The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: TimK2003 on October 01, 2009, 01:46:04 PM
-
This might have been done a loooong time ago, in another chat-area far, far away.
We've always had great discussions about which show was the greatest Goodson-Todman, B & E, Merv Griffin, etc,... ever. But what are the worst shows that came from individual producers/production companies that made at least a handful of different game shows?
Here's a few of my nominations:
CHUCK BARRIS: Camouflage (Words cannot describe this trainwreck).
BARRY/ENRIGHT: Hollywood Connection (High School Production of Match Game)
HEATTER/QUIGLEY: Bargain Hunters (One of the original 30-minute infomercials on daytime).
JAY WOLPERT: Wait Til You Have Kids (The Bonus Round was just a game of dumb luck).
GAME SHOW NETWORK: (Tough decision here...) Luddin's Love Buffet
Others???
-
Robert Townsend Productions: Thousand Dollar Bee
-
Goodson/Todman: What's Going On?
-
Reg Grundy - Was Small Talk worse than Time Machine?
-
Bob Stewart-Love Experts
-
Endemol - Set for Life
-
[quote name=\'jmangin\' post=\'227360\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 02:16 PM\']Reg Grundy - Was Small Talk worse than Time Machine?[/quote]
Yes. Time Machine was at least somewhat challenging and a little engaging...Small Talk was just boring IMO.
-Dick Clark Productions-No Relation...dull as dishwater variation of TTTT that aired on FX (or fX at that time) in summer '96 or '97.
-Fremantle-Temptation USA...still pissed that they cut so many corners with that show, i.e. forcing 5-day champions to pick a prize and retire. What's that? You don't have enough to buy the car. T.S., lady! And don't even get me started on the Temptation Dollars!
-
[quote name=\'Marc412\' post=\'227363\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 02:33 PM\']Endemol - Set for Life[/quote]
Amen to that.
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'227366\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 01:49 PM\']-Fremantle-Temptation USA...still pissed that they cut so many corners with that show, i.e. forcing 5-day champions to pick a prize and retire. What's that? You don't have enough to buy the car. T.S., lady! And don't even get me started on the Temptation Dollars![/quote]
Otherwise known as the "Tempted to steal other ideas" show...
The only thing that's preventing me from nominating "CaSino" (Card Sharks in name only) is that at least the original format was actually used (albeit a drastic variation).
-
[quote name=\'NicholasM79\' post=\'227359\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 02:06 PM\']Goodson/Todman: What's Going On?[/quote]
You'll find a lot of support for Mindreaders.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'227373\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 03:37 PM\'][quote name=\'NicholasM79\' post=\'227359\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 02:06 PM\']Goodson/Todman: What's Going On?[/quote]
You'll find a lot of support for Mindreaders.
[/quote]
I knew you were going to say that.
-
I thought the worst G-T was "The Better Sex." H-Q, "Hot Seat" B&E-"All About the Opposite Sex."
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'227376\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 04:02 PM\']I thought the worst G-T was "The Better Sex."[/quote]
Interesting choice. I was under the impression that everyone in this community liked Better Sex.
...Er, wait, I better rephrase that.
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'227366\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 02:49 PM\']-Dick Clark Productions-No Relation...dull as dishwater variation of TTTT that aired on FX (or fX at that time) in summer '96 or '97.[/quote]
It's amazing that Mike Rowe survived that abomination. It's my nominee for Worst Game Show Ever.
-
[quote name=\'ChrisLambert!\' post=\'227380\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 04:25 PM\'][quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'227366\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 02:49 PM\']-Dick Clark Productions-No Relation...dull as dishwater variation of TTTT that aired on FX (or fX at that time) in summer '96 or '97.[/quote]
It's amazing that Mike Rowe survived that abomination. It's my nominee for Worst Game Show Ever.
[/quote]
Does that title remind anyone else of Buster and Babs Bunny?
Seriously, what was the premise of this show? Google's surprisingly silent.
-
[quote name=\'ChrisLambert!\' post=\'227380\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 04:25 PM\'][quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'227366\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 02:49 PM\']-Dick Clark Productions-No Relation...dull as dishwater variation of TTTT that aired on FX (or fX at that time) in summer '96 or '97.[/quote]
It's amazing that Mike Rowe survived that abomination. It's my nominee for Worst Game Show Ever.
[/quote]
That's your nominee? My vote would've gone to The Chamber. To each their own, I guess.
-
[quote name=\'Twentington\' post=\'227382\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 04:28 PM\'][quote name=\'ChrisLambert!\' post=\'227380\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 04:25 PM\'][quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'227366\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 02:49 PM\']-Dick Clark Productions-No Relation...dull as dishwater variation of TTTT that aired on FX (or fX at that time) in summer '96 or '97.[/quote]
It's amazing that Mike Rowe survived that abomination. It's my nominee for Worst Game Show Ever.
[/quote]
Does that title remind anyone else of Buster and Babs Bunny?
Seriously, what was the premise of this show? Google's surprisingly silent.
[/quote]
Maybe you didn't look hard enough... (http://\"http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_1996_June_10/ai_18371352/\") :-/
-
[quote name=\'Twentington\' post=\'227382\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 04:28 PM\']Seriously, what was the premise of this show? Google's surprisingly silent.[/quote]
From what I can remember, a "family" of five appeared on set, while one was the imposter. A panel of celebrities (3?) asked questions, TTTT-style, to determine to odd (wo)man out.
Forgot all about The Chamber.
/For good reason prolly
-
Michael Davies - Chain Reaction.
-
The Better Sex was saved by a great Bonus Round.
-
[quote name=\'Twentington\' post=\'227382\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 04:28 PM\']Does that title remind anyone else of Buster and Babs Bunny?[/quote]
<Sarcasm>Makes me want to run right out and pick up Tiny Toon Adventures on DVD </Sarcasm>
-
B&E: All About The Opposite Sex; Surprised some of you have forgetten.....
Barris: Three's A Crowd, ORIGINAL version; Now if that version had more variety like the later GSN version did (i.e: husbands vs. fathers-in-law, boyfriends vs. brothers), it would've lasted a couple more years. Instead, it turned into a "one-joke" show; but in this case, the joke bombed -- big-time.
Stone-Stanley: All except Shop Til You Drop; (the Pat Finn years, that is)
Cordially,
Tammy
-
[quote name=\'Winkfan\' post=\'227409\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 03:41 PM\']Stone-Stanley: All except Shop Til You Drop; (the Pat Finn years, that is)[/quote]
Respectfully disagree. Legends was just fine.
-
[quote name=\'Winkfan\' post=\'227409\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 05:41 PM\']Barris: Three's A Crowd, ORIGINAL version; Now if that version had more variety like the later GSN version did (i.e: husbands vs. fathers-in-law, boyfriends vs. brothers), it would've lasted a couple more years. Instead, it turned into a "one-joke" show; but in this case, the joke bombed; big-time.[/quote]Yeah, because it worked so well 20 years later.
-
[quote name=\'Kevin Prather\' post=\'227410\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 06:51 PM\'][quote name=\'Winkfan\' post=\'227409\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 03:41 PM\']Stone-Stanley: All except Shop Til You Drop; (the Pat Finn years, that is)[/quote]
Respectfully disagree. Legends was just fine.
[/quote]
...Except for Kirk-bot, who managed to crash when reading a cue card.
-
[quote name=\'Kevin Prather\' post=\'227410\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 06:51 PM\'][quote name=\'Winkfan\' post=\'227409\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 03:41 PM\']Stone-Stanley: All except Shop Til You Drop; (the Pat Finn years, that is)[/quote]
Respectfully disagree. Legends was just fine.
