Author Topic: AYSTA5G review (Read 7729 times)

brianhenke · « **on:** March 03, 2007, 12:14:01 AM »

The Slate has a review of Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader? The writer, Troy Patterson, calls it "humiliating".

http://www.slate.com/id/2160948/

Brian

PYLdude · « **Reply #1 on:** March 03, 2007, 01:03:53 AM »

Apparently Mr. Patterson wasn't done with the "humiliating" schtick...read a little further down for something concerning another Fox show dropping soon.

(Are you all smarter than the idiots who created these shows? Let's all hope so.)

DoorNumberFour · « **Reply #2 on:** March 03, 2007, 01:11:03 AM »

I wonder if the success of this show will spark a sudden influx of game shows featuring "dumb" people, in the same way that WWTBAM sparked the renaissance of the big-money quiz show.

TimK2003 · « **Reply #3 on:** March 03, 2007, 11:01:27 AM »

[quote name=\'DoorNumberFour\' post=\'147354\' date=\'Mar 3 2007, 02:11 AM\']
I wonder if the success of this show will spark a sudden influx of game shows featuring "dumb" people, in the same way that WWTBAM sparked the renaissance of the big-money quiz show.
[/quote]

Let me pose this question:

If Mark Burnett and company had raised the bar, and called it "Are You Smarter Than A 10th Grader?", or "Are You Smarter Than A High Schooler?" and adjusted the questions likewise, would this game be more likeable to us die-hard game show fans -- especially if they had 'smarter' Jeopardy-caliber contestants, and would there be as much or more success in the ratings?

DoorNumberFour · « **Reply #4 on:** March 03, 2007, 11:19:04 AM »

[quote name=\'TimK2003\' post=\'147360\' date=\'Mar 3 2007, 11:01 AM\']
[quote name=\'DoorNumberFour\' post=\'147354\' date=\'Mar 3 2007, 02:11 AM\']
I wonder if the success of this show will spark a sudden influx of game shows featuring "dumb" people, in the same way that WWTBAM sparked the renaissance of the big-money quiz show.
[/quote]

Let me pose this question:

If Mark Burnett and company had raised the bar, and called it "Are You Smarter Than A 10th Grader?", or "Are You Smarter Than A High Schooler?" and adjusted the questions likewise, would this game be more likeable to us die-hard game show fans -- especially if they had 'smarter' Jeopardy-caliber contestants, and would there be as much or more success in the ratings?
[/quote]

I don't speak for everyone, but I would watch it. That's a far more interesting concept than making people look dumber than a 5th-grader.

I don't think it would be as successful in the long run, because IMO, that's not what the majority of the American TV audience (especially FOX viewers) want to see anymore.

Like Bob Barker said a few months back in an interview, we've entered what could be the most disgusting period in television history; a period in which humiliation of the average man/woman equals quality entertainment + ratings.

Sadly, it looks as if there's no room for the intellectual viewers in the current game show genre, at least for now.

Matt Ottinger · « **Reply #5 on:** March 03, 2007, 11:37:23 AM »

[quote name=\'TimK2003\' post=\'147360\' date=\'Mar 3 2007, 11:01 AM\']If Mark Burnett and company had raised the bar, and called it "Are You Smarter Than A 10th Grader?", or "Are You Smarter Than A High Schooler?" and adjusted the questions likewise, would this game be more likeable to us die-hard game show fans -- especially if they had 'smarter' Jeopardy-caliber contestants, and would there be as much or more success in the ratings?
[/quote]
It still has horrible pacing problems (a problem with many of these copycat shows), and I think we're all smart enough to know that if the material was harder, the show wouldn't be as accessible to the average dim-bulb viewer and the ratings wouldn't be as good. But yes, the show in its current form is an insult to the intelligence of a quiz-show fan. It's Jaywalking for a million dollars, and that's just wrong.

One of the reasons the original Millionaire was a success (and one that doesn't get copied as much) is that there were a series of questions that got progressively harder. (To a degree, Jeopardy works that way too.) The family could watch together because there were questions along the way they could all answer, but the show didn't pander to stupidity.

You can't argue the success of the Foxworthy show, but I don't have to be happy about it.

tpirfan28 · « **Reply #6 on:** March 03, 2007, 11:46:39 AM »

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'147362\' date=\'Mar 3 2007, 11:37 AM\'] [quote name=\'TimK2003\' post=\'147360\' date=\'Mar 3 2007, 11:01 AM\']If Mark Burnett and company had raised the bar, and called it "Are You Smarter Than A 10th Grader?", or "Are You Smarter Than A High Schooler?" and adjusted the questions likewise, would this game be more likeable to us die-hard game show fans -- especially if they had 'smarter' Jeopardy-caliber contestants, and would there be as much or more success in the ratings?
[/quote]
It still has horrible pacing problems (a problem with many of these copycat shows), and I think we're all smart enough to know that if the material was harder, the show wouldn't be as accessible to the average dim-bulb viewer and the ratings wouldn't be as good. But yes, the show in its current form is an insult to the intelligence of a quiz-show fan. It's Jaywalking for a million dollars, and that's just wrong.

