The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => Game Show Channels & Networks => Topic started by: wyoperson888 on January 09, 2007, 08:53:42 PM
-
For all you GSN lovers, 21 has moved to Sundays! Do you think Maury Povich does good?
-
Well.
Look here (http://\"http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=12099\").
-
No, I don't think he "does good," because he hosted these episodes seven years ago.
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'142714\' date=\'Jan 10 2007, 09:51 AM\']
No, I don't think he "does good," because he hosted these episodes seven years ago.
[/quote]
But he'll clear fifty cents in residuals--whoo hoo!
-
Speaking of 21 on Sunday, can anyone explain why it started from the middle of the run over the weekend?
-
I forgot how enjoyable this show was. Unlike today's shows, it moved at a decent pace, and the contestants seemed like natural people. And to answer the earlier question, Maury was a decent host.
The only problems I had were that the dollar values were too inflated (even the modified $25,000/first win), and they never settled on a good contestant process. The audience selection, then some weird "random selector".
Would love to see NBC give it another shot, esp. since 1) their ratings are nowhere near as good as they were in 2000, and 2) they're on such a game show kick. Honestly, I'd love to see this revived with much lower values (like 1/10 of the prize budget) as a 1/2-hour syndicated show...
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'143279\' date=\'Jan 14 2007, 04:12 PM\']
The only problems I had were that the dollar values were too inflated (even the modified $25,000/first win), and they never settled on a good contestant process. The audience selection, then some weird "random selector".
[/quote]
Geez, that DID suck didn't it? ;)
And just a clarification...the "random selector" was picking a name out of a bowl. The graphic afterward was bells and whistles.
Ben
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'143279\' date=\'Jan 14 2007, 07:12 PM\']
I forgot how enjoyable this show was. Unlike today's shows, it moved at a decent pace, and the contestants seemed like natural people. And to answer the earlier question, Maury was a decent host.
The only problems I had were that the dollar values were too inflated (even the modified $25,000/first win), and they never settled on a good contestant process. The audience selection, then some weird "random selector".
Would love to see NBC give it another shot, esp. since 1) their ratings are nowhere near as good as they were in 2000, and 2) they're on such a game show kick. Honestly, I'd love to see this revived with much lower values (like 1/10 of the prize budget) as a 1/2-hour syndicated show...
[/quote]
The contestants seemed like natural people who know about as much as the typical "1 vs. 100" contestant, which is to say, not much. If the questions were challenging and based on more than celebrity gossip, the prize money wouldn't seem so unreasonable--after all, it was a prime time show. The trouble was that there was no logic to how they were paid out, and there was no risk. And then there was that awful, anti-climactic bonus round.
Still, there might be something there for a brisk half hour.