The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: cmjb13 on July 11, 2011, 01:06:16 PM
-
And Syd Vinnedge is involved (http://"http://www.popmonkeytv.com/press-release-4.html")
-
"The new twist is that home audiences can play along with the studio contestants"
As opposed to the earlier versions of Hollywood Squares, when they couldn't?
On edit: take a look at the Hollywood Teasers Logo (http://"http://www.popmonkeytv.com/uploads/4/7/3/1/4731763/5246743.jpg?167"). That thing is exactly what I think it is, isn't it?
Hol. Lee. Shit.
-
On edit: take a look at the Hollywood Teasers Logo (http://"http://www.popmonkeytv.com/uploads/4/7/3/1/4731763/5246743.jpg?167"). That thing is exactly what I think it is, isn't it?
That, sir, is indeed the Blitz board with people sitting inside of it.
As someone who actually liked All-Star Blitz, I cannot share your "ho. lee. shit." I'd totally give this a fair shot. I wonder if they decided to speed up the game (or make it a race to 3 or something) by just outright giving a contestant the clue on a single right answer, since clearly they have tossed out the whole top-middle-bottom-star thing.
/assuming we're right, calling it a "new" word game is horribly disingenuous, though
-
As someone who actually liked All-Star Blitz, I cannot share your "ho. lee. shit." I'd totally give this a fair shot. I wonder if they decided to speed up the game (or make it a race to 3 or something) by just outright giving a contestant the clue on a single right answer, since clearly they have tossed out the whole top-middle-bottom-star thing.
My comment was not based on, "I won't watch this," but on "This is infinitely more surprising and out of left field to me than another Hollywood Squares." I would totally give this a shot too, if it's not too plodding.
-
That thing is exactly what I think it is, isn't it?
Yeah. I don't know how they're going to get three-in-a-row up and down. Maybe that's where the contestant torment comes in.
"All-Star Blitz" wasn't that bad, was it? I just remember it being slow--a celebrity in each chunk of puzzle may help that--and that the stars weren't funny. If I had to round up a panel of six, I'd rather play Match Game, but there's no reason the formula can't work.
-
My comment was not based on, "I won't watch this," but on "This is infinitely more surprising and out of left field to me than another Hollywood Squares." I would totally give this a shot too, if it's not too plodding.
I think Chris has it right when he says it might be as simple as winning the entire square for correctly agreeing/disagreeing with the celebrity, which would be a far faster pace than the original Blitz, and a welcome one. It's also amusing how this will be pushed as a fresh, "new" format when we'll all recognize that it's more than fifteen years old.
Color me intrigued as well, but on the other hand, I was somewhat intrigued by the idea of a new version of Gambit, and Catch 21 leaves me cold.
-
It sounds interesting enough. HSq/H^2 was one of the few recent shows (let's say of the last 15 years) that IMO was competently produced. Hopefully they won't take the "Catch 21" route, which leaves me cold as well, hit or not.
-
You mean you don't want the top prize to be TWENTY. FIVE. THOUSAND. DOLLARS?
-
We talked before on these intarwebs about an earlier pilot for Hollywood Teasers (which TVPMM has the music from) and I wondered how I would execute the show if each answer meant giving away a clue. I think the answer is rather simple. Play it like nighttime (or syndicated, if you prefer to say that) Squares. Play your first two games for X dollars/points, play remaining games for X-times-2 until time runs out, finish any puzzle in progress on the buzzers (a'la Classic Concentration when they ran short on time). I have a bonus round idea that builds off of that concept as well.
I always loved the Blitz word game, and I really hope they get a run at it on television.
-Jason
-
Am I missing something? Is there news that this has been greenlit for airing? If so, I'm not seeing it.
It's a format they've had for years. The "Teasers" game has already been piloted, and failed to sell a few years ago. If they're trying again great, but again, I'm not seeing that either.
-
My comment was not based on, "I won't watch this," but on "This is infinitely more surprising and out of left field to me than another Hollywood Squares." I would totally give this a shot too, if it's not too plodding.
I think Chris has it right when he says it might be as simple as winning the entire square for correctly agreeing/disagreeing with the celebrity, which would be a far faster pace than the original Blitz, and a welcome one. It's also amusing how this will be pushed as a fresh, "new" format when we'll all recognize that it's more than fifteen years old.