[/quote]
I also disagree - Winning Lines and The Mole (in addition to Legends)
/Fremantle: CS '01 is right there with Temptation.
-
[quote name=\'gamed121683\' post=\'227385\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 04:43 PM\']That's your nominee? My vote would've gone to The Chamber. To each their own, I guess.[/quote]
While Chamber was bad, it was never boring.
-
[quote name=\'gamed121683\' post=\'227385\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 03:43 PM\'][quote name=\'ChrisLambert!\' post=\'227380\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 04:25 PM\'][quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'227366\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 02:49 PM\']-Dick Clark Productions-No Relation...dull as dishwater variation of TTTT that aired on FX (or fX at that time) in summer '96 or '97.[/quote]
It's amazing that Mike Rowe survived that abomination. It's my nominee for Worst Game Show Ever.
[/quote]
That's your nominee? My vote would've gone to The Chamber. To each their own, I guess.
[/quote]
I dunno. Chamber might have been a trainwreck, but at least it was visually interesting, and laughing at the poor schmucks who actually signed up for this gives it at least some redeeming value.
Bottom 10%? Sure. Worst ever? Nah. I think a show has to completely put you to sleep to win that title.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'227373\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 03:37 PM\'][quote name=\'NicholasM79\' post=\'227359\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 02:06 PM\']Goodson/Todman: What's Going On?[/quote]
You'll find a lot of support for Mindreaders.
[/quote]
Oh yeah, that one was just as bad.
Something else I just remembered What's Going On?: remember the story related in "The Box" when Lee Bowman misinterpreted the stretch cue as a wrap cue.
/Is it possible to have ties?
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'227387\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 01:46 PM\']Forgot all about The Chamber.[/quote]As much as I'm willing to say "The players went in willingly, and Survivor has harsh environments that you stay in for longer and so on, but The Chamber was just a boring game that was made worse by a dreadful physical element.
[quote name=\'Kevin Prather\' post=\'227388\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 01:50 PM\']Michael Davies - Chain Reaction.[/quote]
[quote name=\'Winkfan\' post=\'227409\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 03:41 PM\']B&E: All About The Opposite Sex; Surprised some of you have forgetten.....[/quote] Really?
Barris: Three's A Crowd, ORIGINAL version; Now if that version had more variety like the later GSN version did (i.e: husbands vs. fathers-in-law, boyfriends vs. brothers), it would've lasted a couple more years. Instead, it turned into a "one-joke" show; but in this case, the joke bombed; big-time.
The revival wasn't all that great, but at least it seemed to have a more light-hearted approach to the whole exercise.
Stone-Stanley: All except Shop Til You Drop; (the Pat Finn years, that is)
Wrong, you fail. Doubly so, because you sweep all the others under the rug, and save what was really a lame uninteresting time-filelr.
So here's a noggin tickler: M. G. 's Crosswords or Monopoly?
-
So here's a noggin tickler: M. G. 's Crosswords or Monopoly?
Boy, you ain't kidding. The thing is, I really wanted to like both of these shows, and I saw a lot of potential in each. There were aspects of both that kept me entertained enough to watch more than one episode of each, but I'd have to say that the edge for "worse" has to go to Crosswords. The play-along factor was great, but that whole "Spoiler" exercise left a really bad taste in my mouth, and let's not even discuss Ty...:)
Monopoly at least had a much more decent game, even if there were stumbles in execution, and there was a good trade-off between luck and skill (just like the real game). YMMV, of course, but I felt Monopoly should've had a decent (at least one full season) run in syndication.
Anthony
-
Bob Stivers Productions: "The Baby Game".
Lets just say that there's a reason that it's not on anyone's "Want List"...
:^)
-Kevin
-
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'227435\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 11:04 PM\']So here's a noggin tickler: M. G. 's Crosswords or Monopoly?[/quote]
For MG, it would have to be "Ruckus." The problem with Monopoly is that there wasn't enough time to play the game. Maybe make it an hour strip, have the three contestants or their partners standing on the game board and have Ron Greenberg work on it so we can borrow the "points representing dice" aspect of "The Big Showdown." All contestants play the entire week so there would be a chance to amass some properties and pass go a couple of times.
-
[quote name=\'tpirfan28\' post=\'227415\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 07:33 PM\']I also disagree - Winning Lines and The Mole (in addition to Legends)[/quote]
My only problem with Winning Lines was that the qualifying round seemed to take forever. I loved the elimination round, and the seven contestants' numbers serving as the answers to questions.
And of course Wonderwall is in my top 3 end games of all time, between the Winner's Circle and perhaps Alphabetics.
/One friggin' Pit Stop
And to answer the Merv Griffin question, Crosswords, for the broken format (spoiler not saying anything for 18 minutes, then inheriting a nice bank in the 19th), constant rule changes (IIRC, three within the first two months), ambiguous clues, and inconsistent bonus round (some days contestants had 10 clues, other days they had almost 15).
I would've played the show as a "reverse" puzzle of sorts and only three contestants, no spoilers. There's about what, 75 clues in a newspaper puzzle? First round is a warm-up with 15 clues, round two is 20. Eliminate the low scoring contestant, and in round three, 25 clues. Bonus round is filling in the remaining 15. It still creates a lot of time to fill in the event of a round three runaway, but it's a start.
-
"What's Going On?" was too ambitious for the technology of the time, but there was a pretty fun idea there. "Mindreaders," on the other hand. . .
And I have to vote for "Hollywood Connection" over (under?) "All About the Opposite Sex," for the mitigating factor that the CBS 9am CT game (may have been the network "Tic Tac Dough") was pre-empted for that steaming pile of Jim Lange.
-
I think "You're In The Picture" deserves a mention here somewhere.
According to "The Encyclopedia of TV Game Shows," the "packager" was Steve Carlin Productions / Solar Enterprises / Idees Grandes Inc."
-
BOB/SANDE STEWART -- Your Number's Up -- It was the 63rd time that the Stewarts tried to do a game by showing the initials in the answers. Nipsey was over the top (see: show, last). The only saving grace was Lee Menning -- and dare I say she still looked hot even in maternity clothes at the end!
KLINE & FRIENDS -- Pictionary -- It was Win, Lose or Draw with D-List Celebs. (BTW, nearly all the K&F shows are close behind Pictionary).
FREMANTLE -- It's a tie between Card Sharks and Temptation, and I have to break the tie by going with Card Sharks since they butchered the format to hell, yet kept the name (They at least changed the primary name of the show to Temptation when they mutilated Sale of the Century).
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'227446\' date=\'Oct 2 2009, 06:02 AM\']For MG, it would have to be "Ruckus."[/quote] So you're saying that a show that had decent (if not mind-bending) gameplay, a show that builds to a reasonable conclusion and one that had some clever bits was worse that a show where the winner was determined either at the very last second or determined after the first round?
The problem with Monopoly is that there wasn't enough time to play the game. Maybe make it an hour strip, have the three contestants or their partners standing on the game board and have Ron Greenberg work on it so we can borrow the "points representing dice" aspect of "The Big Showdown." All contestants play the entire week so there would be a chance to amass some properties and pass go a couple of times.
I don't think time was the problem. The building of properties round is too long no matter what.
Dive headfirst into the game. Roll the dice, and if a property is underfoot, a toss-up is played for some small amount of money. Whoever is right can either bank that money, or risk it and play for the rent with a house. Then two houses, and so on, up to a Hotel. It plays sorta like a Fast Forward: wrong and you lose the cash, and someone else can swoop in and claim the pot, then roll again. Do whatever you like for the railroads and utilities. Everything else functions normally. Most mney at the horn is the winner.
