The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: Twentington on October 16, 2012, 06:02:27 PM
-
Is there any particular format/style/etc. that you've just never gotten into?
As I've said several times before, I generally can't get into dating/relationship shows, and I'm not really sure why. That said, I did find Bzzz! far more palatable than most, and Love Connection has produced some decent stories. (It also had Chuck Woolery.)
I also don't like games that are entirely luck-based. I burned out on Deal or No Deal well before it devolved into an endless string of cartoonish contestants, general gimmickry, and product placement. (Though I would love to win a lifetime supply of Sprecher root beer.) On that same line, I've never liked lottery game shows for the same reason — and it doesn't help that a lot of the ones I've seen have abysmal production values.
Finally, another one that I've stated before — I can't stand any show in the Chuck Barris library. I just find the 70's cheese so overwhelming on them. (It doesn't help that two of Barris' three flagship shows fall into the aforementioned "dating/relationship" category.) Furthermore, nearly every TNG and TDG I've ever seen had multiple instances of answers so off-the-mark st00pid that I wondered how they managed to successfully operate the door leading into the studio. ("What's your husband's favorite condiment?" "Pool table.")
-
Is there any particular format/style/etc. that you've just never gotten into?
As I've said several times before, I generally can't get into dating/relationship shows, and I'm not really sure why. That said, I did find Bzzz! far more palatable than most, and Love Connection has produced some decent stories. (It also had Chuck Woolery.)
I think one reason why it's generally hard to get into shows like this is, the contestants don't seem real. Bzzz!, to me, the people weren't acting natural... they were vamping the camera, and using inuendos that, while they may be entertaining to some, roll the eyes of others. I agree with you though on Love Connection. There, the people at least ACTED real. You could also add Studs to the equation, and most die hard fans know that the responses that the two bachelors(ettes) had to match to the other three were TOTALLY cooked up by the writers.
I also don't like games that are entirely luck-based. I burned out on Deal or No Deal well before it devolved into an endless string of cartoonish contestants, general gimmickry, and product placement. (Though I would love to win a lifetime supply of Sprecher root beer.) On that same line, I've never liked lottery game shows for the same reason — and it doesn't help that a lot of the ones I've seen have abysmal production values.
Yeah, Deal or no Deal was just FINE without the extra gimmicks, but I think shortening it to a half hour actually improved the show, because it forced them to get to the CORE of the game, rather than REALLY stretch it out to the point where it looked ridiculous. How do you feel about PYL? Unless you're a genius like Michael Larsen, the game IS pure luck based.
Finally, another one that I've stated before — I can't stand any show in the Chuck Barris library. I just find the 70's cheese so overwhelming on them. (It doesn't help that two of Barris' three flagship shows fall into the aforementioned "dating/relationship" category.) Furthermore, nearly every TNG and TDG I've ever seen had multiple instances of answers so off-the-mark st00pid that I wondered how they managed to successfully operate the door leading into the studio. ("What's your husband's favorite condiment?" "Pool table.")
I agree with you on Newlywed Game and Dating Game, I can watch them on occasion, but regularly, no way. The one Barris show I enjoyed watching regularly was Treasure Hunt. Geoff just had such command of putting a contestant on a figurative roller coaster ride of emotions as wacky sketches unfolded infront of the contestant's eyes. The Gong Show CAN be fun, but I think towards the end, it was obvious Chuck was trying to kill his own show, and he couldn't have been happier to end the show at the finale. Then of course there were the total duds... $1.98 Beauty Show (Gong Show without a Gong, and you truly wish there WAS a gong!) The Game Game (Probably Chuck's only attempt at a "serious" game show that would bore anyone to tears), Camoflauge (Overly excited contestants and an overbearing host, not to mention the game was impossible to play along with) How's Your Mother in Law (Nipsey and Richard Dawson telling mother in law jokes... Wink hosted, and in an interview, he said it best when he said "It's not really worth talking about") Family Game (Bob Barker hated this Newlywed clone so much, he never talks about it in interviews) and finally, The Parent Game (Another one that was boring, and unmemorable)
-
As I've said several times before, I generally can't get into dating/relationship shows, and I'm not really sure why.
I feel the same way, but I make an exception for Tattle Tales, once they went to the classic format. Of course, that may be because so few of the questions were actually about the relationship, and some of the questions were genuinely thought-provoking.
-
Although I occassionally enjoy special "Celebrity," or "All-Star," editions of game shows, I haven't liked when they over-do-it, and sometimes permanently make that transition.
