Or at least, four of them.
I\'ll be doing four shows each week, plus a few sidebars. If any of you have insights on the shows in question (and it shouldn\'t be that tough to guess the ones that haven\'t been revealed yet), the comment boxes are open.
I remember all but Hole in the Wall being discussed repeatedly on the forums, before, during, and after the shows aired. We mostly bashed them for being half-baked (or just sucking), but offered suggestions...very SIMPLE suggestions on how the shows could\'ve become passable. Like the two Travises, I thought Show Me the Money was a solid enough concept being produced by the wrong people*. Honestly, a few forum members have produced shows, but for the most part, quite a few solid suggestions have come from the Invision boards..........unfortunately, they also stayed on the Invision boards. :-P
The three shows had the potential to at least run for a few seasons. In the case of the ABC shows, the gimmicks far overshadowed the gameplay, and it killed any possible momentum.
*How I\'d do it: make it a daytime/syndicated show for about 1/20 of the budget (don\'t remember the total value one could win...I just know a lady won $600K+), cut the idiotic dancing, and you\'re on to something. Replace the models with civilians who stay all week...and if you flame out, said contestant takes your place, a la Jackpot.
*How I\'d do it: make it a daytime/syndicated show for about 1/20 of the budget (don\'t remember the total value one could win...I just know a lady won $600K+), cut the idiotic dancing, and you\'re on to something. Replace the models with civilians who stay all week...and if you flame out, said contestant takes your place, a la Jackpot.Assuming you have a run of six answers right and pick the six highest values on the board you could win $1,150,000, and at least three contestants won over $500,000 including the first contstant who was infamous for playing the game while wearing his man-purse.
I\'m assuming that next week\'s discussion of Lingo will be limited to the Engvall edition? The Woolery run had its flaws, but was enjoyable overall.
Woolery\'s Lingo premiered in 2002.
Going back to Travis\' point about Downfall, the chrome of seeing prizes (replica or not) fall off the side of a building is prolly cool to a 5-year-old. Reading Tim\'s account of the show, it had to be hell on the production staff, esp. since they had to clean up before sunrise. You\'re honestly creating unnecessary budget issues, all in the name of chrome.
Chris Jericho kept the proceedings moving along nicely, and the trivia format was inoffensive enough, but the falling prizes format could\'ve been done just as easily in a studio, but with scaled down cutouts/models on a raised conveyor belt. At the end of the line is a \"black hole\" of sorts (think Cliff Hangers meets Russian Roulette). Hell, the TPiR audience still gets nervous once Hans crosses the \"20\"...and the only thing on the line there is a dinette or fancy trip or something. ;-) I don\'t think it would\'ve looked as boring as it may sound.
Tim\'s list proves that the chrome only covers but so much if the presentation and execution still suck.
/Resume available upon request
a solid enough concept being produced by the wrong people*.
This kills a lot of things, in my observation.
Chris Jericho kept the proceedings moving along nicely, and the trivia format was inoffensive enough, but the falling prizes format could\'ve been done just as easily in a studio, but with scaled down cutouts/models on a raised conveyor belt. At the end of the line is a \"black hole\" of sorts (think Cliff Hangers meets Russian Roulette). Hell, the TPiR audience still gets nervous once Hans crosses the \"20\"...and the only thing on the line there is a dinette or fancy trip or something. ;-) I don\'t think it would\'ve looked as boring as it may sound.The one cool thing about Minute to Win it is the floor clock. I would ape that and put a prize at each quarter-minute. As the timer moves by each prize a spotlight extinguishes over the dance lessons or popcorn machine. Is it really important to the game that the clock speeds up with each pass? So much so that you risk confusing viewers who don\'t know why 1.2 seconds on the Downfall Clock (TM) tick away per second?
Chris Jericho kept the proceedings moving along nicely, and the trivia format was inoffensive enough, but the falling prizes format could\'ve been done just as easily in a studio, but with scaled down cutouts/models on a raised conveyor belt. At the end of the line is a \"black hole\" of sorts (think Cliff Hangers meets Russian Roulette). Hell, the TPiR audience still gets nervous once Hans crosses the \"20\"...and the only thing on the line there is a dinette or fancy trip or something. ;-) I don\'t think it would\'ve looked as boring as it may sound.
