-
Seven new shows are being made. This is just a summary. Indepth plus interview with Ian Valentine is at Buzzer.
First one is Annie Duke Takes On The World. It will feature four amateur poker players competing against each other each show. The sole survivor after the entire thing gets to face off against Annie head to head.
Second is I've Got A Secret. Most recently revived by Oxygen, this remake will have an all-gay panel. Ian Valentine told Buzzer that there will at least be one woman each show.
Show three is "24 Hours In Vegas". Contestants will have to do jobs in Vegas to earn money. Then, that money will be used to gamble on Vegas games. The person with the most money at the end of 24 hours wins.
Chokers is the 4th one. This show is seeming mostly like "Anything To Win" originally comissioned for GSN. The weekly documentary series will feature people who fell apart at critical moments.
The fifth show is a pilot originally for CBS that failed. Your Worst Nightmare pits two people in a very scary situation (not weird food eating scary. Location scary) trying to escape. The first one out wins. GSN is planning on this to air around Halloween.
The sixth is Phil Hellmuth poker. This is more along the line of an instruction show showing people how to play poker by physical and mental challenges that will somehow help them. The creators did not pitch this as a poker show.
Finally, this one is really weird. It's called "Wet". It will literally be water competitions between Man VS Man and/or Man VS Dolphin. I'm absolutely serious.
Full story is at Buzzer in the link in my sig.
-
Hmmm...outside of "I've Got a Secret", none of them are "traditional" game shows are they? Despite recent schedule changes, I guess they haven't given up on the new direction.
-
Oh, here's the Press Release -- isn't this the way we usually do this?
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories....04067916&EDATE= (http://\"http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/07-15-2005/0004067916&EDATE=\")
-
Anyway I can get people to my site. I had this story last night. It was just embargoed until today.
-
[quote name=\'itiparanoid13\' date=\'Jul 15 2005, 10:04 AM\']Anyway I can get people to my site. I had this story last night. It was just embargoed until today.
[/quote]
So, hapless self-promotion instead of just linking to the press release? Hmmm.
(Yes, I know I've plugged my website here before)
-
I was not aware that they put out a press release when Cory posted this. He put this out at 3AM last night. I like to sleep and said I'll tell the different message boards in the morning.
On a side note, when we talked to Ian Valentine last night, he said TAR is doing very well on GSN and is improving by "multiple percents" each night. I should be able to get the ratings for it sometime this weekend.
-
What Nick said.
GSN also announced a couple new Poker Royales, one featuring teams headed by James Woods and Phil "The Unabomber" Laak (Phil's team naturally includes Jennifer Tilly, who just won her first World Series bracelet), and one that is called "Battle Of The Ages."
Full story here. (http://\"http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/07-15-2005/0004067917&EDATE\").
-
The Annie Duke and Phil Hellmuth shows had been written about for a while. Annie's show sounds something like No Limit Card Sharks, with amateurs getting their fifteen minutes. I don't quite latch onto the idea of Hellmuth's show. A poker lesson from the poker brat? Um, okay.
The Vegas reality series sounds like the Darva disaster minus the marriages and, well, Darva. Which may be addition by subtraction, but this effort doesn't look much different from most any other reality show. Same with Nightmare (an embarrassing name if the show flops), Chokers (another less than brilliant moniker if things go south) and Wet. All seem depressingly usual...standard reality fodder. Why not sell these ideas to Bob Boden?
I realize the all-gay gimmick on the IGAS remake is designed to hook viewers repelled by traditional panel shows. But I can't see the gimmick working for long if the panel stinks. Why not just get the best panelists you can find regardless? Relaunching one of these shows is enough of a gamble without artificially limiting your choice of talent.
-
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'Jul 15 2005, 09:35 AM\']I realize the all-gay gimmick on the IGAS remake is designed to hook viewers repelled by traditional panel shows. But I can't see the gimmick working for long if the panel stinks. Why not just get the best panelists you can find regardless? Relaunching one of these shows is enough of a gamble without artificially limiting your choice of talent.
[snapback]91492[/snapback]
[/quote]
This is, of course, compared to the macho Oxygen version with JmJ. Bullock...
If they were going to revive a panel show, they might have had a better shot with doing a TV version of the current on-stage WML? But, as Peter Marshall once said, this may work out...
Oh, and I really doubt limiting the panelists to those of the same-sex persuaison is really going to limit your talent much.