One of my biggest disappointments was "Celebrity Bullseye." What made it even more disappointing was how the local TV Book, which came with the Sunday Detroit News/Free Press, would mention ALL the celebrity guests to appear on the program each night! This made it easy to tell who was gonna win a match, and go on to meet another celebrity. Of course, I could've just avoided reading the listings!
-
I can't stand any show in the Chuck Barris library. I just find the 70's cheese so overwhelming on them.
Never been a Barris fan either---then again, I do remember watching the GSN "Gong Show" anniversary marathon as well as "Treasure Hunt" [the past few times it had turned up on GSN in the past few years]. Acquired tastes, they are. Can't say I'm a fan of the personal/dating genre as a whole, either.
(Though I would love to win a lifetime supply of Sprecher root beer.)
And I thought I'd be the first to mention that stuff around here.
-
Finally, another one that I've stated before — I can't stand any show in the Chuck Barris library. I just find the 70's cheese so overwhelming on them. (It doesn't help that two of Barris' three flagship shows fall into the aforementioned "dating/relationship" category.) Furthermore, nearly every TNG and TDG I've ever seen had multiple instances of answers so off-the-mark st00pid that I wondered how they managed to successfully operate the door leading into the studio. ("What's your husband's favorite condiment?" "Pool table.")
Yeah, you've mentioned this like a dozen times already.
You just can't put a 2012 perspective on a 1970s show. Times and culture were different.
-
Although I occassionally enjoy special "Celebrity," or "All-Star," editions of game shows, I haven't liked when they over-do-it, and sometimes permanently make that transition.
One of my biggest disappointments was "Celebrity Bullseye." What made it even more disappointing was how the local TV Book, which came with the Sunday Detroit News/Free Press, would mention ALL the celebrity guests to appear on the program each night! This made it easy to tell who was gonna win a match, and go on to meet another celebrity. Of course, I could've just avoided reading the listings!
Bob, did the Detroit News/Free Press list celebs for other games, too? It seems like a lot of newspapers stopped listing game-show celebs sometime around 1978, so to hear about one from the '80s that still did piques my interest!
To keep the post on-topic, I was never much for Q&A shows, but a lot of that has to do with the fact that I'm not really that bright.
Brendan
-
No matter how Chain Reaction is served up, it's a total bore. It seems like it should work on paper but for me it's like watching paint dry. The one letter at a time thing just slows a word game down too much I think. Cullen's version had a decent bonus game but I still can't sit through an entire episode.
-
The one letter at a time thing just slows a word game down too much I think.
How else do you reveal the letters? Pixel by pixel? :)
/Actually there was a game where you would set up a word, and your opponent would ask how many long straight, short straight, wide curves or short curves there were. I don't for the life of me remember anything else.
-
I'm with you, as far as games of chance ... with little or no skill. They could be played without players.
I'm also pretty burned out, frankly, on anything that's a straight-ahead Q&A quiz. Once you've had Jeopardy!, why bother any more? I only like Q&A games if there's a really good twist ... such as the Blockbusters board.
-
Any of the Charades-based shows.
-
Actually there was a game where you would set up a word, and your opponent would ask how many long straight, short straight, wide curves or short curves there were. I don't for the life of me remember anything else.
If you are thinking of a board game, then you are describing Runes (http://"http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/38/runes").
-
Furthermore, nearly every TNG and TDG I've ever seen had multiple instances of answers so off-the-mark st00pid that I wondered how they managed to successfully operate the door leading into the studio. ("What's your husband's favorite condiment?" "Pool table.")
A Group of Pill-Pushers. Strawberry Lip Girls. Miners & Hoes. An Ugly Child. Geronimo Horse. Superman and Spider Woman.
Those are just a small selection of the moronic guesses on Wheel. Nevermind the nonsensical letter calls and general abject stupidity. Hell, those examples were just from the first page of search results for dumbassery from the show. There are a LOT more. If moronic answers on the part of contestants is a disqualifying criteria for you, one of your personal favorites fails rather vividly.
Also: Not the biggest fan of stunt shows (ranging from Beat the Clock to Fear Factor). Just not particularly enjoyable television to me.
-
Not a big fan of couples games where you have to predict what the other said (Newlywed Game, I'm Telling, Tattletales)...to me, it gets kinda old after awhile.
-
Any of the Charades-based shows.
I can only think of Showoffs and Body language, and the latter's puzzle portion actually made the show interesting to watch.
As I've said several times before, I generally can't get into dating/relationship shows, and I'm not really sure why.
I feel the same way, but I make an exception for Tattle Tales, once they went to the classic format. Of course, that may be because so few of the questions were actually about the relationship, and some of the questions were genuinely thought-provoking.
Seconded- you did get a few things about the relationship, but the questions were good. That first format was kind of a bore.
