Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Entertainment Weekly profile on Temptation  (Read 5223 times)

BMaurice06

  • Guest
Entertainment Weekly profile on Temptation
« on: September 05, 2007, 02:37:51 AM »
I spotted this on the magazine's website:

A Game Show Host for a Day

Now my anticipation for the show is up a bit after viewing the video.  I will admit I was too harsh on Rossi even though I haven't yet seen him in action; I like that he shaved off that facial hair 'cause I wasn't digging that at all.  That and the set looks pleasant enough for daytime television.  But I still have issues with a spike-word-styled Fame Game, the pop-culture questions, and the home-shopping crossovers (remember Bargain Hunters with Peter Tomarken?); IMHO Fremantle would have been way much better off preserving most of the elements of the classic "Grundy format" than doing it their own way.

And to Mr. Chris Lemon, if you're going to doo-doo all over my opinions next time, try and be less harsh!

dzinkin

  • Guest
Entertainment Weekly profile on Temptation
« Reply #1 on: September 05, 2007, 07:20:40 AM »
This was posted four days ago -- in a thread that you started, I might add.

tvmitch

  • Member
  • Posts: 1419
Entertainment Weekly profile on Temptation
« Reply #2 on: September 05, 2007, 08:23:04 AM »
Doo-Doo? Really?

I'm understanding Matt's analogy of Invision as a daycare more and more these days.
You should follow me on Twitter

Dbacksfan12

  • Member
  • Posts: 6222
  • Just leave the set; that’d be terrific.
Entertainment Weekly profile on Temptation
« Reply #3 on: September 05, 2007, 08:41:39 AM »
[quote name=\'mitchgroff\' post=\'162785\' date=\'Sep 5 2007, 07:23 AM\']
I'm understanding Matt's analogy of Invision as a daycare more and more these days.
[/quote]
So in other words, Nanny 911 really is a game show.
--Mark
Phil 4:13

dzinkin

  • Guest
Entertainment Weekly profile on Temptation
« Reply #4 on: September 05, 2007, 09:02:15 AM »
[quote name=\'mitchgroff\' post=\'162785\' date=\'Sep 5 2007, 08:23 AM\']
I'm understanding Matt's analogy of Invision as a daycare more and more these days.
[/quote]
Actually, Matt compared the GSN board to day care, not ours.

[quote name=\'BMaurice06\' post=\'162768\' date=\'Sep 5 2007, 02:37 AM\']
And to Mr. Chris Lemon, if you're going to doo-doo all over my opinions next time, try and be less harsh!
[/quote]
Mr. Maurice, it is a stretch to say that you hold "opinions."  You hold exactly one, and it boils down to the following: "Todd Newton is G-d's gift to game shows, television, broadcasting and humanity.  Anyone who thinks otherwise or would consider anyone else for any broadcasting-related job is committing an offense to basic human decency, and any program that does not involve him is destined for failure."  You're so upset by the choice of Rossi Morreale over Todd Newton that you didn't even realize that the article you "spotted" was mentioned in a thread that you yourself started.

I have absolutely no reason to believe that Todd Newton is anything but a professional and an all-around nice guy; everything I've seen and heard — from seeing him at work, from people like Randy West who have worked with him, and from others like Mike Klauss who have merely met him briefly — suggests exactly that.  But the only person whose life reasonably should revolve around Todd Newton is Todd Newton.  You need to understand that a choice has been made and that it wasn't the one you agreed with.  Stop whining, wait until the show has aired before judging it, and move on with your life.

(And a side note to Mr. Morreale, in case he or the Temptation executives read this board: would you please consider signing up for an account with us?  Aside from giving us the insider's perspective many of us enjoy hearing, perhaps you can convince Mr. Maurice that you are far more than Not Todd Newton.)
« Last Edit: September 05, 2007, 10:59:55 AM by dzinkin »

MikeK

  • Member
  • Posts: 5300
  • Martha!
Entertainment Weekly profile on Temptation
« Reply #5 on: September 05, 2007, 01:17:01 PM »
[quote name=\'dzinkin\' post=\'162790\' date=\'Sep 5 2007, 09:02 AM\']I have absolutely no reason to believe that Todd Newton is anything but a professional and an all-around nice guy; everything I've seen and heard — from seeing him at work, from people like Randy West who have worked with him, and from others like Mike Klauss who have merely met him briefly — suggests exactly that.[/quote]
Yes.  Todd Newton's a nice guy.

/Not in the same way as that Pat O'Brien fellow.

BrandonFG

  • Member
  • Posts: 18600
Entertainment Weekly profile on Temptation
« Reply #6 on: September 05, 2007, 01:21:34 PM »
[quote name=\'BMaurice06\' post=\'162768\' date=\'Sep 5 2007, 02:37 AM\']
But I still have issues with a spike-word-styled Fame Game, the pop-culture questions, and the home-shopping crossovers (remember Bargain Hunters with Peter Tomarken?); IMHO Fremantle would have been way much better off preserving most of the elements of the classic "Grundy format" than doing it their own way.
[/quote]
How about Chip Clips and Double Whammies?