-
[quote name=\'DrBear\' date=\'Jul 15 2005, 12:36 PM\']Oh, and I really doubt limiting the panelists to those of the same-sex persuaison is really going to limit your talent much.[/quote]
It is, however, going to needlessly limit your audience. There is going to be a significant chunk of your audience that is just not going to be interested in a fabulous version of IGAS. Some will simply be homophobes, sure, but it's also a gimmick that severely limits the stories you can use.
This is to the original version of IGAS what You Lie Like A Dog or No Relation were to the original TTTT. (For those of you with longer memories, it's also what Relatively Speaking was to the original WML?) Panel shows are an iffy enough proposition as it is. I don't see what's being served by deliberately splintering your potential audience from the outset.
And yes, from all indications, a TV version of what J. Keith & Company are doing on stage would be the right way to revive WML?
-
Quote from Valentine:
"I think that it is a hook, but once you start watching the show, you'll appreciate the panelists on their own without being concerned about what their sexuality is."
Why not hook people in with a panel regardless of sexuality?
Hey, if it get's people talking, right?
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Jul 15 2005, 10:05 AM\']It is, however, going to needlessly limit your audience. There is going to be a significant chunk of your audience that is just not going to be interested in a fabulous version of IGAS. Some will simply be homophobes, sure, but it's also a gimmick that severely limits the stories you can use.
[/quote]
For me, I don't think it's a matter of not being interested, so much as I simply don't care. Gay, straight, purple, green, it doesn't matter a damned bit to me so long as the people and the panel are interesting.
And frankly (and maybe one of our gay members can correct me if I'm missing something here) if they market the show with a position like "Watch this show because everyone is GAY!" instead of "Watch this show because it's GOOD!", I think they're gonna be in trouble in a hurry.
-
The real problem with the IGAS remake is what killed the panel shows in the sixties when Nielsen started doing demos...the dreaded (creepy movie music) Old Skew. As Bennett Cerf remarked for all time: "The kids don't watch 'em."
I realize Valentine is trying to avoid this ugliness with the all-gay hook. He thinks it gives him a shot at a median age under 80.
Well, maybe. But I can't see the young'uns getting all sexed up about a remake of a fifties panel show regardless of who's on the panel. So just get the best talent you can find and content yourself with the traditional game show audience. Or stop doing traditional game shows altogether.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jul 15 2005, 12:37 PM\']if they market the show with a position like "Watch this show because everyone is GAY!" instead of "Watch this show because it's GOOD!", I think they're gonna be in trouble in a hurry.
[snapback]91503[/snapback]
[/quote]
And if this venture fails, I can hear the screaming already. "America's not ready for a show prominently featuring gays", "The homo haters killed this show", "The homophobes never gave the show a chance". I was never a fan of the classic version of this program anyway but if it sees air, I'll give it a whirl and gay or no, if I like it, I'll watch subsequent episodes.
-
[quote name=\'Don Howard\' date=\'Jul 15 2005, 10:55 AM\']And if this venture fails, I can hear the screaming already. "America's not ready for a show prominently featuring gays", "The homo haters killed this show", "The homophobes never gave the show a chance".
[/quote]
Fortunately, with Queer Eye being the runaway hit that it is, arguments like this simply won't hold water.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jul 15 2005, 02:12 PM\'][quote name=\'Don Howard\' date=\'Jul 15 2005, 10:55 AM\']And if this venture fails, I can hear the screaming already. "America's not ready for a show prominently featuring gays", "The homo haters killed this show", "The homophobes never gave the show a chance".
[/quote]
Fortunately, with Queer Eye being the runaway hit that it is, arguments like this simply won't hold water.
[snapback]91508[/snapback]
[/quote]
But of course, there's difference between Bravo & GSN.
Makes me wonder if that show would be a success on another channel.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Jul 15 2005, 01:05 PM\'][quote name=\'DrBear\' date=\'Jul 15 2005, 12:36 PM\']Oh, and I really doubt limiting the panelists to those of the same-sex persuaison is really going to limit your talent much.[/quote]
It is, however, going to needlessly limit your audience. There is going to be a significant chunk of your audience that is just not going to be interested in a fabulous version of IGAS. Some will simply be homophobes, sure, but it's also a gimmick that severely limits the stories you can use.
[snapback]91500[/snapback]
[/quote]
My mom says God hates gay people. That's why he smote the sodomies in France.
(ducking)
-
[quote name=\'cmjb13\' date=\'Jul 15 2005, 02:49 PM\'][quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jul 15 2005, 02:12 PM\'][quote name=\'Don Howard\' date=\'Jul 15 2005, 10:55 AM\']And if this venture fails, I can hear the screaming already. "America's not ready for a show prominently featuring gays", "The homo haters killed this show", "The homophobes never gave the show a chance".