The game shows that were decent translations of board games kept the recognizable aspects of the game, but weren't carbon copies. Monopoly could have done without the building round, and this allows for more time to play the properties in an interesting way.
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'227447\' date=\'Oct 2 2009, 07:19 AM\']My only problem with Winning Lines was that the qualifying round seemed to take forever. I loved the elimination round, and the seven contestants' numbers serving as the answers to questions.[/quote] Since I'm on a roll: have to "sudden death" games, with ten contestants randomly assigned numbers. The winners/survivors in whatever number you want move on to the final round. Twenty-six letters hide various numbers that are the answer to the questions. To score a point, you have to give the proper letter that hides the correct number. To make things interesting, part of the letters reveal their numbers, then flip over, in an undulating and random way. Whoever scores most/reaches the finish line first plays Wonderwall for whatever grand prize you like.
And to answer the Merv Griffin question, Crosswords, for the broken format (spoiler not saying anything for 18 minutes, then inheriting a nice bank in the 19th), constant rule changes (IIRC, three within the first two months), ambiguous clues, and inconsistent bonus round (some days contestants had 10 clues, other days they had almost 15).
There's one thing that I don't think has been addressed. I did not buy Ty's "Ooh." When Alex Trebek says "Ooh, sorry," you know you've messed up. When Ty says "Ooh, sorry, the word we were looking for was 'ESNE'," I think "You wouldn't know what ESNE was if it wasn't on your screen, you smarmy little toad!" And it was really off-putting, at least for me.
Since three's a crowd, I would have two separate smaller puzzles, each with thirty clues. Player with the last right answer gets next pick, and so on. Hide the Getaway prizes and the Extras, which will truly be "discovered" by the player that finds it. I envision the final round as a fifteen-clue puzzle to be finished in 90 seconds for the standard $5,000 + exotic holiday. If you want to have players stick around for the week, or just have the champ back, that's fine.
-
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'227491\' date=\'Oct 2 2009, 09:59 PM\'][quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'227446\' date=\'Oct 2 2009, 06:02 AM\']For MG, it would have to be "Ruckus."[/quote] So you're saying that a show that had decent (if not mind-bending) gameplay, a show that builds to a reasonable conclusion and one that had some clever bits was worse that a show where the winner was determined either at the very last second or determined after the first round?
The problem with Monopoly is that there wasn't enough time to play the game. Maybe make it an hour strip, have the three contestants or their partners standing on the game board and have Ron Greenberg work on it so we can borrow the "points representing dice" aspect of "The Big Showdown." All contestants play the entire week so there would be a chance to amass some properties and pass go a couple of times.
I don't think time was the problem. The building of properties round is too long no matter what.
Dive headfirst into the game. Roll the dice, and if a property is underfoot, a toss-up is played for some small amount of money. Whoever is right can either bank that money, or risk it and play for the rent with a house. Then two houses, and so on, up to a Hotel. It plays sorta like a Fast Forward: wrong and you lose the cash, and someone else can swoop in and claim the pot, then roll again. Do whatever you like for the railroads and utilities. Everything else functions normally. Most mney at the horn is the winner.
The game shows that were decent translations of board games kept the recognizable aspects of the game, but weren't carbon copies. Monopoly could have done without the building round, and this allows for more time to play the properties in an interesting way.
[/quote]
You may be right on "Ruckus" I didn't enjoy it when I saw it. Maybe I'm missing something. I thought MGC was slightly better from a production standpoint.
As far as "Monopoly," Maybe start off with toss-ups to secure properties, with Purple being easy questions and progressing from there. One or two questions per color (depending on the color) so the actual monopolies have to be earned by rolling the dice later.
-
Who did "Treasure Mall"? That was pretty rank.
-
[quote name=\'beatlefreak84\' post=\'227438\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 11:14 PM\']Monopoly at least had a much more decent game,[/quote]
What Monopoly had was a SPECTACTULAR set. Nothing much else, from where I was sitting.
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'227509\' date=\'Oct 3 2009, 05:39 AM\']You may be right on "Ruckus" I didn't enjoy it when I saw it. Maybe I'm missing something. I thought MGC was slightly better from a production standpoint.[/quote]And this just proves what can happen when you ask two people what "worst" means. I would by no means say that "Ruckus" was life-changing Emmy worthy television, because it wasn't. But at least everything made sense to me as a viewer. I also only saw a handful of Ruckus, compared with the entire Monopoly and most of Crosswords.
-
[quote name=\'Clay Zambo\' post=\'227518\' date=\'Oct 3 2009, 10:50 AM\']What Monopoly had was a SPECTACTULAR set. Nothing much else, from where I was sitting.[/quote]
Theme song. Don't forget the theme song. I sure can't.
-
[quote name='davemackey' date='Oct 3 2009, 09:51 AM' post='227510']
Who did "Treasure Mall"? That was pretty rank.
That show was SCREAMING "low budget", and the coin finding rounds aren't as exciting as the could be, but the main game wasn't too bad. It was basically a variation of the main game of Pitfall. I also think Hal Sparks was pretty good as host. It's a couple notches better than Slime Time, which was paired up with Treasure Mall.
-
[quote name=\'Kevin Prather\' post=\'227388\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 04:50 PM\']Michael Davies - Chain Reaction.[/quote]
Oh I dunno....IMO this falls into the TTD '90 category. The gameplay really wasn't totally betrayed, but the other elements did it in (Dylan Lane not being that great, LOOKS AND YOUTH > GAMEPLAY ABILITY...now that made me worry about a possible future for $1M Pyramid, as Davies did that pilot and all)
Same as Temptation...it at least was the same concept as SOTC, but was ruined by dumb prize system (mentioned before), watered-down questions, half-anonymous contestants who were limited to almost all women (not that I am sexist, and hey, it was sexist against them because of the "women like to shop" stereotype), etc. etc. So yeah, CS 2001 = much worse. Almost nothing like the original and cheesy and gut-wrenching to boot.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'227523\' date=\'Oct 3 2009, 10:59 AM\'][quote name=\'Clay Zambo\' post=\'227518\' date=\'Oct 3 2009, 10:50 AM\']What Monopoly had was a SPECTACTULAR set. Nothing much else, from where I was sitting.[/quote]
Theme song. Don't forget the theme song. I sure can't.
[/quote]
My wife hates that one. The first time she heard those recurring "Oh!"s, she growled "you know what they mean with those, don't you?"
-
[quote name=\'JMFabiano\' post=\'227549\' date=\'Oct 3 2009, 06:53 PM\'][quote name=\'Kevin Prather\' post=\'227388\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 04:50 PM\']Michael Davies - Chain Reaction.[/quote]
Oh I dunno....IMO this falls into the TTD '90 category. The gameplay really wasn't totally betrayed, but the other elements did it in (Dylan Lane not being that great, LOOKS AND YOUTH > GAMEPLAY ABILITY... [/quote]
Adam Wurtzel was a contestant on this show. Your argument is invalid.
-
[quote name=\'CountdownRound\' post=\'227572\' date=\'Oct 3 2009, 06:52 PM\'][quote name=\'JMFabiano\' post=\'227549\' date=\'Oct 3 2009, 06:53 PM\'][quote name=\'Kevin Prather\' post=\'227388\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 04:50 PM\']Michael Davies - Chain Reaction.[/quote]
Oh I dunno....IMO this falls into the TTD '90 category. The gameplay really wasn't totally betrayed, but the other elements did it in (Dylan Lane not being that great, LOOKS AND YOUTH > GAMEPLAY ABILITY... [/quote]
Adam Wurtzel was a contestant on this show. Your argument is invalid.
