=\'224134\' date=\'Aug 26 2009, 01:07 AM\']As far as edits go, Price just doesn't "feel" the same. If the edits are barely (if at all) noticeable, then no problem. But I've always cringed at a "choppy" edit.[/quote]
That's the problem. Producing as many shows as Price does leaves minimal time (and funding) to exhaust excessive time on editing. CBS is insisting that all of Drew's "ummm" and "aaaahhhh" mumblings now be edited out. Drew feels that giving the contestants all the time that they need is the right way to be nice to them, so that they aren't 'disadvantaged' by being rushed. Editing is the way of life now. So much that they've added a second editor to the crew. So much that the Big Wheel skipped half a rotation on one of the shows due to all the choppy editing to save every last second possible. So much that they edited out the contestant guessing the first number in 2 For the Price of 1 and Drew awkwardly asking for the third number. Things like that not only take away from the live feel, but also make someone at home wonder if the show is either (a) cheating or (b) a high school production.
For years and years viewers assumed that the shows were aired live, remember?
You can like or dislike certain aspects of the show that are changing or not changing, but having a spontaneous live show is a key-element to the success of this type of show. You can't compare sitting in a chair for 20 minutes thinking of an answer to a trivia question to being selected unknowingly from a studio audience, thrown on stage and in front of a camera, and winning a car in less than 10 minutes. Two completely different animals.
-
[quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'224223\' date=\'Aug 27 2009, 01:16 AM\'][quote name=\'Mr. Brown\' post=\'224215\' date=\'Aug 27 2009, 12:18 AM\']Call me crazy, but I recall hearing (on here, no less) about a taping of one particular game show -- I think it was Deal or No Deal -- that took in excess of 5 hours.[/quote]
Mr. Klauss to the white courtesy phone? Or was that someone else?
[/quote]
My episode of Weakest Link took 5 hours.
-
[quote name=\'Mr. Brown\' post=\'224215\' date=\'Aug 27 2009, 12:18 AM\']Call me crazy, but I recall hearing (on here, no less) about a taping of one particular game show -- I think it was Deal or No Deal -- that took in excess of 5 hours.[/quote]
I went to a taping of DoND in 2006 and walked out at the start of the 6th hour. The part where the models walk down the stairs with the briefcases was re-shot at least 7 or 8 times.
-
[quote name=\'jmangin\' post=\'224245\' date=\'Aug 27 2009, 08:49 AM\']I went to a taping of DoND in 2006 and walked out at the start of the 6th hour. The part where the models walk down the stairs with the briefcases was re-shot at least 7 or 8 times.[/quote]
"Dammit, #12 missed a step!! Everyone back up to the top! Take 2"
"Crap! #9, you're holding your case upside down, we already *have* a #6! Take 3"
-
[quote name=\'aaron sica\' post=\'224247\' date=\'Aug 27 2009, 08:54 AM\']"Dammit, #12 missed a step!! Everyone back up to the top! Take 2"
"Crap! #9, you're holding your case upside down, we already *have* a #6! Take 3"[/quote]
You joke, but that's pretty much what was heard over the P.A. I do recall one woman who got her heel caught in the hole in the floor in which the stem of the "briefcase holder" is placed, and she almost took a tumble to the bottom.
-
[quote name=\'ClockGameJohn\' post=\'224225\' date=\'Aug 27 2009, 12:57 AM\'][quote name=\'JasonA1\' post=\'224127\' date=\'Aug 25 2009, 11:25 PM\']I can't put my finger on the exact reason, but I'm not a fan. It goes against the live feel of the show.[/quote]
That's the key. I know that Mr. Goodson had a standing rule that the shows should feel live. Now, we all know old man Goodson didn't really know anything about game show production...so his ideas can't be taken as gospel -- right?
[/quote]
Correct, but he obviously didn't know as much about 21st century game show production as he did about 20th century game show production.
I absolutely, 102% agree with everything you said below that, though.
-
[quote name=\'jmangin\' post=\'224245\' date=\'Aug 27 2009, 08:49 AM\'][quote name=\'Mr. Brown\' post=\'224215\' date=\'Aug 27 2009, 12:18 AM\']Call me crazy, but I recall hearing (on here, no less) about a taping of one particular game show -- I think it was Deal or No Deal -- that took in excess of 5 hours.[/quote]
I went to a taping of DoND in 2006 and walked out at the start of the 6th hour. The part where the models walk down the stairs with the briefcases was re-shot at least 7 or 8 times.
[/quote]
That's very interesting. Maybe they were still working all the kinks out of the production...I went to a taping over here in Waterford a couple of weeks ago, and it took 5 hours for 5 half-hour episodes, the whole session going by rather smoothly. It was a great time.
-
[quote name=\'DoorNumberFour\' post=\'224259\' date=\'Aug 27 2009, 12:04 PM\']That's very interesting. Maybe they were still working all the kinks out of the production...I went to a taping over here in Waterford a couple of weeks ago, and it took 5 hours for 5 half-hour episodes, the whole session going by rather smoothly. It was a great time.[/quote]
Not bad. That sounds about on par with the amount of time Wheel spends on a taping.
-
[quote name=\'Mr. Armadillo\' post=\'224258\' date=\'Aug 27 2009, 12:03 PM\'][quote name=\'ClockGameJohn\' post=\'224225\' date=\'Aug 27 2009, 12:57 AM\'][quote name=\'JasonA1\' post=\'224127\' date=\'Aug 25 2009, 11:25 PM\']I can't put my finger on the exact reason, but I'm not a fan. It goes against the live feel of the show.[/quote]That's the key. I know that Mr. Goodson had a standing rule that the shows should feel live. Now, we all know old man Goodson didn't really know anything about game show production...so his ideas can't be taken as gospel -- right?[/quote]Correct, but he obviously didn't know as much about 21st century game show production as he did about 20th century game show production.[/quote]
One could also argue that 21st-century producers just don't know as much about the genre in general as Goodson did.
-
[quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'224223\' date=\'Aug 27 2009, 01:16 AM\'][quote name=\'Mr. Brown\' post=\'224215\' date=\'Aug 27 2009, 12:18 AM\']Call me crazy, but I recall hearing (on here, no less) about a taping of one particular game show -- I think it was Deal or No Deal -- that took in excess of 5 hours.[/quote]
Mr. Klauss to the white courtesy phone? Or was that someone else?
[/quote]
Sorry I'm late to the party.
It took 8+ hours to tape what ended up being just over an hour of TV time including commercials. The taping started 2-3 hours late because it was the first taping of season 2 and the first taping at that studio. If the place was air conditioned and the powers that be gave those of us who spent the day there something besides a Deal hat for our suffering, the experience might have been just the least bit enjoyable.
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'224297\' date=\'Aug 27 2009, 10:10 PM\']One could also argue that 21st-century producers just don't know as much about the genre in general as Goodson did.[/quote]
Well, few do. That doesn't necessarily mean that they're wrong, though, as you seem to be suggesting. I know that doing a retake for fingerprints may be silly to an old hand, but in this era of super-high-def 1,000,000p televisions, I don't think it's unreasonable to wonder how something like that reflects on a production. Same thing for the aged game sets people cling to in the name of tradition. Again, I'm not completely excusing the choppier edits or the disembodied voice overs. I'm just saying that with the need to keep a rigid format within time constraints, I'm willing to cut them some slack.
As for the lack of experience, it's not like there was much chance to learn about game shows during the 90s, with the genre being pretty dead. Where else is someone supposed to get game show production experience now? They've fallen out of favor in network nighttime. Lack of and/or bad clearances make syndication seem increasingly unlikely. (Gotta have room for the Oprah spin-offs!) Cable may be fertile ground, as you can mold a game show out of other types of shows, but the smaller budgets may not impress the casual viewer, especially after the big money shows of a decade ago. Finally, I wonder if CBS is the only network serious about daytime programming anymore, with constant rumors of NBC giving up on Days and ABC wanting to cut a soap as well. I just don't know how you're supposed to build a stellar reputation in this environment.
-
^^
This seems, to me, to be as good an explanation as any for why today's game shows just don't grab my attention and affection like the pre-'90s shows did/do.
-
Let the...speculation(?) begin, according to the timeline on G-R:
"On Monday, the opening spiel is changed significantly for the first time since the late '70s; its new text is not yet known. "
and the new LCD contestant's row supposedly acts like the old one visually.
-
[quote name=\'Lirodon\' post=\'224632\' date=\'Aug 31 2009, 11:12 PM\']Let the...speculation(?) begin, according to the timeline on G-R:
"On Monday, the opening spiel is changed significantly for the first time since the late '70s; its new text is not yet known. "[/quote]
We've known for a month or two that it would be changing. I only added it to the timeline last week because CBS didn't post a schedule until next week.
-
As long as the change in the opening spiel gets rid of references to the "Bob Barker studio", I'm okay with it.
-
[quote name=\'Fedya\' post=\'224669\' date=\'Sep 1 2009, 02:41 PM\']As long as the change in the opening spiel gets rid of references to the "Bob Barker studio", I'm okay with it.[/quote]
Bob stays, other stuff goes.
-
[quote name=\'ClockGameJohn\' post=\'224695\' date=\'Sep 1 2009, 08:22 PM\']Bob stays, other stuff goes.[/quote]
Which also pretty much describes the situation with the models in the 1990s.
-
When I saw Price last month, there were a number of re-takes done during the commercials. Drew spoke the wrong numbers at the end of a game, Drew forgot to mention a bonus during a game, and there were definitely reshoots of prizes both after the games were completed. Not to mention a few pick-ups from rich at the end of the show. the taping took a lot longer than it did when I went ten years back. Barker had us in and out in an hour--tops. Every stop down lasted as long at the televised commercials. Aside from the line, the longest part of the whole process is when they drew for the $100.00. Editing is totally a way of life at the BBS and just as it has been said before, the final product just doesn't feel the same.
-
Drew spoke the wrong numbers at the end of a game, Drew forgot to mention a bonus during a game
For $7 million per year and after 2+ years, you'd think Doofus McGoofus would do better than this now.
The last time I was in the studio (and the last time I saw the show), Doofus took the contestant to the downstage side of the Take Two board instead of the upstage side like he's supposed to. It didn't require an edit but it sure as Hades had Bart squealing like a greased little piggy.
How long did the taping you saw take in total?
-
Where else is someone supposed to get game show production experience now?
I would remind you that they had a seasoned producer who learned his craft from no less than Mark Goodson, but they threw him out to "take the show in a new direction". After Roger there's Kathy Greco and Stan Blits who could have stepped in. Heck, they could even bring in Andy Felsher if they had to.
As long as the change in the opening spiel gets rid of references to the "Bob Barker studio", I'm okay with it.
"From the Doofus McGoofus studio in Hollywood ..."
I'm sorry, Droofus McGoofus.
-
[quote name=\'ClockGameJohn\' post=\'224695\' date=\'Sep 1 2009, 07:22 PM\'][quote name=\'Fedya\' post=\'224669\' date=\'Sep 1 2009, 02:41 PM\']As long as the change in the opening spiel gets rid of references to the "Bob Barker studio", I'm okay with it.[/quote]
Bob stays, other stuff goes.
[/quote]
Yeah, an opening spiel that takes all of ten seconds in the first place, and you chop that down and leave the only part that makes Bob watch the show in the first place? What's so wrong with keeping it the way it is, or even reverting back to the days before the studio was named for Bob?
Keeping Bob in the intro isn't gonna make people watch the show any more or less. Technically, all of the lines in the intro are common knowledge now, but Bob''s line is expendable.
But hey, it's not my show, it's too small a change to cry over, and I'll still watch the show anyway. Back to online multiplayer Tetris.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'224761\' date=\'Sep 2 2009, 08:29 PM\']"From the Doofus McGoofus studio in Hollywood ..."
I'm sorry, Droofus McGoofus.[/quote]
Can't you make your point without cheap insults?
Good God, that's very low blow.
I wasn't going to say anything, but you took way it too far by editing that in.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'224759\' date=\'Sep 2 2009, 09:20 PM\']The last time I was in the studio (and the last time I saw the show), Doofus took the contestant to the downstage side of the Take Two board instead of the upstage side like he's supposed to.[/quote]
Just curious -- when was this? I ask mostly because Take Two hasn't been played since December.
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'224766\' date=\'Sep 2 2009, 07:25 PM\'][quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'224759\' date=\'Sep 2 2009, 09:20 PM\']The last time I was in the studio (and the last time I saw the show), Doofus took the contestant to the downstage side of the Take Two board instead of the upstage side like he's supposed to.[/quote]
Just curious -- when was this? I ask mostly because Take Two hasn't been played since December.[/quote]
Early June 2008.
Well, they didn't hire O'Hurley, because he relied on the "cue cards" too much. He seems to be hosting Feud quite well. Hmmmmm
Feud doesn't have 2,547 pricing games, and O'Hurley was considered "too regal".
-
[quote name=\'J.R.\' post=\'224764\' date=\'Sep 2 2009, 10:10 PM\']Can't you make your point without cheap insults?
Good God, that's very low blow.[/quote]
To call the guy Doofus? I don't actively champion for either guy, but people throw in all the remarks they want about Bob Barker when his name comes up, and that doesn't seem to ruffle any feathers on this particular board. Same goes for Richard Dawson, whose talent as Feud host and game show panelist often takes a backseat in our discussion to his tyrannical tendencies during his hosting heyday.
-Jason
-
[quote name=\'JasonA1\' post=\'224789\' date=\'Sep 2 2009, 09:29 PM\']but people throw in all the remarks they want about Bob Barker when his name comes up, and that doesn't seem to ruffle any feathers on this particular board.[/quote] There is a difference between "I think that Bob Barker was a lousy host in his last five years", and "Droofus couldn't host his way out of a wet bag," to wit, the use of insult to advance the point. I think that it's a weak insult that only trades on Drew's name being similar in sound to "Doofus," so it doesn't really singe my cackles.
Same goes for Richard Dawson, whose talent as Feud host and game show panelist often takes a backseat in our discussion to his tyrannical tendencies during his hosting heyday.
If I want to say "I thought Richard Dawson was an excellent host of Family Feud," I could do that. But anyone else could say "That's true, but he was a real asshat off-stage." I don't see what this point proves.
-
[quote name=\'rollercoaster87\' post=\'224763\' date=\'Sep 2 2009, 09:07 PM\']Yeah, an opening spiel that takes all of ten seconds in the first place, and you chop that down and leave the only part that makes Bob watch the show in the first place? What's so wrong with keeping it the way it is, or even reverting back to the days before the studio was named for Bob?[/quote]
Because, whether you like it or not, the studio's still named after Bob?
Keeping Bob in the intro isn't gonna make people watch the show any more or less. Technically, all of the lines in the intro are common knowledge now, but Bob''s line is expendable.
Why, exactly, is that line more expendable than any other? Do people still need to be reminded that it's now the "60-minute Price is Right!"?
But hey, it's not my show, it's too small a change to cry over, and I'll still watch the show anyway. Back to online multiplayer Tetris.
....multiplayer...Tetris? Just when I thought I'd heard it all...
-
[quote name=\'Mr. Armadillo\' post=\'224802\' date=\'Sep 3 2009, 06:16 AM\']....multiplayer...Tetris? Just when I thought I'd heard it all...[/quote]
Most multiplayer versions of Tetris I've played have been exceptional. (Do people still play TetriNet? I tend to stick with my DS these days.)
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'224807\' date=\'Sep 3 2009, 11:43 AM\'][quote name=\'Mr. Armadillo\' post=\'224802\' date=\'Sep 3 2009, 06:16 AM\']....multiplayer...Tetris? Just when I thought I'd heard it all...[/quote]
Most multiplayer versions of Tetris I've played have been exceptional.
