The Game Show Forum

The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: Matt Ottinger on February 22, 2012, 04:01:13 PM

Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Matt Ottinger on February 22, 2012, 04:01:13 PM
Original TMZ reporting (http://"http://www.tmz.com/2012/02/21/biggest-loser-quit-mutiny-contestants-twist/?adid=hero3") (with some clever, though questionable, wordplay) about a developing situation you'd never see on a traditional game show.  I'd love to see NBC show us exactly what happened, drop them all from the show, and bring in a bunch of new ones.  They're reality contestants, for heaven's sake.  They are totally disposable.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: TLEberle on February 22, 2012, 04:49:30 PM
(with some clever, though questionable, wordplay)
Better or worse than the guys at ESPN who were turfed over "trying to find a chink in Jeremy Lin's armor"?
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Dbacksfan12 on February 22, 2012, 04:53:33 PM
(with some clever, though questionable, wordplay)
Better or worse than the guys at ESPN who were turfed over "trying to find a chink in Jeremy Lin's armor"?
I'd like to hear your answer on it first.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: PYLdude on February 22, 2012, 05:03:39 PM
(with some clever, though questionable, wordplay)
Better or worse than the guys at ESPN who were turfed over "trying to find a chink in Jeremy Lin's armor"?
I'd like to hear your answer on it first.

Well, here's what I would ask- would everyone be so up in arms if Jeremy Lin was not of Chinese heritage and the same thing was said?
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Kevin Prather on February 22, 2012, 05:06:02 PM
With regards to the OP, I say dump them all. They applied for the show, they all signed the agreement, they really have no leg to stand on. And I bet the line of contestants waiting to play the game isn't short.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: TLEberle on February 22, 2012, 05:07:54 PM
(with some clever, though questionable, wordplay)
Better or worse than the guys at ESPN who were turfed over "trying to find a chink in Jeremy Lin's armor"?
I'd like to hear your answer on it first.
Of course you would.

The idea that contestants on a game show who are there to lose weight because their previous lifestyles has put them in a dangerous situation would unionize and stage a walkout because the game has taken an unexpected turn amuses the hell out of me, because the genre and show is known for changing things up very frequently. This pegs out right near toetyper's hypothetical contestant who says "I call quitsies, but I don't want to give a rabbit hunt answer, nor do I even want to see the answer."

Judgment: Stupid-dumb.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Jeremy Nelson on February 22, 2012, 05:43:21 PM
This is ridiculous. I don't know how many of you watch the show, but the contestants this year are TERRIBLE. All of the fairly genuine contestants have been voted off in favor of the gossipy bunch who play "the game". Saying all that, this doesn't surprise me any. To be fair though, the producers have done this before...as a matter of fact, they did it LAST season (all the voted off contestants got to come back and compete in a full marathon for a guaranteed spot in the finale), and other similar twists have been added over the years. This is nothing different.

You sign the contract, and you're subjected to whatever rules, twists and whatnot they throw into the game. I'm with Matt. Kick em all off. Better yet, bring everyone back and only conduct the at-home prize for the contestants who had been eliminated.

This is one of the few reality shows on TV that actually offers a prize that ultimately beats the money- I wonder if they would have had the same problems if the grand prize (cash or merchandise) was under $50K.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: J.R. on February 22, 2012, 05:59:56 PM
This is ridiculous. I don't know how many of you watch the show, but the contestants this year are TERRIBLE. All of the fairly genuine contestants have been voted off in favor of the gossipy bunch who play "the game".
I agree totally, which is why I really haven't been watching this season.  It really dropped from being "appointment TV" to "background noise" rapidly.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: TLEberle on February 22, 2012, 06:03:36 PM
On the CBS radio top o' the hour news, Harley Carnes just read "The obesity epidemic is getting huge, no pun intended." If it wasn't intended maybe someone should have rewritten the copy. Either own the joke or don't.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Matt Ottinger on February 22, 2012, 06:40:52 PM
(with some clever, though questionable, wordplay)
Better or worse than the guys at ESPN who were turfed over "trying to find a chink in Jeremy Lin's armor"?
I'd like to hear your answer on it first.
Well, here's what I would ask- would everyone be so up in arms if Jeremy Lin was not of Chinese heritage and the same thing was said?
At the risk of watching you guys keep getting all pissy with each other, that's a fair question.  The one ESPN guy who got sacked (if I'm reading right, the other, higher-profile guy only got suspended) insists that he WASN'T making a racial comment and that the phrase, which ought to be totally benign in the proper context, is one he's used plenty of times in his writings.  (Which, come to think of it, ought to be provable.) The reason I might accept that is because the comment is SO racist in this context that it would be astonishing that a professional writer would deliberately use it as a "clever" joke.  Still, this is how ESPN deals with controversy, and it's their sandbox.

