Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: 12/06 Schedule Changes  (Read 10078 times)

CaseyAbell

  • Guest
12/06 Schedule Changes
« Reply #15 on: October 25, 2004, 12:32:08 PM »
I bow to Zach. We'll have to wait until next month before some of GSN's Millionaire eps get into the five-year category. Some of GSN's WBSM episodes are already there. Incidentally, anybody know why GSN didn't license the August, 1999 Millionaire shows?

But really, this shows how arbitrary a time cutoff is. Do the Regis Millionaire eps suddenly turn into "classics" when they cross the five-year line, or the ten-year line, or the any-year line? Are the WBSM episodes from 1998 classics, while those from 2000 aren't?

Again, this isn't to be argumentative. It's just that an age requirement for "classic-ness" does seem pretty subjective and, well, arbitrary. Millionaire and WBSM are two of my favorite game shows ever. For me they'll always be classics regardless of age requirements. Of course, that's my own purely subjective and arbitrary opinion.
« Last Edit: October 25, 2004, 12:37:43 PM by CaseyAbell »

clemon79

  • Member
  • Posts: 27220
  • Director of Suck Consolidation
12/06 Schedule Changes
« Reply #16 on: October 25, 2004, 12:37:23 PM »
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'Oct 25 2004, 09:32 AM\']I bow to Zach.
[/quote]
That says it all.
Chris Lemon, King Fool, Director of Suck Consolidation
http://fredsmythe.com
Email: clemon79@outlook.com  |  Skype: FredSmythe

mmb5

  • Member
  • Posts: 2061
12/06 Schedule Changes
« Reply #17 on: October 25, 2004, 12:37:46 PM »
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'Oct 25 2004, 11:32 AM\']I bow to Zach. We'll have to wait until next month before some of GSN's Millionaire eps get into the five-year category. Some of GSN's WBSM episodes are already there. Incidentally, anybody know why GSN didn't license the August, 1999 Millionaire shows?

[snapback]61874[/snapback]
[/quote]

Just guessing out of an undertermined body orafice, but probably because some of them were half hour shows?


--Mike
Portions of this post not affecting the outcome have been edited or recreated.

CaseyAbell

  • Guest
12/06 Schedule Changes
« Reply #18 on: October 25, 2004, 12:41:09 PM »
IIRC, GSN has accommodated some half-hour Millionaire eps before. I don't know, maybe the very oldest shows just got missed.

Absolute truth: I was wondering how soon Chris Lemon would pick up the "bow to Zach" line. Five minutes.

dzinkin

  • Guest
12/06 Schedule Changes
« Reply #19 on: October 25, 2004, 12:45:10 PM »
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'Oct 25 2004, 12:21 PM\']Some Regis Millionaire eps date from more than five years ago, as do many of the WBSM episodes. Is that old enough? I don't know. As I said in the previous post, it gets pretty arbitrary as to where you place the magic line of "oldness" for game shows. They certainly are traditional game shows, like almost everything else on GSN's current schedule.
[snapback]61872[/snapback]
[/quote]
The fact that there is no fixed formula for determining whether or not a game show is "old" does not mean that there is not a clear difference between a show that has not aired anywhere else in 10, 20, or 30 years, and a show that gets canceled by another network and immediately goes to GSN.  And again, you know that as well.

Quote
Quote
I also know for certain that if the rest of the board were perfectly happy with GSN as it is, you'd be the one criticizing it... just to be different, and just to get a rise out of people.
How could you know this for a "fact"? Believe it or not, I don't believe in just being different to get a rise out of people. I realy don't care if people get a rise or not. (This is not a reference to Viagra.)
The word I used was "certain," not "fact."  Can I read your mind?  No.  Can I predict, with "assurance in mind or action" (m-w.com is a wonderful thing), that no matter what criticism anyone else offers regarding GSN, you'll take the opposite view nearly every time?  Yes.  Your pattern of posts demonstrates the ample grounds for my certainty.