One of the reasons the original Millionaire was a success (and one that doesn't get copied as much) is that there were a series of questions that got progressively harder. (To a degree, Jeopardy works that way too.) The family could watch together because there were questions along the way they could all answer, but the show didn't pander to stupidity.

You can't argue the success of the Foxworthy show, but I don't have to be happy about it. [/quote]

I could not agree with a fellow Matt even more. One thing I've gotten to like more about 1 vs. 100 is that they've done creative editing/timing to get more questions in...which seems to be opposite the normal trend. But to have a show that, in a half-hour show, only gets 6 questions in....that's pathetic. A show doesn't need to be lightning fast (Jeopardy), but needs to have a good amount of pacing to it so that a good amount of material can be covered. The neighborhood of 13-17 seems good...I think.

And the point about covering topics from 1st grade all the way through 12th grade-ish....the title "Are You Smarter Than A Public School Graduate" doesn't have the same ring to it.

[quote name=\'DoorNumberFour\' post=\'147361\' date=\'Mar 3 2007, 11:19 AM\']
Like Bob Barker said a few months back in an interview, we've entered what could be the most disgusting period in television history; a period in which humiliation of the average man/woman equals quality entertainment + ratings.
[/quote]

Just to throw this off to a slight tangent....I wonder if this will bring down TPiR in the future...or it's "stranglehold" will stay there.

Jimmy Owen · « **Reply #7 on:** March 03, 2007, 02:42:49 PM »

People were willing to be humiliated back in the days of "Truth or Consequences" or "Beat the Clock." It's just that now it's for a million dollars rather than a console TV.

chris319 · « **Reply #8 on:** March 03, 2007, 03:04:27 PM »

Quote

Like Bob Barker said a few months back in an interview, we've entered what could be the most disgusting period in television history; a period in which humiliation of the average man/woman equals quality entertainment + ratings.

As someone who has humiliated a few contestants in his time, I don't see where Barker gets the idea that missing quiz questions = humiliation, if that's what he meant. If someone asked me to define the Pythagorean Theorem I'd have to look it up, but I'm sure a lot of people in the TV audience would have to look it up as well, so I don't see where the humiliation comes in.

BrandonFG · « **Reply #9 on:** March 03, 2007, 03:30:05 PM »

[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'147372\' date=\'Mar 3 2007, 03:04 PM\']

Quote

Like Bob Barker said a few months back in an interview, we've entered what could be the most disgusting period in television history; a period in which humiliation of the average man/woman equals quality entertainment + ratings.

As someone who has humiliated a few contestants in his time, I don't see where Barker gets the idea that missing quiz questions = humiliation, if that's what he meant. If someone asked me to define the Pythagorean Theorem I'd have to look it up, but I'm sure a lot of people in the TV audience would have to look it up as well, so I don't see where the humiliation comes in.
[/quote]
Honestly, the only demeaning thing from the show is that you have to admit to the camera you're supposedly dumber than a 5th grader. It's been 14 years since I've been in 5th grade, and I couldn't prolly be bothered to remember half the stuff I learned back then, other than the basics. Does it make me dumb, not really. The title and premise of the show is misleading, and somewhat subjective.

Honestly, dumb game show contestants are nothing new. As long as there's game shows with trivia, you'll have the ones who miss laughably easy questions. However, to try and revolve a game show around such a concept is just ridiculous. If it had been a competitive setup, say a team of 5th graders against a grown-up, it could have potential. But the fact that FOX is going for the more demeaning route (as only FOX can) is what makes this show so lame IMODO.

And I can't help but feel that it's somewhat condescending, making the 5th graders think they're really smarter than a college graduate, like they're some kind of genius.

clemon79 · « **Reply #10 on:** March 03, 2007, 04:16:17 PM »

[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'147373\' date=\'Mar 3 2007, 12:30 PM\']
Honestly, the only demeaning thing from the show is that you have to admit to the camera you're supposedly dumber than a 5th grader.
[/quote]
And for $100,000 (or more, but it looks like $100K is pretty much guaranteed unless you're a complete moron, like most of these contestants), I'll look in that camera and admit damned near anything they want.

alfonzos · « **Reply #11 on:** March 08, 2007, 03:22:23 PM »

The Chicago Sun-Times says the show's fifth-graders are child actors.

clemon79 · « **Reply #12 on:** March 08, 2007, 04:17:26 PM »

That...is something.

Joe Mello · « **Reply #13 on:** March 08, 2007, 04:20:36 PM »

Yeah, they're all SAG. However, I don't necessarily think that fact by itself comprises the integrity (HA!) of the game.

clemon79 · « **Reply #14 on:** March 08, 2007, 04:44:52 PM »

[quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'147666\' date=\'Mar 8 2007, 01:20 PM\']
Yeah, they're all SAG. However, I don't necessarily think that fact by itself comprises the integrity (HA!) of the game.
[/quote]
No, it doesn't, but it sure as hell raises a red flag.

It's just another example of a television production being extremely disingenuous to their viewers. This is up there with the whole scam on PlayMania where the phone queue is slow to "update" on screen to get more people to call in.