The one cool thing about Minute to Win it is the floor clock. I would ape that and put a prize at each quarter-minute. As the timer moves by each prize a spotlight extinguishes over the dance lessons or popcorn machine. Is it really important to the game that the clock speeds up with each pass? So much so that you risk confusing viewers who don\'t know why 1.2 seconds on the Downfall Clock (TM) tick away per second?
You could just never specify the time and/or use something other than 60 subdivisions. Hell, if you want to go LED-crazy, you could put 4 prizes on the quarters, then when they\'re all done, have 4 light tracks creep in on the center where the contestant would stand.
Is it really important to the game that the clock speeds up with each pass?
To keep people from winning the big money, maybe?
I also wonder at what level of the game they\'d dispose of the prizes altogether and focus on the money. Obviously, the $1M level would probably have nothing but the money on the belt, but if that\'s the case I\'m really curious what sort of prizes they\'d have for the $500K level. (\"On the belt for this round, we have... A three-bedroom house! A mint-condition Jackie Robinson rookie card! And a live tiger!\")
Didn\'t Downfall catch some mild controversy over being looked at as being wasteful in a down economy?
Tim, that was a very well put-together write-up. Look forward to the next installment.
Didn\'t Downfall catch some mild controversy over being looked at as being wasteful in a down economy?
Yes. I think this was the primary reason they went to such great pains to mention at the top of the show that the items on the belt were props and not actual prizes. \"But they\'ll still break real good!\"
It\'s not surprising Crosswords made the list -- but I hate to admit that I\'ve found some positives in a show that I really trashed a while back. With reruns on RTV, I find myself watching the eps again and seeing a few things I\'ve mellowed on. Since it is a game played against the clock, Ty has little choice but to just go from clue to clue to clue with little chat in between. Alex doesn\'t discuss answers on Jeopardy at any great length, either, so I\'ve toned down my dislike of Ty\'s hosting. He tries to be personable. Not the warmest host, but he does keep it moving. And, like the classic games, I liked watching everyday people play, instead of the types of contestants that seem to come from central casting for shows like Deal or No Deal. Genuine happiness or disappointment, depending on how the game goes for them. The aspect of the chance of a spoiler answering only one question in the whole show and winning the game has happened so rarely that I find it less upsetting. What\'s the diff between that and a family on Feud happening to come up with 3 or 4 \"steal\" answers and winding up winning the game on them? A couple of the main gripes still remain - such as not allowing contestants to see the whole board being filled in while the game is playing. Still too many questions where several possible answers have the same number of letters - \"Five letters, a popular pie fruit\". Apple? Peach? Lemon? Without a clue letter among the blanks, one guess is as good as another -or as bad, since you lose cash. Still enough faults to make it a disappointment, but I like watching it again more than I used to.
Part Two is now up for reading:
Is it really important to the game that the clock speeds up with each pass?
To keep people from winning the big money, maybe?
But the people winning the big money aren\'t the ones doing a lot of passing.
Honestly, I watched every episode of Downfall and I don\'t think I would have even noticed the belt sped up on a pass if I hadn\'t read about it on here. I\'d have no problems dropping that concept entirely.
The biggest downside to replacing the dropping of objects off a tall building with spotlights and a Minute to Win It track is that you might need a new name for your show if nothing\'s actually falling.
The biggest downside to replacing the dropping of objects off a tall building with spotlights and a Minute to Win It track is that you might need a new name for your show if nothing\'s actually falling.
Lights Out, or with apologies to Jay Stewart, Blackout. ;-)
/You all do remember where the hyphen goes when you cut my check, right?
with apologies to Jay Stewart, Blackout. ;-)
Jay Stewart? I thought Jay Wolpert created Blackout, or am I getting my Jay\'s mixed up? :P
Technically, Blackout had both Jay\'s -- Jay Stewart filled in for Johnny Gilbert on the last week of the show (which was Stewart\'s final announcing gig, BTW). Jay Wolpert was the EP of the show.
With that said, I think he meant to say Jay Wolpert.
Yep...Wolpert, Good catch!