Color me intrigued as well, but on the other hand, I was somewhat intrigued by the idea of a new version of Gambit, and Catch 21 leaves me cold.
Catch 21 leaves me cold too, but that's largely because it moves at one-third the pace of Gambit. Like I said, "if it's not too plodding".
-
Color me intrigued as well, but on the other hand, I was somewhat intrigued by the idea of a new version of Gambit, and Catch 21 leaves me cold.
How does Catch 21 leave you cold? Is it with the game itself, or the choices made in mounting it?
-
We talked before on these intarwebs about an earlier pilot for Hollywood Teasers
And only a year or so ago, as it turns out. (http://"http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=20262")
Color me intrigued as well, but on the other hand, I was somewhat intrigued by the idea of a new version of Gambit, and Catch 21 leaves me cold.
How does Catch 21 leave you cold? Is it with the game itself, or the choices made in mounting it?
Little of both. Mostly, as others have mentioned, the ridiculously slow pace. Unlike some, I have no problem with Carlton as the host, he's perfectly adequate.
-
We talked before on these intarwebs about an earlier pilot for Hollywood Teasers
And only a year or so ago, as it turns out. (http://"http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=20262")
And funny that I could have recalled those panelists listed for you, but I conveniently skipped over Dan saying they played it almost exactly as I suggested - to a time limit. Works for me.
Yes, this announcement is little more than "we're trying," but I guess i'm excited to see that A) Merrill hasn't dropped the format from contention, because I enjoyed it and B) if it does become a go somewhere, it's another chance at a traditional game being successful, and a chance to tip the scales in that direction. For all the games with harnesses and more jib sweeps per segment than questions asked, the shows that ran multiple orders in recent memory have been Lingo (without the bells & whistles), Catch 21, Millionaire, Feud....I'd like to see something like this join the list.
-Jason
-
You mean you don't want the top prize to be TWENTY. FIVE. THOUSAND. DOLLARS?
When it's yelled at me like that and I have functioning buttons on my remote, absolutely not. ;-)
-
So if you think about it, it's practically a revival of All-Star BLitz right?
-
On edit: take a look at the Hollywood Teasers Logo (http://"http://www.popmonkeytv.com/uploads/4/7/3/1/4731763/5246743.jpg?167").
Am I the only one who thought, Hollywood Rectangle when I saw that?
-
I am listening to the Hollywood Teasers theme and it sounds like an Entertainment news show theme.
-
I am listening to the Hollywood Teasers theme and it sounds like an Entertainment news show theme.
Aw man. I was hoping it'd have "hobba hum, hobba heeba humba" somewhere in it.
-
So if you think about it, it's practically a revival of All-Star BLitz right?
yes.
-
Now for the obvious question: What does Merrill Heatter need Syd Vinnedge for? For that matter, what does anybody need Syd Vinnedge for?
-
Speculation: Heatter likes having a partner. Since Quigley retired, almost all of Heatter's projects have included another partner. Besides, the guy is in his eighties.
-
Speculation: Heatter likes having a partner. Since Quigley retired, almost all of Heatter's projects have included another partner. Besides, the guy is in his eighties.
He dropped Bob Quigley in a hurry.
At age 80, Merrill has probably forgotten more about game shows than Syd has ever known.
-
Now for the obvious question: What does Merrill Heatter need Syd Vinnedge for? For that matter, what does anybody need Syd Vinnedge for?
As unpopular as it may be to say anything nice about Syd, he is a blue ribbon shmoozer and salesman. Merrill has the creativity, but somebody needs to do the high-level, multi-martini, confidence-building relationship selling. I've seen Syd in action, and there are few who do it as well.
Randy
tvrandywest.com
-
Add me to those who'd love to see the project happen. The question again would be where, and even if it's just on GSN, that's cool. One more in-studio show. Who knows? There may be hope for Malcolm yet....
-
http://www.smallworldift.com/format_item.php?pageid=dice_fever - Here's video of a retooling of Lucky Numbers. Merrill's keeping plenty busy.
-
Can PDQ/Baffle be far behind?