[/quote]
Tetris Party for the Wii (available from the WiiWare menu) is absolutely fantastic. Many new one player options, as well!
http://www.tetrisparty.com/us_en/ (http://\"http://www.tetrisparty.com/us_en/\")
-
[quote name=\'JasonA1\' post=\'224789\' date=\'Sep 3 2009, 12:29 AM\'][quote name=\'J.R.\' post=\'224764\' date=\'Sep 2 2009, 10:10 PM\']Can't you make your point without cheap insults?
Good God, that's very low blow.[/quote]
To call the guy Doofus? I don't actively champion for either guy, but people throw in all the remarks they want about Bob Barker when his name comes up, and that doesn't seem to ruffle any feathers on this particular board. Same goes for Richard Dawson, whose talent as Feud host and game show panelist often takes a backseat in our discussion to his tyrannical tendencies during his hosting heyday.
[/quote]
The defining difference between Drew and Barker (in my view), and thus where I stand, is that, whatever you think of their hosting abilities, Barker's antics backstage, putting it mildly, in particular those that went to court, have directly hurt and caused anguish to others through his egotism and other unenviable traits. Chris can pour insults upon Drew, call him every name in the book, and give a list of hosting grievances the length of some lucky guy's schlong he wants, and I will still hold Drew in higher regard than Barker, because no matter how much you think Drew's hosting sucks, whatever antics you think he's done so far have not gone out and HURT other people. I feel no sympathy for Barker whatsoever because of such...
I ultimately judge a person on their character, not their time-perfected ability to go through a show without an edit. In short, I'm with Raygor...
/Now back to your Tetris discussion. I prefer the original, that is all...
-
[quote name=\'wheelloon\' post=\'224811\' date=\'Sep 3 2009, 01:03 PM\']I ultimately judge a person on their character, not their time-perfected ability to go through a show without an edit.[/quote]
That is true. However, if a show goes way over budget (supposedly) due to a lot of post production editing, someone has to be to blame for it happening in the first place. Plus, like everyone else has said, it just doesn't feel like the same show anymore.
Chris' point stands.
-
[quote name=\'NicholasM79\' post=\'224812\' date=\'Sep 3 2009, 10:12 AM\']Plus, like everyone else has said, it just doesn't feel like the same show anymore.[/quote]
Other'n the guy who isn't Barker at the helm, I say to you in all seriousness (and I freely admit that I haven't watched very much lately) that I haven't noticed a difference.
And I seriously SERIOUSLY question whether half of you would either if you didn't know what was going on behind the scenes.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'224814\' date=\'Sep 3 2009, 01:22 PM\']And I seriously SERIOUSLY question whether half of you would either if you didn't know what was going on behind the scenes.[/quote]
It isn't hard to tell something is going on when Drew and contestant walks over to the pricing game and throws to the prize plug. Then when it goes back, you hear obvious canned applause and Drew is already explaining the rules of the game with something to the effect of "Now what you're gonna do in this game is..." I've noticed that on multiple shows (albeit when I have TRIED to watch the show,) and I don't even watch regularly.
-
[quote name=\'NicholasM79\' post=\'224816\' date=\'Sep 3 2009, 11:39 AM\']Then when it goes back, you hear obvious canned applause[/quote]
Herein invalidates your argument. The average viewer has no idea that applause is canned.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'224817\' date=\'Sep 3 2009, 02:43 PM\']Herein invalidates your argument. The average viewer has no idea that applause is canned.[/quote]
Fair enough. It's still an edit. The whole point is: the show is much better off being done without stopping (if possible). That's not what's going on now. Surely that point can't be invalidated.
-
if a show goes way over budget (supposedly) due to a lot of post production editing, someone has to be to blame for it happening in the first place.
You don't know that they haven't budgeted for additional edit time, etc. It just makes the show more expensive to do.
I will still hold Drew in higher regard than Barker, because no matter how much you think Drew's hosting sucks, whatever antics you think he's done so far have not gone out and HURT other people. I feel no sympathy for Barker whatsoever because of such...
The same could be said for any emcee who isn't Bob Barker. Having seen both men do the same show, I'd take Todd Newton over Drew any day. Todd at least has discernable emcee skills.
-
[quote name=\'NicholasM79\' post=\'224818\' date=\'Sep 3 2009, 12:10 PM\']The whole point is: the show is much better off being done without stopping (if possible). That's not what's going on now. Surely that point can't be invalidated.[/quote]
And I'd be much better off if Heather Davis were sitting on my lap feeding me those little hot dogs right now. Both are not realities in 2009.
You're also changing the argument. The only point I was responding to was:
[quote name=\'NicholasM79\' post=\'224812\' date=\'Sep 3 2009, 10:12 AM\']Plus, like everyone else has said, it just doesn't feel like the same show anymore.[/quote]
...and I'm suggesting that to the average viewer at home, the one who neither knows nor cares how the show is actually produced, that besides the new guy in the glasses hosting it, that's not the case.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'224814\' date=\'Sep 3 2009, 01:22 PM\'][quote name=\'NicholasM79\' post=\'224812\' date=\'Sep 3 2009, 10:12 AM\']Plus, like everyone else has said, it just doesn't feel like the same show anymore.[/quote]
Other'n the guy who isn't Barker at the helm, I say to you in all seriousness (and I freely admit that I haven't watched very much lately) that I haven't noticed a difference.
[/quote]
Agreed and seconded 100%. I see nothing more wrong with the show now that I didn't see before, and I enjoy it just as much so. It is, as someone else mentioned, still more enjoyable now than when having to watch Barker go "HURRY UP OR YOU'LL LOSE YOUR TURN," or "LET'S GO ALREADY," or "Mary... MARY... MARYYYYYYYY, I NEED YOUR BID" every other day...
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'224819\' date=\'Sep 3 2009, 03:13 PM\']I will still hold Drew in higher regard than Barker, because no matter how much you think Drew's hosting sucks, whatever antics you think he's done so far have not gone out and HURT other people. I feel no sympathy for Barker whatsoever because of such...
The same could be said for any emcee who isn't Bob Barker. Having seen both men do the same show, I'd take Todd Newton over Drew any day. Todd at least has discernable emcee skills.
[/quote]
While our opinions whether Newton has discernable emcee skills (or at least, any significantly more than Drew currently shows) may differ, I do agree with your original and underlying point... :)
-
Honestly, I don't care if people like Drew's hosting or not, I just think the name calling is totally unnecessary.
Sorry if I seem like a bit of a Drew apologist at times, I just don't see what has this guy done to draw such harsh criticism. (That and I just can't bash someone who seems like such a nice person off-camera)
-
Sorry if I seem like a bit of a Drew apologist at times, I just don't see what has this guy done to draw such harsh criticism. (That and I just can't bash someone who seems like such a nice person off-camera)
In my opinion, he does a thoroughly mediocre job of emceeing the show. His performances are inconsistent, he can't conceal his moods from the audience, he doesn't "get it" when it comes to building suspense, he doesn't foment excitement, it appears that he doesn't have all the games down, etc. It's not my money, but IMO he's way overpaid despite these shortcomings. Todd, since a certain Fremantle person started working with him, has improved greatly and has all of these things down slick.
Neither you nor I nor almost anyone on this board knows what kind of guy he is off camera. I'll leave it to others to draw inferences from what they may read on other boards.
Again, all of this is just my personal opinion.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'224759\' date=\'Sep 2 2009, 09:20 PM\']
Drew spoke the wrong numbers at the end of a game, Drew forgot to mention a bonus during a game
For $7 million per year and after 2+ years, you'd think Doofus McGoofus would do better than this now.
The last time I was in the studio (and the last time I saw the show), Doofus took the contestant to the downstage side of the Take Two board instead of the upstage side like he's supposed to. It didn't require an edit but it sure as Hades had Bart squealing like a greased little piggy.
How long did the taping you saw take in total?
[/quote]
The first show had a major stop down because the showcase podiums refused to work. that was probably better than two hours. The second show we went to the next day started 45 mintues late, and we were probably in the studio for another hour and a half.
-
Since the displays on the Showcase podiums are now video screens, there always is the very slim possibility a Showcase of at least $100,000 could be offered on the 38th season premiere- or more likely, somebody who makes an insane bid of $1 Million or something close to that.
-
The first show had a major stop down because the showcase podiums refused to work. that was probably better than two hours.
Ouch! That's shocking, considering the reputation CBS Electronics has for doing solid work.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'224829\' date=\'Sep 3 2009, 02:38 PM\']Neither you nor I nor almost anyone on this board knows what kind of guy he is off camera.[/quote]
He looks pretty damned cheerful at Sounders F.C. matches. :)
/of course, a stadium of 32,000 screaming fans will do that to even a minority owner
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'224820\' date=\'Sep 3 2009, 02:20 PM\']And I'd be much better off if Heather Davis were sitting on my lap feeding me those little hot dogs right now. Both are not realities in 2009.[/quote]
Your reply is pointless without at least one pic of Heather Davis.
...and I'm suggesting that to the average viewer at home, the one who neither knows nor cares how the show is actually produced, that besides the new guy in the glasses hosting it, that's not the case.
Same argument, different wrapping: Nicholas, with the three of us either working or have worked in television - we're much more critical than the viewer at home. Not to say that some won't catch it; some might. However, I'm with Mr. Lemon when he says that the majority won't catch it.
-
...and I'm suggesting that to the average viewer at home, the one who neither knows nor cares how the show is actually produced, that besides the new guy in the glasses hosting it, that's not the case.
But many of us on this board are armchair executive producers so it's going to come up. Not only that, but we know how better to produce the show than the actual producers.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'224829\' date=\'Sep 3 2009, 05:38 PM\']In my opinion, he does a thoroughly mediocre job of emceeing the show. His performances are inconsistent, he can't conceal his moods from the audience, he doesn't "get it" when it comes to building suspense, he doesn't foment excitement, it appears that he doesn't have all the games down, etc. It's not my money, but IMO he's way overpaid despite these shortcomings. Todd, since a certain Fremantle person started working with him, has improved greatly and has all of these things down slick.
Neither you nor I nor almost anyone on this board knows what kind of guy he is off camera. I'll leave it to others to draw inferences from what they may read on other boards.
Again, all of this is just my personal opinion.[/quote]
While I can agree with most of the points you make, Chris, I can throw in some positives that I think that Drew has brought to the table. He doesn't take the show as seriously as Bob did..... IMO, Price is a show that does not require cerebral thinking, but I believe this is the biggest reason that hardcore fans dislike Drew, as he doesn't treat the show likes its an event. Drew gives the show a warmer, "family" vibe, something which has been sorely lacking for the past several years. I still believe that contestants being able to take their time instead of feeling rushed is a good thing, since it gives more spotlight to the contestant, not the host. Now I can't say that Drew is a complete pleasure to work with behind the scenes, although the worst I've heard is he's addicted to Second Life, but overall I'd say his attitude seems much more pleasant to be around that Barker's. Just my two pennies....
Tyshaun
-
[quote name=\'tyshaun1\' post=\'224863\' date=\'Sep 3 2009, 07:38 PM\']as he doesn't treat the show likes its an event.[/quote]
Sometimes, you just have to sit back and let the car be the star.
-
Drew, to me, just needs to realize that they skipped over a whole crop of good, seasoned prospects on the Price is Right Live! farm team to hire him- people who could come in knowing game rules and show structure (although that is a little unfair to say, seeing as how they only host the same 5 games every show, IIRC).
Drew seems to have a high level of respect for the show, but that's not enough to keep him as host if production ever comes to the conclusion that he's an overpaid, crappy host (not my opinion). He should be showing his respect for the show by becoming the best host he can. If Drew can become more consistent as far as on-air attitude, and a tad more formal when it comes to show description, he'll be so much better.
I tried and keep in mind that Barker started with less, but that's my only excuse, and even that one has no backing now.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'224859\' date=\'Sep 3 2009, 10:24 PM\']
...and I'm suggesting that to the average viewer at home, the one who neither knows nor cares how the show is actually produced, that besides the new guy in the glasses hosting it, that's not the case.
But many of us on this board are armchair executive producers so it's going to come up. Not only that, but we know how better to produce the show than the actual producers.
[/quote]
If the show felt a certain way when bob was at the helm, the "feeling" generated was probably from a combination of factors. The fact that it went straight through with nearly no editing was just a part of the whole. Today when people say its 'just not the same' I would think this too is a result of the same combination (Guaranteed to make you say Doofus.) Wheather the average audience member can pinpoint the editing or not, I don't believe this departure from the way it was done for thirty some odd years is helping the program.
And if you don't have anything nice to say, come sit next to me.
-
Happy 37th birthday to The (New) Price Is Right!!!!
Bob has his style. Drew has his.
Had we all been around during the mid-1960s, we possibly would be picking apart Steve Allen's performance as Garry Moore's replacement on IGAS.
-
[quote name=\'Don Howard\' post=\'224913\' date=\'Sep 4 2009, 10:23 AM\']Had we all been around during the mid-1960s, we possibly would be picking apart Steve Allen's performance as Garry Moore's replacement on IGAS.[/quote]
We do that now. :)
-
[quote name=\'Don Howard\' post=\'224913\' date=\'Sep 4 2009, 10:23 AM\']Had we all been around during the mid-1960s, we possibly would be picking apart Steve Allen's performance as Garry Moore's replacement on IGAS.[/quote]
More directly to the point, a lot of people in 1972 said Bob Barker couldn't measure up to Bill Cullen, who was still a popular host at the time and whose own version had only been off the air a scant seven years.
-
I'd be interested in reading any articles concerning Bob Barker being compared to Bill Cullen...
As much as Bob insisted that this was the "same game" on the very first show, I think it's plain to see that after 8 years off the air, it was SIMILAR at best, but not at all the EXACT SAME show. The original TPIR was NOT audience participation, it was just straightforward bidding. There were some "side games" played on Cullen's version that more often than not had NOTHING to do with pricing. (One which comes to mind was that the winner got to choose a bonus prize amongst a list of prizes that were written in French. If the bidder knows a lot of French, he/she could've gotten a decent bonus.)
-
[quote name=\'whewfan\' post=\'224939\' date=\'Sep 4 2009, 02:00 PM\']I'd be interested in reading any articles concerning Bob Barker being compared to Bill Cullen...
As much as Bob insisted that this was the "same game" on the very first show, I think it's plain to see that after 8 years off the air, it was SIMILAR at best, but not at all the EXACT SAME show. The original TPIR was NOT audience participation, it was just straightforward bidding. There were some "side games" played on Cullen's version that more often than not had NOTHING to do with pricing. (One which comes to mind was that the winner got to choose a bonus prize amongst a list of prizes that were written in French. If the bidder knows a lot of French, he/she could've gotten a decent bonus.)[/quote]
That's why they called it "The New Price is Right", but then it became so popular that they re-christened it.
I seriously think one day they should do a tribute to the Cullen version...
-
a lot of people in 1972 said Bob Barker couldn't measure up to Bill Cullen
I've never heard of anyone having doubts about Barker measuring up to Cullen, not even among people who worked on the show with Bill in New York. Bud Grant certainly didn't have doubts, Mark Goodson apparently didn't, and Bill himself knew he couldn't do the new format for obvious reasons. Bill's description of Barker on TPIR was "Mr Smooth".