[/quote]
Fortunately, with Queer Eye being the runaway hit that it is, arguments like this simply won't hold water.
[snapback]91508[/snapback]
[/quote]
But of course, there's difference between Bravo & GSN.
Makes me wonder if that show would be a success on another channel.
[snapback]91510[/snapback]
[/quote]
I thought Bravo became the "gay network" pretty much because Queer Eye was a success, not the other way around. Or have I missed something?
-
[/quote]
That's why he smote the sodomies in France.
(ducking)
[snapback]91511[/snapback]
[/quote]
Looks like he picked the wrong week to quit smoting.
-
[quote name=\'Don Howard\' date=\'Jul 15 2005, 01:55 PM\']I was never a fan of the classic version of this program anyway but if it sees air, I'll give it a whirl and gay or no, if I like it, I'll watch subsequent episodes.[/quote]
Thing is, it was a "show about nothing" long before Seinfeld came along. There's just nothing there. The game completely rises and falls based on whether the stories ("secrets") they get are interesting and whether there's any chemistry to the panel. As I say about the original on my website, the panel they finally assembled was about as good a mix as you're ever going to see, and the ratings reflected it.
As for the dreaded demographic, tell me that comedy club in LA isn't filled with the "perfect" audience on Wednesdays when they play WML? live. J. Keith is showing that it can be done. Gimmicks are for the desperate.
-
[quote name=\'dzinkin\' date=\'Jul 15 2005, 01:55 PM\'][quote name=\'cmjb13\' date=\'Jul 15 2005, 02:49 PM\']
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jul 15 2005, 02:12 PM\']
Fortunately, with Queer Eye being the runaway hit that it is, arguments like this simply won't hold water.
[snapback]91508[/snapback]
[/quote]
But of course, there's difference between Bravo & GSN.
Makes me wonder if that show would be a success on another channel.
[snapback]91510[/snapback]
[/quote]
I thought Bravo became the "gay network" pretty much because Queer Eye was a success, not the other way around. Or have I missed something?
[snapback]91512[/snapback]
[/quote]
Perhaps it would be best suited on the new gay channel LOGO. It may not be on many cable systems but it would fit right in. It would also be a perfect addition to the gay-themed Orbitz game show commercial with Wink (which is different than the one seen on other channels).
It's a gimmick, as Matt seemed to intone. If there's no panel chemistry, I don't think there will be anything to attract an audience. It'll be hard, if not impossible, to duplicate the classic Secret comraderie, especially that of Bill, Garry, and Henry, even if they only really saw each other for the show.
-
I think I first read this on Perfesser's site, but I would love to know what he thinks of this. Is this the first openly gay TV game show? Not that there's anything wrong with it, but I seriously can't think of another show that would qualify.
-
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'Jul 15 2005, 10:35 AM\'] name if the show flops), All seem depressingly usual...standard reality fodder. Why not sell these ideas to Bob Boden?
[snapback]91492[/snapback]
[/quote]
Thats the best way to put it.
-
[quote name=\'cmjb13\' date=\'Jul 15 2005, 12:14 PM\']Quote from Valentine:
"I think that it is a hook, but once you start watching the show, you'll appreciate the panelists on their own without being concerned about what their sexuality is."
Why not hook people in with a panel regardless of sexuality?
Hey, if it get's people talking, right?
[snapback]91502[/snapback]
[/quote]
Well, for one thing, thanks for citing my work. I appreciate that a lot. Second, I didn't bother to tell Ian (since I did that interview) that it was a needless hook. I personally think that if they have to rely on the sexuality of the panelists, then it's not a strong show to begin with. Let's hope between now and the time they finish the pilot and have a focus group, they'll see it's needless and they'll change the focus of the show.
-
[quote name=\'pacdude\' date=\'Jul 15 2005, 08:01 PM\'][quote name=\'cmjb13\' date=\'Jul 15 2005, 12:14 PM\']Quote from Valentine:
"I think that it is a hook, but once you start watching the show, you'll appreciate the panelists on their own without being concerned about what their sexuality is."
Why not hook people in with a panel regardless of sexuality?
Hey, if it get's people talking, right?
[snapback]91502[/snapback]
[/quote]
Well, for one thing, thanks for citing my work. I appreciate that a lot. Second, I didn't bother to tell Ian (since I did that interview) that it was a needless hook. I personally think that if they have to rely on the sexuality of the panelists, then it's not a strong show to begin with. Let's hope between now and the time they finish the pilot and have a focus group, they'll see it's needless and they'll change the focus of the show.