-
http://www.smallworldift.com/format_item.php?pageid=dice_fever - Here's video of a retooling of Lucky Numbers. Merrill's keeping plenty busy.
"The intriguing absence of knowledge and skill." And as far as the trailer shows, there's even less strategy than Deal or No Deal. I mean, sure, Merrill's going where the industry is going, so good on him for staying semi-relevant. Still, I never thought I'd see a day when High Rollers is considered too complicated.
Yep, one step closer to $1,000,000 Heads or Tails?
-
Yep, one step closer to $1,000,000 Heads or Tails?
Been there, at least in the UK (http://"http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=19305").
The end game rubs me the wrong way. Dumb luck can get you a 1-in-6 shot at a million or a 1-in-36 shot, depending on what the lucky dice vixen rolls. OTOH, Andrew O'Keefe hosted the pilot. If there is one foreign talent I'd like to host a show here in the States, it would be O'Keefe. Or Philip Schofield, if The Cube ever got here.
-
"The intriguing absence of knowledge and skill."
TOTALLY the line that stuck in my head as well. And not in a good way. More in a "I can't friggin' believe that's actually a SELLING point" way.
And as far as the trailer shows, there's even less strategy than Deal or No Deal.
But you can pass, Matt! You can PASS! TWICE! YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO THE THING THAT MIGHT MAKE YOU LOSE! OMG STRATEGERY!
(What's sad is that I actually thought "hey, they didn't make the same mistake Grand Slam did with the switch-fights.")
Seriously, you totally echo my thoughts on this. In terms of being a quality game format, that thing has more holes in it than the stockroom at a blow-up doll factory. (Insert joke about the Dice Girls here.) It actually strips out what little was good about High Rollers, and I say that as someone who really likes High Rollers despite recognizing that it's a flimsy-as-hell format too.
Still, I never thought I'd see a day when High Rollers is considered too complicated.
Well, you had a little more hope for the future than I did. Frankly, I'm just relieved that rolling up a 7 only loses the game and doesn't get any tender parts of the body hooked up to a car battery. (Admittedly, that might actually improve the show.)
-
Heck, why don't they just call it Roll Me The Money? Hard to imagine Rollers w/o the Q&A.
-
Speculating here...the thing I'm noticing is that Heatter-Quigley concepts from the 70s and 80s are coming back with revamped formats, modernized (not for the better I'm afraid), but with new titles.
I'm guessing it's because the average 20-something has no clue what "Gambit" or "High Rollers" are/were, and calling it "The New ___" does nothing when both shows were off the air 20-25+ years, and the most recent versions lasted a year at the most ("Las Vegas Gambit" and Wink's HR).
-
http://www.smallworldift.com/format_item.php?pageid=dice_fever - Here's video of a retooling of Lucky Numbers. Merrill's keeping plenty busy.
this should be produced for American TV!
-
I see a $1,000,000 Shenanigans. To keep up with the times, they can change the game of Operation to Malpractice.
-
"This isn't your father's 'High Rollers'...that version's too boring! This is 2011...it needs the mood lighting. And you know what else it needs?...hot models. 10 of them!!1!"
-Hotshot newbie tool producer to Merrill Heatter
I just saw the trailer. Craptastic...I have a hard time believing Merrill came up with anything this half-baked, insipid, or derivative. I'll just go with my imagery of the above conversation happening.
The front game gives away way too much money (shocked I tell you, see my point below).
The bonus round blows, mainly because there's no thrill or risk involved. I take a blind stab at $1 million and lose. Boohoo, now I only get to keep the chump change of $125K that I won just a few minutes ago. Since when did 6-figures get treated like a mere $500? On one hand, I can't see the contestants NOT going for the million. On the other hand, it's such a blind shot in the dark, I'd gladly take the $5,000 per die point, even if it's "just" another $10K.
Granted, I'm happy that they didn't find a way to take that $125K away, the bonus round still blows. $1M cash prizes have become a cliche.