-
[quote name=\'chris319, a moderator\'][quote name=\'Matt Ottinger, the other moderator\']a lot of people in 1972 said Bob Barker couldn't measure up to Bill Cullen[/quote]
I've never heard of anyone having doubts about Barker measuring up to Cullen, not even among people who worked on the show with Bill in New York. Bud Grant certainly didn't have doubts, Mark Goodson apparently didn't, and Bill himself knew he couldn't do the new format for obvious reasons. Bill's description of Barker on TPIR was "Mr Smooth".
[/quote]
Awwww, snap, yo! Mod v. Mod!
-
I also think it would be cool if a contestant's DSW difference is in a background with fireworks. Also, I would like to see the word OVER amongst a red background when a contestant overbids in the Showcase.
I'm also thinking there will be different ways in how the Showcase bids pop up on the podiums (like the scores on Wheel of Fortune).
-
[quote name=\'wheelloon\' post=\'224811\' date=\'Sep 3 2009, 01:03 PM\']...and I will still hold Drew in higher regard than Barker, because no matter how much you think Drew's hosting sucks, whatever antics you think he's done so far have not gone out and HURT other people.[/quote]
Roger Dobkowitz might disagree with that assessment...
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'224980\' date=\'Sep 4 2009, 10:00 PM\']\Roger Dobkowitz might disagree with that assessment...[/quote]Did Drew, himself, as one man personally fire Roger? Or did he just not "go to bat" for him?
-
[quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'224982\' date=\'Sep 4 2009, 07:02 PM\'][quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'224980\' date=\'Sep 4 2009, 10:00 PM\']\Roger Dobkowitz might disagree with that assessment...[/quote]Did Drew, himself, as one man personally fire Roger? Or did he just not "go to bat" for him?
[/quote]
What? Drew had nothing to do with Roger being fired.
-
[quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'224982\' date=\'Sep 4 2009, 10:02 PM\'][quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'224980\' date=\'Sep 4 2009, 10:00 PM\']\Roger Dobkowitz might disagree with that assessment...[/quote]Did Drew, himself, as one man personally fire Roger? Or did he just not "go to bat" for him?[/quote]
The actual act of firing Roger was performed by someone in Fremantle's Human Resources department. Someone in a similar capacity also got rid of Janice Pennington, Kathleen Bradley, Paul Alter, and Nikki Ziering. This doesn't mean that whoever was hosting the show at the time didn't have anything to do with the dismissals.
-
[quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'224985\' date=\'Sep 4 2009, 10:17 PM\'][quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'224982\' date=\'Sep 4 2009, 07:02 PM\'][quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'224980\' date=\'Sep 4 2009, 10:00 PM\']\Roger Dobkowitz might disagree with that assessment...[/quote]Did Drew, himself, as one man personally fire Roger? Or did he just not "go to bat" for him?[/quote]What? Drew had nothing to do with Roger being fired.[/quote]
Perhaps not in the little pocket reality you inhabit, but in the main universe of this plotline, yes, he did.
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'224987\' date=\'Sep 4 2009, 10:25 PM\']This doesn't mean that whoever was hosting the show at the time didn't have anything to do with the dismissals.[/quote]So are you saying that Drew, himself, as one man requested, urged, demanded, whatever that Dobkowitz be fired?
-
[quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'224989\' date=\'Sep 4 2009, 10:28 PM\'][quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'224987\' date=\'Sep 4 2009, 10:25 PM\']This doesn't mean that whoever was hosting the show at the time didn't have anything to do with the dismissals.[/quote]So are you saying that Drew, himself, as one man requested, urged, demanded, whatever that Dobkowitz be fired?[/quote]
You read between the lines very well, grasshopper.
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'224991\' date=\'Sep 4 2009, 10:34 PM\']You read between the lines very well, grasshopper.[/quote]I'm just trying to get you to come out and make an accusation forthright for a change.
-
[quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'224992\' date=\'Sep 4 2009, 10:37 PM\'][quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'224991\' date=\'Sep 4 2009, 10:34 PM\']You read between the lines very well, grasshopper.[/quote]I'm just trying to get you to come out and make an accusation forthright for a change.[/quote]
So basically, you knew full well what I was saying and were just being an ass.
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'224993\' date=\'Sep 4 2009, 10:41 PM\']So basically, you knew full well what I was saying and were just being an ass.[/quote]Negative, Ghost Rider. I just want you to come out and say it so that if/when it's proven as hearsay, it can be traced back to a direct quote of yours and not be able to hide behind a shield of "well, I didn't say that."
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'224993\' date=\'Sep 4 2009, 10:41 PM\']You made the accusation.[/quote]Yeah, no. But nice try.
-
[quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'224994\' date=\'Sep 4 2009, 10:42 PM\'][quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'224993\' date=\'Sep 4 2009, 10:41 PM\']So basically, you knew full well what I was saying and were just being an ass.[/quote]Negative, Ghost Rider. I just want you to come out and say it so that if/when it's proven as hearsay, it can be traced back to a direct quote of yours and not be able to hide behind a shield of "well, I didn't say that."[/quote]
Dude, I've implied tons of times that Drew fired Roger. What the hell makes you think I'd want to back away from that statement?
EDIT: And y'know, the more I think about it, the more bothered I become by the fact that you appear to have designated yourself as my personal truth squad simply because I wouldn't phrase things the way you wanted me to. It gives the impression that you've got some kind of obsession with me...and dude, that's creepy.
-
To be fair Steve you do speak in a way that is beating around the bush. It's very similar to an attention grabbing measure used by those who know nothing.
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'224996\' date=\'Sep 4 2009, 10:44 PM\']You've got some kind of obsession with me...and dude, that's creepy.[/quote]If you're really going to say things like that, you need to grow up and get over yourself. That's a really, really stupid and immature thing to say and you know it. And if you don't, then that's a problem.
-
Break it up, fellas.
-
I haven't really said too much on the subject of Roger's dismissal (or anything else for that matter...), and I don't want to get too deep in it (because personally I think it's just a stupid rumor), but I will say this. I have yet to read one piece of critical evidence (hell, ANY evidence) that supports the notion that Drew played a part or was even the driving force behind the firing.
The only thing that could possibly SUGGEST that he MAY have been involved in either scenario is that since coming on board, Drew has had a hand in some (emphasis: SOME) of the creative control behind the scenes, which is evident in the much-improved Showcase skits. Yes, improved. I'll take "Fried Chicken" over "This showcase contains prizes revealed as we investigate the word 'blow'" any day because it least it shows they actually give a damn about making the Showcases interesting again. But I digress...
I just find it hard to believe that after only two years on the job, Drew has acquired as much power of the show as Barker did. Not sure of the exact year, but I know it took Barker at least a decade and some change to gain Executive Producer status. Folks are giving too much credit to Mr. Carey IMO (in this case at least).
/I love (parenthesis)
-
[quote name=\'MTCesquire\' post=\'225061\' date=\'Sep 5 2009, 06:54 PM\']I'll take "Fried Chicken" over "This showcase contains prizes revealed as we investigate the word 'blow'" any day because it least it shows they actually give a damn about making the Showcases interesting again.[/quote]
Ah yes, the infamous "coke and hookers" showcase. Didn't some tool bid $42,069?
I agree on the showcase creativity though, and got tired of the variations on the same word. It was boring and uninspired. I do like that Drew is trying to have more fun with the show, and although I enjoy a lot of the older Barker eps., I'm willing to accept a new era of the show becoming fun (i.e. the April Fools ep.). As for Barker becoming EP, I believe it was in the late-80s (c. 1988)...wasn't it due to the death of EP Frank Wayne, or do I have my office politics mixed up?
/And yes, I know that 420 refers to another drug
-
[quote name=\'MTCesquire\' post=\'225061\' date=\'Sep 5 2009, 03:54 PM\']I have yet to read one piece of critical evidence (hell, ANY evidence) that supports the notion that Drew played a part or was even the driving force behind the firing.[/quote]
He didn't/wasn't. (See Curling lawsuit.)
[quote name=\'MTCesquire\' post=\'225061\' date=\'Sep 5 2009, 03:54 PM\']...I just find it hard to believe that after only two years on the job, Drew has acquired as much power of the show as Barker did. Folks are giving too much credit to Mr. Carey IMO (in this case at least).[/quote]
You're right, Drew has not aquired the power that Barker had, nor does he want it. His focus has been the bigger deal with CBS to develop his own shows. Hosting Price is just a part of a much bigger package. So no, he doesn't have the power that Barker did as EP (Executive Prick), nor does he want it. Drew just wants to have fun while he develops his projects. But unfortunately for him, what a s**t storm he stepped into.
/Barker became EP before Wayne's death, but didn't take the title until after Wayne died because he "didn't want to do that to poor old Frank".
-
[quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'225069\' date=\'Sep 5 2009, 09:04 PM\']You're right, Drew has not aquired the power that Barker had, nor does he want it. His focus has been the bigger deal with CBS to develop his own shows. Hosting Price is just a part of a much bigger package. So no, he doesn't have the power that Barker did as EP (Executive Prick), nor does he want it. Drew just wants to have fun while he develops his projects. But unfortunately for him, what a s**t storm he stepped into.[/quote]
You know, this just proves to me beyond any doubt that you'll say absolutely anything as long as it makes Bob sound bad or Drew sound good.
(Not that you have to make things up about Bob to make him sound bad...but you have a tendency to do it anyway.)
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'225062\' date=\'Sep 5 2009, 07:03 PM\']I agree on the showcase creativity though, and got tired of the variations on the same word. It was boring and uninspired.[/quote]
To be fair, the word association Showcases were extremely rare in the later Barker years. When Stan and Adam began taking over the Showcase writing full time under Roger's direction, things were especially creative. (Match Game, Dating Game, Shipwreck, First Bank, etc.)
-
You know, this just proves to me beyond any doubt that you'll say absolutely anything as long as it makes Bob sound bad or Drew sound good.
(Not that you have to make things up about Bob to make him sound bad...but you have a tendency to do it anyway.)
Mr. Gavazzi, please take your grievances with pentellit elsewhere.
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'225070\' date=\'Sep 5 2009, 09:15 PM\']You know, this just proves to me beyond any doubt that you'll say absolutely anything as long as it makes Bob sound bad or Drew sound good.
(Not that you have to make things up about Bob to make him sound bad...but you have a tendency to do it anyway.)[/quote]
Do you always get this defensive and pissy when someone dares to disagree with you?
/And there's something wrong with making "Drew sound good"?
-
[quote name=\'J.R.\' post=\'225076\' date=\'Sep 5 2009, 10:59 PM\']Do you always get this defensive and pissy when someone dares to disagree with you?[/quote]
When they're making shit up, yes.
-
[quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'225069\' date=\'Sep 5 2009, 09:04 PM\']You're right, Drew has not aquired the power that Barker had, nor does he want it. His focus has been the bigger deal with CBS to develop his own shows. Hosting Price is just a part of a much bigger package.[/quote]
See, THIS sounds much more plausible than Drew trying to do everything he can do ruin a television show, including firing people left and right (at one point, some tried to say he was responsible for Bart Eskander's exit but, of course, had nothing concrete to support the claim). Game shows aren't the big business they once were back in the '80s, so it would make perfect sense to use the show as a launch pad for larger endeavors. In fact, I even recall reading an article posted on here saying Drew was working with CBS to get some new shows of his on the network (*gasp* evidence to back up a statement! Could it be???)
Clearly this is a case of some fans not liking the new direction the show has headed in, but they don't have one main person to point the finger at and blame. Because Barker did whatever he wanted with the show, they just assume that Drew does as well and use him as the scapegoat. We can all go back and forth till we're blue in the face about whether or not Drew's style meshes with TPIR or not. If you want to say that Drew's hosting is causing the downfall of TPIR, fine. He is 100% responsible for how he handles the emceeing on the air but that's where it stops. Until proven otherwise, that's the only thing Drew can be blamed for. Aim your finger towards either CBS or Fremantle if you feel you just have to put the blame somewhere for everything else.
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'224996\' date=\'Sep 4 2009, 10:44 PM\'][quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'224994\' date=\'Sep 4 2009, 10:42 PM\'][quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'224993\' date=\'Sep 4 2009, 10:41 PM\']So basically, you knew full well what I was saying and were just being an ass.[/quote]Negative, Ghost Rider. I just want you to come out and say it so that if/when it's proven as hearsay, it can be traced back to a direct quote of yours and not be able to hide behind a shield of "well, I didn't say that."[/quote]
Dude, I've implied tons of times that Drew fired Roger. What the hell makes you think I'd want to back away from that statement?
EDIT: And y'know, the more I think about it, the more bothered I become by the fact that you appear to have designated yourself as my personal truth squad simply because I wouldn't phrase things the way you wanted me to. It gives the impression that you've got some kind of obsession with me...and dude, that's creepy.
[/quote]
sometimes, late at night, i take a long drive out to weedville and watch you sleeping...so peaceful, so angelic. sigh......
-
[quote name=\'MTCesquire\' post=\'225079\' date=\'Sep 5 2009, 11:20 PM\'][quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'225069\' date=\'Sep 5 2009, 09:04 PM\']You're right, Drew has not aquired the power that Barker had, nor does he want it. His focus has been the bigger deal with CBS to develop his own shows. Hosting Price is just a part of a much bigger package.[/quote]See, THIS sounds much more plausible than Drew trying to do everything he can do ruin a television show, including firing people left and right (at one point, some tried to say he was responsible for Bart Eskander's exit but, of course, had nothing concrete to support the claim). Game shows aren't the big business they once were back in the '80s, so it would make perfect sense to use the show as a launch pad for larger endeavors. In fact, I even recall reading an article posted on here saying Drew was working with CBS to get some new shows of his on the network (*gasp* evidence to back up a statement! Could it be???)
Clearly this is a case of some fans not liking the new direction the show has headed in, but they don't have one main person to point the finger at and blame. Because Barker did whatever he wanted with the show, they just assume that Drew does as well and use him as the scapegoat. We can all go back and forth till we're blue in the face about whether or not Drew's style meshes with TPIR or not. If you want to say that Drew's hosting is causing the downfall of TPIR, fine. He is 100% responsible for how he handles the emceeing on the air but that's where it stops. Until proven otherwise, that's the only thing Drew can be blamed for. Aim your finger towards either CBS or Fremantle if you feel you just have to put the blame somewhere for everything else.
[/quote]
No.
I really don't understand how you get off saying something like this. You have absolutely no evidence about anything you're claiming isn't Drew's fault, and yet you've blasted those of us who actually have connections at the show for making statements we can't back up. How is this supposed to make any sense?
You think Drew didn't fire Bart Eskander? Then why did a person who, as far as anyone can tell, works at Fremantle break the news on Golden-Road before anybody outside of the company knew about it by posting that "Drew fired the director?" That sounds like evidence to me.
You think Drew wasn't behind getting rid of 3 Strikes? Then why did he insult the game on the air on the second episode of Season 37? Why did it not appear on any episodes for the rest of the season after they used all the lineups that had already been written by Roger? That sounds like evidence to me.
You think Drew giving an explanation automatically makes it true? Then why, after saying that 3 Strikes was pulled so that "we could make it ready for HD," did the game return to the rotation almost a year later with the board completely unchanged? That sounds like a lie to me.
You think Drew respects Roger's work, like he said in his blog? Then why, only days later, did he post about how excited he was last fall that Mike Richards agreed with everything he wanted to change on the show? Why did he brag about his new producer, his new director, and how much more exciting everything was? That sounds like evidence and a lie to me.
So thank you very much for your input, but I will continue to aim my finger directly at Drew Carey, because he's the one who's in charge of the giant cluster**** that the show has become.