You act like the 80s version was the most solid show in the world, and this is from someone who holds the show as one of his Top 10 in the Top 50 list he sent Michi-Matt. The show was called "$ale of the Century" for a reason, mainly because of the concept of contestants buying prizes at reduced prices. The questions took a backseat to the actually "Sale" gimmick, evidence by the most basic Q&A format you can think of. I love the show to this day (fond childhood memory), but I won't deny the fact that the lower-prices gimmick dressed up a very dry format idea. Quite honestly, how the contestants earn their purchase money is quite irrelevant; as long as I'm seeing a $900 appliance offered for $12+a possible small cash bonus, I'm happy.

Or maybe you would've liked that Robin Leach pilot that didn't even have Instant Bargains?

Stop whining about small issues, and just watch the show.

/Tonight at 8, on MyNetworkTV!
//Now, in over 75 homes!!!
"It wasn't like this on Tic Tac Dough...Wink never gave a damn!"

BMaurice06

  • Guest
Entertainment Weekly profile on Temptation
« Reply #7 on: September 05, 2007, 02:21:01 PM »
[quote name=\'dzinkin\' post=\'162777\' date=\'Sep 5 2007, 07:20 AM\']
This was posted four days ago -- in a thread that you started, I might add.
[/quote]


Sorry.  I guess I don't keep up with this forum as much as I think I do.

BMaurice06

  • Guest
Entertainment Weekly profile on Temptation
« Reply #8 on: September 05, 2007, 02:40:42 PM »
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'162809\' date=\'Sep 5 2007, 01:21 PM\']
[quote name=\'BMaurice06\' post=\'162768\' date=\'Sep 5 2007, 02:37 AM\']
But I still have issues with a spike-word-styled Fame Game, the pop-culture questions, and the home-shopping crossovers (remember Bargain Hunters with Peter Tomarken?); IMHO Fremantle would have been way much better off preserving most of the elements of the classic "Grundy format" than doing it their own way.
[/quote]
How about Chip Clips and Double Whammies?

You act like the 80s version was the most solid show in the world, and this is from someone who holds the show as one of his Top 10 in the Top 50 list he sent Michi-Matt. The show was called "$ale of the Century" for a reason, mainly because of the concept of contestants buying prizes at reduced prices. The questions took a backseat to the actually "Sale" gimmick, evidence by the most basic Q&A format you can think of. I love the show to this day (fond childhood memory), but I won't deny the fact that the lower-prices gimmick dressed up a very dry format idea. Quite honestly, how the contestants earn their purchase money is quite irrelevant; as long as I'm seeing a $900 appliance offered for $12+a possible small cash bonus, I'm happy.

Or maybe you would've liked that Robin Leach pilot that didn't even have Instant Bargains?

Stop whining about small issues, and just watch the show.

/Tonight at 8, on MyNetworkTV!
//Now, in over 75 homes!!!
[/quote]

Let me clear some thing up:

1.  I thought the 80s version was great, but not exactly the most solid in the world; that title I think belongs to Aussie Sale during the Tony Barber era.  I just would have liked it more if the producer of Temptation came up with much harder material than just seemingly easy pop-culture questions.
2.  I was not disparaging the fact that the Instant Bargain format; just merely believing that by putting equal emphasis on both the Q&A and prizes much as they do on Aussie Temptation the show would be perfect.
3.  No, I have not see the Robin Leach pilot and if I did I wouldn't have liked it at all because it didn't have the Instant Bargains.
4.  Chip Clips were bad and Double Whammies were good IMO.

Having said all of this, for you I will check out the preview and give Rossi a chance because he's a rookie.

dzinkin

  • Guest
Entertainment Weekly profile on Temptation
« Reply #9 on: September 05, 2007, 03:38:34 PM »
[quote name=\'BMaurice06\' post=\'162820\' date=\'Sep 5 2007, 02:40 PM\']
I just would have liked it more if the producer of Temptation came up with much harder material than just seemingly easy pop-culture questions.
[/quote]
How in the world do you know how hard the material is until you've seen the show?  And I might add that the original SotC wasn't exactly Jeopardy! or Who Wants to Be a Millionaire in terms of difficulty of the material, since that wasn't the focus.

Quote
No, I have not see the Robin Leach pilot and if I did I wouldn't have liked it at all because it didn't have the Instant Bargains.
And how do you know you wouldn't have liked it anyway?

Quote
Having said all of this, for you I will check out the preview and give Rossi a chance because he's a rookie.
How about this: instead of checking it out for Brandon's sake (I'm sure he wouldn't lose sleep if you didn't watch it, actually), how about checking it out for yourself so that, for once, you can have an informed opinion instead of "I don't like it because Todd Newton's not the host and it's not exactly the same as it always was"?

I'm reminded of Nathan Hantz's "review" of Whammy! The All-New Press Your Luck.  Of course, while his "it's not exactly like the original PYL in every detail so it sucks" rant was pure dreck, at least Nathan had the courtesy to watch the damned show first before posting about how much he thought it sucked.