-
As is my hobby, I was part way into making a box version of Merrill's HR revamp Lucky Numbers when I just felt "meh" and gave it up. Looking at the new Dice Fever - well, both shows are a bit weak by themselves, but I think by combining elements of both, you might have a more exciting game. Use the dice girls and high value amounts, bring back the Q&A with the pass or play option, and keep the "red zone" (danger zone, whatever) from Lucky. Once the first 7 is rolled, the next player to roll a 7 loses the game. Working on a refined two-stage bonus that starts like the classic version, but you must win so much or hit a certain combination of numbers for the chance to go on to the million dollar match the roll.
-
And you know what else it needs?...hot models. 10 of them!!1!
You say this as though hot models are a bad thing. :-)
-
I just saw the trailer. Craptastic...I have a hard time believing Merrill came up with anything this half-baked, insipid, or derivative. I'll just go with my imagery of the above conversation happening.
Wasn't this a retread of Lucky Numbers from 1985?
-
this should be produced for American TV!
No, this shouldn't be produced for ANY TV, much less American.
-
Here's another gem. Say it ain't so, Wink!
CELEBRITY GARBAGE
From legendary game show host and producer Wink Martindale comes the filthiest, dirtiest and downright hilarious celebrity game show. Are you astute enough to identify famous people by the garbage they make? Contestants put on the boots, masks and hazmat suits to sift through celebrity "garbage," attempting to identify who the junk belongs to by deciphering clues amongst the trash.
Wink narrates how the game works, here. (http://"http://www.smallworldift.com/format_item.php?pageid=celebrity_garbage")
-
Here's another gem. Say it ain't so, Wink!
CELEBRITY GARBAGE
It's Password Plus/Super Password with a few more clues, and dumpster diving instead of traditional clue giving. I like the idea of finding clues, not so fond of digging through a trash can to find them.
-
CELEBRITY GARBAGE
From legendary game show host and producer Wink Martindale comes the filthiest, dirtiest and downright hilarious celebrity game show. Are you astute enough to identify famous people by the garbage they make? Contestants put on the boots, masks and hazmat suits to sift through celebrity "garbage," attempting to identify who the junk belongs to by deciphering clues amongst the trash.
This is actually one of the mini-games played with some regularity on the Aussie comedy panel quiz "Talkin' Bout Your Generation."
As a lighthearted segment, it's fun. As the entire conceit of a program... ehhh.
-
Thought for sure Andrew was gonna throw in a "Deal or no deal?" upon offering $5,000 per die pip. And evidently, he thought admitting the show didn't have any on-the-buzzer questions would be the clincher.
I just saw the trailer. Craptastic...I have a hard time believing Merrill came up with anything this half-baked, insipid, or derivative. I'll just go with my imagery of the above conversation happening.
Wasn't this a retread of Lucky Numbers from 1985?
Yeah, except the...everything...was 1,000,000x better in '85.
I see a $1,000,000 Shenanigans.
Family Game Night!
...Oh, wait.
-
I look forward to the inevitable need to perk up the ratings, thus the show becoming Celebrity Celebrity Garbage :)
Ryan.
/sorta like Hungry Hungry Hippos, I guess
-
/sorta like Hungry Hungry Hippos, I guess
Now listen, I don't like them either, but there's no need to talk about the Kardashians like that.
-
Here's another gem. Say it ain't so, Wink!
CELEBRITY GARBAGE
From legendary game show host and producer Wink Martindale comes the filthiest, dirtiest and downright hilarious celebrity game show. Are you astute enough to identify famous people by the garbage they make? Contestants put on the boots, masks and hazmat suits to sift through celebrity "garbage," attempting to identify who the junk belongs to by deciphering clues amongst the trash.
Wink narrates how the game works, here. (http://"http://www.smallworldift.com/format_item.php?pageid=celebrity_garbage")
my sweet lord, I thought Wink was more talented and more creative than that.
-
The only thing about Celebrity Garbage which piqued my interest is the cat used in that video shares the same name as one of my cats.
I could see it on VH1 or E!, but I'm not holding my breath.
/or maybe I should, around celebrity garbage
-
my sweet lord, I thought Wink was more talented and more creative than that.
But Dice Fever needs to have a Fast Forward Pass to get on American TV, doesn't it.
/Prosecution rests.
-
Celebrity Garbage sounds like an idea I might have posted here not so long ago -- AS A JOKE!!!