(To answer the original question, on the scale for this sort of thing, the ESPN stuff is FAR worse than the TMZ gags.)
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: PYLdude on February 22, 2012, 08:11:47 PM
At the risk of watching you guys keep getting all pissy with each other, that's a fair question.  The one ESPN guy who got sacked (if I'm reading right, the other, higher-profile guy only got suspended) insists that he WASN'T making a racial comment and that the phrase, which ought to be totally benign in the proper context, is one he's used plenty of times in his writings.  (Which, come to think of it, ought to be provable.) The reason I might accept that is because the comment is SO racist in this context that it would be astonishing that a professional writer would deliberately use it as a "clever" joke.  Still, this is how ESPN deals with controversy, and it's their sandbox.

1) you are reading correctly- the sacked party was an editor, the suspended an anchor for ESPNews

2) when I heard about that whole rigamarole I was kind of reminded of a certain Robot Chicken sketch (http://"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dnb1aRb_p80") which might or might not be appropriate- but still, I'm one of those people who believes there isn't an overabundance of political correctness these days and even I found that to be ridiculous

Now, if I may for a second, let me undo my hijack and go back to the topic at hand...am I the only one who's surprised this show is still on the air regardless, due to the exploitative nature of it? I mean, I'm in that kind of a boat myself and I'd never go on The Biggest Loser.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: weaklink75 on February 22, 2012, 08:13:50 PM
You know, when people sign up for these shows, they should know that twists are part and parcel of the genre- no sympathy for them at all.

I wonder if this will be the final straw that kills the show...the ratings are down, it's an older show, and fans have said it has never really been the same since Jillian Michaels left last year. Of course with NBC in such disarray (they should rename it the Needs Booting Constantly network), you never know.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Matt Ottinger on February 22, 2012, 08:31:03 PM
2) when I heard about that whole rigamarole I was kind of reminded of a certain Robot Chicken sketch (http://"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dnb1aRb_p80") which might or might not be appropriate- but still, I'm one of those people who believes there isn't an overabundance of political correctness these days and even I found that to be ridiculous
The Robot Chicken thing is a funny take on it, but again, that's the crux of the matter.  (Crux is OK, right?  Sounds dirty.)  Are you deliberately using an offensive term in its non-offensive context in order to put it out there, or are you genuinely using a trite but accepted cliche, with no extra entendre intended?

Words Have Meanings, but naturally they evolve.  "Gay" is now inexorably linked to "homosexual", though as Fred Flintstone can tell you, that wasn't always the case.  And then there's this. (http://"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversies_about_the_word_%22niggardly%22")
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: TLEberle on February 22, 2012, 09:03:36 PM
At the risk of watching you guys keep getting all pissy with each other,
I do take a pill for that, y'know. :)

I'm one of those people who believes there isn't an overabundance of political correctness these days and even I found that to be ridiculous
I disagree; I think there's an arms race to the bottom. People look for ways to be offended in order to be a victim. If people want to be offended by speech that's their dime and I can't stop them, but I dislike when a Congresswoman from California decides that this is worth her time to comment on. ESPN gets to do whatever they want about it, and we get to either like it or lump it.

