The Game Show Forum > Game Show Channels & Networks
The new GSN schedule effective March 15th...
melman1:
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Feb 16 2004, 02:41 PM\'] No matter how much "cheesy fun" it may turn out to be, there will be a group of traditionalists who will rip it to shreds. There doesn't appear to be anything out of place in making that observation. [/quote]
The observation itself is flawed, as it assumes that anyone would like (or dislike) a show simply because they are a "traditionalist" when maybe, just maybe, they have a fully functioning brain that can decide what is and isn't crapola on a show-by-show basis.
These boards usually operate at a higher level than that, which is why I requested that the argument go back to from whence it came. (Which doesn't look quite right grammatically but so be it.) Hardly worth being "amazed" over, I'd think.
FeudDude:
I personally would love to see them show one of the early '90s WOF seasons. 1993-94 would be great (and yes, I remember that puzzleboard very fondly). Actually I'd really love to see the 92-93 season again, but I am aware that GSN showed that one before I started getting the channel, so I digress.
Also, I believe the 92-93 and 93-94 openings were pretty much identical visually except that in the 92-93 season, "10th Anniversary" appeared at the beginning I believe. Charlie's spiels were slightly different in the two seasons as well.
CaseyAbell:
Gee, you take a walk and a thread develops about you. I thought my observation was tepid, almost a truism. And the comments after the observation helped to prove my point. I'm sure that GSN execs have the same worry: their core audience won't even give dating or reality games a chance since that audience has already pretty much decided the shows are "Grade-A CRAP." That's why they're kicking off the changes with a double run of blackjack instead of a double run of Fake-a-Date. That's why they've ordered more episodes of blackjack and none of the other non-trad shows.
This is controversial? Looks more like a recognition of reality to me. Of course GSN isn't going for the traditionalists with Fake-a-Date or Spy TV. Those shows are designed to appeal to a new audience that's not interested in traditional, in-studio game shows. I don't know why anybody should get upset over this thuddingly obvious fact.
But luring a new audience is really tricky. You risk turning off the traditionalists, who of course will tend to regard the new stuff as "crapola." So GSN is hedging its bets by not committing too heavily to the further-out non-traditional stuff. Wow, this is a blinding insight, no?
In other top-secret, highly controversial news...the sun sets in the west.
EDIT: By the way, I like the fast-paced slapstick and silliness on Cram, and I'm happy that GSN is bringing the show back, if only in reruns. Nice to see the return of RR to nighttime, too. I also think the third season of Lingo is the best yet, with a much better set and a sidekick to smooth out the judging decisions and transitions between puzzles. Now if we could only get rid of the scoring updates after every puzzle...
Whammy? Todd Newton got too loud for me. I know the producers told him to get loud, but he still rubbed my auditory nerves the wrong way.
melman1:
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'Feb 16 2004, 07:28 PM\'] You risk turning off the traditionalists, who of course will tend to regard the new stuff as "crapola." [/quote]
You just don't get it, do you? If I dislike crapola, don't brand me with a label. Just describe me as "one who dislikes crapola".
For the record, I consider TJW, Bullseye, PYL and reality shows to collectively be crapola. What categorization would you use to describe that?
tommycharles:
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'Feb 16 2004, 09:28 PM\'] Whammy? Todd Newton got too loud for me. I know the producers told him to get loud, but he still rubbed my auditory nerves the wrong way. [/quote]
Hold on a second here - they *told* him to get loud?? Hmm....what would the show have been like if he hadn't been told that....
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version