It\'s not surprising Crosswords made the list -- but I hate to admit that I\'ve found some positives in a show that I really trashed a while back. With reruns on RTV, I find myself watching the eps again and seeing a few things I\'ve mellowed on. Since it is a game played against the clock, Ty has little choice but to just go from clue to clue to clue with little chat in between. Alex doesn\'t discuss answers on Jeopardy at any great length, either, so I\'ve toned down my dislike of Ty\'s hosting. He tries to be personable. Not the warmest host, but he does keep it moving. And, like the classic games, I liked watching everyday people play, instead of the types of contestants that seem to come from central casting for shows like Deal or No Deal. Genuine happiness or disappointment, depending on how the game goes for them. The aspect of the chance of a spoiler answering only one question in the whole show and winning the game has happened so rarely that I find it less upsetting. What\'s the diff between that and a family on Feud happening to come up with 3 or 4 \"steal\" answers and winding up winning the game on them? A couple of the main gripes still remain - such as not allowing contestants to see the whole board being filled in while the game is playing. Still too many questions where several possible answers have the same number of letters - \"Five letters, a popular pie fruit\". Apple? Peach? Lemon? Without a clue letter among the blanks, one guess is as good as another -or as bad, since you lose cash. Still enough faults to make it a disappointment, but I like watching it again more than I used to.
It\'s weird, because the exact opposite happened for me when I started watching the reruns on AmericanLifeTV...I was a fan of it originally but then I looked back and wondered what the hell was I watching.
Deal or No Deal, Set for Life, National Bingo Night and How Much is Enough? are the victims this week.
Here\'s Part 3.
Deal or No Deal, Set for Life, National Bingo Night and How Much is Enough? are the victims this week.
\"How Much is Enough - the game that makes Deal or No Deal look like Jeopardy in comparison.\"
One problem with National Bingo Night: they made it sound like it was being broadcast live, when of course it couldn\'t be (even without taking the west coast into account) as they had to know what the drawn numbers were in advance in order to control the number of home winners.
The one game I remember where they went overboard on this was when they announced that \"the computer had determined that nobody at home had a Bingo.\" Gee, you don\'t think the fact that they had not drawn any Bs (so there could not be a horizontal or diagonal Bingo), and not enough of any other column to get a vertical Bingo, in that game had something to do with that, do you?
My main gripe with Set for Life was, they never explained how they determine the amount of each payment, other than saying it was determined before the show began somehow.
(And what are the last four going to be, besides Amne$ia (although The Moment of Truth deserves to be on there) and It\'s Worth What??)
My main gripe with Set for Life was, they never explained how they determine the amount of each payment, other than saying it was determined before the show began somehow.
It was essentially the exact same round, just with fewer tubes. Contestants drew an envelop with a money amount (say, $575) and had to play with a set of 8 white tubes and 3 reds to determine the value of monthly check. You had to make it at least 4 steps up the ladder to stop and continue on to the game they actually televised.
(The British version, \"For the Rest of Your Life\", actually did show both halves of the game. And yes, the qualifying round is just as meaningless to watch as it sounds. Especially since you knew that if a team bombed out on the first part of the game, they wouldn\'t bother airing it.)
(And what are the last four going to be, besides Amne$ia (although The Moment of Truth deserves to be on there) and It\'s Worth What??)
Next week will have Identity and Who\'s Still Standing along with the two you mentioned. As for Moment of Truth, well, you\'ll have to wait and see about that one.
My main gripe with Set for Life was, they never explained how they determine the amount of each payment, other than saying it was determined before the show began somehow.
IMO, the show was already a steaming POS, but this is what irked me the most. It\'s like playing Press Your Luck, but cutting out the questions. So instead, you start with the players having 5, 6, and 3 spins. But, I just remember watching the first episode, where (in typical Endemaul fashion) the producers insisted on having Jimmy constantly make witty banter with the contestant\'s 4-year-old nephew. I believe the same episode* had a woman in a tiara constantly crying (hey, another En-dem-all trait).
In nominating Rossi, I’d like to also incriminate Dylan Lane, Ty Treadway, and Mark McGrath as four people who hosted their respective shows the same way – robotic, unconvincing, people who were clearly disinterested in the people playing their games. They leaned so heavily on script that every episode sounded interchangeable. They adding nothing to their productions – and given how most of their shows are on this list in some way, they needed hosts to contribute.