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'225082\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 12:30 AM\']You think Drew didn't fire Bart Eskander?[/quote]Not when BuzzerBlog (http://\"http://buzzerblog.flashgameshows.com/a-public-apology-to-former-price-is-right-director-bart-eskander/\") made a major retraction after learning the information they published could be found untrue.
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'225082\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 12:30 AM\']You think Drew respects Roger's work, like he said in his blog? Then why, only days later, did he post about how excited he was last fall that Mike Richards agreed with everything he wanted to change on the show? That sounds like evidence and a lie to me.[/quote]I respect Jackson Pollock's contributions to the art world, but I still think his paintings look like crap.
-
Before this gets thrown in my face we were not sued and forced to put up a retraction. Susan Eskander and I have had some very great conversations, she's a nice lady, and I wanted to correct the situation because I despise having false information on my site, whether or not I wrote it. She brought it to my intention, I felt very bad having that up there, and it needed to be corrected. Simple as that.
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'225082\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 12:30 AM\']You think Drew didn't fire Bart Eskander? Then why did a person who, as far as anyone can tell, works at Fremantle break the news on Golden-Road before anybody outside of the company knew about it by posting that "Drew fired the director?" That sounds like evidence to me.[/quote]I thought that was called "hearsay".
You think Drew wasn't behind getting rid of 3 Strikes? Then why did he insult the game on the air on the second episode of Season 37? Why did it not appear on any episodes for the rest of the season after they used all the lineups that had already been written by Roger? That sounds like evidence to me.
Then why, after saying that 3 Strikes was pulled so that "we could make it ready for HD," did the game return to the rotation almost a year later with the board completely unchanged? That sounds like a lie to me.
1) How are you so sure it wasn't changed in a way that wasn't detectable from the audience?
2) He made fun of how long Ten Chances takes, just like he did with 3 Strikes, but far as I can tell it was never in any danger. Why kick out one, but not the other?
You think Drew respects Roger's work, like he said in his blog? Then why, only days later, did he post about how excited he was last fall that Mike Richards agreed with everything he wanted to change on the show?
Because just because you respect someone, doesn't mean you agree with them all the time. Or even most of the time. Roger Dobkowitz does deserve respect for running the show as long as he has. I DO respect him. That's not going to stop me from being excited about changes in the future that I think could help the show appeal to a wider audience than it does now.
Why did he brag about his new producer, his new director, and how much more exciting everything was? That sounds like evidence and a lie to me.
So...he shouldn't try to talk up the new season? He shouldn't say nice things about his new co-workers?
So thank you very much for your input, but I will continue to aim my finger directly at Drew Carey, because he's the one who's in charge of the giant cluster**** that the show has become.
...if you think it has become one, which I don't.
-
[quote name=\'J.R.\' post=\'225089\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 12:51 AM\'][quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'225082\' date=\'Sep 5 2009, 11:30 PM\']So thank you very much for your input, but I will continue to aim my finger directly at Drew Carey, because he's the one who's in charge of the giant cluster**** that the show has become.[/quote]
Is Drew Carey also responsible for the Hindenburg Disaster, Titanic sinking, Kennedy assassination, Stock Market Crash of 1929 *and* 1987 too?
You know what's really creepy? Your obsession with TPIR with the thought that any change is a crime more heinous than mass murder and that Drew Carey is a man more evil than Hitler, Stalin and Hussein combined.
[/quote]
Oh, for fuck's sake...
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'225082\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 12:30 AM\']Oh, for f***'s sake...[/quote]Would you watch your language, please? That's the second F-bomb you've dropped in this page of the thread (the first one later censored "in post.")
-
[quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'225093\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 01:23 AM\'][quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'225082\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 12:30 AM\']Oh, for f***'s sake...[/quote]Would you watch your language, please? That's the second F-bomb you've dropped in this page of the thread (the first one later censored "in post.")[/quote]
Then kindly tell Mr. Raygor not to say things to me that are batshit insane.
(The first one wasn't intended to be uncensored. I didn't realize Invision didn't do that automatically. The second...yeah, that one was.)
-
[quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'225093\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 12:23 AM\']Would you watch your language, please? That's the second F-bomb you've dropped in this page of the thread (the first one later censored "in post.")[/quote]This hasn't ever been against the rules, TMK.
Not saying that you, Steve, or anyone else is wrong.
-
[quote name=\'Modor\' post=\'225099\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 02:59 AM\']This hasn't ever been against the rules, TMK.[/quote]Oh, I know. I've thought of it as an "unwritten rule." It's always nice to carry a level of decorum around here as a sign of respect for yourself and your peers. I figure it's inappropriate for someone on their own to use language here outside of what we'd see on primetime broadcast TV.
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'225082\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 12:30 AM\']No.
I really don't understand how you get off saying something like this. You have absolutely no evidence about anything you're claiming isn't Drew's fault, and yet you've blasted those of us who actually have connections at the show for making statements we can't back up. How is this supposed to make any sense?[/quote]
And I said I wasn't going too get deep into it...
True, I don't have anything that explicitly states that Drew Carey wasn't, either in whole or partly, responsible for Roger or Eskander's dismissal. Likewise, you have nothing that explicitly states that Drew Carey WAS, either in whole or partly, responsible for Roger or Eskander's dismissal. "As far as anyone can tell" is not the same as "definitely works for Fremantle". I can go to allhiphop.com right now, create a username claiming to be a Def Jam representative and say that I'm scouting talent for a record deal. "As far as anyone can tell" I'd be legit if I made the bio on my profile page convincing enough, but I wouldn't be.
CarShark and Chad hit on the other points I was going to make, so I have nothing further to say on the matter.
Oh BTW, here's an article (http://\"http://news.bostonherald.com/track/star_tracks/view/2009_05_26_Drew_Carey_inks_CBS_deal/srvc=home&position=recent\"), not the same one that was posted here, but a similar one that reports on Drew Carey's two-year deal with CBS regarding bringing new programs to the network. So much for pentelit "making s*** up".
-
[quote name=\'MTCesquire\' post=\'225101\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 03:18 AM\']Oh BTW, here's an article (http://\"http://news.bostonherald.com/track/star_tracks/view/2009_05_26_Drew_Carey_inks_CBS_deal/srvc=home&position=recent\"), not the same one that was posted here, but a similar one that reports on Drew Carey's two-year deal with CBS regarding bringing new programs to the network. So much for pentelit "making s*** up".[/quote]
Not even close to what I was talking about.
-
Okay, my post to Steve was way out of line and I have removed it. I got way too carried away and I apologize.
-
[quote name=\'J.R.\' post=\'225103\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 01:25 AM\']Okay, my post to Steve was way out of line and I have removed it. I got way too carried away and I apologize.[/quote]
It wasn't, you shouldn't have, you didn't, and you have nothing to apologize for, but your desire to avoid conflict is you own decision.
-
As stated before, I think as either people who work in television or are fans are way more critical than Joe and Jane Public.
When, on a different board, there was a heated discussion about how the show's death notice was being written (or not), I went and looked back at about three years' worth of our local Nielsen books. Two things: I did disclose that I think there was one or two sweeps I wasn't able to find; secondly, Price either held its own or beat The View. Every time.
-
[quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'225093\' date=\'Sep 5 2009, 10:23 PM\'][quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'225082\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 12:30 AM\']Oh, for f***'s sake...[/quote]Would you watch your language, please? That's the second F-bomb you've dropped in this page of the thread (the first one later censored "in post.")
[/quote]
I know you're trying to be helpful, Chad, but Matt and I will make that call.
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'225102\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 03:48 AM\'][quote name=\'MTCesquire\' post=\'225101\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 03:18 AM\']Oh BTW, here's an article (http://\"http://news.bostonherald.com/track/star_tracks/view/2009_05_26_Drew_Carey_inks_CBS_deal/srvc=home&position=recent\"), not the same one that was posted here, but a similar one that reports on Drew Carey's two-year deal with CBS regarding bringing new programs to the network. So much for pentelit "making s*** up".[/quote]
Not even close to what I was talking about.
[/quote]
Please leave. Seriously. Please leave.
[quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'225100\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 03:06 AM\'][quote name=\'Modor\' post=\'225099\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 02:59 AM\']This hasn't ever been against the rules, TMK.[/quote]Oh, I know. I've thought of it as an "unwritten rule."
[/quote]
As did I. Until recently, I don't remember seeing any S-bombs or F-bombs in here. I expect the first C-bomb to be dropped by month's end.
-
those of us who actually have connections at the show
Didn't you tell me you have never been inside studio 33? The problem is, we have no way of knowing whether your information is from credible sources. The one person who immediately comes to mind wants to keep their job so they don't post and they don't leak.
-
[quote name=\'Don Howard\' post=\'225109\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 08:25 AM\']Until recently, I don't remember seeing any S-bombs or F-bombs in here. I expect the first C-bomb to be dropped by month's end.[/quote]
Crisco!
-
[quote name=\'dale_grass\' post=\'225112\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 09:51 AM\'][quote name=\'Don Howard\' post=\'225109\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 08:25 AM\']Until recently, I don't remember seeing any S-bombs or F-bombs in here. I expect the first C-bomb to be dropped by month's end.[/quote]
Crisco!
[/quote]
Didn't I tell you? The last envelope has now been torched. It's all fair game now, friends.
-
[quote name=\'Don Howard\' post=\'225117\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 10:42 AM\'][quote name=\'dale_grass\' post=\'225112\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 09:51 AM\'][quote name=\'Don Howard\' post=\'225109\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 08:25 AM\']Until recently, I don't remember seeing any S-bombs or F-bombs in here. I expect the first C-bomb to be dropped by month's end.[/quote]
Crisco![/quote]
Didn't I tell you? The last envelope has now been torched. It's all fair game now, friends.[/quote]
What the Kelly Clarkson is going on around here?
-
[quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'225136\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 12:48 PM\'][quote name=\'Don Howard\' post=\'225117\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 10:42 AM\'][quote name=\'dale_grass\' post=\'225112\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 09:51 AM\'][quote name=\'Don Howard\' post=\'225109\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 08:25 AM\']Until recently, I don't remember seeing any S-bombs or F-bombs in here. I expect the first C-bomb to be dropped by month's end.[/quote]
Crisco![/quote]
Didn't I tell you? The last envelope has now been torched. It's all fair game now, friends.[/quote]
What the Kelly Clarkson is going on around here?[/quote]
LOL. Well played, both of you.
-
[quote name=\'dale_grass\' post=\'225112\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 08:51 AM\'][quote name=\'Don Howard\' post=\'225109\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 08:25 AM\']Until recently, I don't remember seeing any S-bombs or F-bombs in here. I expect the first C-bomb to be dropped by month's end.[/quote]
Crisco!
[/quote]
That tears it. I'm outta here. See you next Tuesday.
-
[quote name=\'TeppanYaki\' post=\'225105\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 08:37 AM\']Two things: I did disclose that I think there was one or two sweeps I wasn't able to find; secondly, Price either held its own or beat The View. Every time.[/quote]
I can say with certainty that this is not true. I posted a chart of ratings in the Top 25 markets from February of this year and showed the comparison of Price to The View and included National Averages from the previous three years during the same time frame. The difference was quite noticeable. I haven't done an updated chart in the meantime; perhaps it is time to do that again.
The chart can be found here. (http://\"http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y36/SLY4420/rating1.gif\")
-
[quote name=\'ClockGameJohn\' post=\'225145\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 04:15 PM\'][quote name=\'TeppanYaki\' post=\'225105\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 08:37 AM\']Two things: I did disclose that I think there was one or two sweeps I wasn't able to find; secondly, Price either held its own or beat The View. Every time.[/quote]
I can say with certainty that this is not true. I posted a chart of ratings in the Top 25 markets from February of this year and showed the comparison of Price to The View and included National Averages from the previous three years during the same time frame. The difference was quite noticeable. I haven't done an updated chart in the meantime; perhaps it is time to do that again.
The chart can be found here. (http://\"http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y36/SLY4420/rating1.gif\")
[/quote]
John: Please read my original post on your board and on here - if I say "a ratings book," it's not the national average. I understand one market isn't going to make it or break it, but I was posting what I found.
Suggestion, now that I think about it. It takes more time, but it will show trending more. Instead of reporting year to year, report *all* the sweeps in that three year period. Sometimes there are good books, some times there aren't. At least you can see the big picture that way, IMO.
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'225092\' date=\'Sep 5 2009, 10:18 PM\']Oh, for fuck's sake...[/quote]
MODS; Paraphrasing WWTBAM; "So what is your final answer" on Mr. Gavazzi's style of language here on the Forum?
-
[quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'225150\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 03:46 PM\'][quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'225092\' date=\'Sep 5 2009, 10:18 PM\']Oh, for fuck's sake...[/quote]
MODS; Paraphrasing WWTBAM; "So what is your final answer" on Mr. Gavazzi's style of language here on the Forum?
[/quote]
If we consider Steve's language a problem we will tell him so, either publicly or privately.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'225152\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 03:59 PM\'][quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'225150\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 03:46 PM\'][quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'225092\' date=\'Sep 5 2009, 10:18 PM\']Oh, for fuck's sake...[/quote]
MODS; Paraphrasing WWTBAM; "So what is your final answer" on Mr. Gavazzi's style of language here on the Forum?
[/quote]
If we consider Steve's language a problem we will tell him so, either publicly or privately.
[/quote]
So can the rest of us use that type of language here? Because you know, a well placed f.......
-
Here's what our rules say:
A pattern of excessive and gratuitous use of foul language shall constitute grounds for disciplinary action.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'225154\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 04:12 PM\']Here's what our rules say:
A pattern of excessive and gratuitous use of foul language shall constitute grounds for disciplinary action.
[/quote]
Works for me.
-
Averaging the top six markets, TPIR got a 2.2 rating vs. The View's 4.2 rating on 2/9/2009. Not good.
-
Just out of curiosity, I'd like to see numbers, especially quarter hour breakdowns, now that they've expanded the first segment to include two pricing games.
-
Personally, I think the best thing to do with the cloak-and-dagger information we get here is to size up what both camps say, and decide the truth for yourself. There's enough fact to be found in both Steve and pentellit's posts that you can discern your own view from it and move on. Reading between the lines is almost essential. I find myself just as easily sifting through their opinions/biases, as they do seem to come from opposite camps.
On that end, I think being a "Bob person" or a "Drew person" is pretty silly. I think on this board and Golden-Road, you too often get people firmly on one side. The Bob people refuse to believe Drew's show is watchable. The Drew people don't want to even think of there being a chink in the armor. Really, I think they could both admit their own faults, but won't in the heat of these arguments. I can't see a fan of Drew ready to defend last season's (lack of) game rotation. Similarly, would a Barker fan go to bat for On the Nose or Professor Price? Both sides could show a lot more tact in dealing with each other, and in fact were doing so for most of this thread.
I'm keeping most of my opinions to myself here, but with regards to Drew, re-reading this blog post (http://\"http://drewfromtv.blogspot.com/2009/06/christmas-in-june.html\") might help. It shows his passion for the show (and how it manifests itself). And I found Chris' story about Drew & Take Two to be a little eye-opening, but that's merely my opinion.
-Jason
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'225152\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 06:59 PM\']If we consider Steve's language a problem we will tell him so, either publicly or privately.[/quote]
Just to make things completely transparent for everyone, I've received no such notifications from Matt or Chris.
That even surprises me.
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'225172\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 06:50 PM\'][quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'225152\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 06:59 PM\']If we consider Steve's language a problem we will tell him so, either publicly or privately.[/quote]
Just to make things completely transparent for everyone, I've received no such notifications from Matt or Chris.