[/quote]
For every Adam Wurtzel, you've got three who couldn't solve DUMBAS_. He was the exception, not the rule.
-
[quote name=\'Kevin Prather\' post=\'227575\' date=\'Oct 3 2009, 09:57 PM\'][quote name=\'CountdownRound\' post=\'227572\' date=\'Oct 3 2009, 06:52 PM\'][quote name=\'JMFabiano\' post=\'227549\' date=\'Oct 3 2009, 06:53 PM\'][quote name=\'Kevin Prather\' post=\'227388\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 04:50 PM\']Michael Davies - Chain Reaction.[/quote]
Oh I dunno....IMO this falls into the TTD '90 category. The gameplay really wasn't totally betrayed, but the other elements did it in (Dylan Lane not being that great, LOOKS AND YOUTH > GAMEPLAY ABILITY... [/quote]
Adam Wurtzel was a contestant on this show. Your argument is invalid.
[/quote]
For every Adam Wurtzel, you've got three who couldn't solve DUMBAS_. He was the exception, not the rule.
[/quote]
That would be interesting...."Welcome to Chain Reaction, the show that sees if three half-a-heads are better than one"
-
GSN: Definitely "Million Dollar Cat Game Show"
For sure.
-
[quote name=\'CountdownRound\' post=\'227572\' date=\'Oct 3 2009, 09:52 PM\'][quote name=\'JMFabiano\' post=\'227549\' date=\'Oct 3 2009, 06:53 PM\'][quote name=\'Kevin Prather\' post=\'227388\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 04:50 PM\']Michael Davies - Chain Reaction.[/quote]
Oh I dunno....IMO this falls into the TTD '90 category. The gameplay really wasn't totally betrayed, but the other elements did it in (Dylan Lane not being that great, LOOKS AND YOUTH > GAMEPLAY ABILITY... [/quote]
Adam Wurtzel was a contestant on this show. Your argument is invalid.
[/quote]
I find myself asking who this Adam Wurtzel is? I've heard his name before, mostly in negative connotations.
-
[quote name=\'JMFabiano\' post=\'227549\' date=\'Oct 3 2009, 03:53 PM\']Oh I dunno....IMO this falls into the TTD '90 category. The gameplay really wasn't totally betrayed, but the other elements did it in (Dylan Lane not being that great, LOOKS AND YOUTH > GAMEPLAY ABILITY...now that made me worry about a possible future for $1M Pyramid, as Davies did that pilot and all)[/quote]But the question isn't one of good or bad, it is "worst by producer." If it isn't Chain Reaction, what is it? And I think much of the fault lies in the fact that Dylan Lane was cuffed by cue cards, and three-headed teams. And the gambling round.
-
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned You Don't Know Jack.
I mean sure the game was based on a great series of PC games, but they ruined it by throwing some really stupid elements into it.
1. A "fake" host. (Paul Reubens as Troy Stevens) They could have at least let "Cookie" (Tom Masterson, reprising his role from the computer games) host it via voice over.
2. A question which was supposed to be valued up to 2 million dollars, but was never worth more than $500 due to a rather stupid problem which kept delaying the reading of the question as the money ran down.
3. A Math question involving elements of pop culture. While the players were trying to work out the math, major distractions, such as marching bands
If they had kept this show closer to the original game's format, it would have lasted longer than 6 episodes, IMNSHO.
-
[quote name=\'Lirodon\' post=\'227583\' date=\'Oct 3 2009, 11:16 PM\']GSN: Definitely "Million Dollar Cat Game Show"
For sure.[/quote]
What about "American Dream Derby"?
-
The game isn't (or wasn't supposed to be) "Name a bad game show." Try to stay on this topic:
But what are the worst shows that came from individual producers/production companies that made at least a handful of different game shows?
-
Agree with what's been said about Monopoly. I actually didn't mind the show, but by the time they actually got to go around the board, the show was two-thirds over. Maybe a better way would have been to have one toss-up question per monopoly. That way they would have had two show segments to go around the board.
-
[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' post=\'227618\' date=\'Oct 4 2009, 11:09 AM\']Maybe a better way would have been to have one toss-up question per monopoly. That way they would have had two show segments to go around the board.[/quote]
That's not bad for speeding the game up, but what you do there is magnify the problem of a good player taking insurmountable control of the game in the early going.
The things that make Monopoly interesting as a board game simply don't translate to television. I understand the desire to try, I just don't think there's a good way to do it.
-
[quote name=\'Fedya\' post=\'227611\' date=\'Oct 4 2009, 08:54 AM\'][quote name=\'Lirodon\' post=\'227583\' date=\'Oct 3 2009, 11:16 PM\']GSN: Definitely "Million Dollar Cat Game Show"
For sure.[/quote]
What about "American Dream Derby"?
[/quote]
I'll see you that and raise you most of the Fleming Era.
-
[quote name=\'Kaos\' post=\'227607\' date=\'Oct 4 2009, 12:57 AM\']I'm surprised nobody has mentioned You Don't Know Jack.[/quote]
Probably because it wasn't that bad, if you got the joke.
1. A "fake" host. (Paul Reubens as Troy Stevens) They could have at least let "Cookie" (Tom Masterson, reprising his role from the computer games) host it via voice over.
2. A question which was supposed to be valued up to 2 million dollars, but was never worth more than $500 due to a rather stupid problem which kept delaying the reading of the question as the money ran down.
3. A Math question involving elements of pop culture. While the players were trying to work out the math, major distractions, such as marching bands
...and clearly you didn't.
-
MERV GRIFFIN: Jeopardy '78
Proven Format for over 10 years previously,
minus one player after the first round,
minus 2nd player after the second round,
minus a Final Jeopardy betting round,
equals the precursor to what most Fremantle remakes did in later years.
/Although the music cues were pretty darn good.
//And they brought back the original host.
-
Here's a producer we haven't broached yet: Bill Carruthers Productions. "The Neighbors", anyone?
-
I'm surprised "Moment of Truth" hasn't shown up in this thread, or are we just dismissing everything that ever came from FOX.
-
[quote name=\'GrandMasterGalvatron\' post=\'227669\' date=\'Oct 4 2009, 10:10 PM\']I'm surprised "Moment of Truth" hasn't shown up in this thread, or are we just dismissing everything that ever came from FOX.[/quote]FOX merely aired Moment of Truth. I believe Howard Schultz's production company was behind it.
Several good game shows have aired on FOX, but I can't recall any they actually did in house.
-
I can't give it to What's Going On? because Lee Bowman is so darned dashing.
Choose Up Sides, to me, is the G-T show I like the least. Replacing Bob Kennedy with Gene Rayburn was a wise move, however.
For H-Q, as much as I like the theme music, I give my WotB nod to Hot Seat.
[quote name=\'Kaos\' post=\'227607\' date=\'Oct 4 2009, 03:57 AM\']I'm surprised nobody has mentioned........[/quote]
Ahhhhhhhhhh!! That sentence. That damned sentence!!!!!
-
[quote name=\'Don Howard\' post=\'227776\' date=\'Oct 5 2009, 06:02 PM\']Ahhhhhhhhhh!! That sentence. That damned sentence!!!!![/quote]
I just have Greasemonkey replace that sentence with the phrase, "Look how much more clever I think I am than you..."
-
For Fishman-Freer, you can only choose between two and it's a no-brainer to say that "Diamond Head Game" was their worst effort.
"Child's Play" actually gets my vote for the least interesting G-T show I've ever seen.