I'm burned out on Match Game. Once they mowed through all of the raunchy jokes, it just didn't seem fun to watch anymore. Maybe it wasn't so much a bad format as one that wasn't built to last for a very long time.
-
Part of the lightning in a bottle aspect of MG 7x was the era. Standards had loosened up to the point where you could make obvious double-entendres, but you couldn't actually acknowledge the second meaning. Humor today is all about crossing boundaries, so everyone goes for the obvious dirty joke.
On topic, I've never been a fan of dating or "guess your partner's answer" couples shows in any form.
-
On topic, I've never been a fan of dating or "guess your partner's answer" couples shows in any form.
I've always wondered if there was ever a couple who ever "gamed" the game?
You know like "If they ask for a color, we'll say Green" or "If they ask for a woman's name, we'll say Judy", etc.
-
Furthermore, nearly every TNG and TDG I've ever seen had multiple instances of answers so off-the-mark st00pid that I wondered how they managed to successfully operate the door leading into the studio. ("What's your husband's favorite condiment?" "Pool table.")
A Group of Pill-Pushers. Strawberry Lip Girls. Miners & Hoes. An Ugly Child. Geronimo Horse. Superman and Spider Woman.
For one, answers like that on Wheel only come around every few months or so. On TNG, they feel like they come around every episode.
Second of all, maybe it's just that I don't like the format and am transferring the blame to the dopey answers. As I already said, I generally don't like dating or relationship shows, so maybe I just need to stop there.
-
I've always wondered if there was ever a couple who ever "gamed" the game?
You know like "If they ask for a color, we'll say Green" or "If they ask for a woman's name, we'll say Judy", etc.
In Bob Eubanks' autobiography, he says it happened once on "The Newlywed Game." The couple got caught and the episode didn't air.
-
I've always wondered if there was ever a couple who ever "gamed" the game?
You know like "If they ask for a color, we'll say Green" or "If they ask for a woman's name, we'll say Judy", etc.
In Bob Eubanks' autobiography, he says it happened once on "The Newlywed Game." The couple got caught and the episode didn't air.
I would think that would be a nearly impossible thing to catch, much less prove, without going into a ridiculous amount of investigation. And all over a new refrigerator?
I remember noting that on multiple choice questions, whatever they asked the wives they'd ask the husbands in a different order. So they made some effort to prevent "gaming". Still, I have to think that couples employed 'cheat' strategies a lot more than Bob's letting on.
-
Although I occassionally enjoy special "Celebrity," or "All-Star," editions of game shows, I haven't liked when they over-do-it, and sometimes permanently make that transition.
One of my biggest disappointments was "Celebrity Bullseye." What made it even more disappointing was how the local TV Book, which came with the Sunday Detroit News/Free Press, would mention ALL the celebrity guests to appear on the program each night! This made it easy to tell who was gonna win a match, and go on to meet another celebrity. Of course, I could've just avoided reading the listings!
Bob, did the Detroit News/Free Press list celebs for other games, too? It seems like a lot of newspapers stopped listing game-show celebs sometime around 1978, so to hear about one from the '80s that still did piques my interest!
To keep the post on-topic, I was never much for Q&A shows, but a lot of that has to do with the fact that I'm not really that bright.
Brendan
That is a good question, and I don't recall there being any celebrity listings for other game shows at that time. One thing for sure, network game shows were fading away almost entirely around that time (FF on ABC; TPIR and TT on CBS; and four others on NBC, until just WOF in spring of 1982). Come to think of it, they may not have always listed the celebrities for "Celebrity Bullseye," in the weekly book, but the daily paper TV listings usually did, and that's how you could usually determine who was going to win or lose, if you watched the show loyally.
More recently, USA Today and other publications used to mention the names/winnings for "Celebrity Jeopardy!" participants.
-
I'm also pretty burned out, frankly, on anything that's a straight-ahead Q&A quiz. Once you've had Jeopardy!, why bother any more? I only like Q&A games if there's a really good twist ... such as the Blockbusters board.
What do you term a straight-ahead Q&A quiz? Does Sale of the Century fall in there? How about Who/What/Where? History IQ is probably as dry as they come (except for the little video clips, I guess) but I sure did enjoy playing along when I could and learning something when I didn't.
-
I think many of the "classics" used a clever twist to a trivia contest (With Sale, you build up your bank to buy discounted gifts, Jeopardy you give the questions, TTD was just that...tic-tac-toe). But, the hook was making a pedestrian trivia game engaging, and those shows did that. Millionaire and The Challengers are really simple on paper (and honestly on TV too), but added their own twists that made them engaging.