That even surprises me.[/quote]
Your F-bomb is the least of our worries in this thread.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'225154\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 07:12 PM\']Here's what our rules say:
A pattern of excessive and gratuitous use of foul language shall constitute grounds for disciplinary action.
[/quote]That's fine for me too... but three uncensored curses in two days don't pave a road for "a pattern of excessive and gratuitous use of foul language"? I'm not trying to play backseat moderator, don't get me wrong, I just don't think that language is necessary as part of the board experience.
[quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'225069\' date=\'Sep 5 2009, 09:04 PM\'][quote name=\'MTCesquire\' post=\'225061\' date=\'Sep 5 2009, 03:54 PM\']I have yet to read one piece of critical evidence (hell, ANY evidence) that supports the notion that Drew played a part or was even the driving force behind the firing.[/quote] He didn't/wasn't. (See Curling lawsuit.)[/quote]You know, I did and that could also be a valid point. The papers of the suit (http://\"http://www.aolcdn.com/tmz_documents/1004_bob_barker_wm.pdf\") drop Dobkowitz's name numerous times and it wouldn't shock me if it played a role in his eventual departure/dismissal.
-
three uncensored curses in two days don't pave a road for "a pattern of excessive and gratuitous use of foul language"? I'm not trying to play backseat moderator, don't get me wrong, I just don't think that language is necessary as part of the board experience.
Chad, now that you've registered your displeasure with such language, perhaps the offending parties will take your displeasure to heart and alter their choice of words, making any action by me or Matt unnecessary. We'll see.
I want to know two things about Curling's lawsuit and I'm having trouble getting an answer. 1) Is the case ongoing? 2) Is the case now, or will it in the future, go before a jury?
-
The most recent info I can find on it is as of May 2009. (http://\"http://investing.businessweek.com/businessweek/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=92774\")
Judge Denies Deposition of CBS CEO in Former 'The Price is Right' Screener Lawsuit
05/8/2009
-
[quote name=\'rwalker\' post=\'225183\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 07:54 PM\'][quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'225181\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 10:42 PM\']The most recent info I can find on it is as of May 2009. (http://\"http://investing.businessweek.com/businessweek/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=92774\")
Judge Denies Deposition of CBS CEO in Former 'The Price is Right' Screener Lawsuit
05/8/2009[/quote]
So, Chen the robot was invoked in this? Moonves is her husband. Jesus. Next thing you know, they'll have Barker in bed with Chen on Big Brother.[/quote]
She was not mentioned by name in the article so we can't assume that she was.
-
Thanks for looking that up, Chad. So the case was ongoing as of 5/8/09.
Here ya go:
- Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Malcom Mackey dismissed the case against Bob Barker on August 6, 2008
- Judge Malcom Mackey determined that Curling was employed by CBS and not by Bob Barker
http://www.mahalo.com/deborah-curling (http://\"http://www.mahalo.com/deborah-curling\")
But wait! There's more!
The only remaining claim against Barker from the suit, which Curling filed in 2007, is an allegation that he created a hostile work environment, and that is expected to be dismissed as well
http://www.reuters.com/article/entertainme...622844120080807 (http://\"http://www.reuters.com/article/entertainmentNews/idUSN0622844120080807\")
Judge Mackey has also dismissed several claims against Fremantle Media.
Judge Mackey will allow Curling's attorney, Nick Alden, to attempt to prove Barker inflicted emotional distress and to argue some of the charges against Fremantle Media should be included in the suit.
http://www.shortnews.com/start.cfm?id=72570 (http://\"http://www.shortnews.com/start.cfm?id=72570\")
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'225179\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 10:33 PM\']
three uncensored curses in two days don't pave a road for "a pattern of excessive and gratuitous use of foul language"? I'm not trying to play backseat moderator, don't get me wrong, I just don't think that language is necessary as part of the board experience.
Chad, now that you've registered your displeasure with such language, perhaps the offending parties will take your displeasure to heart and alter their choice of words, making any action by me or Matt unnecessary. We'll see.[/quote]
Mr. Mosher might also note that said party has done this in one thread in six years.
-
Interesting stuff Chad. Shed light on some of my opinions, but mileage does vary around here.
Another notion that popped into my head this evening: it's hard to doubt Drew's the catalyst for some of the changes on the show, but it also seems clear to me he's not doing it to buck tradition. He came in as an outsider, and from that point of view, made changes based on his own observations during year 1. There look to be a few mea culpas on the way this next season anyway. Rich Dipirro's directing kept me watching through their rough growing period late last year.
-Jason
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'225188\' date=\'Sep 6 2009, 10:38 PM\']Mr. Mosher might also note that said party has done this in one thread in six years.[/quote]
Noting that, I suggest board members mark their calendars for December 13, 2012, when I will be proudly presenting Mike Pries' Expletives-a-Go-Go.
/might even use it as an adverb
-
I read this article linked on pg21 here about Bart Eskander not being fired and just wanted to point out that whoever posted that is a sucker. "A public apology" is not needed, someone is just trying to do damage control. Is this a new article?
-
it's hard to doubt Drew's the catalyst for some of the changes on the show, but it also seems clear to me he's not doing it to buck tradition. He came in as an outsider, and from that point of view, made changes based on his own observations during year 1.
I've worked with a few game show emcees over 30 years and I can tell you what an emcee is supposed to and not supposed to do.
A game show emcee should learn the format, language and rules of the show and have them all down rock-solid. He should be consistent in his performances. He should project enthusiasm. He should know how to build anticipation and suspense. He should approach the show as if it were live. He should treat the production staff and crew with dignity and respect. He should treat all contestants with dignity and cordiality.
In my opinion an emcee is not supposed to come in as an arrogant, imperious prima donna and refashion the format to his concept of what the show should be. He does not own the show and does not produce the show*. He does not usurp the producers. He does not try to make a game show into a comedy show. He does not make personnel changes. He does not treat the show as a mere stepping stone to a bigger and better network deal. He should not telegraph his mood du jour to the audience. He should not be overpaid by a factor of three or four.
All of this is just my humble opinion. If anyone else who has worked with emcees has a different idea I'll be happy to discuss it with you.
The ratings erosion of TPIR speaks for itself.
*With the exceptions of Monty Hall, Jack Barry, Chuck Barris, Jan Murray, etc.
-
A game show emcee should learn the format, language and rules of the show and have them all down rock-solid. He should be consistent in his performances.
Definitely. Drew should do a better job of knowing the rules of the games by heart. If that means more rehearsal time and less Second Life time, so be it.
He should project enthusiasm. He should know how to build anticipation and suspense.
But if that's not your style, you're probably better off not doing it, else you'll come across as trying too hard. The fact that Barker made a name for himself with his ridiculous, melodramatic build-ups probably would make any successor nervous about not appearing to ape him.
He should approach the show as if it were live.
If you know that not only major disasters, but minor flubs will be left on the cutting room floor, wouldn't you start to adapt to that way of thinking rather than forcing the production to adapt to you? Wouldn't that just lead to more choppy edits?
He should treat the production staff and crew with dignity and respect.
Absolutely.
He should treat all contestants with dignity and cordiality.
But don't be stiff or formal about it. A little teasing never killed anyone.
In my opinion an emcee is not supposed to come in as an arrogant, imperious prima donna and refashion the format to his concept of what the show should be.
So he shouldn't have any opinion at all? His name is attached to the show just as much as the producer's or director's. In fact, I'd say even MORE so. People knew Bob Barker hosted Price is Right, but how many knew it was a Goodson-Todman Production? I can see why Drew (or ANY incoming host) would want some creative input, and I can see why CBS would value it. If he has an idea that he believes could improve the show, I don't see why you should immediately disqualify it, just because he's not the originator.
He does not own the show and does not produce the show*. He does not usurp the producers. He does not try to make a game show into a comedy show. He does not make personnel changes.
...unless he was brought in to host and produce. Initially, I was reluctant to believe that Drew had the kind of pull some were suggesting. Now, I'm of the mind that CBS wanted a new, fresh set of eyes looking at the show, possibly for the first time in years. Someone who saw the show for what it was, rather than what it believed itself to be. And there's a difference between making a game show into a comedy show and adding more comedy to the existing game. I'd expect it. Hell, I'd probably demand it from a comedian.
-
He does not treat the show as a mere stepping stone to a bigger and better network deal.
First off, what makes you think he's treating it only like a stepping stone, and not a proper project? Second, CBS and Drew have come to a deal that makes them both happy. CBS gets their big name host and the ability to tie any future Carey primetime CBS success back to TPIR and vice versa. Drew gets a job and a fast track for future projects in a fairly unforgiving climate. It may seem cold or mercenary to you, but to me it sounds like a good opportunity for both.
He should not telegraph his mood du jour to the audience.
Why? Because hosts haven't done that in the past? Big deal. Who says a host HAS to be ever unchanging? Unmoved? How do you avoid veering off into the unfeeling, or even unhuman? Sometimes, I think Barker was downright robotic in how he effortlessly returned to center from either a win or a loss. Made me think he didn't really care either way. What makes sincerity in a host bad? What makes plasticity and predictability good?
He should not be overpaid by a factor of three or four.
If the salary represented just a host, sure. But a host, producer and future producer?
All of this is just my humble opinion. If anyone else who has worked with emcees has a different idea I'll be happy to discuss it with you.
And since you know most of the participants of this thread haven't, why shouldn't I read this a passive-aggressive way of quieting your future critics, effectively ending the conversation before it even starts?
The ratings erosion of TPIR speaks for itself.
Not really. You and others who hate Drew with such a passion have NEVER been able to conclusively prove that it's his presence causing the ratings dive, as opposed to the absence of Barker. How do you measure the effect of Barker making sure that his star was the only one that shined for years? From banning Rod from being shown on camera, to the seemingly never-ending flurry of "lovely" models leaving under questionable terms. After years of being the only constant, how can you so easily dismiss the negative effect of his not being on the show?
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'225195\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 12:36 AM\']I've worked with a few game show emcees over 30 years and I can tell you what an emcee is supposed to and not supposed to do.[/quote]Your whole approach sounds as if hosting is a completely static exercise. In a vacuum, untouched by changes in society. Without a doubt, some parts of the craft remain the same, but some of the statements you've made above leave me questioning whether you're really displaying wisdom...or just showing your age.
-
So he shouldn't have any opinion at all? His name is attached to the show just as much as the producer's or director's. In fact, I'd say even MORE so. People knew Bob Barker hosted Price is Right, but how many knew it was a Goodson-Todman Production? I can see why Drew (or ANY incoming host) would want some creative input, and I can see why CBS would value it. If he has an idea that he believes could improve the show, I don't see why you should immediately disqualify it, just because he's not the originator.
You miss the point. Throughout decades of radio and TV game/quiz shows, an emcee's job is to personify the producer's vision; otherwise the producer is justified in finding another emcee. You don't bring in Joe Garagiola to take over TTTT from Garry Moore only to have Garagiola demand changes to the format and try to reshape the show. Why should Drew Carey be any different? He had pity little experience with game shows and was largely unfamiliar with TPIR when he took the job. He didn't even have to audition. In my opinion the only reason he has the job is because CBS shoved him down Fremantle's throat. With such skimpy game show credentials, why should he be treated like royalty?
...unless he was brought in to host and produce. Initially, I was reluctant to believe that Drew had the kind of pull some were suggesting. Now, I'm of the mind that CBS wanted a new, fresh set of eyes looking at the show
Are you kidding? Read what I said about his lack of game show credentials. Now look at how the ratings have slid opposite The View. Does that look like a formula for success to you?
Others have theorized that Drew is there because of his connections in the CBS executive wing. Take that for what you will.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'225203\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 03:17 AM\']You miss the point. Throughout decades of radio and TV game/quiz shows, an emcee's job is to personify the producer's vision; otherwise the producer is justified in finding another emcee.[/quote]But again, what if he was brought in to do both? To come up with AND personify his own vision?
Why should Drew Carey be any different?
Again, what makes you think they were looking for someone with a lot of traditional game show experience? Maybe they looked at a more varied, less prejudiced experience as a positive. You keep coming back to this because you're thinking too narrowly.
Are you kidding? Read what I said about his lack of game show credentials. Now look at how the ratings have slid opposite The View. Does that look like a formula for success to you?
Again, you're conveniently forgetting the subtraction of the long-time host, who made himself the most and largely only visible part of the show.
-
Some people like Drew Carey. Some people don't like Drew Carey.
There. Can we all try to come up with something resembling a truce? This is getting beyond ridiculous.
-
[quote name=\'J.R.\' post=\'225206\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 12:29 AM\']Some people like Drew Carey. Some people don't like Drew Carey.[/quote]
I like tater tots.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'225209\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 01:09 AM\'][quote name=\'J.R.\' post=\'225206\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 12:29 AM\']Some people like Drew Carey. Some people don't like Drew Carey.[/quote]
I like tater tots.[/quote]
I just got up and had to take some Pepto Bismol in a hurry so I don't much feel like discussing Tater Tots at the moment. :-(
Back on topic: to his credit, Tom Kennedy didn't want to change the format of our show when he took over, else we would have gotten someone else.
-
First of all, In the TK nighttime run, it HAD to be kept similar to the daytime show. There was an expectation of what TPIR was to be at night. This was the era where even Wheel of Fortune was a very similar format (just jacked up $ amounts) to the daytime show. Same sets, etc...
TNPIR '94 was a different story. Different format, different feel to the show. It tanked. CBS is treading a thin line here between taking the TPIR we all knew and loved down the toilet or trying to evolve. They've opted to evolve which has eased us into the changes. This is Drew's 3rd (yes 3rd) season. He's getting better, no question about that.
We have to face facts here. Barker *left the show* and it has to change.
Bring in a new host, some things WILL change, in variably.
Do we hear whining about the shopping rounds going away at WOF?
Or Jeopardy! doubling the dollars?
Did we hear whining when Whammy! debuted and it had a different format than what we were all used to?
This is 2009, and times change. Frankly, I actually LIKE alot of the changes made on TPIR since Drew came in. Its made the show fun to watch again.
Don't think the changes were solely Drew's. I don't think they are. CBS wanted for a long time to change things on TPIR, but Barker put the 'no' in innovation. Not to say every change has been good, some I am not crazy about, but hey, if it keeps TPIR going, I'm all for it.
As for the ratings drop...Do note soaps are going away, we've lost Passions and Guiding Light in the last couple years with NON Soap replacements. And CBS has enough faith in game shows to put LMAD back on the air. That should tell you a LOT about the direction they're heading in.
To sum it up, its not realistic to expect Drew Carey to be Bob Barker or do Bob Barker's show. He has to take TPIR and make it his. Its that simple. He's doing that, and CBS is smart enough to let him. For that I'm glad.
-
Does it take more than an hour to crank out an hour show? That's the question.
-
To sum it up, its not realistic to expect Drew Carey to be Bob Barker or do Bob Barker's show. He has to take TPIR and make it his.
As far as putting his own personality into it, true.
Of the litany of emcees Family Feud has had in the last 10 years, which one came in and demanded that the format be changed or that personnel be replaced or came in and started writing questions? If you paid attention to my post, there are many things a good emcee should be that Drew isn't. He should either hone his skills or be replaced (and he is not irreplaceable). The ratings bear me out on this.
Drew is like a C-list actor who comes in and demands that Hamlet be rewritten.
All of this is my humble opinion.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'225223\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 09:09 AM\']Drew is like a C-list actor who comes in and demands that Hamlet be rewritten.[/quote]
"Apt" was the first word that came to mind when reading this statement.