Quote
What I do care for is being as objective as possible in evaluating GSN or anything else. If somebody says something about GSN's schedule, I think the best way to discuss the issue is to...look at GSN's actual schedule. You know, what they're showing RIGHT NOW!, as Fox would say.
And yet, you don't offer an objective assessment of what makes Celebrity Blackjack a "traditional" game show.  It is your OPINION -- and you're entitled to it.  It is the basis for said opinion that I question.  If most of the board called "Celebrity Blackjack" a traditional game show, there's no doubt in my mind that you'd say that it wasn't.

As for looking at the actual schedule, that's not enough when you go out of your way to classify as many shows as "old reruns" as possible... especially when you know that your definition is far away from what everybody else who's voiced an opinion on the matter here considers "old."  Yet again, you know exactly what you're doing when you make that judgment -- and if everyone else here were to call WBSM "an old rerun," you'd say it was recent, just to be different.

Quote
If this gets a rise out of people, I'm honestly sorry. But - and I'm not trying to get into a spitting match - what other approach would you suggest?
I doubt very much that you're sorry... but as to what I'd suggest, I've already made my suggestion: admit that you're taking the contrarian view for the sole purpose of taking the contrarian view.  I don't expect it to happen, but it would be nice to see you admit it nonetheless.
« Last Edit: October 25, 2004, 12:54:47 PM by dzinkin »

Jimmy Owen

  • Member
  • Posts: 7472
12/06 Schedule Changes
« Reply #20 on: October 25, 2004, 12:48:09 PM »
I'd be willing to propose that anything that went off the air before the sign-on of Game Show Network (ten years ago) should be considered "old." Anything that preemed and went off after (0-9 years ago) is of recent vintage and in-production shows should be called new.  My dream schedule would be the B&Ws from 7-9 am. Classic color network daytime show reruns from 9-4, (maybe an infomercial hour from 11-12 as a consession to TPIR) Recent GSN productions from 4-7, another infomercial hour from 7-8 when fans will probably be watching J! and WOF) 8-9 WWTBAM. 9-12 the Dodgeball and Blackjack Tourneys.  Ben Stein and Street Smarts from 12-1. The nightcap from 1-2 would be color TTTT and WML? At 2 am-7am, solid Infomercials or more games if the budget will allow.
Let's Make a Deal was the first show to air on Buzzr. 6/1/15 8PM.

CaseyAbell

  • Guest
12/06 Schedule Changes
« Reply #21 on: October 25, 2004, 12:56:05 PM »
Quote
If most of the board called "Celebrity Blackjack" a traditional game show, there's no doubt in my mind that you'd say that it wasn't.
Again, I don't know why you've gotten this idea. Most people on this board don't seem to think All New 3's a Crapper is a good show. I agree with that consensus. Most folks here also don't seem to have much use for Extreme Gong or Love Buffet or Throut and Neck, and I again agree. This odd notion that I automatically disagree with what seems to be the consensus on this board is, well, odd.

I changed "fact" to "certain." Still don't know how you can be so certain about something, when I've just offered several counter-examples to your "certainty."

As for Celeb Blackjack, it shows contestants playing an interesting and complex game for admittedly charity prizes. One host interacts continually with the contestants. Visual displays update the score continually. Frankly, it strikes me as far more of a spontaneous and traditional game show than the heavily scripted and manipulated goings-on in H2. It certainly places far more emphasis on the gameplay than many panel and interview shows like IGaS, You Bet Your Life, Love Connection, etc.

SplitSecond

  • Guest
12/06 Schedule Changes
« Reply #22 on: October 25, 2004, 01:00:36 PM »
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'Oct 25 2004, 09:56 AM\']Frankly, it strikes me as far more of a spontaneous and traditional game show than the heavily scripted and manipulated goings-on in H2.
[snapback]61880[/snapback]
[/quote]

Pray tell, what do you mean by "heavily... manipulated"?

dzinkin

  • Guest
12/06 Schedule Changes
« Reply #23 on: October 25, 2004, 01:03:50 PM »
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'Oct 25 2004, 12:56 PM\']Again, I don't know why you've gotten this idea. Most people on this board don't seem to think All New 3's a Crapper is a good show. I agree with that consensus. Most folks here also don't seem to have much use for Extreme Gong or Love Buffet or Throut and Neck, and I again agree. This odd notion that I automatically disagree with what seems to be the consensus on this board is, well, odd.