-
[quote name=\'Eric Paddon\' post=\'227781\' date=\'Oct 5 2009, 06:47 PM\']For Fishman-Freer, you can only choose between two and it's a no-brainer to say that "Diamond Head Game" was their worst effort.[/quote]
Actually, there were three: Dealers Choice, Diamond Head, and Fun Factory. And I would have to lean towards Fun Factory -- It was not in a factory nor was it really fun...Discuss.
-
I forgot about "Fun Factory" and I would agree, that was the worst of the three. At least "Diamond Head Game" gave us Jane Nelson!
-
[quote name=\'inturnaround\' post=\'227779\' date=\'Oct 5 2009, 03:29 PM\']I just have Greasemonkey replace that sentence with the phrase, "Look how much more clever I think I am than you..."[/quote]
That is ten pounds of win in a five-pound bag. :)
-
[quote name=\'Eric Paddon\' post=\'227781\' date=\'Oct 5 2009, 06:47 PM\']"Child's Play" actually gets my vote for the least interesting G-T show I've ever seen.[/quote]
I'm glad someone else said that. I don't think it's the worst G-T game (hey, look, Uncle Bill!), but it's on my "most disappointing" list.
-
Griffin - One In A Million. Dull one-on-one version of To Tell The Truth where a contestant listened to four people telling their individual stories and had to guess which stories were true or false. Reach For The Stars wasn't far behind.
B&E - Pictionary. Dan Enright even called it a "throwaway" show which MCA used as a bonus to stations for buying other syndicated properties. The Floating Ping-Pong Ball end game was lame. I barely remember seeing one episode of Way Out Games with Sonny Fox, and it wasn't that impressive. Blank Check was just a Barry production, so I didn't list it under B&E.
G-T - Showoffs. Make The Connection was also one trip too many to the panel game show well.
H-Q - Hot Seat or Showdown? Flip a coin. When you get a winner, then put Temptation up against it and flip again. Like Blank Check, there was just no game there.
Barris - How's Your Mother-In-Law?
Stewart - Blankety Blanks. Liked Shoot For The Stars, didn't care for Double Talk re-hash.
(Edit: Have to say I did not see either All About The Opposite Sex or Hold Everything, B&E's last hurrahs.)
-
[quote name=\'Eric Paddon\' post=\'227796\' date=\'Oct 5 2009, 08:03 PM\']I forgot about "Fun Factory" and I would agree, that was the worst of the three. At least "Diamond Head Game" gave us Jane Nelson![/quote]
Best things about "Fun Factory" were Stan Worth leading the live band in studio. And that really tall, really funny Betty Thomas, later a respected director of such films as "The Brady Bunch Movie" and "Howard Stern Private Parts".
-
G-T: Child's Play - The novelty wore off real fast.
H-Q: Temptation - More like an exercise in ESP rather than a game.
B&E: What's worse, making a "throwaway show" (Pictionary), or butchering one of your classics (TTD'90)? It's a tie for me.
Griffin: Ruckus, just because it stole Reach for the Stars as the endround! Which made it go from bad to worse!
Stewart: Double Talk, enough already!
Barris: The Game Game. What was the game anyway?
Grundy: Time Machine. John Davidson. Nuff said!
Fremantle: CS'01 - Just for the audacity of reviving CS in name only!
-
[quote name=\'joker316\' post=\'228001\' date=\'Oct 7 2009, 02:37 PM\']Griffin: Ruckus, just because it stole Reach for the Stars as the end round! Which made it go from bad to worse![/quote] How can you steal from yourself?
Fremantle: CS'01 - Just for the audacity of reviving CS in name only!
I don't know who started the "Card Sharks in Name Only" thing, but I'd love to go back in time and give that person a strongly wagged finger for it.
-
TLEberle said, "How can you steal from yourself?"
I don't know...Ask this guy! (http://\"http://www.americansongwriter.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/john-fogerty.jpg\")
-
One of the things that made it tough to select a B&E show (almost forgot Back That Fact, which ABC dropped after just a couple of airings, and You're On Your Own was forced to make a format switch), was that the shows Joker316 picked (which I agree with) were, if I recall, totally under Dan's supervision. IIRC, Hot Potato was the last project Barry oversaw, and it's tough to throw blame on Barry when he had little or no input with them. Jack has always struck me as the developer/refiner, and Dan was the director/facilitator to make the project run smoothly. I'd like to know if Dan had a major hand in inventing when he was working with Screen Gems in Canada, or if he took other peoples' ideas and shaped them.
-
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'228014\' date=\'Oct 7 2009, 08:27 PM\'][quote name=\'joker316\' post=\'228001\' date=\'Oct 7 2009, 02:37 PM\']Griffin: Ruckus, just because it stole Reach for the Stars as the end round! Which made it go from bad to worse![/quote] How can you steal from yourself?
Fremantle: CS'01 - Just for the audacity of reviving CS in name only!
I don't know who started the "Card Sharks in Name Only" thing, but I'd love to go back in time and give that person a strongly wagged finger for it.
[/quote]
* Runs and finds a hiding place *
/ *pout* Well it WAS in name only... *pout*
-
Michael Davies - Chain Reaction.
----------------
CSI Las Vegas seasons dvd (http://\"http://www.boxset4less.com/products/CSI-Lasvegas-Seasons-1-9-DVD-Boxset-DVDS-1571.html\")
NCIS DVD box set (http://\"http://www.boxset4less.com/products/Navy-NCIS-Naval-Criminal-Investigative-Service-Seasons-1-6-DVD-Boxset-DVDS-1630.html\")
-
Bob Stewart-Love Experts
------------------
CSI Las Vegas series (http://\"http://www.boxset4less.com/products/CSI-Lasvegas-Seasons-1-9-DVD-Boxset-DVDS-1571.html\")
CSI Miami DVD box set (http://\"http://www.boxset4less.com/products/CSI-Miami-Seasons-1-7-DVD-Boxset-DVDS-1650.html\")
-
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'228014\' date=\'Oct 7 2009, 08:27 PM\'][quote name=\'joker316\' post=\'228001\' date=\'Oct 7 2009, 02:37 PM\']Griffin: Ruckus, just because it stole Reach for the Stars as the end round! Which made it go from bad to worse![/quote] How can you steal from yourself?
Fremantle: CS'01 - Just for the audacity of reviving CS in name only!
I don't know who started the "Card Sharks in Name Only" thing, but I'd love to go back in time and give that person a strongly wagged finger for it.
[/quote]
Fine Travis, I accept that (after all Words Have Meanings!). I meant to say that when you have a bad idea, and you add another bad idea to it, you get an even worse idea!
/Now I'm gonna pout too, because CS'01 was in name only!
-
G-T/MGP: Body Language - the ratings began to decrease really quickly after the regular game resume with the $500 bonus being added to Round 2 and the scoring system was weird. That $500 bonus in Round 2 was what caused the cancellation and didn't make it beyond December 1985.
B&E: All About The Opposite Sex - somehow it's more of a relationship game show that's perfect for Chuck Barris but not for this company.
Chuck Barris Enterprises: $1.98 Beauty Show - Somehow it's more like the Miss America Pageant. I don't know why Barris come up with the idea to have a pageant. Also, Camouflage, it's more like Where's Waldo with the outline tracing.
Merv Griffin Enterprises: Headline Chasers - Well, simply too little going on, but the Winkster and his producing debut here was the best it can have.
Pearson Television: 100%, Match Game '98.