[snapback]91544[/snapback]
[/quote]
Odds are I have a feeling if the focus group's results find the hook needless, knowing GSN, IGAS will go the way of the Pictionary/Scrabble Challenge pilots...slipping away in the vast world of anonymity.
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' date=\'Jul 15 2005, 03:37 PM\']I think I first read this on Perfesser's site, but I would love to know what he thinks of this. Is this the first openly gay TV game show? Not that there's anything wrong with it, but I seriously can't think of another show that would qualify.
[snapback]91519[/snapback]
[/quote]
What about Who Knows You Best, the apparent lesbian version of the Newlywed game, which is (or was as of a few weeks ago) being reshown on "Lifetime Real Women"?
(The only thing Who Knows You Best had going for it was the bonus round, which was a nice twist on the usual 10-in-60 deal.)
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' date=\'Jul 15 2005, 04:37 PM\']I think I first read this on Perfesser's site, but I would love to know what he thinks of this. Is this the first openly gay TV game show? Not that there's anything wrong with it, but I seriously can't think of another show that would qualify.[/quote]
MTV very occasionally did same-sex episodes of Singled Out. That's the only other example that comes to mind.
-
Phil Hellmuth Poker, eh? If the Bill Fillmaff (http://\"http://www.planetstacked.com/fillmaff/\") parodies are any indication, this could be great for entirely different reasons than what Cutler, Hellmuth, Soderstrom, and Bellin are hoping for.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Jul 15 2005, 10:15 PM\'][quote name=\'fostergray82\' date=\'Jul 15 2005, 04:37 PM\']I think I first read this on Perfesser's site, but I would love to know what he thinks of this. Is this the first openly gay TV game show? Not that there's anything wrong with it, but I seriously can't think of another show that would qualify.[/quote]
MTV very occasionally did same-sex episodes of Singled Out. That's the only other example that comes to mind.
[snapback]91560[/snapback]
[/quote]
They do same-sex versions fairly regularly on their current dating shows, Room Raiders, Next, and Date My Mom, as well. (I admit, somewhat shamefully, to liking the first two of them.)
Drifting OT, I'm not sure the Date My Mom format works as well for the same-sex episodes. On the hetero versions, guy takes girls' mothers out, and chooses one based on the interaction with the mothers. I can see this if you buy into the idea that women are similar to their mothers, but not so much when the mothers are trying to sell their sons to a male suitor.
Also, at least with the gay men, the potential suitors seem to wind up more interested in each other about one time in three.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jul 15 2005, 01:37 PM\']And frankly (and maybe one of our gay members can correct me if I'm missing something here) if they market the show with a position like "Watch this show because everyone is GAY!" instead of "Watch this show because it's GOOD!", I think they're gonna be in trouble in a hurry.
[/quote]
Late reply...
I totally agree 100% here. If you try to go for the jugular with a niche audience, you're doomed to failure. Look at The Popular Channe.... er... MTV and what they do, they constantly make the look of every show the same, with the same bad camera work, as if the young person watching thinks it's "rad" and "cool" to see stuff. Not only that, they load it up with sex. Yeah, sex sells anything... again, an example of a network trying to go after a niche demographic/audience.
If they're going to tap into the gay audience, they need to not just emphasize it on the gay audience, but, as everyone else here has said already, make it interesting, intriguing or whatnot. The reason the original IGAS worked is because we had usual people with unusual secrets. But, this probably won't happen.
Okay, enough, I'm off the soapbox.
-
In some ways, having people like Lynde, Bullock, Romero and others on the classic traditional shows made a better case for everyone getting along together because everyone was playing on the same page and were out to entertain rather than promote causes. Those who knew about their lifestyles could smile and enjoy them, while others who did not didn't lose any enjoyment. I've rarely been a fan of "in your face", and what could be worse, if the antics of the panel come off as stereotypical, it could do more harm than good.
-
[quote name=\'The Ol' Guy\' date=\'Jul 16 2005, 03:25 PM\']In some ways, having people like Lynde, Bullock, Romero and others on the classic traditional shows made a better case for everyone getting along together because everyone was playing on the same page and were out to entertain than promote causes. Those who knew about their lifestyles could smile and enjoy them, while others who did not didn't lose any enjoyment. I've rarely been a fan of "in your face", and what could be worse, if the antics of the panel come off as stereotypical, it could do more harm than good.