And not surprisingly, all four of their shows were equally forgettable. Coincidence? Prolly not,
*Had to be the same one...there\'s no way I would\'ve sat through this garbage twice.
National Bingo Night had another problem, other than all the dubbing -- if the studio player finished their task, they had to hope and pray that nobody in the audience managed to get a bingo with that last drawn ball...because if they did, the studio player still lost.
That\'s correct, because everyone gets an equal number of turns. How is that a problem?
IIRC, the rules were \"Accomplish your task before someone gets a bingo.\"
Yes. And the game is played simultaneously, so they were accomplishing their task as someone got a bingo. As is not before.
I think it was the execution that really made it seem jerkish, if not unfair. Contestant completes their goal, music and fanfare, everyone is excited - and now here comes the buzzkill, because an audience player completed their line. Womp womp.
See, if everyone gets disappointed because someone in the audience has just won $5000, you\'re doing it wrong.
I find that a show that places too much emphasis on audience play-along is usually not worth the effort.
That\'s why I wasn\'t fully sold on Bingo America. While the show wasn\'t THAT bad (even with monotone Patrick Duffy as the host- there\'s some things he just wasn\'t meant to do, and that plus narrating documentaries is another), and Richard Karn was actually decent as an emcee (although that\'s not saying much), I just felt the audience part felt tacked on. That plus the bonus rounds, even if you could win $100,000.
Did anyone ever hear an explanation of just how NBN\'s \"Big-Ass Number Jumbler\" worked?
I should know -- I taped the premiere, and that was the outcome of the first game.
For future reference (not that I think you\'ll listen to me), when you use the phrase \"I should know,\" you want to be using it in conjunction with something that happened specifically to you -- not with something that probably more than half the people here also watched and you just happened to record.
It still irks me a little bit that Deal had so many different executions of the format that they could have copied and been better off- England was tense, Australia didn\'t take itself seriously, and the Netherlands was a periodic high stakes lottery game. Even worse, they should have learned from Millionaire\'s death by overexposure not even five years prior.
Set for Life was the first show that came to mind when I first saw this topic title a couple weeks ago. (The Chamber was the second, probably because in the back of my mind I was unsure if it was over 10 years ago or not and a quick Google check confirmed it is.) I generally like game shows enough that I\'ll give anything at least a few episodes, but between not showing or explaining the first half of the game, showing the second half of the game twice, the whole game being nothing but picking up glowsticks, the stupid guardian angel mechanic, Jimmy Kimmel barely being able to stay awake... the whole thing was so bad I didn\'t even bother to tune in after the first episode.
One thing I\'ve noticed a number of times over the years is that I tend to be far too lenient in judging hosts, especially mediocre ones like Ty and Dylan. I do prefer hosts who do the job well, because good hosts can make a bad show decent or a good show great (heck, even the lousiest formats the 70s could come up with were watchable thanks to Bill Cullen), but unless a host is obnoxious or out of it to the point that he\'s actively making the show worse, I usually don\'t think they\'re doing the job as poorly as they actually are.
I must be in the minority on Dylan Lane because I didn\'t think he was as bad as everyone made him out to be. The production of Chain Reaction was the problem- disorganized and haphazard from the beginning (when I went to try out they screwed up our audition sheet), and no attention paid to any sort of detail regarding proper contestant selection. Dylan Lane was the absolute LEAST of Chain Reaction\'s problems.
^ Of course, saying that Dylan Lane is the least of your problems is like saying that the salad was the part of your meal that had the least amount of the chef\'s armpit hair in it.
I must be in the minority on Dylan Lane because I didn\'t think he was as bad as everyone made him out to be. The production of Chain Reaction was the problem- disorganized and haphazard from the beginning (when I went to try out they screwed up our audition sheet), and no attention paid to any sort of detail regarding proper contestant selection. Dylan Lane was the absolute LEAST of Chain Reaction\'s problems.I\'ll ask this: what did they get right?
Wasn\'t there an episode where one of the contestants in the bonus round got so fed up that he was ready to quit, mid-round? Could\'ve sworn I read an account of that happening.
