The Game Show Forum > The Big Board
Have Game Shows Jumped the Shark?
Ian Wallis:
--- Quote ---The genre typically doesn't lend itself to those defining end-of-the-line moments that other types of shows do.
--- End quote ---
What about when a show dramatically changes its format part way through the run? I'd think of that as a "jump the shark" moment. The Christmas, 1974 changes on "Now You See It" come to mind as one that fits the bill.
--- Quote ---Whew! are two examples of games that weren't meant to be celebrity games, but were retro-fitted during the run to awkwardly accomodate stars in a misguided attempt to boost ratings.
--- End quote ---
Was "Whew" really doing that badly when they added celebrities? If I remember correctly, they tried a celebrity format for three weeks and then went back to regular contestants before making the celebrity format permanent.
Jay Temple:
[quote name=\'inturnaround\' date=\'Oct 22 2003, 09:08 AM\'] The game show style you see now is temporary. It will forever be attached to this era and, I think, will stay there. Game shows of the future will have their own styles just like game shows of the past.
We're currently in a game show lull sure, but this too shall pass. We will have a new or remade show hit and hopefully it will lead to more quality shows being made. Of course this will also lead to a lot of bad shows being made, too, but since when hasn't that happened?
Do they make them like they used to? Of course not. They don't do anything the way they used to. If they did, Andy Rooney would be out of a job. [/quote]
There is one thing from our era that I fear will not be restricted to just our era, the amount of commercial time in a program. (And I'm only talking about the commercials that aren't built into the show proper. Fee plugs and TPIR's pricing games are a different matter.) Consider what would happen or did happen to some shows if they had to go from 25 minutes to 20-22:
Pyramid: 6-in-20, but that's not the worst of it. A huge part of the play-along factor in the Dick Clark era was giving the contestant a few more clues after time ran out. Now, it happens only occasionally in round one, and after round two, they go directly to the recap.
The Joker's Wild (the version that didn't suck): Then: You could usually get two complete games and bonus rounds in, if you didn't have to go to a tie-breaker. The prize package wasn't huge, but with two tries per day, it still gave you winners with nice totals. Now: (Ignore the need to adjust the dollar values for inflation.) You'd be lucky to get a full game, a bonus round and the beginning of another game in. (You can't just make it self-contained, because three Jokers early would give you ten minutes of air to fill.) If you only have one bonus round most days, you need to make it a bigger prize package, which makes it unlikely that anyone will stop with the money.
Tic Tac Dough: Impossible to adjust. Unlike TJW, you can't even change how long it takes to play a game.
Match Game 7x: Ignoring all the other problems with the actual MG98, the change is similar to TJW. Then: A full game come hell or high water. Occasionally, you have a 1-1 or 0-0 tie which means that a full game and bonus round takes a full half-hour of air time, but that's okay because the contestants dumb enough to force a 1-1 or 0-0 tie are funny on their own. Now: In order to get a full game and audience match even without the tie-breaker, you'd have to edit out the chit-chat that made the show so much fun to watch. (Picture Hollywood Squares with Vulcan celebrities.)
LMAD and Beat the Clock: One less deal and one less stunt per half-hour.
calliaume:
--- Quote ---
--- Quote ---The genre typically doesn't lend itself to those defining end-of-the-line moments that other types of shows do.
--- End quote ---
What about when a show dramatically changes its format part way through the run? I'd think of that as a "jump the shark" moment. The Christmas, 1974 changes on "Now You See It" come to mind as one that fits the bill.
--- End quote ---
I would argue that Now You See It's format was pretty mediocre to begin with. Generally speaking, G-T shows were usually as sound as they would get from day 1. When they started making major changes in the middle of the run -- Now You See It and Showoffs being the obvious examples; I wouldn't consider the changes they made to the end game on Card Sharks '86 or the Star Wheel in that category -- it was like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. The format signed off on didn't work really well and wasn't going to no matter what changes were made.
And Matt's absolutely right; I forgot about adding celebrities to shows, a point I make several times on my own site (and tack The Magnificent Marble Machine onto that list as well).
I honestly don't remember when Whew's changes became permanent, but if it was within two or three weeks of the initial experiment, it's possible the change was okayed by network execs enamored of the idea rather than waiting for the ratings to come in. Sometimes it's just utterly obvious celebrities on the show won't work, with New York-based The Money Maze's failed week with Soupy Sales and Anita Gillette being the obvious example. (Would have loved to have seen Peggy Cass or Arlene Francis romping through the maze, however.)
goongas:
The worst thing that has happened to game shows IMO is the abundance of commercials. Many shows I see now seem rushed. Also, the catering to 18-34 year olds doesn't help formats that are normally enjoyed by older people.
chris319:
--- Quote ---the very things you're complaining about happened thirty years ago, in relative terms. And that period of time is the beginning of the most vibrant and (debatably) the most interesting period of game shows in history
--- End quote ---
What I complained about in the initial post were changes for the worse, not changes for the better. You just described the '70s as a vibrant and interesting period, so would you agree that on balance the modernized '70s versions of shows were better than their '50s predecessors? I would say this was certainly the case with TPIR, MG and WML? Now let's bring this discussion into the new millenium: Would you argue that CS 2001 or MG 98 were improvements over the NBC/CBS versions?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version