This is one of the few reality shows on TV that actually offers a prize that ultimately beats the money- I wonder if they would have had the same problems if the grand prize (cash or merchandise) was under $50K.
The thing I don't understand is that in many cases the contestants are given a new lease on life. Why would you kick anyone off? I understand that thinning out the herd is the old standby for shows like this, but would it be so terrible to allow everyone to enjoy the ride, and you have some way to determine the three people who get to duke it out for the jackpot?
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Jeremy Nelson on February 22, 2012, 09:18:06 PM
I wonder if this will be the final straw that kills the show...the ratings are down, it's an older show, and fans have said it has never really been the same since Jillian Michaels left last year. Of course with NBC in such disarray (they should rename it the Needs Booting Constantly network), you never know.
Churning out season after season with minimal breaks can't be helping it, either. But hey,, I'd imagine the show doesn't cost a whole lot to produce compared to most other prime time fare, and they've made a brand out of it. Now they've got cruises, exercise retreats, exercise gear, cookbooks, videotapes, and a Weight Watchers-type meal plan. I don't know how well that stuff will sell if they don't have a TV product.

This is one of the few reality shows on TV that actually offers a prize that ultimately beats the money- I wonder if they would have had the same problems if the grand prize (cash or merchandise) was under $50K.
The thing I don't understand is that in many cases the contestants are given a new lease on life. Why would you kick anyone off? I understand that thinning out the herd is the old standby for shows like this, but would it be so terrible to allow everyone to enjoy the ride, and you have some way to determine the three people who get to duke it out for the jackpot?
Well, you're still labeling it as a contest. People would still have to compete to get to that final three, which means there's some sort of conniving going on at some point- unless you take the three players with the largest percentage of weight loss after 10 or 12 weeks.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Bryce L. on February 22, 2012, 09:35:31 PM
Now, if I may for a second, let me undo my hijack and go back to the topic at hand...am I the only one who's surprised this show is still on the air regardless, due to the exploitative nature of it? I mean, I'm in that kind of a boat myself and I'd never go on The Biggest Loser.

As much as I don't care for reality shows, I will admit I'm NOT suprised that it has lasted, and here's why: It gets ratings.

As long as you keep generating money for the network and the sponsors, your show will last, no matter how trashy it gets. Case in point: "The Jerry Springer Show"
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Bryce L. on February 22, 2012, 09:40:20 PM
This is one of the few reality shows on TV that actually offers a prize that ultimately beats the money- I wonder if they would have had the same problems if the grand prize (cash or merchandise) was under $50K.
The thing I don't understand is that in many cases the contestants are given a new lease on life. Why would you kick anyone off? I understand that thinning out the herd is the old standby for shows like this, but would it be so terrible to allow everyone to enjoy the ride, and you have some way to determine the three people who get to duke it out for the jackpot?
Well, you're still labeling it as a contest. People would still have to compete to get to that final three, which means there's some sort of conniving going on at some point- unless you take the three players with the largest percentage of weight loss after 10 or 12 weeks.

Great ideas, both to Travis for saying "Don't boot anybody" and to Jeremy for figuring out a plausible way of implementing that idea.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Jimmy Owen on February 22, 2012, 09:40:57 PM
The thing I don't understand is that in many cases the contestants are given a new lease on life. Why would you kick anyone off? I understand that thinning out the herd is the old standby for shows like this, but would it be so terrible to allow everyone to enjoy the ride, and you have some way to determine the three people who get to duke it out for the jackpot?
<sarcasm coming> What do you mean by "thinning out the herd"?<sarcasm out>
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: jjman920 on February 22, 2012, 09:44:58 PM
These contestants are stupid. You signed a contract, you play the game. Not only that, this should be some motivation to work harder for the top prize. Not only that, it makes you all look greedy and there only for the money. Who cares about how your actual life will improve after the weight loss? Absolutely ridiculous.