Part 4 is now published, and includes a firsthand account by Adam Nedeff on his time as a \"stranger\" on Who\'s Still Standing?. That alone is worth reading.
I\'m really enjoying these, but Part 4 does leave me with three questions:
Looking forward to the last installment. I know one of the four shows is The Moment Of Truth, but honestly can\'t figure out the other three...
Tim was a contestant on Catch 21 and won $2,000. Take it All would fit either of two clues I think.
Ah - didn\'t know that. Yeah, Take It All is probably on there, but I\'ll be honest - I\'ve never even heard of My Kind Of Town.
What NBC show is \"the single biggest bomb in television history\"? My first thought was Jay Leno at 10PM...
Well, if we\'re playing that game...
...My Mother The Car?
CBS\' Fire Me Please was my first thought for \"A show where contestants literally sold out their good name,\" but Part 1 said no CBS shows made the list, so My Kind of Town is as good a guess as any.
My Mother The Car didn\'t nearly bankrupt NBC.
Supertrain did? Oh. Never heard that part of the story.
My Mother The Car didn\'t nearly bankrupt NBC.
And MMTC has been seen in reruns over the years, albeit very irregularly, so it has made some money.
/Captain Nice wasn\'t such a bad NBC show. At least the theme was catchy.
Part 4 is now published, and includes a firsthand account by Adam Nedeff on his time as a \"stranger\" on Who\'s Still Standing?. That alone is worth reading.
Good write-up, but I respectfully disagree about \"Amnesia\".
Sure, I agree that there was next-to-no play-along value, but I thought the show was cute and harmless. The contestants were friendly and genuine, not over-caffeinated caricatures, their life stories were usually interesting and Dennis Miller endeared me during the premiere when, during some sort of dramatic transition, said something to the effect of \"Wow, the lighting is two shades darker and we\'re supposed to act like God Almighty has descended from the clouds!\". Had me lol-ing hard.
I think the show would\'ve worked out in the long-run as a 30 minute low stakes kind of affair. I recall I was actually kinda sorta bummed when I got word of Amnesia\'s cancellation.
Oh, and the story about the beauty pageant gal legit PO\'d me. Freaking wow.
I actually wasn\'t the biggest fan of Minute to Win It, due to its typical NBC production values, and Catch 21\'s contestants could\'ve used a cup of decaf or 10*. But thinking about it now, they were fairly solid shows, much better than the other ones you described. The recap of Who\'s Still Standing further lets me know that NBC should just stop making prime time game shows. That\'s only a partial exaggeration...
From what I remember, My Kind of Town was summer 2005, and might even have been canceled after the first episode...
*/except that Tim Connolly guy...he\'s cool haha
//Resume available blah blah blah
///Amnesia wasn\'t too bad IMO and was a cute enough show, but definitely had zero play-along
I actually wasn\'t the biggest fan of Minute to Win It,It is as if the producers create this show and then have no faith in it and feel like they have to resort to gimmickry and silliness as opposed to just putting out a watchable product.
///Amnesia wasn\'t too bad IMO and was a cute enough show, but definitely had zero play-alongI like the mechanics of building the pot then deciding to play it safe or have a punt for big money, but the actual quiz portion ate a heaping bowl.
I liked Minute to Win It, even though I only paid attention to about ten minutes of each hour-long show and yet didn\'t actually miss anything. I tend to enjoy stunt shows in general and admittedly I did get the materials to play a number of the stunts at home and had fun practicing them. Still, I\'m not sure I\'d list it as one of the best four of the past decade... the typical NBC stuff drags it down, the ratings were never spectacular, and Guy could be mildly annoying at times, though I didn\'t mind him that much (again, I\'m far too kind to hosts.)
Shows I would\'ve put on the best list would include Trivial Pursuit: America Plays (underrated IMO) and Million-Dollar Mind Game (I\'m still bitter that ABC saw fit to burn it off against Sunday football, yet crap like Bet on your Baby and You Deserve It are totally fit for prime time.)
I\'m really enjoying these, but Part 4 does leave me with three questions:
- Why are you biased about Catch 21? Were you involved with its production somehow?