On the other hand Free 4 All was the probably straightest Q & A I saw, and it made watching paint dry seem like a nailbiter.
-
Any of the Charades-based shows.
I can only think of Showoffs and Body language, and the latter's puzzle portion actually made the show interesting to watch.
I'm also including "Stump the Stars" and "Celebrity Charades." I'm too young to have seen "Pantomime Quiz."
-
Any of the Charades-based shows.
I can only think of Showoffs and Body language, and the latter's puzzle portion actually made the show interesting to watch.
I'm also including "Stump the Stars" and "Celebrity Charades." I'm too young to have seen "Pantomime Quiz."
If you saw Stump the Stars, you saw Pantomine Quiz. It was the same show, but with a much more stylish set and the panelists wore evening clothes.
-
On topic, I've never been a fan of dating or "guess your partner's answer" couples shows in any form.
While I tend to agree with you on that, I still love to watch the Pat & Charlie episode of "The Newlywed Game" over and over and goofy me chokes up with Pat every time at that winning moment...
JakeT
-
Furthermore, nearly every TNG and TDG I've ever seen had multiple instances of answers so off-the-mark st00pid that I wondered how they managed to successfully operate the door leading into the studio. ("What's your husband's favorite condiment?" "Pool table.")
A Group of Pill-Pushers. Strawberry Lip Girls. Miners & Hoes. An Ugly Child. Geronimo Horse. Superman and Spider Woman.
Those are just a small selection of the moronic guesses on Wheel. Nevermind the nonsensical letter calls and general abject stupidity. Hell, those examples were just from the first page of search results for dumbassery from the show. There are a LOT more. If moronic answers on the part of contestants is a disqualifying criteria for you, one of your personal favorites fails rather vividly.
Also: Not the biggest fan of stunt shows (ranging from Beat the Clock to Fear Factor). Just not particularly enjoyable television to me.
Total opposite for me.. I LOVE stunt shows! Then again, I'd like the way Pat or Bud had a reading tone in their voice as they read the directions.
-
On topic, I've never been a fan of dating or "guess your partner's answer" couples shows in any form.
While I tend to agree with you on that, I still love to watch the Pat & Charlie episode of "The Newlywed Game" over and over and goofy me chokes up with Pat every time at that winning moment...
JakeT
Throw me on the pile of folks who don't care for those shows, especially The Newlywed Game, despite being a mark for Bob Eubanks. I still think Eubanks's best work was his stint on Card Sharks, but YMMV.
-
I'm also pretty burned out, frankly, on anything that's a straight-ahead Q&A quiz. Once you've had Jeopardy!, why bother any more? I only like Q&A games if there's a really good twist ... such as the Blockbusters board.
What do you term a straight-ahead Q&A quiz? Does Sale of the Century fall in there? How about Who/What/Where?
Sorry I missed this earlier. I don't recall enough about Sale to answer that. But The Three W's? Definitely a great twist, with the wagering system.
-
Formats I hated were the Pat Finn version of The Joker's Wild and the "all-star" versions of games. The novelty wears thin after a while. Password, Bullseye, and to some extent, Millionaire and Weakest Link prove this.
I was never a huge fan of dating shows, but I can tolerate an ep of TNG or TDG on occasion.
-
I'm not sure if it's the format, but any show that is heavily edited rates a kill button. Unless there was a technical reason to edit, programs should be live to tape with minimal stopdown. It shows poor directing skills or a poor format - i.e. drawing suspense by overkilled needless closeups. This isn't $64,000 Question with an overhead Kliegl and an isolation booth.
-
I'm not sure if it's the format, but any show that is heavily edited rates a kill button. Unless there was a technical reason to edit, programs should be live to tape with minimal stopdown. It shows poor directing skills or a poor format - i.e. drawing suspense by overkilled needless closeups.
Or just poor producing. Taking 7 hours to tape a one-hour show is ridiculous, considering how most solid producers used to tape close to a week's worth of shows in that amount of time.
-
The Gong Show CAN be fun, but I think towards the end, it was obvious Chuck was trying to kill his own show, and he couldn't have been happier to end the show at the finale.
Except he didn't. While NBC cancelled the show, Chuck did produce two more seasons of nighttime syndie episodes (and they weren't all done in one fell swoop--the 1979-80 season they migrated from NBC to Sunset Gower). Granted, that's not the grind of churning out a weekday series, but if he was really tired of doing the show, he wouldn't have even done the two extra seasons.
I know Barris has said that he wanted to stop because he was having "a midlife crisis on national TV" in interviews. Personally, I think that's a denial move.