-
You all keep assuming that it's Drew making all these changes and it's not. It's FREMANTLE. With a heavy dose of CBS thrown in.
Everyone seems to forget that Barker's TPIR ratings had been declining for years, UNTIL that is, his "retirement" announcement. After that Barker got ratings like he hadn't seen in ages!
For years Price had essentially become a cracker factory, cranking out the same old same old, and it was as stale as yesterdays toast. (Not to mention that Barker had restructured it to become the "All About Bob Show", with anonymous models and invisible announcers, and in doing so Price had lost that TPIR Family Fun appeal that audience, and more importantly, sponsors loved). TPTB wanted and needed to bring in fresh blood and kick start the old show into the millenium. They desperately needed to attract a new audience since Barker's "Blue Hairs" demographic were continually dying off. And getting rid of Barker opened that door.
Don't even bore me with ratings and "The View", because it's cable that's KILLING network. (You know what they say in The Biz; "Network TV, television for people who can't afford Cable."). Price's ratings had been declining for years, in spite of it being in CBS's Golden Hour, meaning you could put a chimpanzee in there to host whatever and it was a win/win situation. Before cable came along the only competition to the Golden Hour had been for the most part soap operas and local programing. But then along comes cable... and suddenly America had CHOICES! And America started choosing the Food Network and The Discovery Channel!
Changes to Price had to be made. With rare exceptions, network execs (IMO) are not typically the most innovative people in The Biz because they tend to just copy whatever is working for the competition. And the trend now is to get a hot comedian to host or star in your sitcom/game show/even news. And for Price, they also needed to get a producer in there who could jump start old stale Price into the daytime game and attract that desirable younger demographic.
Drew Carey is a nice guy, a comedian who, in the simplest terms, loves performing, loves making people laugh and loves giving stuff away. I have met him, and I know people who worked for him, and they all love him. I don't believe Drew knew when he started Price what a s*** storm it had become with the politics, the lawsuits and the unpleasant mess and set that Barker left behind.
It is my understanding that now Drew is simply doing what Drew Carey likes best; trying to give a good show, and he is not at all interested in the politics of firing people, or in rewriting or destroying a television mainstay.
-
[quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'225235\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 01:10 PM\']You all keep assuming that it's Drew making all these changes and it's not. It's FREMANTLE. With a heavy dose of CBS thrown in.
Everyone seems to forget that Barker's TPIR ratings had been declining for years, UNTIL that is, his "retirement" announcement. After that Barker got ratings like he hadn't seen in ages!
For years Price had essentially become a cracker factory, cranking out the same old same old, and it was as stale as yesterdays toast. (Not to mention that Barker had restructured it to become the "All About Bob Show", with anonymous models and invisible announcers, and in doing so Price had lost that TPIR Family Fun appeal that audience, and more importantly, sponsors loved). TPTB wanted and needed to bring in fresh blood and kick start the old show into the millenium. They desperately needed to attract a new audience since Barker's "Blue Hairs" demographic were continually dying off. And getting rid of Barker opened that door.
Don't even bore me with ratings and "The View", because it's cable that's KILLING network. (You know what they say in The Biz; "Network TV, television for people who can't afford Cable."). Price's ratings had been declining for years, in spite of it being in CBS's Golden Hour, meaning you could put a chimpanzee in there to host whatever and it was a win/win situation. Before cable came along the only competition to the Golden Hour had been for the most part soap operas and local programing. But then along comes cable... and suddenly America had CHOICES! And America started choosing the Food Network and The Discovery Channel!
Changes to Price had to be made. With rare exceptions, network execs (IMO) are not typically the most innovative people in The Biz because they tend to just copy whatever is working for the competition. And the trend now is to get a hot comedian to host or star in your sitcom/game show/even news. And for Price, they also needed to get a producer in there who could jump start old stale Price into the daytime game and attract that desirable younger demographic.
Drew Carey is a nice guy, a comedian who, in the simplest terms, loves performing, loves making people laugh and loves giving stuff away. I have met him, and I know people who worked for him, and they all love him. I don't believe Drew knew when he started Price what a s*** storm it had become with the politics, the lawsuits and the unpleasant mess and set that Barker left behind.
It is my understanding that now Drew is simply doing what Drew likes best, trying to give a good show, and he is not at all interested in the politics of firing people, or in destroying a television mainstay.[/quote]
I can absolutely vouch for you 110%. The work enviroment has become much more tolerable, for that crew. I respect Drew.
-
Let's go back, let's go back, let's go way on way back when
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'224814\' date=\'Sep 3 2009, 01:22 PM\'][quote name=\'NicholasM79\' post=\'224812\' date=\'Sep 3 2009, 10:12 AM\']Plus, like everyone else has said, it just doesn't feel like the same show anymore.[/quote]
Other'n the guy who isn't Barker at the helm, I say to you in all seriousness (and I freely admit that I haven't watched very much lately) that I haven't noticed a difference.[/quote]
I've probably seen as much as Lemon, and I have sort of noticed a difference between Boobo and Droofus. (If we're calling names, it should be equal time, right?). With Boobo, there did seem to be an essence of rigid formality. Droofus' show, and I'm probably going to be lambasted for making this analogy, seems to be a lot like a drive-time radio show. A whole bunch of style and wacky and stupid fun, and substance is made secondary. With the magic of television, they can edit out anything that the prods think weigh the show down. Forget The Price is Right, it's Droofus and The Screamer (ninety-seven point onnnnnne (http://\"http://radiosucks.ytmnd.com/\")).
And honestly, I don't mind the more lax, party-ish atmosphere. God forbid a show with bright colors and offers washing machines and Rice-A-Roni be something other than serious business. My problem is that for every good thing Price has done, they've seemed to have cranked it up to excess. Relaxed pace is okay, but they're a little too relaxed. An edit here and there is fine, but after a while, it will become noticable. Leet swag is always welcome, but do we have to have 2-3 "designer" prizes on every show? A little tightening here and there and I think you'd get a very good, very watchable show.
As for the Droofus, he comes off as someone who understands that the show is important and he wants to try and continue to keep the show good while making it a different PIR than Boobo's. Until I'm shown otherwise, I'll believe that he does, at the very least, give a crap. The problem may be that either he doesn't know why or how the show is important and/or his working schlub everyman persona prevents him from getting that final layer of polish.
It's a whole bunch of conjecture, but as of right now, I'd continue to want to watch Price, but not every day.
-
[quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'225242\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 12:37 PM\']The problem may be that either he doesn't know why or how the show is important[/quote]
Well, that makes two of us. Important? Ultimately, we're making entertainment television here. To call it "important" makes me question one's priorities.
-
Sorry pentellit, gotta disagree with you about those ratings. Regardless of whether or not you factor in cable, look at the numbers I posted for the top six markets in February 2009: 2.2 vs. 4.2. No matter how you slice it, The View ate TPIR's lunch with or without taking cable into account. It is a well-known fact that when Barker left, the 18-34 female demo went with him. Yes, TPIR needed a transfusion of new blood but as emcees go, Drew is third-rate in my opinion.
Used to be that a 4.2 rating was considered quite respectable in daytime, and that was before cable. These aren't national numbers, but The View is doing healthy business and you'll see less of Wilford Brimley, Alex Trebek and Mr. Scooter Store on The View than TPIR.
-
And, for the record for the upteenth hundred time, MIKE RICHARDS is the EP, NOT DREW. Until Drew's name officially shows up in the credits, he's not the EP of the show. End of discussion on that one.
Your comment would have some validity had you ever worked but one day of your career on a show such as TPIR (c.f. Dawson, Richard and Barker, Bob).
Important? Ultimately, we're making entertainment television here. To call it "important" makes me question one's priorities.
See above comment. If your paycheck came from "Price Productions LLC" or whatever the hell they call it now, you'd consider it important. If you were in the executive suite at CBS, you'd consider it important. It all depends where you stand.
-
[quote name=\'dazztardly\' post=\'225236\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 02:22 PM\'][quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'225235\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 01:10 PM\']You all keep assuming that it's Drew making all these changes and it's not. It's FREMANTLE. With a heavy dose of CBS thrown in.
Everyone seems to forget that Barker's TPIR ratings had been declining for years, UNTIL that is, his "retirement" announcement. After that Barker got ratings like he hadn't seen in ages!
For years Price had essentially become a cracker factory, cranking out the same old same old, and it was as stale as yesterdays toast. (Not to mention that Barker had restructured it to become the "All About Bob Show", with anonymous models and invisible announcers, and in doing so Price had lost that TPIR Family Fun appeal that audience, and more importantly, sponsors loved). etc.
Don't even bore me with ratings and "The View", because it's cable that's KILLING network. (You know what they say in The Biz; "Network TV, television for people who can't afford Cable."). Price's ratings had been declining for years, in spite of it being in CBS's Golden Hour, meaning you could put a chimpanzee in there to host whatever and it was a win/win situation. etc.
Drew Carey is a nice guy, a comedian who, in the simplest terms, loves performing, loves making people laugh and loves giving stuff away. I have met him, and I know people who worked for him, and they all love him. I don't believe Drew knew when he started Price what a s*** storm it had become with the politics, the lawsuits and the unpleasant mess and set that Barker left behind.
It is my understanding that now Drew is simply doing what Drew likes best, trying to give a good show, and he is not at all interested in the politics of firing people, or in destroying a television mainstay.[/quote]
I can absolutely vouch for you 110%. The work enviroment has become much more tolerable, for that crew. I respect Drew.
[/quote]
Amen.
Lemme also put emphasis in that when I get a chance to watch the show, I enjoy it just as much as I ever did in the past. No matter what argument one could possibly give, that reason alone makes Drew fine in my book, because TPIR with Drew=as enjoyable as TPIR with Bob=>Drew equal to Bob (not even taking into account their backstage mannerisms, which I made clear before which side I'm totally in favor for, and I would think should be a no-brainer here, as none of the current models have complained about being assaulted by both the host's big and little heads, for a change, hmmmm?)
In short: ED=EB=>D=B
I will now let Mr. Klauss explain the theory behind this statement and give you the proof via induction, because I do enough of that on a daily basis and his big head could use the workout... :)
-
[quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'225242\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 03:37 PM\']Leet swag is always welcome, but do we have to have 2-3 "designer" prizes on every show?[/quote]
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'225245\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 03:52 PM\']It is a well-known fact that when Barker left, the 18-34 female demo went with him.[/quote]But doesn't that go more to my point, then? All those young females could very well have been "Bob Barker fans" rather than "Price is Right fans" as they would have been in the past. Now that their hunka hunka burnin' geezer love is gone, they've dropped the show like last year's fashions. Speaking of which, the emergence of one has obvious roots in the other. Truthfully, what else is the show to do to seriously attract young females?
-
[quote name=\'CarShark\' post=\'225253\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 04:17 PM\']Now that their hunka hunka burnin' geezer love is gone, they've dropped the show like last year's fashions.[/quote]
What Bob Barker would say to them if he was still on the show: http://i350.photobucket.com/albums/q438/da...ass/hitthat.jpg (http://\"http://i350.photobucket.com/albums/q438/dale_grass/hitthat.jpg\")
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'225247\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 01:01 PM\']See above comment. If your paycheck came from "Price Productions LLC" or whatever the hell they call it now, you'd consider it important. If you were in the executive suite at CBS, you'd consider it important.[/quote]
...and neither one of those were the context of Joe's comment. At all.
-
[quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'225235\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 02:10 PM\']You all keep assuming that it's Drew making all these changes and it's not. It's FREMANTLE. With a heavy dose of CBS thrown in.[/quote]
On his own blog, Drew talks about having dinner with Mike Richards, where the two shared their grievances with the old way of doing the show. I chose my words carefully, saying it's hard to argue Drew's the catalyst for a lot of the changes. I think it would be mighty smart for Mr. Richards to grant SOME of Drew's wishes at the very least.
Besides that, it's not like all of these changes are wildly unpopular with the fanbase. On this board, Drew's got enough support for what he does. So you needn't work to disassociate Drew with the new direction of the show. I think it's abundantly clear he supports it, regardless if he's directly responsible for their running orders or not. In the same blog post I reference above, Drew's proudly touting extravagant trips over grandfather clocks, and video screens over "old paintings." The basic show's the same, and that's where I think some people are going overboard with the decline in quality. But on the other hand, as Chris brings up, this is a forum with industry professionals and fans acting as armchair producers. I watch the show as much as I did with Bob, but if I had to choose, I'd want the "old paintings" back (for example). And some would like to think a decision like that is hanging on to the past too much.
-Jason
-
All those young females could very well have been "Bob Barker fans" rather than "Price is Right fans" as they would have been in the past.
What difference does it make? They're gone and the ratings reflect it, particularly when you break out the demos.
...and neither one of those were the context of Joe's comment. At all.
You dismissed the whole thing as just being "entertainment television".
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'225260\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 03:11 PM\']You dismissed the whole thing as just being "entertainment television".[/quote]
Yes. Because from the perspective of a fan, that is precisely what it is. Not some "cherished piece of Americana", not "a reason for existing," a freakin' TV SHOW. As a matter of fact, I believe I've seen you use the same argument more than once.
-
From a fan's perspective, if a show's business model fails due to low ratings, your "freakin' TV SHOW" goes away and you now have an unhappy fan.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'225274\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 07:07 PM\'][quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'225260\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 03:11 PM\']You dismissed the whole thing as just being "entertainment television".[/quote]
Yes. Because from the perspective of a fan, that is precisely what it is. Not some "cherished piece of Americana", not "a reason for existing," a freakin' TV SHOW. As a matter of fact, I believe I've seen you use the same argument more than once.
[/quote]
Absolutely spot on!
When are folks around here and on other boards in the game show world going to realize...you are not an average viewer. Just as the people on Doctor Who message boards are not average viewers. We may think we know what works but we aren't necessarily the best litmus test out there.
The sooner we all realize that The Price is Right is just a television show and not something on the level of a religion, the sooner we'll all be able to sleep at night.
Unfortunately Chris, some don't mind if it goes away. They'd rather cut their nose off to spite their face.
-
[quote name=\'Millionaire81\' post=\'225281\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 06:04 PM\']The sooner we all realize that The Price is Right is just a television show and not something on the level of a religion, the sooner we'll all be able to sleep at night.[/quote]
You're thinking of another message board if you're going to keep using the term "we all." :)
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'225245\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 12:52 PM\']Sorry pentellit, gotta disagree with you about those ratings. Regardless of whether or not you factor in cable, look at the numbers I posted for the top six markets in February 2009: 2.2 vs. 4.2. No matter how you slice it, The View ate TPIR's lunch with or without taking cable into account. It is a well-known fact that when Barker left, the 18-34 female demo went with him. Yes, TPIR needed a transfusion of new blood but as emcees go, Drew is third-rate in my opinion.
Used to be that a 4.2 rating was considered quite respectable in daytime, and that was before cable. These aren't national numbers, but The View is doing healthy business and you'll see less of Wilford Brimley, Alex Trebek and Mr. Scooter Store on The View than TPIR.[/quote]
You are right Chris. I shouldn't have said "cable is KILLING network", I should have said "nipping at it's heels"/"giving it a run for the money"/"chasing it up the charts", etc. And The View will continually eat TPIR for lunch with it's demographic. But the point was that even with Barker hosting, TPIR's ratings, like most of network daytime, had been declining long before Drew Carey was on the short list. (Except for the period following Barker's "retirement" announcement.)
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'225260\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 06:11 PM\']
All those young females could very well have been "Bob Barker fans" rather than "Price is Right fans" as they would have been in the past.