-
[quote name=\'joker316\' post=\'228080\' date=\'Oct 8 2009, 02:42 PM\']Fine Travis, I accept that (after all Words Have Meanings!). I meant to say that when you have a bad idea, and you add another bad idea to it, you get an even worse idea![/quote] OK, now I have something to work with here. :)
I really didn't think it was that horrible, is all. And when you have a choice between what became the main game for Click, or Monopoly or ....Crosswords, I really didn't think it was more than a two horse race. What didn't you like about Ruckus?
/Now I'm gonna pout too, because CS'01 was in name only!
And this is what I don't get. The bit that people remember (the cards) was there. I only saw the show once or twice because it was on a UHF station at one or two in the afternoon, but the jist of the game was there. (Yeah, I suppose they cut out everything ELSE, but it was still Card Sharks.)
-
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'228100\' date=\'Oct 8 2009, 09:29 PM\'][quote name=\'joker316\' post=\'228080\' date=\'Oct 8 2009, 02:42 PM\']Now I'm gonna pout too, because CS'01 was in name only![/quote]And this is what I don't get. The bit that people remember (the cards) was there. I only saw the show once or twice because it was on a UHF station at one or two in the afternoon, but the jist of the game was there. (Yeah, I suppose they cut out everything ELSE, but it was still Card Sharks.)
[/quote]
Now there's something here *I* dont' get...
You say that you only saw CS'01 once or twice (in lovely fuzzy UHF - I mean, it must have been nearly unwatchable if that is what made it one of the stated factors for you only being able to see one or two episodes in total). I believe it is safe to suggest that the vast majority of the others who have made a point to express their disaapointment and dismay in the revival were extremely likely to have seen significantly more than one or two episodes themselves, putting them, in my estimation anyway, in a much better (and even more credible even) position to compare the revival to the previous incarnations and just how it stacked up. The overwhelming majority (in fact, the closest to an unanimous opinion I've ever seen around here or previously on a.t.g-s) believed that, although the show in question did indeed incorporate large decks of cards in gameplay, the resemblances to any of the previous versions evaporated quickly. From my own personal recollection, the only thing about the show that even came close to being even close to the original was the end game, yet it still was f*cked around with just enough to make it the final turd in this game show punch bowl. The front game certainly didn't even come close to the same as the previous versions. Just having big-assed cards on-set does not "CARD SHARKS" make. First of all, the CS main game had always been played with each player having their own decks of cards to work from. The '01 producers must have thought that having two decks were two costly or too much work for the lovely hostesses so they just slashed that to one single deck for the players to go through, making it possible for a player to win a round with only one correct high-low guess, as oppossed to the original rules having each player work their way across the board using their individual deck of cards and the player who actually succeeds in completing that task won the game (except in Sudden Death situations). Perhaps it is just me but that's certainly a different game. Also by removing the mechanism that gave contestant proper control of the cards (and the game and their ultimate fate), that being the survey questions, virtually anything resembling skill or knowledge needed to play the game was stripped away and what little did remain relied almost entirely on dumb luck for the contestants. I mean, control of the cards in the first round was determined by a coin toss backstage? Are you kidding me?
Bottom line for me is this...would this revival EVER have met the standards of Mark Goodson or his trusted staff and made it on-air? No way. It simply isn't reasonable to believe that having a mere "jist" of the original is enough to make it a true revival of said original. I mean, didn't you yourself say that other than there being cards there that they "cut out everything ELSE"? Actually, it almost sounds like you made my arguement for me with those few words alone.
But then again, what do I know about turds in game show punch bowls? I'm sorry...I gotta go now...those evil-doers have found me and are gonna drag me back to the home...hmmmmm...wonder how long they'll be able to contain me this time...maybe if I bribe them with a "clip chip", they'll deny ever seeing me and let me remain free...ohhhhh, the agony...:)
Jake
-
[quote name=\'irismason42\' post=\'228086\' date=\'Oct 8 2009, 07:57 PM\']G-T/MGP: Body Language - the ratings began to decrease really quickly after the regular game resume with the $500 bonus being added to Round 2 and the scoring system was weird. That $500 bonus in Round 2 was what caused the cancellation and didn't make it beyond December 1985.[/quote]
While the scoring system left much to be desired, your logic about the second round is baseless. I actually liked that $500 bonus for getting all the words in Round 2. And the show barely made it into January 1986, the 3rd of January to be exact.
Pearson Television: 100%, Match Game '98.
Agreed on MG '98. 100% never made it to air in this country.
-
[quote name=\'NicholasM79\' post=\'228129\' date=\'Oct 9 2009, 02:23 PM\']
Pearson Television: 100%, Match Game '98.
Agreed on MG '98. 100% never made it to air in this country.
[/quote]
Yes it did. Casey Kasem was the Disembodied Voice Emcee. Twas boring.
-
[quote name=\'jalman\' post=\'228130\' date=\'Oct 9 2009, 02:27 PM\'][quote name=\'NicholasM79\' post=\'228129\' date=\'Oct 9 2009, 02:23 PM\']
Pearson Television: 100%, Match Game '98.
Agreed on MG '98. 100% never made it to air in this country.
[/quote]
Yes it did. Casey Kasem was the Disembodied Voice Emcee. Twas boring.
[/quote]
Oh, it did? My bad. (Researches) Limited trial run in only seven markets.
Never saw it, probably don't want to.
-
[quote name=\'NicholasM79\' post=\'228131\' date=\'Oct 9 2009, 02:56 PM\'][quote name=\'jalman\' post=\'228130\' date=\'Oct 9 2009, 02:27 PM\'][quote name=\'NicholasM79\' post=\'228129\' date=\'Oct 9 2009, 02:23 PM\']
Pearson Television: 100%, Match Game '98.
Agreed on MG '98. 100% never made it to air in this country.
[/quote]
Yes it did. Casey Kasem was the Disembodied Voice Emcee. Twas boring.
[/quote]
Oh, it did? My bad. (Researches) Limited trial run in only seven markets.
Never saw it, probably don't want to.
[/quote]
I remember the limited markets, and that Dallas was one of them, airing at like 3am. I wanted to check it out while I visited family there back in winter '99, but couldn't stay up late enough. Seems like I didn't miss much. :-P
-
[quote name=\'NicholasM79\' post=\'228129\' date=\'Oct 9 2009, 02:23 PM\'][quote name=\'irismason42\' post=\'228086\' date=\'Oct 8 2009, 07:57 PM\']G-T/MGP: Body Language - the ratings began to decrease really quickly after the regular game resume with the $500 bonus being added to Round 2 and the scoring system was weird. That $500 bonus in Round 2 was what caused the cancellation and didn't make it beyond December 1985.[/quote]
While the scoring system left much to be desired, your logic about the second round is baseless. I actually liked that $500 bonus for getting all the words in Round 2. And the show barely made it into January 1986, the 3rd of January to be exact.
Pearson Television: 100%, Match Game '98.
Agreed on MG '98. 100% never made it to air in this country.
[/quote]
I thought BL went weird when all of a sudden, every week was teen week.
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'228135\' date=\'Oct 9 2009, 04:24 PM\']I thought BL went weird when all of a sudden, every week was teen week.[/quote]
Oh, don't forget that whole Teen Month in the summer of '85!
-
[quote name=\'gamed121683\' post=\'228016\' date=\'Oct 7 2009, 09:05 PM\']TLEberle said, "How can you steal from yourself?"
I don't know...Ask this guy! (http://\"http://www.americansongwriter.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/john-fogerty.jpg\")[/quote]
For once, someone actually makes an obscure joke that I actually get. Well played.
-
[quote name=\'JakeT\' post=\'228127\' date=\'Oct 9 2009, 11:05 AM\']Now there's something here *I* dont' get...