As for the ESPN-Lin Debacle, he should've known better. There's already a thousand "Lin puns" everywhere, there is honestly no other way people would react to that other than to think of it as some backhanded racist pun. We live in such a sensitive and judgmental world, he should've known better. The fact that it didn't cross his minds shows they didn't realize this. It doesn't mean he's some sort of closet bigots, it just means he didn't look at all angles. Unfortunately, it cost him his job. I don't think it should have, but zero tolerance seems to go over well with the public.

It is amazing how words change and take on other meanings as time goes on. People begin to misuse them and before you know it, it's the new meaning.

/I miss the Gay 90s Popcorn Cart from TPIR.
//At least The Flintstones are still on television.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: TLEberle on February 22, 2012, 10:15:57 PM
Great ideas, both to Travis for saying "Don't boot anybody" and to Jeremy for figuring out a plausible way of implementing that idea.
As rightly maligned as Kid Nation was, they managed to pull it off: nobody was ever kicked out, and they had a vote at the end to see which of the citizens would get a larger cash prize.

I don't remember where I saw this or whether it was Germany or Netherlands, but there was a weight loss competition show where the contestants had all the assistance they wanted over the time period and the person who shed the most weight would win that amount in gold. On the other hand, the home was equipped with a shame pantry where contestants could indulge in their favorite foods that would be a no-no when dieting. So it was a devious mixture.

Do a Krypton Factor pentathlon, or obstacle course, or nutrition quiz, or endurance cage match. There's umpteen ways that you can have a final group from a larger contendership. I just don't think it is right to take away the tools that the contestants have, in the form of onsite training and equipment and nutritional advice. Plus the players have probably taken three months or so off, expecting that they're going to spend eight hours a day (or more) doing intense training. And then it gets taken away because that person is "a threat with too much weight to lose" or they're in the wrong alliance/clique.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: chris319 on February 23, 2012, 05:35:29 AM
Who cares about The Biggest Loser? The big news is that Carrot Top says his buff days are over. Oh darn.

http://www.poprock80s.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/03/carrottop.jpg

Carrot Top, take a number and go stand behind Joe Piscopo.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Neumms on February 23, 2012, 10:00:15 AM
/I miss the Gay 90s Popcorn Cart from TPIR.

Another game show note: Anyone else remember the week on Mike Reilly's Monopoly when the player in the center position, previously referred to as "the yellow player," became "the gold player?" He was an Asian-American fellow.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Neumms on February 23, 2012, 10:04:24 AM
(with some clever, though questionable, wordplay)
Better or worse than the guys at ESPN who were turfed over "trying to find a chink in Jeremy Lin's armor"?

The really questionable wordplay is the title of the frigging show.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: bandit_bobby on February 23, 2012, 10:16:59 AM
If the rest of the season's cancelled, split the $250K between the remaining contestants at the time of the walkout.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Matt Ottinger on February 23, 2012, 10:45:34 AM
If the rest of the season's cancelled, split the $250K between the remaining contestants at the time of the walkout.
Reward all of them for screwing over your show.  GOOD plan!

On the TMZ television show last night, the consensus in the bullpen was pretty much what I said earlier.  If they all want to walk out, cancel their season and bring a new bunch in.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: toddyo on February 23, 2012, 11:04:15 AM
Look what it has gotten them though: free publicity. Follow the Randy Michaels philosophy. Get everyone to talk about you. It works. TMZ, ET, Inside Edition, Extra, etc. Free advertising for a program that may not be on that affiliate's network. Brilliant!  And yes, is the Biggest Loser becoming the new WWTBAM with the burnout factor?
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: weaklink75 on February 23, 2012, 11:24:35 AM
I wonder if this will be the final straw that kills the show...the ratings are down, it's an older show, and fans have said it has never really been the same since Jillian Michaels left last year. Of course with NBC in such disarray (they should rename it the Needs Booting Constantly network), you never know.
Churning out season after season with minimal breaks can't be helping it, either. But hey,, I'd imagine the show doesn't cost a whole lot to produce compared to most other prime time fare, and they've made a brand out of it. Now they've got cruises, exercise retreats, exercise gear, cookbooks, videotapes, and a Weight Watchers-type meal plan. I don't know how well that stuff will sell if they don't have a TV product.