What difference does it make? They're gone and the ratings reflect it, particularly when you break out the demos.
[/quote]
...? What difference does it make? Really? Think about it. If someone is a fan of the TPIR, and they don't like the show now, improvements in the next year could very well bring them back. It might not, but at least there's a chance. If someone was a fan of Bob Barker only, however, there is nothing the show can do to bring them back, short of bringing Barker back. Drew could suddenly be an Emmy-winning host with perfectly rotating games and set pieces belonging in the The Louvre, but none if it will matter because Barker isn't there. They will never accept anyone else, in part because Barker only cultivated their attachment to him, and no one else.
-
If someone was a fan of Bob Barker only, however, there is nothing the show can do to bring them back, short of bringing Barker back.
You're pointing out the obvious.
-
[quote name=\'dazztardly\' post=\'225236\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 02:22 PM\']The work enviroment has become much more tolerable, for that crew. I respect Drew.[/quote]
I'm sure we could ask 100 people and the Top 10 answers will be on the board. Everyone has a different view, but I've heard the opposite from some sources. Longer work days, staff losing their hiatus weeks, and constant demand for "perfection" by the execs has put a strain on both Price and CBS personnel.
[quote name=\'CarShark\' post=\'225253\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 05:17 PM\']Truthfully, what else is the show to do to seriously attract young females?[/quote]
They could have hired suave Mario Lopez, if the only thing in mind was to attract young females.
[quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'225297\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 10:23 PM\']But the point was that even with Barker hosting, TPIR's ratings, like most of network daytime, had been declining long before Drew Carey was on the short list. (Except for the period following Barker's "retirement" announcement.)[/quote]
pentellit,
Did you have access to ratings from the past three years? I do and I do have to disagree. I can post the ratings from both before and after Barker's retirement announcement and you will notice that there was very little change. It even surprised me. (Yes, all daytime ratings had been decling for years, but there was never a point when The View beat Price under the Barker Administration.)
-
John -
Do you have national ratings? If so, what are the most recent nationals you have?
Truthfully, what else is the show to do to seriously attract young females?
They could have hired suave Mario Lopez, if the only thing in mind was to attract young females.
When I think of Drew the words "chick magnet" do not come to mind.
-
Drew Carey should be arrested for desecrating the holy sanctity that is The Price is Right.
Clearly he is a man of great evil. He's obviously ruining the show's ratings on purpose. All part of his diabolical scheme to destroy America.
He must stand trial for this heinous act against humanity.
The Price is Right: Serious Business.
-
[quote name=\'dazztardly\' post=\'225236\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 02:22 PM\']The work enviroment has become much more tolerable, for that crew. I respect Drew.[/quote]
[quote name=\'ClockGameJohn\' post=\'225374\' date=\'Sep 8 2009, 01:14 PM\']I'm sure we could ask 100 people and the Top 10 answers will be on the board. Everyone has a different view, but I've heard the opposite from some sources. Longer work days, staff losing their hiatus weeks, and constant demand for "perfection" by the execs has put a strain on both Price and CBS personnel.[/quote]
And I've heard the crew is happier now because they're getting overtime again, which is something that Barker had taken away by changing the taping schedule. As they say, "It's better than Barker" (who even took away their candy drawer!).
As for the "strain"; c'mon, the show has a new host, a new producer, and a new director. Did anyone really think it wasn't going to be stressful?
[quote name=\'CarShark\' post=\'225253\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 05:17 PM\']Truthfully, what else is the show to do to seriously attract young females?[/quote]
Male models? Works for me ;)
[quote name=\'ClockGameJohn\' post=\'225374\' date=\'Sep 8 2009, 01:14 PM\']They could have hired suave Mario Lopez, if the only thing in mind was to attract young females.[/quote]
But how could they script it so Mario would be shirtless at least once during both half hours? ;)
RE ratings John: Yes, declining before announcement - up after, culminating with Barker's final week with numbers like he hadn't gotten in ages. I also said "The View will continually eat TPIR for lunch with it's demographic".
-
[quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'225408\' date=\'Sep 8 2009, 10:03 PM\']As they say, "It's better than Barker" (who even took away their candy drawer!).[/quote]
This is definitely a new one... Old Man Barker shakes cane and takes away candy!
-
[quote name=\'ClockGameJohn\' post=\'225374\' date=\'Sep 8 2009, 03:14 PM\']Longer work days, staff losing their hiatus weeks, and constant demand for "perfection" by the execs has put a strain on both Price and CBS personnel.[/quote]
So I can have a better perspective, can the "longer work days" be defined as well as if staff gets vacation or not?
Also, regarding "perfection," it's a subjective word, but my goals in my profession is for a clean show or a clean spot. Sometimes it happens, sometimes it doesn't. But the demand for a clean show, i.e. "perfection," is always there. Is there a different definition of the "perfection" that the execs are looking for?
-
[quote name=\'TeppanYaki\' post=\'225416\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 12:27 AM\'][quote name=\'ClockGameJohn\' post=\'225374\' date=\'Sep 8 2009, 03:14 PM\']Longer work days, staff losing their hiatus weeks, and constant demand for "perfection" by the execs has put a strain on both Price and CBS personnel.[/quote]
So I can have a better perspective, can the "longer work days" be defined as well as if staff gets vacation or not?
Also, regarding "perfection," it's a subjective word, but my goals in my profession is for a clean show or a clean spot. Sometimes it happens, sometimes it doesn't. But the demand for a clean show, i.e. "perfection," is always there. Is there a different definition of the "perfection" that the execs are looking for?
[/quote]
I think that kind of slick performance, near perfection, was just a by-product of barker walking through the same doors for 35 years. Aside from dementia, how much could the guy screw up?
-
I think that kind of slick performance, near perfection, was just a by-product of Barker a seasoned professional with live broadcasting chops walking through the same doors for 35 years. Aside from dementia, how much could the guy screw up?
You could make the same point about Dennis James, Tom Kennedy, even Bill Cullen going back to the old days.
It took Barker 30-some years to have his "Dice Game moment" and everyone, apparently even Barker, thought he was finally losing it. How long did it take The Drewster to have his first similar moment? It seems to be the common wisdom that it took a great deal of effort to get Drewski to work the three simple words "without going over" into his patter and he still balked when he had to say them. Again, I was there when Drew escorted a contestant to the downstage side of the Take Two game and while he was saying "You can win these fabulous prizes" on stage, Bart Eskander was screaming "He's on the wrong side of the game! He's on the wrong side of the game!" over the P.L. and the stage manager positioned Drewmeister to the upstage side of the game.
-
[quote name=\'TeppanYaki\' post=\'225416\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 12:27 AM\']So I can have a better perspective, can the "longer work days" be defined as well as if staff gets vacation or not?[/quote]
From what I understand, it refers to longer days, more days per week (even compared to the later Barker years), and much less vacation.
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'225423\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 04:32 AM\'][quote name=\'TeppanYaki\' post=\'225416\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 12:27 AM\']So I can have a better perspective, can the "longer work days" be defined as well as if staff gets vacation or not?[/quote]
From what I understand, it refers to longer days, more days per week (even compared to the later Barker years), and much less vacation.[/quote]
That, and the above-the-line people don't get overtime. They make the same whether they work eight or 16 hours per day.
Longer work days, staff losing their hiatus weeks, and constant demand for "perfection" by the execs
Don't forget more time in the edit suite, and all of this to put out the same product. It's still a one-hour show, five days per week, 39 weeks per year, no nighttime show, six One Bids, six pricing games and two showcases. Heck, they've even gone back to their old taping schedule so they can crank out six shows in three days rather than five shows in four days. Nothing about the format and nothing about the prize structure has changed.
-
[quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'225408\' date=\'Sep 8 2009, 11:03 PM\']And I've heard the crew is happier now because they're getting overtime again, which is something that Barker had taken away by changing the taping schedule. As they say, "It's better than Barker" (who even took away their candy drawer!).[/quote]
I'm sure they are also thrilled that catered food is back after it was removed. Not sure if that was Barker or CBS who took it away, but I understand Drew was the one who brought it back.
-
[quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'225408\' date=\'Sep 8 2009, 11:03 PM\'][quote name=\'ClockGameJohn\' post=\'225374\' date=\'Sep 8 2009, 01:14 PM\']They could have hired suave Mario Lopez, if the only thing in mind was to attract young females.[/quote]
But how could they script it so Mario would be shirtless at least once during both half hours? ;)[/quote]
You're thinking of Matthew McConaughey.
-
[quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'225432\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 08:08 AM\'][quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'225408\' date=\'Sep 8 2009, 11:03 PM\'][quote name=\'ClockGameJohn\' post=\'225374\' date=\'Sep 8 2009, 01:14 PM\']They could have hired suave Mario Lopez, if the only thing in mind was to attract young females.[/quote]
But how could they script it so Mario would be shirtless at least once during both half hours? ;)[/quote]
You're thinking of Matthew McConaughey.
[/quote]
Have you seen Mario shirtless? Mario works for me!
/If I knew how you guys insert those links I would link the "Mario Bares All" shot from People Mag...yuhummmmm!
-
[quote name=\'cmjb13\' post=\'225425\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 07:43 AM\'][quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'225408\' date=\'Sep 8 2009, 11:03 PM\']And I've heard the crew is happier now because they're getting overtime again, which is something that Barker had taken away by changing the taping schedule. As they say, "It's better than Barker" (who even took away their candy drawer!).[/quote]
I'm sure they are also thrilled that catered food is back after it was removed. Not sure if that was Barker or CBS who took it away, but I understand Drew was the one who brought it back.
[/quote]
The good host taketh, the good host giveth away.
I think we can all agree that things are vastly different over there than the 'good ol' days'; it just seems to be mostly a matter of opinion and/or perspective as to whether you want to see the changes as good or bad. Best I can tell, they seem to be hurting more than helping, but at least they're trying new things over there. That's my opinion and I'm sticking with it.
/pentellit, when making a post, click the green 'Insert Link' icon next to the smiley-face on the toolbar above the text-entry box, then follow the instructions.
-
Moderators are nothing if not helpful. (http://\"http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a1Hhm03lT2k/STrRF7_27BI/AAAAAAAAEx4/7-7zRzpNXY8/s320/mario-lopez-shirtless_240x320.0.0.0x0.240x320.jpeg\")
Knowing our demographic, I'm sure pentellit is not nearly the only member pleased with this.
-
[quote name=\'Mr. Armadillo\' post=\'225434\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 08:52 AM\'][quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'225408\' date=\'Sep 8 2009, 11:03 PM\']And I've heard the crew is happier now because they're getting overtime again, which is something that Barker had taken away by changing the taping schedule. As they say, "It's better than Barker" (who even took away their candy drawer!).[/quote] [/quote]
[quote name=\'Mr. Armadillo\' post=\'225434\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 08:52 AM\']I think we can all agree that things are vastly different over there than the 'good ol' days'; it just seems to be mostly a matter of opinion and/or perspective as to whether you want to see the changes as good or bad. Best I can tell, they seem to be hurting more than helping, but at least they're trying new things over there. That's my opinion and I'm sticking with it.[/quote]
I couldn't tell if by the phrase 'good ol' days' you were being sarcastic or serious. Just so it's known, for the people who worked on Price the 'good ol' days' were also racked with fear, dread, lawyers, questioning, suspicion, distrust, anxiety, interogations, lies moles rats weasel, being questioned about co-workers, fearing for one's job, depositions, legal documents to sign, testifying, friends and co-workers getting fired, longtime employees losing their jobs. One model, who shall remain nameless (see Claudia Jordan's twitter) actually left Price because it was such an awful place to work.
So yeah, those were "the good ol' days".
Like they say now "It's better than Barker".
-
Don't forget more time in the edit suite, and all of this to put out the same product. It's still a one-hour show, five days per week, 39 weeks per year, no nighttime show, six One Bids, six pricing games and two showcases. Heck, they've even gone back to their old taping schedule so they can crank out six shows in three days rather than five shows in four days. Nothing about the format and nothing about the prize structure has changed.
Maybe I'm just being dense, but if they're doing more shows in fewer days, and no matter now much editing they do I'm sure it doesn't involve the entire staff, how do they lose weeks off? What are they doing in the extra time that they weren't before?
Re: Mario Lopez: a flaw in the plan. When was the last time you saw a game show where contestants dressed up more than the host?* The host has to stay fully dressed to keep the contestants from disrobing.**
*Excluding LMAD
**Excluding Yolanda
-
[quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'225440\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 12:05 PM\']I couldn't tell if by the phrase 'good ol' days' you were being sarcastic or serious.[/quote]
A little of both, actually. Nostalgia can make anything look better than it actually was, and like I said before, I was never backstage at TBBS to judge for myself, so all I have to go by are the reports of others in this thread.
From the perspective of my living room, 'good ol' days' is an accurate term. From the perspective from someone who actually WAS there, 'good ol' days' is probably sarcasm, but what do I know?
-
[quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'225440\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 01:05 PM\']One model, who shall remain nameless (see Claudia Jordan's twitter) actually left Price because it was such an awful place to work.[/quote]Just about ruined these (http://\"http://www.flickr.com/photos/like_the_grand_canyon/3380901081/\") for me.
-
[quote name=\'CarShark\' post=\'225454\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 02:10 PM\']Just about ruined these (http://\"http://www.flickr.com/photos/like_the_grand_canyon/3380901081/\") for me.[/quote]
Wait, what?
/dammit, now I want Oreos
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'225455\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 05:36 PM\']Wait, what?[/quote]In the Curling suit, there's an allegation that one of the higher-ups (Rossi, I think?) would demand that in instances were three models were used, Claudia ("the black model") would always be in the center, calling it the "reverse Oreo."
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'225455\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 05:36 PM\']/dammit, now I want Oreos[/quote]
The only bright side to having a daylong power outage: I have a chance to refill my Hot Fudge Sundae Oreo supply when I go shopping.
-
[quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'225458\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 03:08 PM\']calling it the "reverse Oreo."[/quote]
Yes, thank you, I'm aware of the symbolism, I was just wondering about why it was mentioned.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'225461\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 06:28 PM\']I was just wondering about why it was mentioned.[/quote]...because Claudia was mentioned, who made that allegation.
-
[quote name=\'CarShark\' post=\'225454\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 02:10 PM\'][quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'225440\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 01:05 PM\']One model, who shall remain nameless (see Claudia Jordan's twitter) actually left Price because it was such an awful place to work.[/quote]Just about ruined these (http://\"http://www.flickr.com/photos/like_the_grand_canyon/3380901081/\") for me.
[/quote]
Ooohhh, someone is familiar with TPIR lawsuits! (Or has been doing his homework....). Which is it?
/Thanks Matt for that taste of Mario eye candy ;)
//Does anyone know; Is it humanly possible to be more cut than Mario? Is there such a thing as a 24pack?
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'225397\' date=\'Sep 8 2009, 09:08 PM\']John -
Do you have national ratings?[/quote]
:)
[quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'225408\' date=\'Sep 8 2009, 11:03 PM\']RE ratings John: Yes, declining before announcement - up after, culminating with Barker's final week with numbers like he hadn't gotten in ages. I also said "The View will continually eat TPIR for lunch with it's demographic".[/quote]
Actually, again not true.