You say that you only saw CS'01 once or twice (in lovely fuzzy UHF - I mean, it must have been nearly unwatchable if that is what made it one of the stated factors for you only being able to see one or two episodes in total).[/quote] KTZZ was channel 22 back when CS was on. That qualfies as UHF, right? And I was only able to see an episode or two because it was on at one or two in the afternoon, and I worked after school. And I think the only time I was able to see it would have been the Friday after Thanksgiving, or some such. Plus the fact that I backed into it. There was almost no advertising to be seen.
position to compare the revival to the previous incarnations and just how it stacked up.
But we're not comparing how it stacked up. That's another thread. I do not believe in assigning penalty points to a show because it happens to be an inferior revival of a show that is beloved by many.
If you're comparing Fremantle shows, you compare Fremantle shows. If you believe that Card Sharks 2001 was the awfulest of the lot, then I have no beef with you. I don't think that "worst Fremantle show" is a one horse race, however. Even if you take Temptation or Whammy by themselves and not just as revivals, I think either one is worse than Card Sharks.
-
[quote name=\'jalman\' post=\'228130\' date=\'Oct 9 2009, 02:27 PM\'][quote name=\'NicholasM79\' post=\'228129\' date=\'Oct 9 2009, 02:23 PM\']
Pearson Television: 100%, Match Game '98.
Agreed on MG '98. 100% never made it to air in this country.
[/quote]
Yes it did. Casey Kasem was the Disembodied Voice Emcee. Twas boring.
[/quote]
It was ****ing PONDEROUS!
-
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'228245\' date=\'Oct 10 2009, 10:17 PM\'][quote name=\'JakeT\' post=\'228127\' date=\'Oct 9 2009, 11:05 AM\']position to compare the revival to the previous incarnations and just how it stacked up.[/quote] But we're not comparing how it stacked up. That's another thread. I do not believe in assigning penalty points to a show because it happens to be an inferior revival of a show that is beloved by many.
If you're comparing Fremantle shows, you compare Fremantle shows. If you believe that Card Sharks 2001 was the awfulest of the lot, then I have no beef with you. I don't think that "worst Fremantle show" is a one horse race, however. Even if you take Temptation or Whammy by themselves and not just as revivals, I think either one is worse than Card Sharks.
[/quote]
Let me first say that if I came across as harsh and/or bitchy in my original reply, well, that's just me these day, it seems (heheheh) but I still wanna offer up my apologies to all for anything I said that mighta pushed unnecessary buttons or crossed unnecessary lines...
ANYWAY, I guess that if CS'01 can't properly be compared to previous versions due to '01 being Fremantle and others being MG-BT/MGP, I'm willing to give ya that. However, I appreciate ya helping me to reinforce my original opinion of just how crappy CS'01 was, whether it was a revival or a whole new game standing on its own merits. Even judging it on its own, for me, it falls apart in so many places. For the most part, there is very little main game structure, leaving me wondering which part of the gameplay was supposed to be seen as the "main" focus and to have carried the most weight towards a player's success. It all just seemed really rushed to me (maybe the "whooosh" effect when playing the cards didn't help that) so I found myself asking, "is it a card game with not-so-funny video clips thrown in" or "is it a new not-so-funny video clips game with a bit of card play thrown in"? Bottom line is that I really can't recall particularily enjoying any given episode and I believe I did see every episode aired (yes, I used to often watch shows that I didn't necessarily like in hopes they'd grow on me).
When comparing CS'01 to other Fremantle shows exclusively, I still rank it the top stinkeroo...while I'm no great fan of "Whammy", I don't think it is all that bad and I believe the reason I don't care as much for it is that it "feels" like cable" to be as opposed to how PYL had that "CBS feeling", i.e. Whammy felt cheaper but the game still seemed more or less in tact. As for "Temptation", I must admit that I've probably made a point of not watching any more eps of it than I have because I do believe that the more "Temptation" I watch, the more my great memories of the original "$otC" would potentially be tainted. And although I believe that there was a better underlying game with "Temptation" than CS'01, "T" was wrecked by the careless execution of it from all angles.
So, while I still hold CS'01 up as Fremantle's greatest debacle, I must admit that it probably wouldn't take that much effort for "Temptation" to take that place in my mind...ya just never know, I guess...:)
Jake
-
[quote name=\'JakeT\' post=\'228463\' date=\'Oct 13 2009, 08:15 PM\']And although I believe that there was a better underlying game with "Temptation" than CS'01, "T" was wrecked by the careless execution of it from all angles.[/quote]
And I think that's why I have such disdain for Fremantle. Just about everything they do is horribly and carelessly executed. Quality be damned, as long as those involved get a paycheck, no one really cares. Changes are made just to make changes (Chip Clips, Double Whammies), and corners are cut out of cheapness (Temptation Dollars, solo Big Deals), and you end up with cookie-cutter game shows, compared to just 15 years ago, when it looked like the Goodson Production company actually gave a damn about what they were doing.
I'm not asking Fremantle to appease us exclusively as fans. I'm asking them to actually do a competent job, and figure out why, in 11 years, you've had seven new game show revivals (MG98, FF99, TTTT00, CS01, Whammy!, Temptation, and LMaD), only three saw a second season, and two of those three were canceled after season two.
-
[quote name=\'Kaos\' post=\'227607\' date=\'Oct 4 2009, 12:57 AM\']They could have at least let "Cookie" (Tom Masterson, reprising his role from the computer games) host it via voice over.[/quote]
Minor correction: "Cookie" Masterson is the character's name. The guy providing the voice is Tom Gottlieb, brother (?) of YDKJ creator Harry Gottlieb, who also provided the voice of original host Nate Shapiro.
Tom has since gone on to do other VO work, particularly on the syndie/cable sports blooper show Whacked Out Sports.
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'228464\' date=\'Oct 13 2009, 07:45 PM\']I'm not asking Fremantle to appease us exclusively as fans. I'm asking them to actually do a competent job, and figure out why, in 11 years, you've had seven new game show revivals (MG98, FF99, TTTT00, CS01, Whammy!, Temptation, and LMaD), only three saw a second season, and two of those three were canceled after season two.[/quote]
I absolutely agree with you. In fact, I'd take it another step or two further and suggest that I kinda expect Fremantle to be more than capable of taking a classic game and completely blowing our minds with their revival. There's no question that Fremantle has the bucks in pocket to give any game the absolute "supreme" treatment, both in appearance and content. Fremantle also has the largest and greatest library of past proven games to start from when approaching the relaunch of a classic format. Finally, while so much of the incredible talent responsible for the creation and then day-to-day production of many of our beloved classics are either no longer living or are long since retired, there are still a large number of very capable and talented people damn near dying for the chance to work in this once-again neglected TV genre and Fremantle could virtually have their pick of those people instead of just throwing in whoever they seemed to have in the past in hopes that someone would be competent. I truly do believe that game shows are one of those TV genres that really do require having a production team, from initial development through post-production of the near-finished product, that have not only a real love of this genre but a real understanding of what makes it work and what makes a viewer want to tune in day after day...in other words, the kind of people Mark Goodson would be looking to hire if he were still with us today.
Of course, can we really fault Fremantle? Just how much creativity and such can we expect from a company whose greatest successes have been "BAYWATCH" (get me a barf bag puleeeze) and "AMERICAN IDOL". And I can't help but wonder...in the cases of programs in their library that don't look particularily dated, what do you think the odds would be that if aired head-to-head (or at least placed in syndication simulataneously) that older previously aired shows would garner significantly higher ratings than most, if not all, of their more recent offerings? I personally think the odds might be rather good. Maybe Fremantle oughta consider putting a package together for syndication called "The Best Of International Game Shows" and see what kind of ratings some of their better semi-recent foreign holdings might do in the current tired syndication market. I'd be almost certain that they could pull a 1.5 or better with seasons from, say the mid-90s and later, of the Aussie "$ALE OF THE CENTURY" (that is, given decent timeslots).