True...and you forgot the BL-branded Visa card..  (http://"http://thefutoncritic.com/news/2012/02/21/nbcuniversal-television-consumer-products-group-and-reveille-partner-with-the-edwards-group-to-launch-the-biggest-loser-visa-card-955411/20120221nbc02/")
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: clemon79 on February 23, 2012, 12:58:02 PM
Carrot Top, take a number and go stand behind Joe Piscopo.
Crap on Teh Top all you want, but the man seems to have found a niche with his Vegas show. Inebriated gamblers are apparently more than willing to drop $80 on a ticket to watch him play with his junk.

/eye bleach is available in the lobby, right next to the the $50 T-shirts
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: trustno1 on February 23, 2012, 03:20:52 PM
I have to make a comment about this.
On the version shown in my homeland we have had people return in most series.  Now, true the remaining competitors are not happy about this, but they have never walked out.  I would reckon that this would amount to a breach of contract here.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: knagl on February 23, 2012, 04:45:05 PM
Inebriated gamblers are apparently more than willing to drop $80 on a ticket to watch him play with his junk.

Didn't Louie Anderson get in trouble for something like that?
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: tpirfan28 on February 23, 2012, 04:59:25 PM
Carrot Top, take a number and go stand behind Joe Piscopo.
Crap on Teh Top all you want, but the man seems to have found a niche with his Vegas show. Inebriated gamblers are apparently more than willing to drop $80 on a ticket to watch him play with his junk.
That means two things!
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: parliboy on February 23, 2012, 07:55:05 PM
[quote name='tpirfan28']
[quote name='clemon79']
Crap on Teh Top all you want, but the man seems to have found a niche with his Vegas show. Inebriated gamblers are apparently more than willing to drop $80 on a ticket to watch him play with his junk.
[/quote]
That means two things!
[/quote]

It's very laudable that Mr. Top has such an interest in Chinese ships, but I won't buy a ticket to see that.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Matt Ottinger on February 23, 2012, 10:34:12 PM
TMZ reports (http://"http://www.tmz.com/2012/02/23/biggest-loser-quitters-continues-resumes/#.T0cE6ozUmPQ") that two contestants are out, the rest have come back, the show is back in production and the producers may use the mutiny as a plot point.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Joe Mello on February 23, 2012, 11:04:30 PM
Couple of potentially interesting things.

-Not too long ago, there was a player who tried to tank her way out of TBL and failed catastrophically.  When confronted on camera, the host pretty much said "There's the door, feel free to use it."

-I'm going to presume they're taping for next season, because if they're still taping for the one currently airing--the one dubbed "No Excuses" where they gave an eliminated team a chance to return--that would be rather silly.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Twentington on February 23, 2012, 11:19:14 PM
Quote
Quote
Inebriated gamblers are apparently more than willing to drop $80 on a ticket to watch him play with his junk.

Didn't Louie Anderson get in trouble for something like that?

Quote
It's very laudable that Mr. Top has such an interest in Chinese ships, but I won't buy a ticket to see that.

Damn it, I only have one Internet to award. Looks like I'll have to pull a Solomon and cut it in half to split between the two of you.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Clay Zambo on February 23, 2012, 11:29:21 PM
TMZ reports (http://"http://www.tmz.com/2012/02/23/biggest-loser-quitters-continues-resumes/#.T0cE6ozUmPQ") that two contestants are out, the rest have come back, the show is back in production and the producers may use the mutiny as a plot point.

May?  They may use it?  Isn't that like saying the sun may rise in the east?
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: weaklink75 on February 24, 2012, 12:02:37 AM
-I'm going to presume they're taping for next season, because if they're still taping for the one currently airing--the one dubbed "No Excuses" where they gave an eliminated team a chance to return--that would be rather silly.