- What NBC show is \"the single biggest bomb in television history\"? My first thought was Jay Leno at 10PM...
- My biggest question: in your discussion of It\'s Worth What, no mention of \"The Entertainer\" being named the new host of WWTBA?
Looking forward to the last installment. I know one of the four shows is The Moment Of Truth, but honestly can\'t figure out the other three...
1. That question\'s been answered by others, but yeah, I was a contestant on the show and did pretty damn well at it. I\'d link you to the Youtube videos, but GSN found them first.
2. I was actually alluding to Do No Harm on that one, seeing as it had the single lowest rating for a series debut in network television history, but the great thing about this question is that there are so many right answers.
3. Written before that announcement was made. I would say that the show is doomed in the hands of someone who really doesn\'t have the chops to host a big-money quiz, but I thought the show was doomed when they put all the dollar values in a blender, so what the hell do I know.
2. I was actually alluding to Do No Harm on that one, seeing as it had the single lowest rating for a series debut in network television history, but the great thing about this question is that there are so many right answers.
I\'m proud to say I was one of the three people who watched that show.
and the single biggest bomb in television history.
Pretty sure Turn-On was on ABC.
Let\'s not forget The Will, the CBS family reality show pulled after one episode in 2005.
Brian
I\'m really enjoying these, but Part 4 does leave me with three questions:
- Why are you biased about Catch 21? Were you involved with its production somehow?
- What NBC show is \"the single biggest bomb in television history\"? My first thought was Jay Leno at 10PM...
- My biggest question: in your discussion of It\'s Worth What, no mention of \"The Entertainer\" being named the new host of WWTBA?
Looking forward to the last installment. I know one of the four shows is The Moment Of Truth, but honestly can\'t figure out the other three...
1. That question\'s been answered by others, but yeah, I was a contestant on the show and did pretty damn well at it. I\'d link you to the Youtube videos, but GSN found them first.
2. I was actually alluding to Do No Harm on that one, seeing as it had the single lowest rating for a series debut in network television history, but the great thing about this question is that there are so many right answers.
3. Written before that announcement was made. I would say that the show is doomed in the hands of someone who really doesn\'t have the chops to host a big-money quiz, but I thought the show was doomed when they put all the dollar values in a blender, so what the hell do I know.
Thanks Tim - that answers my questions. I actually thought of Do No Harm as well, but dismissed it as, while certainly a flop, at least it didn\'t become a media circus the way Jay Leno vs. Conan O\'Brien did.
If we\'re naming television shows that disappeared after one episode, how about Secret Talents Of The Stars with John O\'Hurley?
\"Cutlets\". Jee-zus.
2. I was actually alluding to Do No Harm on that one, seeing as it had the single lowest rating for a series debut in network television history,
Which is about as useful a statistic in an age of hundreds upon hundreds of TV channels as suggesting that Whatever is the top-grossing movie of all time and refusing to adjust for inflation when making that determination.
...Is it too late for Bet On Your Baby to get an honorable mention?
...Is it too late for Bet On Your Baby to get an honorable mention?
Considering that the final batch are the most offensive shows of the decade, the timing couldn\'t have been any more perfect.
Nice batch of essays, which certainly drove home the points of why I\'ve been driven away from most recent game shows. More faux drama/emotions than brains and skill. You Deserve It and Show Me The Money would have been better as faster-paced half hours with smaller stakes..and in the case of You Deserve It, exchanging the deepest of sob stories for lighter, possibly more community based needs or a classic charity (losing my mom to cancer, I might want to play for cancer research, a donation to the cancer treatment center of a local hospital or a hospice program). Play it so that the attraction is in playing the game well, not how tragic my story is. Even if I only win a couple of thousand bucks, it\'s something on the positive side.
and the single biggest bomb in television history.
Pretty sure Turn-On was on ABC.
It was.
And I could\'ve sworn that BET\'s \"Take the Cake\" (basically \"The Celebrity Is Right\") with Joe Clair and Toccara Jones would\'ve made the list.
And I could\'ve sworn that BET\'s \"Take the Cake\" (basically \"The Celebrity Is Right\") with Joe Clair and Toccara Jones would\'ve made the list.