I changed "fact" to "certain." Still don't know how you can be so certain about something, when I've just offered several counter-examples to your "certainty."
[snapback]61880[/snapback]
[/quote]
It doesn't invalidate my point at all.  It simply demonstrates that occasionally, taking the contrarian view would be so ridiculous that even you can't say it with a straight face. :-)
« Last Edit: October 25, 2004, 01:04:33 PM by dzinkin »

CaseyAbell

  • Guest
12/06 Schedule Changes
« Reply #24 on: October 25, 2004, 01:04:35 PM »
Quote
I'd be willing to propose that anything that went off the air before the sign-on of Game Show Network (ten years ago) should be considered "old."
Well, does that mean the Regis Millionaire eps will never be old, because they were all made after GSN debuted?

Again, I'm really not trying to be contrarian for the sake of being contrarian, no matter what David says. But this looks like another subjective and at least debatable criterion for "old-ness."

Even by this prior-to-GSN's-debut criterion, the current schedule offers many hours of old shows. In fact, by this criterion, GSN may be the only outlet in this country's TV universe offering any old game shows for grownups at all.
« Last Edit: October 25, 2004, 01:09:23 PM by CaseyAbell »

clemon79

  • Member
  • Posts: 27220
  • Director of Suck Consolidation
12/06 Schedule Changes
« Reply #25 on: October 25, 2004, 01:05:11 PM »
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'Oct 25 2004, 09:41 AM\']Absolute truth: I was wondering how soon Chris Lemon would pick up the "bow to Zach" line. Five minutes.
[snapback]61877[/snapback]
[/quote]
Well, when you THROW high gas to Johnny Damon, you shouldn't be surprised when the ball is headed towards Landsdown Street a few minutes later....
Chris Lemon, King Fool, Director of Suck Consolidation
http://fredsmythe.com
Email: clemon79@outlook.com  |  Skype: FredSmythe

CaseyAbell

  • Guest
12/06 Schedule Changes
« Reply #26 on: October 25, 2004, 01:06:59 PM »
Quote
It simply demonstrates that occasionally, taking the contrarian view would be so ridiculous that even you can't say it with a straight face. :-)
So now "occasionally" I'm not contrarian? In other words, when I'm contrarian, you're certain I'm always contrarian, and when I'm not contrarian, you're certain I'm not always contrarian?

Okay, I can agree with that. Which is not contrarian.

CaseyAbell

  • Guest
12/06 Schedule Changes
« Reply #27 on: October 25, 2004, 01:08:36 PM »
Quote
Well, when you THROW high gas to Johnny Damon, you shouldn't be surprised when the ball is headed towards Landsdown Street a few minutes later....
No doubt. Though the Yankees were getting Damon out with just about anything before those two pitches in game seven.

CaseyAbell

  • Guest
12/06 Schedule Changes
« Reply #28 on: October 25, 2004, 01:12:22 PM »
Quote
Pray tell, what do you mean by "heavily... manipulated"?
"The areas of questioning designed for each celebrity and possible bluff answers are discussed with each celebrity in advance. In the course of their briefing, actual questions and answers may be given or discerned by the celebrities."

If this stuff was happening on a reality show, the Prof would be, well, very interested. In fact, he got upset with similar briefings of the celebs on Donny Pyramid. And I agree with him (I said in my best non-contrarian voice).
« Last Edit: October 25, 2004, 01:13:34 PM by CaseyAbell »

dzinkin

  • Guest
12/06 Schedule Changes
« Reply #29 on: October 25, 2004, 01:13:34 PM »
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'Oct 25 2004, 01:06 PM\']
Quote
It simply demonstrates that occasionally, taking the contrarian view would be so ridiculous that even you can't say it with a straight face. :-)
So now "occasionally" I'm not contrarian? In other words, when I'm contrarian, you're certain I'm always contrarian, and when I'm not contrarian, you're certain I'm not always contrarian?

Okay, I can agree with that. Which is not contrarian.
[snapback]61885[/snapback]
[/quote]
Please show me where I've said that you've always taken the contrarian view.  In fact, I said "nearly every time," not simply "every time."

You take the contrarian view when you're reasonably certain that you can get a rise out of people.  You don't when you realize that taking the contrarian view will simply make people question your judgment and/or sanity.