The week of October 23-27, 2006 (the week prior to Barker's retirement announcement) here were the ratings:
PRICE (1st Half): 3.6/13 Share
VIEW (1st Half): 2.7/10 Share
PRICE (2nd Half): 4.2/16 Share
VIEW (2nd Half): 2.5/9 Share
PRICE AVERAGE: 3.9/14.5
VIEW AVERAGE: 2.6/9.5
The week of October 30-November 3, 2006 (the week after Barker's retirement announcement) here were the ratings:
PRICE (1st Half): 3.4/13 Share (-.2)
VIEW (1st Half): 2.8/11 Share (+.1)
PRICE (2nd Half): 4.2/16 Share (-)
VIEW (2nd Half): 2.6/10 Share (+.1)
PRICE AVERAGE: 3.8/14.5 (-.1)
VIEW AVERAGE: 2.7/10.5 (+.1)
The week of June 11-15, 2007 (the week of Barker's final shows) here were the ratings:
PRICE (1st Half): 3.7/13 Share
VIEW (1st Half): 2.7/10 Share
PRICE (2nd Half): 4.5/16 Share
VIEW (2nd Half): 2.6/9 Share
PRICE AVERAGE: 4.1/11.5
VIEW AVERAGE: 2.65/9.5
The week of October 15-19, 2007 (the week of Drew's first shows) here were the ratings:
PRICE (1st Half): 3.8/14 Share
VIEW (1st Half): 3.0/11 Share
PRICE (2nd Half): 4.3/16 Share
VIEW (2nd Half): 2.7/10 Share
PRICE AVERAGE: 4.05/15
VIEW AVERAGE: 2.85/10.5
One year later, October 13-17, 2008...
PRICE (1st Half): 2.6/10 Share (-1.2)
VIEW (1st Half): 3.1/12 Share (+.1)
PRICE (2nd Half): 3.3/12 Share (-1.0)
VIEW (2nd Half): 3.0/11 Share (+.3)
PRICE AVERAGE: 2.95/11 (-1.1)
VIEW AVERAGE: 3.05/11.5 (+.2)
-
Nice job, John. What are the latest you have?
-
I'm not at home right now, so the last I have access to are saved in my e-mail.
Week of November 17-21, 2008:
PRICE (1st Half): 2.9/11 Share
VIEW (1st Half): 3.2/12 Share
PRICE (2nd Half): 3.5/13 Share
VIEW (2nd Half): 3.1/11 Share
PRICE AVERAGE: 3.2/12
VIEW AVERAGE: 3.15/11.5
-
Wow, even I fell for the Barker PR spin about the high ratings his last shows got! Wow. Thanks for the clarification, good to know.
-
Any nationals for 2009?
TPIR went from about a 4 to about a 3 in the year subsequent to Drew's taking over, about a 25% drop.
These numbers don't take into account clearances.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'225478\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 08:51 PM\']Any nationals for 2009?[/quote]
Not with me here. There was an article a few months ago just prior to the end of the Season that noted Price's ratings dropped another 6% this past Season after they dropped 12% his first year.
http://daytimeconfidential.com/2009/05/the...loss-of-ratings (http://\"http://daytimeconfidential.com/2009/05/the-price-is-right-suffers-six-percent-loss-of-ratings\")
-
[quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'225477\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 08:43 PM\']Wow, even I fell for the Barker PR spin about the high ratings his last shows got! Wow. Thanks for the clarification, good to know.[/quote]
You mean you were -- *gasp* -- wrong about something?!
...no, it couldn't be. I must have misread it.
*Reads again*
Nope, it's true -- the Pen didn't know what it was Telling.
Incidentally, I can't say I remember any "spin" about the ratings in question -- just a lot of assumptions that they'd be higher which were, apparently, never backed up by anyone actually finding them.
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'225482\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 06:01 PM\'][quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'225477\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 08:43 PM\']Wow, even I fell for the Barker PR spin about the high ratings his last shows got! Wow. Thanks for the clarification, good to know.[/quote]
You mean you were -- *gasp* -- wrong about something?![/quote]
Yep, and I admit it!
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'225482\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 09:01 PM\'][quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'225477\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 08:43 PM\']Wow, even I fell for the Barker PR spin about the high ratings his last shows got! Wow. Thanks for the clarification, good to know.[/quote]
You mean you were -- *gasp* -- wrong about something?!
...no, it couldn't be. I must have misread it.
*Reads again*
Nope, it's true -- the Pen didn't know what it was Telling.
Incidentally, I can't say I remember any "spin" about the ratings in question -- just a lot of assumptions that they'd be higher which were, apparently, never backed up by anyone actually finding them.
[/quote]
Steve, please. Not another one.
-
[quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'225433\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 10:37 AM\'][quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'225432\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 08:08 AM\'][quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'225408\' date=\'Sep 8 2009, 11:03 PM\'][quote name=\'ClockGameJohn\' post=\'225374\' date=\'Sep 8 2009, 01:14 PM\']They could have hired suave Mario Lopez, if the only thing in mind was to attract young females.[/quote]
But how could they script it so Mario would be shirtless at least once during both half hours? ;)[/quote]
You're thinking of Matthew McConaughey.
[/quote]
Have you seen Mario shirtless? Mario works for me!
/If I knew how you guys insert those links I would link the "Mario Bares All" shot from People Mag...yuhummmmm!
[/quote]
Mr. Davidson would like a word with you (http://\"http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_n-hm9gvEHbk/SmNUC0_chSI/AAAAAAAAFKo/iykG7Hmi1WM/s400/john+davidson.jpg\"), Pent...
[color=\"#FF0000\"]
WARNING: Not for the faint of heart!!![/color] (Yeah, it's THAT photo of John Davidson!!)
-
^NO WAY! Is that for real TimK2003? Nah, gotta be Photo Shop. Is it? Oh, you are bad!
-
Steve, please. Not another one.
What Brandon said.
-
[quote name=\'ClockGameJohn\' post=\'225473\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 08:23 PM\']I'm not at home right now, so the last I have access to are saved in my e-mail.
Week of November 17-21, 2008:
PRICE (1st Half): 2.9/11 Share
VIEW (1st Half): 3.2/12 Share
PRICE (2nd Half): 3.5/13 Share
VIEW (2nd Half): 3.1/11 Share
PRICE AVERAGE: 3.2/12
VIEW AVERAGE: 3.15/11.5[/quote]
This was right around the elections, when The View was getting a TON of buzz. It is usually now the #1 show in all of daytime currently (based off what I've read), while TPIR bounces around between 1st and 3rd.
Tyshaun
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'225490\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 09:43 PM\']
Steve, please. Not another one.
What Brandon said.
[/quote]
In Steve's defense, it's a two way street. :)
-
Why are daytime ratings so hard to come by?
-
[quote name=\'ClockGameJohn\' post=\'225493\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 10:07 PM\']In Steve's defense, it's a two way street. :)[/quote]
No, let's be real clear on this. The only time either one of them dared admit they were wrong about something, and the other makes a huge, nasty, totally unnecessary sarcastic deal about it. There's only one person out of line in that situation, and it better not happen again.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'225499\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 07:40 PM\'][quote name=\'ClockGameJohn\' post=\'225493\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 10:07 PM\']In Steve's defense, it's a two way street. :)[/quote]
No, let's be real clear on this. The only time either one of them dared admit they were wrong about something, and the other makes a huge, nasty, totally unnecessary sarcastic deal about it. There's only one person out of line in that situation, and it better not happen again.[/quote]
Not to mention that one of the parties was asked to "take it outside" a mere few days ago.
-
[quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'225496\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 09:16 PM\']Why are daytime ratings so hard to come by?[/quote]
I asked the ratings gods at TVByTheNumbers.com this very question a while back. The response I got was basically this (paraphrased): Nielsen only reports the top 5 shows among women in the 18-49 demo on a regular basis, and TPIR is almost never in this demo. The only way that numbers become publically known is if CBS (or ABC) puts out a press release about the ratings of their particular shows.
So, I think it was back in February or March, ABC put out a press release touting The View's demos and viewership. The presser included ratings of other programs that The View 'competes' against (and I use compete loosely - even though Price and The View are in the same time slot, they do not attract the same audience), such as Price and Y&R.
But you know, some will totally discount those ratings found in such press releases as "ridiculous" and "wildly inaccurate".
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'225422\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 06:25 AM\']
I think that kind of slick performance, near perfection, was just a by-product of Barker a seasoned professional with live broadcasting chops walking through the same doors for 35 years. Aside from dementia, how much could the guy screw up?
You could make the same point about Dennis James, Tom Kennedy, even Bill Cullen going back to the old days.
It took Barker 30-some years to have his "Dice Game moment" and everyone, apparently even Barker, thought he was finally losing it. How long did it take The Drewster to have his first similar moment? It seems to be the common wisdom that it took a great deal of effort to get Drewski to work the three simple words "without going over" into his patter and he still balked when he had to say them. Again, I was there when Drew escorted a contestant to the downstage side of the Take Two game and while he was saying "You can win these fabulous prizes" on stage, Bart Eskander was screaming "He's on the wrong side of the game! He's on the wrong side of the game!" over the P.L. and the stage manager positioned Drewmeister to the upstage side of the game.
[/quote]
Say, I've heard of this "dice game moment" but I can't find any clips of it online....can someone please elaborate?
-
[quote name=\'J.R.\' post=\'225206\' date=\'Sep 7 2009, 02:29 AM\']Some people like Drew Carey. Some people don't like Drew Carey.[/quote]
Put me down as one who likes him.
-
[quote name=\'Bill Neuweiler\' post=\'225511\' date=\'Sep 10 2009, 12:11 AM\']Say, I've heard of this "dice game moment" but I can't find any clips of it online....can someone please elaborate?[/quote]Boom. (http://\"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckWylA0ztD4\") He had some other "senior moments" sprinkled around this episode, like during the third one-bid and Bonus Game.
-
[quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'225514\' date=\'Sep 10 2009, 12:33 AM\'][quote name=\'Bill Neuweiler\' post=\'225511\' date=\'Sep 10 2009, 12:11 AM\']Say, I've heard of this "dice game moment" but I can't find any clips of it online....can someone please elaborate?[/quote]Boom. (http://\"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckWylA0ztD4\") He had some other "senior moments" sprinkled around this episode, like during the third one-bid and Bonus Game.[/quote]
I can't even remember the one during Bonus Game (although I knew there was a third one in there somewhere). What happened with that one?
-
You guys really think THAT'S what made him decide to retire?!?! Sure, he made a mistake. Big deal. I'm 50 years younger than him, and I've made similar mistakes on the air. I think this whole "Dice Game incident" is making a mountain out of a mole hill.
I honestly think that Barker did not retire because of that, and he didn't retire because of a lawsuit. He retired because he was 83 and it was time. 50 years is a loooong time.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'225478\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 08:51 PM\']Any nationals for 2009?[/quote]
Week of February 16-20, 2009:
PRICE (1st Half): 2.9
VIEW (1st Half): 3.5
PRICE (2nd Half): 3.5
VIEW (2nd Half): 3.3
PRICE AVERAGE: 3.2
VIEW AVERAGE: 3.4
-
You guys really think THAT'S what made him decide to retire?!?!
By itself, no. Supposedly he had been thinking about his retirement date for some time before then, and he does seem a little rattled over these on-air incidents, saying "Maybe I should start seeing a psychiatrist" or words to that effect.
I don't think Deborah Curling's refusal to sign the CBS agreement had anything to do with it either, sorry pentellit. Curling's lawsuit naming CBS as a defendant didn't come until much later, almost a year, and by then the die had been cast.
-
[quote name=\'pentellit\' post=\'225489\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 09:38 PM\']^NO WAY! Is that for real TimK2003? Nah, gotta be Photo Shop. Is it? Oh, you are bad![/quote]
It's real and from the early-to-mid-70s. It caused quite a stir at our former home about seven years ago...I revisited the thread recently and it still gave me a good laugh...
-
[quote name=\'ClockGameJohn\' post=\'225523\' date=\'Sep 10 2009, 02:48 AM\'][quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'225478\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 08:51 PM\']Any nationals for 2009?[/quote]
Week of February 16-20, 2009:
PRICE (1st Half): 2.9
VIEW (1st Half): 3.5
PRICE (2nd Half): 3.5
VIEW (2nd Half): 3.3
PRICE AVERAGE: 3.2
VIEW AVERAGE: 3.4
[/quote]
So honestly, despite the dip in ratings, there really hasn't been any consistency from week to week. From what I saw, the numbers were high for Bob's last and Drew's first week, fairly low by Drew's one-year mark, back up a month later, and about the same a few more months later, but still behind The View. Weird.
-
I can't even remember the one during Bonus Game (although I knew there was a third one in there somewhere). What happened with that one?
There was a time that Bob forgot how to play Bonus Game. The mistake was edited out, but not very well. The player won the first 3 prizes, but incorrectly guessed the 4th. Bob thought she LOST THE GAME and started to escort her off the stage. He COMPLETELY FORGOT about revealing the "bonus" prize. However, what WE saw was Bob reacting unusually to the contestant getting the 4th prize wrong, and then he suddenly recovers and reveals the bonus prize. So, not only did he forget about the bonus prize reveal, he also forgot that the contestant actually had a pretty good chance of winning, guessing 3 out of 4 right!
-
I can't look at YouTube videos here at work, but this (http://\"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlAII1eHhNg\") should be the playing in question, if the link's still good.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'225526\' date=\'Sep 10 2009, 02:30 AM\']
You guys really think THAT'S what made him decide to retire?!?!
Supposedly he had been thinking about his retirement date for some time before then, and he does seem a little rattled over these on-air incidents, saying "Maybe I should start seeing a psychiatrist" or words to that effect.
I don't think Deborah Curling's refusal to sign the CBS agreement had anything to do with it either, sorry pentellit.
[/quote]
Not a problem. Some people attribute Barker's "senior moments" and subsequent leaving to age and dementia, and others attribute it to distraction by the legal drama that was unfolding at the time. Either way doesn't matter, he's gone!
-
[quote name=\'Mr. Armadillo\' post=\'225540\' date=\'Sep 10 2009, 09:15 AM\']I can't look at YouTube videos here at work, but this (http://\"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlAII1eHhNg\") should be the playing in question, if the link's still good.[/quote]
Nothing much happened during the Bonus Game here.
-
[quote name=\'TimK2003\' post=\'225487\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 08:31 PM\']WARNING: Not for the faint of heart!!! (Yeah, it's THAT photo of John Davidson!!)[/quote]
It'd be vastly appreciated if these warnings were posted BEFORE the link to which they pertain, as some members of the board read these posts with blinders on and simply click a link as soon as they see one.
\And yes, that was Photoshopped. Anyone can tell that's Dick Clark's body.
\\And no, I can't tell you how I know.
-
[quote name=\'TimK2003\' post=\'225487\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 09:31 PM\']Mr. Davidson would like a word with you (http://\"http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_n-hm9gvEHbk/SmNUC0_chSI/AAAAAAAAFKo/iykG7Hmi1WM/s400/john+davidson.jpg\")...
[color=\"#FF0000\"]
WARNING: Not for the faint of heart!!![/color] (Yeah, it's THAT photo of John Davidson!!)[/quote]
Forgive me, but... Cathy Lee Crosby took one look at that and went "That's Incredible!"...sorry.
-
[quote name=\'dale_grass\' post=\'225560\' date=\'Sep 10 2009, 11:59 AM\'][quote name=\'TimK2003\' post=\'225487\' date=\'Sep 9 2009, 08:31 PM\']Yeah, it's THAT photo of John Davidson!![/quote]\And yes, that was Photoshopped. Anyone can tell that's Dick Clark's body.[/quote]
Oh, soooo good. LOL!
-
[quote name=\'golden-road\' post=\'225566\' date=\'Sep 10 2009, 02:53 PM\']sorry.[/quote]
No, you're not. :)