It's likely for this season- they schedule the filming so that the final few contestants in the game have about 6 weeks or so to work out and diet on their own before the finale ep airs. A an ep on their show can cover various amounts of time (usually 7-10 days from reports), so I'd suspect they have 2 or 3 more episodes to tape before the finalists were going to be decided.

And having players come back in very late isn't new- last season the contestants were specifically told that when they got to the final few  players, all the previously eliminated contestants would come back and compete against each other in a marathon for an automatic spot in the finale ep.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: knagl on February 24, 2012, 03:38:21 AM
It's very laudable that Mr. Top has such an interest in Chinese ships, but I won't buy a ticket to see that.

Well played, sir.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: PYLdude on February 24, 2012, 03:42:26 AM
Crap on Teh Top all you want, but the man seems to have found a niche with his Vegas show. Inebriated gamblers are apparently more than willing to drop $80 on a ticket to watch him play with his junk.!

This guy wishes people would drop $80 on a ticket to see him play with his junk. (http://"http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_PuZoLkvmBbc/Sa2j0VDvSwI/AAAAAAAAC7I/xONaarDlYMA/s320/Masturbating+Bear.JPG")

/yes, there are a few things wrong with me
//I apologize
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Matt Ottinger on February 24, 2012, 08:58:21 AM
TMZ reports (http://"http://www.tmz.com/2012/02/23/biggest-loser-quitters-continues-resumes/#.T0cE6ozUmPQ") that two contestants are out, the rest have come back, the show is back in production and the producers may use the mutiny as a plot point.
May?  They may use it?  Isn't that like saying the sun may rise in the east?
Well, the other side of that argument is that it could be perceived as being embarrassing to the show, that the producers can't control their players.  We all know that there's a lot of behind-the-scenes nonsense that doesn't get used for one reason or another.  But yeah, with all the publicity this has generated, it certainly seems likely that they'll use it.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Clay Zambo on February 24, 2012, 09:46:19 AM
Well, the other side of that argument is that it could be perceived as being embarrassing to the show, that the producers can't control their players.

I suppose.  But considering that the producers have all the power in the editing booth, I'd say there's a likelier chance that the players will be made to look ridiculous.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: TLEberle on February 25, 2012, 05:25:30 PM
In all the years I've been watching competitive reality shows (and that number is 13 or so), I've never seen an instance where it worked out well, in terms of making a good game or a good show. I suppose this is less egregious than allowing an entire bloc of previous players another chance to win the game against a group of fresh meat (as in Big Brother 2011), but not by much. I still remember the acrimony from Survivor: Pearl Islands, when the six Outcasts got a chance to play for the right to re-enter the game. They weren't guaranteed a spot, but each tribe they beat in a jailbreak challenge would take on one Outcast. And it was nasty, all-up. Bad TV. I just don't see what Biggest Loser gains in this, besides headlines and ink. Maybe that's enough.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Thunder on February 25, 2012, 06:16:52 PM
That's quite more than enough.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: TLEberle on February 25, 2012, 06:24:21 PM
That's quite more than enough.
Is it? People in this thread have said that the show has gotten stale, and it doesn't sound like the shake-up has made them want to watch the show anymore. That isn't good at all.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: davemackey on February 27, 2012, 10:17:16 AM
[quote name='tpirfan28']
[quote name='clemon79']
Crap on Teh Top all you want, but the man seems to have found a niche with his Vegas show. Inebriated gamblers are apparently more than willing to drop $80 on a ticket to watch him play with his junk.
That means two things!
[/quote]

It's very laudable that Mr. Top has such an interest in Chinese ships, but I won't buy a ticket to see that.
[/quote]
Okay, three things then.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Mr. Armadillo on April 25, 2012, 05:23:30 PM
TMZ reports (http://"http://www.tmz.com/2012/02/23/biggest-loser-quitters-continues-resumes/#.T0cE6ozUmPQ") that two contestants are out, the rest have come back, the show is back in production and the producers may use the mutiny as a plot point.
I'm only bringing this back up because the shows regarding the mutiny have aired, and oh, the irony--

After Mark and Buddy left the game, one of the remaining three was eliminated, putting the other two in the finals.  At this point, all of the eliminated contestants, excepting those who had quit, came back to compete for the third spot in the finals.