BTW this was done as a spot on I've Got A Secret back in the '60s, sans gas masks.
-
The front game gives away way too much money (shocked I tell you, see my point below).
The money may as well have been points for all we know. At least a couple of other shows "gave away" more cash and prizes in the pilot before making it to series. Whatever network or syndicate would pick this up was going to tweak the prize budget to what they needed. Of course, it was going to be just as interesting a game whether the eight hid $200 in M&Ms or a ticket on the now defunct Concorde.
The bonus round blows, mainly because there's no thrill or risk involved. I take a blind stab at $1 million and lose. Boohoo, now I only get to keep the chump change of $125K that I won just a few minutes ago. Since when did 6-figures get treated like a mere $500? On one hand, I can't see the contestants NOT going for the million. On the other hand, it's such a blind shot in the dark, I'd gladly take the $5,000 per die point, even if it's "just" another $10K.
The problem I have is that the decision isn't all that interesting. "I have $125,000? What the hell, let's have a go, eh?" At least Catch 21 manages to make the bonus interesting by increasing each step five-fold.
The thing that grills my cheese about this is that there are two really (http://"http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/41/cant-stop") really (http://"http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/2371/choice") good dice games (and by the same guy, even!) that could easily be plopped into a game show format with a little tweaking. But hey, that would require planning and thought and stuff. It isn't enough to vote with your remote. When you hear people talking about game shows that aren't cutting it, do the genre a favor and speak up, otherwise we're gonna get the same old stuff for a while.
-
Celebrity Garbage sounds like an idea I might have proposed here not so long ago -- AS A JOKE!!!
Hell, I pretty much did. (http://"http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=419&st=0&p=2823&#entry2823")
-
Celebrity Garbage sounds like an idea I might have proposed here not so long ago -- AS A JOKE!!!
Hell, I pretty much did. (http://"http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=419&st=0&p=2823&#entry2823")
They owe you a royalty.
-
Maybe Wink was in the Heatter-Quigley office along with Art James back in 1978 when the staffers were talking about the most outrageous ideas ever submitted to them. Art's September 23rd TV Guide article included such gems as Celebrity Skydiving (And here she comes...Farrah Fawcett must land within 56 feet of the bullseye, or else Paul Williams wins the game....), the celebs and recipes game Eat The Clock and, sure enough, Celebrity Garbage! ("Hi, Garbage Lovers!") It took only 33 years for this format to come to light.
Besides, what level of celebrity will we get on this show?
Host: "Okay, players...for $500 and the game, let's empty this trash can and see if you can guess who all this stuff belongs to! (Opens can, dumps contents) Let's see. Here's a 1997 issue of Vibe Magazine and a half-dozen past due rent notices!(Buzzer sfx) Connie, for the game...name the star!"
Connie: "Is it...Coolio?"
Hey...count me in!
-
"Here's a 1997 issue of Vibe Magazine and a half-dozen past due rent notices!(Buzzer sfx) Connie, for the game...name the star!"
Connie: "Is it...Coolio?"
See, I was thinking Sinbad.
-
You could be correct. Right after Connie guessed, the host went, "Is it...Coolio?? We'll find out.....right after this!!"
-
I'm guessing you zoom through one of the B's in the title?
-
"The intriguing absence of knowledge and skill."
That caught my ear, too. Wow.
Was the VO on that trailer Rich Fields?
-
Wow, I can't believe they're actually promoting the "absence of skill" like it's a good thing, that's just sad. Celebrity Garbage sounds interesting though.
-
Celebrity Garbage actually doesn't sound like such an outrageous concept to me. In the first place, they wouldn't actually make people crawl around through somebody's real, unsanitary waste, that's just the "extreme" gimmick. As Chris mentioned, the idea of trying to figure out who's who by going through their junk was a stunt on I've Got a Secret in the sixties. Identifying celebrities based on figuring out unusual clues about them was also the premise of such sixties relics as The Object Is and You're Putting Me On. Not to mention any number of Jay Wolpert bonus games. As far as Wink game play goes, this doesn't sound like any crazier an idea than Bumper Stumpers or Headline Chasers.
-
Was the VO on that trailer Rich Fields?
Yes.