[snapback]91577[/snapback]
[/quote]
You list some good points,
-
[quote name=\'PaulD\' date=\'Jul 16 2005, 04:29 PM\']You list some good points,
[/quote]
I nominate this as reply of the year-- without making any sense whatsoever.
-
[quote name=\'NicholasM79\' date=\'Jul 16 2005, 09:50 PM\']I nominate this as reply of the year-- without making any sense whatsoever.
[/quote]
I agree.
/sorry, I was feeling left out
-
[quote name=\'NicholasM79\' date=\'Jul 16 2005, 11:50 PM\'][quote name=\'PaulD\' date=\'Jul 16 2005, 04:29 PM\']You list some good points,
[/quote]
I nominate this as reply of the year-- without making any sense whatsoever.
[snapback]91601[/snapback]
[/quote]
This and at least thirty other replies as such that he's made along the way all tie for the honor. Anything to jack up the ol' post count, wot?
Back to topic, will this persuasion decision include their choice for host, I wonder.
-
[quote name=\'Don Howard\' date=\'Jul 17 2005, 11:25 PM\'][quote name=\'NicholasM79\' date=\'Jul 16 2005, 11:50 PM\'][quote name=\'PaulD\' date=\'Jul 16 2005, 04:29 PM\']You list some good points,
[/quote]
I nominate this as reply of the year-- without making any sense whatsoever.
[snapback]91601[/snapback]
[/quote]
This and at least thirty other replies as such that he's made along the way all tie for the honor. Anything to jack up the ol' post count, wot?
Back to topic, will this persuasion decision include their choice for host, I wonder.
[snapback]91653[/snapback]
[/quote]
If that is a stipulation, perhaps Steve Kmetko would be a good choice for host.
-
If they go that way I think Jerry Penacoli of "Extra" is the guy.
But all told, if they just keep the panel gay and let everything else be normal, it might help the show's cause. The concept is four stars trying to guess secrets of everyday people -- and those four stars have chosen to let the big cat out of the closet. Who better to ferret out secrets than four people who are loath to keep them themselves?
-
Will our flamboyant host or whoever they get be introducing the distinguished panel as The Gay Questioners? Will there be special sweeps theme weeks featuring, say, The Village People as the cross-dressing cross-examiners? And what's to stop a straight celeb in need of work from bluffing their way onto the stage? Maybe that could be his or her secret: "I'm really not gay". By the way, has Richard Chamberlain ever appeared on a game show?
IMPORTANT NOTE: I'm not slamming the lifestyle--just the "gay panel for the sake of having a gay panel" idea.
-
[quote name=\'Don Howard\' date=\'Jul 18 2005, 10:15 PM\']
By the way, has Richard Chamberlain ever appeared on a game show?
[snapback]91767[/snapback]
[/quote]
He and Raymond Massey were the mystery guests on the 7/29/62 Daly WML episode.
-
[quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'Jul 19 2005, 07:28 AM\'][quote name=\'Don Howard\' date=\'Jul 18 2005, 10:15 PM\']
By the way, has Richard Chamberlain ever appeared on a game show?
[snapback]91767[/snapback]
[/quote]
He and Raymond Massey were the mystery guests on the 7/29/62 Daly WML episode.
[snapback]91790[/snapback]
[/quote]
Was that the one with the all-gay panel? If so, how'd it do in the Trendex?
-
If WML? were to be done today, wouldn't they have to reveal the identity of the mystery guest in the promos to spike the ratings?
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' date=\'Jul 19 2005, 09:32 AM\']If WML? were to be done today, wouldn't they have to reveal the identity of the mystery guest in the promos to spike the ratings?
[snapback]91803[/snapback]
[/quote]
That and make a set capable of flashing millions of colors in addition to upping the money and tripling points and so on and so on and so on...all the more reason for me to try to host it at my college.
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' date=\'Jul 19 2005, 09:32 AM\']If WML? were to be done today, wouldn't they have to reveal the identity of the mystery guest in the promos to spike the ratings?
[snapback]91803[/snapback]
[/quote]
They were doing that in the last network year at least once--I recall the MG appearing on camera as Johnny O whispered that he was going to be one of two Mystery Guests that week (don't remember who it was). Cut to opening animation.
-
Sorry for dredging up this topic again, but I did find out that one of the panelists on the new IGAS is going to be standup comedienne Suzanne Westenhofer. She was one of the first openly lesbian standups. Suzanne is doing a show next weekend at the Paramount Theatre in Asbury Park, NJ.