Game Shows in the 1950s and 1960s

[Neumms]

One reason they may have been so popular in the 50s is that people played and liked parlor games and card games. Ladies had bridge club, board games filled living room shelves. It would follow that they'd be interested in games in general. They'd have skills and knowledge and temperment to play along with good, challenging games. Now people watch violent DVDs in their spare time.

Of course, it may have helped their popularity that they were rigged. "Twenty One" had lots of compelling drama until they were caught.

[tommycharles]

[quote name=\'CSUPYLFAN\' date=\'Oct 17 2003, 05:20 PM\'] Matt,

Thanks!  Yes, as a fan both of early television and game shows, I do forget that an "average" (non-media fan) college student may have never seen a small black and white TV or can't relate to how television was unlike anything before, even radio or film.  At the present, I can't think of anything that had quite the novelty since (although I suppose arguments could be made for the Internet...).


Mike,

Colorado State University  =)  One of our own won Jeopardy! today (10/17).

I hope you all don't mind if I pose another question: Do you think another reason game shows were so closely followed (especially the quiz shows) was because of some of the same reasons reality TV is followed today, or was it primarily the novelty of TV?  Or something else?

Thanks for all your help! [/quote]
 Well ain't that something.

Thomas Bullock - freshman at Colorado State.

Anyhow - yeah, I think that in the early days, the reason VanDoren/Stempel, etc. were followed each and every Monday night was because of their personalities. It's just down to good contestant selection. The same reason Survivor would perish if they had bad constestant coordinators. It's all casting, the same way one would get cast in a sitcom.

Oh, and as far as the "novelty" thing goes, I (not having been around at the time) I would guess that it had a lot to do with it, plus the idea that there were, when it came down to it, only two other options of something to watch. Your odds of getting an audience were much better.

[chris319]

Now people watch violent DVDs in their spare time.

Then they elect the stars of those violent movies to high office, no matter how unqualified.

[MikeK]

[quote name=\'CSUPYLFAN\' date=\'Oct 17 2003, 06:20 PM\'] Mike,

Colorado State University  =)  One of our own won Jeopardy! today (10/17). [/quote]
 Darn, I thought you went to the REAL CSU--Cleveland State University.  Go Vikings!

ObGS:  One of our own was on an ep. of Weakest Link during the first season's college week and won. :-)

[mmb5]

[quote name=\'CSUPYLFAN\' date=\'Oct 17 2003, 05:20 PM\'] Colorado State University  =)  One of our own won Jeopardy! today (10/17).

 [/quote]
 You're not the only CSU graduate student named Mike here.


--Mike (CSU '93)

Now, if you're in the business school, this is getting really creepy.

[The Ol' Guy]

There were a lot of things about the early tv days that made them so much fun. Among them, there actually were censors, which forced writers and producers to build shows on character development and wit. So much of early tv was little better
than filmed radio, and even though so many people our age love to gush about "The Golden Age of.."radio, tv, movies, whatever, it was just like it is today. For every great show, there were two dozen bland, forgettable programs that only excite hard-core fans (admittedly, I'm one of them). One of the key things in early TV was that sponsors back then ruled the roost - network time was purchased by sponsors and their advertising agencies, and they had a lot of say as to what got on. Obviously, everybody wanted a bargain - so one of the reasons so many prime time game and quiz shows appeared is that they were economical to produce. A lot of them were live. Build a set, rent a host, and you have a show. Many were cheap summer replacements - a few of them hitting paydirt, like The $64,000 Question. But a good- or even fair- tv game show could get your sponsor message to millions (especially in pre-cable days) for so much less than a live or filmed drama or comedy. If a daytime show did well, bring it to night time. I think it was CBS in the 60s that started the trend of claiming back it's air time and selling it's commercial positions to as many sponsors as wanted on board.

Speaking of one of the thoughts above, perhaps we could build a thread on it by itself - many of the great game shows could have been around even without television ever being devised - Mark Goodson, Dan Enright, Ralph Edwards, Ed Wolf and several others started in radio - I have a feeling that the core of most good solid game shows is "could you just listen to it and play along?" I'd say about 80% of G-T's biggest tv hits would have worked on radio. Now let's not debate the obvious, like Concentration, Wheel, Squares, and Video Village - those were and remain the perfect TV games. In one case, What's My Line started on tv, then a radio version followed later. I'm curious as to your thoughts on the idea as to what makes a good game format successful.