Out of all the eliminated contestants brought back to compete for the finals spot, which one earned it?  The one that was eliminated after the mutiny, obviously.  

In other words, the scenario that worked up Mark and Buddy to the point of leaving the show never happened.  Whoops.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Jeremy Nelson on April 25, 2012, 07:28:01 PM
TMZ reports (http://"http://www.tmz.com/2012/02/23/biggest-loser-quitters-continues-resumes/#.T0cE6ozUmPQ") that two contestants are out, the rest have come back, the show is back in production and the producers may use the mutiny as a plot point.
I'm only bringing this back up because the shows regarding the mutiny have aired, and oh, the irony--

After Mark and Buddy left the game, one of the remaining three was eliminated, putting the other two in the finals.  At this point, all of the eliminated contestants, excepting those who had quit, came back to compete for the third spot in the finals.

Out of all the eliminated contestants brought back to compete for the finals spot, which one earned it?  The one that was eliminated after the mutiny, obviously.  

In other words, the scenario that worked up Mark and Buddy to the point of leaving the show never happened.  Whoops.
I wonder if those two will be allowed compete for the at home prize. My guess is no, since by leaving, they break their agreement to be part of the game in any capacity.

I don't know how many of you watch the show, but to me, it seems like the two people in the house who stirred up most of the drama this season (both of whom are in the final) orchestrated the walkout to see if they could get rid of their biggest competitors.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: colonial on April 26, 2012, 06:01:01 AM
TMZ reports (http://"http://www.tmz.com/2012/02/23/biggest-loser-quitters-continues-resumes/#.T0cE6ozUmPQ") that two contestants are out, the rest have come back, the show is back in production and the producers may use the mutiny as a plot point.
I'm only bringing this back up because the shows regarding the mutiny have aired, and oh, the irony--

After Mark and Buddy left the game, one of the remaining three was eliminated, putting the other two in the finals.  At this point, all of the eliminated contestants, excepting those who had quit, came back to compete for the third spot in the finals.

Out of all the eliminated contestants brought back to compete for the finals spot, which one earned it?  The one that was eliminated after the mutiny, obviously.  

In other words, the scenario that worked up Mark and Buddy to the point of leaving the show never happened.  Whoops.
I wonder if those two will be allowed compete for the at home prize. My guess is no, since by leaving, they break their agreement to be part of the game in any capacity.


They are immediately DQd from the at-home prize if they walk off the show.  Olympic wrestler Rulon Gardner was not eligible for the at-home when he quit the show during the spring 2011 tournament.

 NBC typically holds a media conference call with the winner a few days after the finale, so I'm hoping for some fireworks to break out in the Q-and-A. (the NBC PR flaks who are on the call tend to publicly flip out whenever an "inapprrpriate" question is asked to the winner -- happened three times during the spring 2011 call, including once to me).

JD
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: clemon79 on April 26, 2012, 01:05:41 PM
(the NBC PR flaks who are on the call tend to publicly flip out whenever an "inapprrpriate" question is asked to the winner -- happened three times during the spring 2011 call, including once to me).
What was your question that flipped them out?
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: colonial on April 27, 2012, 06:07:02 AM
(the NBC PR flaks who are on the call tend to publicly flip out whenever an "inapprrpriate" question is asked to the winner -- happened three times during the spring 2011 call, including once to me).
What was your question that flipped them out?

I asked the winner (Olivia Ward) if she would use some of her winnings to deal with her infertility issues, even mentioning the issues my family went through before my daughter arrived.  Olivia was beginning her answer when the NBC flak took the phone and said that Olivia "would not answer" because it was "inappropriate," even though Olivia mentioned dozens of times during the season that her weight, along with an endocrine disorder, were preventing her from getting pregnant.  I was later told from another reporter that the show only wanted us to ask questions about "health and wellness."  If Olivia thought the question was inappropriate, NBC could have let her tell me -- I just have a feeling she wanted to answer.

