The Game Show Forum > Game Show Channels & Networks
Arrrrrrrsssseeeeniiiiooo Haaaaalllll,
tyshaun1:
Star Search is a "game" in loosest sense of the term. No one is going to sit at home and play Star Search (or Average Joe, for that matter) with their friends and family. But, back to the original question, does this qualify as a game under GSN's new standards? The answer is yes, since apparently GSN thinks of SPY TV, Vegas Weddings and Average Joe as "games". Now, to get back to playing the home game of the Miss USA Pagaent. ;)
Tyshaun
uncamark:
The last time we went over this, Chris C. proclaimed that a game show is essentially an unjudged competition that tests skill, luck or instincts, no matter if there's a prize offered or not. Under his definition, *all* talent contests and shows like "Survivor" aren't game shows because they depend on a judged decision for the winner, even if they do contain unjudged competition elements. However, "TWL" does count as a game show because even if most of the game's outcomes are judged, the winner in the end is the one with the most correct answers in the final round. Something I would easily agree with.
However, for the layman game shows are mixed in with all other unscripted programming, including talent contests, relationship shows, hidden-camera shows, etc. All of which allows GSN to widen its programming net.
While thinking this over, I just came to a realization that in many ways, "Truth or Consequences," the show considered the granddaddy of all non-quiz game shows, is not really a game show. Yes, some of the stunts were competitions against the house or others (particularly the "Hush/Walking Man" contests on the radio version). However, so many stunts on the show were just observations of human nature, practical jokes or set-ups for reunions, with the contestants receiving the prizes no matter what the outcome. Also, the basic "game" of "if you don't tell the truth, you must pay the consequnces" had become by the Barker era purely a mechanic, since the contestants were going to participate in the stunt no matter what and the questions had gone from obscure knowledge to silly riddles like the catch-up round on "Cram" (much of the time Barker didn't even do the question, especially since he spent more time on the contestant interviews than his predecessors or successors).
Something to think about.
CaseyAbell:
--- Quote ---Chris C. proclaimed that a game show is essentially an unjudged competition that tests skill, luck or instincts, no matter if there's a prize offered or not.
--- End quote ---
So Chris C. also hit on the judging - or lack of it, or minimization of it - as a critical identifier for what most folks call a game show.
I could say something about great minds here, but I could also catch a lotta grief.
clemon79:
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'May 6 2004, 08:48 AM\'] Personal example: my wife's a classical soprano and she LOVES singing, even in an empty warehouse, even if there's no prize money, publicity, street buzz or national exposure involved. [/quote]
But that's the same trap that I mentioned in my post. Your wife enjoying singing FOR THE SAKE OF SINGING. At worst, she does it for the joy of performing for herself, if not for others. (And there's nothing wrong with that.)
But the act of being on Star Search is not just singing (or dancing, or telling jokes, or whatever), it is the act of being judged arbitrarily against someone else to see who they thought was better at the activity. THAT is the part that I question whether your wife (or anyone else) would be willing to take part in with nothing to be gained. And I mean NOTHING. No tangible prize, no public recognition, and I'll go so far as to suggest that the "contestants" would have to sign a waiver swearing never to reveal the results to a soul. At BEST they walk out knowing that four people thought their performance was better than someone elses, and then we start getting into issues of psychological justification.
CaseyAbell:
--- Quote ---But the act of being on Star Search is not just singing (or dancing, or telling jokes, or whatever), it is the act of being judged arbitrarily against someone else to see who they thought was better at the activity. THAT is the part that I question whether your wife (or anyone else) would be willing to take part in with nothing to be gained.
--- End quote ---
Sorry, but my wife has done this. Many times, in fact. She has often gone to auditions at volunteer singing groups - no money, publicity, street buzz, etc., involved at all - where she was judged (let's hope not completely arbitrarily, but there have been cases...) against other people trying to get into the group.
She purely LOVED the competition. It stimulated her, got her interested in perfecting her craft, motivated her practicing, etc.
And she didn't get a dime for it. She got no publicity for it. She got NOTHING for it (I should know, I keep track of our bank account) except personal satisfaction. These were (and are) unpaid groups who sing in pretty thorough anonymity. It really is very similar to your empty-warehouse thought example.
And, of course, all the other people who auditioned for the groups similarly got nothing for their pains except personal satisfaction. There are literally tens of thousands of people across the country who have auditioned for such volunteer classical singing groups.
Now I'm sure that passing an audition is more fun than failing, and happily my wife has rarely failed at anything involving vocal ability. But many, many people have done exactly what you suggest nobody would be willing to do.
I'm also sure that many contestants on Star Search are somewhat similar to these folks. They're in it - at least to some extent - for the fun of the competition and to show off their skills. Just as I'm sure that some contestants on Jeopardy are in it to show off their knowledge and to enjoy the game.
Yes, there's an obvious monetary motivation in both cases as well. For some contestants on both shows, it may be the primary motivation. As I said before, I'd guess that almost all contestants on both shows have a mix of motives.
So, indeed, this looks more like a similarity between the two types of shows rather than a difference.
But I noticed you slipped in a bit about the judging on talent contests. And I agree with Chris C. that the real difference lies here.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version