But nothing I've said here will be considered nor heeded so...sigh...blah blah blah...yak yak yak...
BTW, are they keeping Monty Hall locked in a closet 'cause I surely don't see much, if any, of his touch on this new version...try as Wayne Brady may, even he can't make this version a success in the long term. Hell, I think he himself said it best on either the first or second aired episode when throwing to commercial, he said, "we're INCHING our way towards the Big Deal"...yup...inching...slowly...creeping...in...that...direction...and...by...t
he...time...we...get...there...no...one...cares...plus...the...one...player...thi
ngy...and...weird...reveal...order...makes...the...baby...Jesus...cry...
But that's just me...
Jake
-
[quote name=\'JakeT\' post=\'228463\' date=\'Oct 13 2009, 05:15 PM\']Let me first say that if I came across as harsh and/or bitchy in my original reply, well, that's just me these day, it seems (heheheh) but I still wanna offer up my apologies to all for anything I said that mighta pushed unnecessary buttons or crossed unnecessary lines...[/quote] No way. You don't owe me anything; and I had a lot of fun crafting my response.
ANYWAY, I guess that if CS'01 can't properly be compared to previous versions due to '01 being Fremantle and others being MG-BT/MGP, I'm willing to give ya that.
It's not that. I'm saying that they shouldn't be compared because they're different. I don't judge Richard Karn's Feud harshly because I enjoy the first two versions; I judge it harshly because it sucks rocks. That's the distinction. :)
However, I appreciate ya helping me to reinforce my original opinion of just how crappy CS'01 was, whether it was a revival or a whole new game standing on its own merits.
Totally. But then, as we've seen, that seems to be Standard Operating Procedure with Fremantle...
-
Anybody remember a show called "Wedding Party," which aired on
ABC from April to July 1968? It was produced by Art Stark, who had
been in-studio producer on "Who Do You Trust?" (that show was based
in New York, while executive producer Don Fedderson worked out of LA).
The host was Alan Hamel (Mr. Suzanne Somers) and I'm still not clear as
to whether the show was intended as a talk show or a game show (Stark
was obviously drawing on his "Trust" experience--that show was more talk
than game). Anyway, engaged couples talked with Hamel about their courtships,
then played a lame game in which each secretly picked a prize and if they matched,
they won it. That was it. No competition for "As The World Turns" on CBS or
"Let's Make A Deal," then still on NBC.
-
Who the hell produced "The Riddlers"?
Yeah, it never got out of the pilot stage, but that show was an abomination and the production company should be thoroughly scolded for it.
-
[quote name=\'Mr. Brown\' post=\'245542\' date=\'Aug 7 2010, 09:48 PM\']Who the hell produced "The Riddlers"?[/quote]
"Okay, so we'll go down the line, and as each celebrity is introduced, they'll issue a friendly "Hello!" It'll be great, it'll be the next catchphrase. People will be saying "Hello!" to each other on the streets. And while I'm on the subject, do they GET any funnier than Robert Urich? I don't think so! Wait, what?"
-
[quote name=\'Mr. Brown\' post=\'245542\' date=\'Aug 7 2010, 11:48 PM\']Who the hell produced "The Riddlers"?
Yeah, it never got out of the pilot stage, but that show was an abomination and the production company should be thoroughly scolded for it.[/quote]
If the question's rhetorical, skip this answer.
Bob Stewart.
/Dave Letterman was funny, though. He oughta host some late night show. Maybe several.
-
[quote name=\'NicholasM79\' post=\'227359\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 02:06 PM\']Goodson/Todman: What's Going On?[/quote]
The biggest problem with What's Going On was that it was ahead of its time. Technology wasn't perfect... audio would get cut off, video quality seemed substandard. Host Lee Bowman seemed lost and lacked the ease and charm of John Daly and Garry Moore. Some of the outside events were hilarious, others, very dull. The best one was arranging for Jack Benny to pay the check at a restaurant. (If you've heard stories about waiters arguing about who gets to serve Jack Benny, in fear of not getting a tip, it's hysterical)
-
[quote name=\'jmangin\' post=\'227360\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 02:16 PM\']Reg Grundy - Was Small Talk worse than Time Machine?[/quote]
For me, Small Talk was just dull, and kind of stupid. It tried to be Child's Play, but it just wasn't funny. However, it apparently got MG productions attention when the tiebreaker round was a total rip off of the "Hi-Lo" questions on Card Sharks. Wil Shriner didn't help much, as he seemed like a caricature of a game show host, but then again I don't think he did anything that was funny.
I wonder of MG productions also caused Time Machine to change its format from the "solo players play TPIR ripoff games that deal with time periods instead of prices" to a not much better two player format. John Davidson, for me, was somewhat tolerable on Time Machine, better than he was on Pyramid, but not as good as he was on HS for the first 2 seasons.
-
[quote name=\'Chief-O\' post=\'227362\' date=\'Oct 1 2009, 02:26 PM\']Bob Stewart-Love Experts[/quote]
I think the obvious problem with Love Experts was that it was a talk show with game show elements, but there was very little if any game. If anyone other than Bill Cullen was hosting, the whole thing would be a wash. One of Bill's many talents was making a game with a weak premise look very good and entertaining to watch.
-
Ruckus' biggest problem was that it was almost totally reliant on the host... Amazing Jonathan is a magician/comedian. His antics and boisterous, loud persona overshadowed the contestants. If you've ever seen his act, Amazing Jonathan is pretty funny, but take his act and spread it out over a handful of shows, it just became increasingly less tolerable to watch. I read someplace that Reach for the Stars was not at all the show that Merv Griffin envisioned. The network gave the show a spaceship set (which Merv didn't want) and there were elements of gameplay that Merv didn't like. Merv had similar problems when producing Wheel... he didn't want the shopping format at all, just a series of Hangman puzzles, and Merv got his way in 1987 when he eliminated the shopping format.
-
I think the obvious problem with Love Experts was that it was a talk show with game show elements, but there was very little if any game. If anyone other than Bill Cullen was hosting, the whole thing would be a wash. One of Bill's many talents was making a game with a weak premise look very good and entertaining to watch.
To be honest, I kind of liked Love Experts. I think it was a combination of a few things - Bill, plus the celebrity panel (Geoff Edwards was on there a lot, as were other game show regulars like Soupy Sales and Elaine Joyce), the theme (some have said it was out of place but I've always liked Spring Rain), and the fact they did offer a prize to one of the "contestants".
I guess it was a game show in every way - except they forgot to include the game!
-
I wonder of MG productions also caused Time Machine to change its format from the "solo players play TPIR ripoff games that deal with time periods instead of prices" to a not much better two player format. John Davidson, for me, was somewhat tolerable on Time Machine, better than he was on Pyramid, but not as good as he was on HS for the first 2 seasons.
I guess we all have those short-lived "gems" that we liked, but I don't think Time Machine was that bad. Maybe I'm one of the few, but I actually enjoyed watching the show - both formats.
-
[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' post=\'245568\' date=\'Aug 8 2010, 11:51 AM\']I guess we all have those short-lived "gems" that we liked, but I don't think Time Machine was that bad. Maybe I'm one of the few, but I actually enjoyed watching the show - both formats.[/quote]
I thought it was a good concept (A TPIR-like "collection of mini games" show with trivia instead of pricing), but the execution was way off, IMHO.