-
21 Cards. It was a local show that aired in Minnesota on WUCW 23, filmed at Mystic Lake Casino. They tried way too hard to mimic Deal or No Deal. The format, the models, the execution, it was boring as hell.
It would take over 4 hours to shoot three 24-minute episodes. The audience was just bored to tears.
-
For the most part, I can't stand relationship shows. I'll watch TNG now and then.
Notable exception: "Bzzzz!!!" Energetic format and Annie Wood was (and still is) easy on the eyes.
-
Love Experts was good.
-
I'm not sure if it's the format, but any show that is heavily edited rates a kill button. Unless there was a technical reason to edit, programs should be live to tape with minimal stopdown. It shows poor directing skills or a poor format - i.e. drawing suspense by overkilled needless closeups. This isn't $64,000 Question with an overhead Kliegl and an isolation booth.
This is one of the things that's stopping me from going back to watching The Price is Right full time. I know it has to do more with my background in broadcasting (and the fact that I saw one of Barker's last episodes live), but I can tell where a stopdown took place (the most glaring being the segue from pricing game 1 to IUFB 2) or where ADR was inserted. That really disrupts the flow of the show and adversely affects my viewing experience, in my honest opinion.
On another technical standpoint, I dislike time constraints. I miss the days when hosts can "shoot the s**t" for a few minutes or where errors that don't affect the outcome of gameplay are kept in for laughs. It's more natural for a show to come off that way than looking like the show was sterilized by George Lucas.
As for actual game formats, count me in as one who loathed dating shows. Strangely enough, the show I liked the most was Bzzz! I also had a soft spot for Freakin' Studs.
Outside of Millionaire, shows that offer $1,000,000 prizes, regardless of format, get a dislike from me, as well.
The Inquisitive One
-
Outside of Millionaire, shows that offer $1,000,000 prizes, regardless of format, get a dislike from me, as well.
This makes no damned sense whatsoever, and this is coming from the guy who coined the phrase "Mo' Money Syndrome."
-
Really? I understood him completely. I don't agree with him, but I understood him.
-
Really? I understood him completely. I don't agree with him, but I understood him.
And you think it makes sense to instantly dislike a series because of the top prize, regardless of format?
It makes no more sense than it does to dismiss one because it doesn't pay out enough.
-
And you think it makes sense to instantly dislike a series because of the top prize, regardless of format?
That's why I said understand what he's saying, and I disagree.
-
That's why I said understand what he's saying, and I disagree.
Fine, then in response to your original question: Yes, really.
-
To clarify:
First, I apologize for wording this incorrectly. The recent glut of shows that offered a seven-digit payday made me a jaded person, and I put my thoughts on the screen the wrong way.
Millionaire (in its purest form) presented a solid format that rewarded astute players who can answer increasingly difficult questions. However, look at what other million-dollar shows that came after consisted of: a money ladder, help to move the contestant along (lifelines), increased difficulty, and properly inserted commercial breaks done to death. The only difference was that most shows offered a small twist to keep it from looking like a completely aped format (Greed, Weakest Link), offered a decent twist to the formula (Duel), or used a lot of style to hide the lack of substance (Deal or No Deal, Set for Life). Wheel of Fortune doesn't make a big deal out of it every single show, and we did lambaste The Price is Right's efforts to offer the big prize, both in Barker's (guaranteed spin on TV) and Carey's (MDPG and larger-than-necessary showcase bid conditions) versions.
To me, I'd rather have a format that rewards a contestant for being skilled (and equally as lucky), than have a show who uses the cash prize to hide the fact that the format is fatally flawed (Million Dollar Money Drop). So, that latter part of the previous sentence is what I should have said, and I messed up. I'm sorry.
The Inquisitive One
EDIT: I can't take credit for coining the phrase "Mo' Money Syndrome." I'd like to, but I did get it from someone else on this board. :)
-
I never got into panel shows outside of 2/3rds of the Big Three; namely, WML? and TTTT. And even then I leaned more towards the latter. A friend from Florida got me interested in WML? again, though, and I wish the aborted DVD set came out.
I'm not sure if I'll have to hand in my hardcore fan card for this one...
-
I don't see why: at various times I've liked or not cared for What's My Line, To Tell the Truth and I've Got a Secretion.
-
I've Got a Secretion.
"What color is it?"
"Does it smell particularly unpleasant?
"Would I recognize the name of your secretion in the pages of Gray's Anatomy?
-
I've Got a Secretion.
"What color is it?"
"Does it smell particularly unpleasant?
"Would I recognize the name of your secretion in the pages of Gray's Anatomy?
"Is it sexual in nature?"
/Only asked when the Perfesser was a panelist.