The other two questions that were shouted down were one on Rulon Gardner's departure from the show, and Anna Kournikova joining the show as a trainer (the PR flak basically told us "Anna is a certified trainer, so ASK ANOTHER QUESTION!).    

JD
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: clemon79 on April 27, 2012, 01:18:41 PM
I was later told from another reporter that the show only wanted us to ask questions about "health and wellness."  If Olivia thought the question was inappropriate, NBC could have let her tell me -- I just have a feeling she wanted to answer.
Yeah, I'm inclined to agree. And I fail to see why that question *isn't* about "health and wellness."

Quote
The other two questions that were shouted down were one on Rulon Gardner's departure from the show, and Anna Kournikova joining the show as a trainer (the PR flak basically told us "Anna is a certified trainer, so ASK ANOTHER QUESTION!).
Yeah, I imagine that they got word from On High to not let the conversation get CLOSE to questioning her qualifications.

/Ace-King in poker is sometimes referred to as "Anna Kournikova"
//looks good, but rarely wins
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: TLEberle on April 28, 2012, 01:23:30 AM
I don't know how many of you watch the show, but to me, it seems like the two people in the house who stirred up most of the drama this season (both of whom are in the final) orchestrated the walkout to see if they could get rid of their biggest competitors.
If that's what they did, I'd say that's no more or less contemptible than Jon Dalton lying about his dead grandmother back in the Pearl Islands.

Here's the kicker: aside from the fact that Biggest Loser almost always allows the previously eliminated players back in teh game (as a way to subvert the voting-out aspect, maybe) so the complainers aren't really in a position to complain. And even then, the whole thing was based on merit: the returnees got on the scale and half the group was cut based on weight los. Then a 100 yard dash cut down a few more. Then a nutrition based Race Game-ish puzzle knocked out a few more. Finally there was a "hang on to the golden ticket" challenge that would have been right at home as Final Immunity on Survivor. Every last challenge was one based on who was best, fastest, smartest, sturdiest. There was nothing about it that was a popularity contest or based on luck.

Here's the problem I see. Yes, they're making a television show, and everything should revolve around what makes for a program that more people will watch. But that television show is about saving people's lives and weight loss. It seems highly inappropriate to dress up something this important in a reality show.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: clemon79 on April 28, 2012, 01:34:34 AM
Here's the problem I see. Yes, they're making a television show, and everything should revolve around what makes for a program that more people will watch. But that television show is about saving people's lives and weight loss. It seems highly inappropriate to dress up something this important in a reality show.
So goddamn much this.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Jimmy Owen on April 28, 2012, 07:16:22 AM
Why are we discussing this piece of crap show?
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Dbacksfan12 on April 28, 2012, 07:19:50 AM
Why are we discussing this piece of crap show?
Why don't you direct your question to the moderator that started this thread?  If you think its a piece of crap, you're free not to read about it.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Jimmy Owen on April 28, 2012, 10:40:22 AM
Why are we discussing this piece of crap show?
Why don't you direct your question to the moderator that started this thread?  If you think its a piece of crap, you're free not to read about it.
I thought I did.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: TLEberle on April 28, 2012, 11:15:22 AM
Why are we discussing this piece of crap show?
1/10, J. Bradford Owen the Third.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Kevin Prather on April 29, 2012, 12:32:04 AM
Nah, Trav. 3/10. He did get one bite.
Title: When Reality Contestants Revolt!
Post by: Mr. Armadillo on April 30, 2012, 02:28:55 PM
Then a nutrition based Race Game-ish puzzle knocked out a few more.
Unless the contestants were given more information off-air than we got on television (one of the questions was "How many calories in a cheeseburger?"), I'd disagree that that challenge rewarded merit.