Neumms

  • Member
  • Posts: 2459
Entertainment Weekly profile on Temptation
« Reply #10 on: September 05, 2007, 05:31:55 PM »
But boy, those Double Whammies sure were corkers, weren't they? Ha, ha, ha, ha! I'm still laughing! Real feathers!

BrandonFG

  • Member
  • Posts: 18600
Entertainment Weekly profile on Temptation
« Reply #11 on: September 05, 2007, 06:03:38 PM »
[quote name=\'BMaurice06\' post=\'162820\' date=\'Sep 5 2007, 02:40 PM\']
Let me clear some thing up:

1.  I thought the 80s version was great, but not exactly the most solid in the world; that title I think belongs to Aussie Sale during the Tony Barber era.  I just would have liked it more if the producer of Temptation came up with much harder material than just seemingly easy pop-culture questions.
2.  I was not disparaging the fact that the Instant Bargain format; just merely believing that by putting equal emphasis on both the Q&A and prizes much as they do on Aussie Temptation the show would be perfect.
3.  No, I have not see the Robin Leach pilot and if I did I wouldn't have liked it at all because it didn't have the Instant Bargains.
4.  Chip Clips were bad and Double Whammies were good IMO.

Having said all of this, for you I will check out the preview and give Rossi a chance because he's a rookie.
[/quote]
1. Outside of a few Speed Round clips, I've never seen the Aussie shows. Other than the theme, and the set (which the US borrowed from), what was different?
2. Again, the Q&A is irrelevant to the format. The basic structure of $ale/Temptation is to give correct answers to build money, so you can buy a reduced prize. It doesn't matter if they answer questions, or do the word game their going for. As long as I'm seeing the contestants earn the money to buy something, I'm cool.
3. Well...okay.
4. Well.........okay?

Oh, and like Dave said, please don't watch the show for me. You could chuck your TV out the window for all I care...watch the show for yourself.

/MyNetworkTV
//8 pm
///now up to 137 households!!!
« Last Edit: September 05, 2007, 06:04:36 PM by fostergray82 »
"It wasn't like this on Tic Tac Dough...Wink never gave a damn!"

clemon79

  • Member
  • Posts: 27694
  • Director of Suck Consolidation
Entertainment Weekly profile on Temptation
« Reply #12 on: September 05, 2007, 06:52:27 PM »
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'162849\' date=\'Sep 5 2007, 03:03 PM\']
1. Outside of a few Speed Round clips, I've never seen the Aussie shows. Other than the theme, and the set (which the US borrowed from), what was different?
[/quote]
There are a couple of in-game mini-Speed-Rounds called Sprint Rounds, there are a couple of new weird Fame Game cards (the Burglar and the Turbo, if I remember rightly...Travis watches it more than I do and could probably tell us if some more stuff has been added), and Instant Cash has been replaced by the Temptation Vault (a random amount between $1 and...$5,000), and (again, when I was watching) cost a flat $10 to play.

Other'n that, it's straight Sale.

////138
/////wonders if his TV even knows HOW to tune to MyNetwork
« Last Edit: September 05, 2007, 06:52:39 PM by clemon79 »
Chris Lemon, King Fool, Director of Suck Consolidation
http://fredsmythe.com
Email: clemon79@outlook.com  |  Skype: FredSmythe

tpirfan28

  • Member
  • Posts: 2771
Entertainment Weekly profile on Temptation
« Reply #13 on: September 05, 2007, 06:55:04 PM »
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'162853\' date=\'Sep 5 2007, 06:52 PM\']
...and Instant Cash has been replaced by the Temptation Vault (a random amount between $1 and...$5,000), and (again, when I was watching) cost a flat $10 to play.
[/quote]The clip on YouTube of day 1 said it was the lead (i.e. if ahead by $12, then it cost $12).

/still 138

EDIT: Obviously things have changed since day 1.  Look down one post.
« Last Edit: September 05, 2007, 06:58:38 PM by tpirfan28 »
When you're at the grocery game and you hear the beep, think of all the fun you could have at "Crazy Rachel's Checkout Counter!"

MikeK

  • Member
  • Posts: 5300
  • Martha!
Entertainment Weekly profile on Temptation
« Reply #14 on: September 05, 2007, 06:57:04 PM »
I'll fill in the gaps even though I'm not Travis.

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'162853\' date=\'Sep 5 2007, 06:52 PM\']
There are a couple of in-game mini-Speed-Rounds called Sprint Rounds, there are a couple of new weird Fame Game cards (the Burglar and the Turbo, if I remember rightly...[/quote]
And the Lock Out, which is used immediately to lock one person of the holder's choice for 3 questions.

Quote
and Instant Cash has been replaced by the Temptation Vault (a random amount between $1 and...$5,000), and (again, when I was watching) cost a flat $10 to play.
Up to AUS$10,000; and it costs $15 to play.

/Up to 141.
//Hello Topeka!
« Last Edit: September 05, 2007, 06:57:36 PM by MikeK »