Author Topic: Millionaire "Conspiracy Theory"? (Read 6293 times)

Stevini18 · « **on:** May 11, 2009, 04:39:02 PM »

Since the new auditions for Millionaire in NY just opened up - I have to ask a question and throw up a scenario to the former auditionees/contestants. BTW, I am in the field of video production and know a little bit about what "sells" and how to make a profitable show. Here's my thoughts (and the thoughts of all my co-workers, who have all taken the test and "failed"):

When Millionaire first started - you had to be smart. REALLY smart. You had to answer the Fastest Finger questions to get on the show. And they wound up giving out a good amount of cash.

Fast-forward to the Meredith version of the show. You now have to take an audition test, "pass" the test, then get interviewed twice to see if you're interesting enough to be on the show. One would think that if you "passed" the test, it means you got 100% (or damn near close) of the questions correct. YET EVERY DAY, when we watch the show in our office - there i someone we deem a "50%er" (fifty percenter)...someone who could not have possibly gotten all the questions on the test correct because their answers on the show and lack of general knowledge are just mind-blowingly stupid. How is it possible to not even get to $1000 yet pass that test? The test I took last year (and the ones my co-workers took) had some pretty hard questions on them. Questions perhaps the general public wouldn't know. Questions only a supremely cultured citizen or history buff would know. And if you know those answers, you SHOULD be able to tell Meredith how many feet are in 50 yards.

Maybe it's vain - but we all thought perhaps we were too smart for the test. We had gotten too many questions right - that's why we weren't chosen by the ScanTron machine. Is this too far off base? I say no. I had a slight suspicion about this after the test, so I asked the lady in charge if you really had to get 100% on the test to go to the interview stage. She said "we have our number". I said, "so it's not 100 then?". Her response was "I can't give you any more information other than we have our number". So what's the magic number? 50%? 30%? 70%?

This also makes sense from a Producer's standpoint. Regis version of the show - smart contestants - boring show - give out lots of money. Meredith version - dumber contestants (or contestants who lie on their tests to seem dumber so they'll get on) - more interesting show (people at home saying "how could they NOT know that!!???") - give out less money (because the contestants are only making it to roughly $25,000 max).

So, what are YOUR thoughts? Is this "conspiracy theory" based on nothing more than our jealousy that we're not on the show? Or did the format change allow better cash-flow for the show and ensure that the really smart people don't get through that easily?

And what are your suggestions to conquering the test this year?

J.R. · « **Reply #1 on:** May 11, 2009, 05:07:30 PM »

Keep in mind the syndie show doesn't have quite the same generous budget as the network version had. Sometimes, they simply can't AFFORD gigantic winners all the time.

I personally like the fact $25,000+ is more of a challenge, makes for some serious drama when it happens. Strange as it might sound, in the later months of the network show, it was honestly boring seeing everyone constantly winning $125,000 on semi-easy questions. (Sometimes it's nice to see people being content with amounts like "just" $8000)

I don't see a "conspiracy" here, sorry. I'll leave the more snarkier replies to my forum brothers/sisters.

Matt Ottinger · « **Reply #2 on:** May 11, 2009, 05:21:54 PM »

I think our newcomer makes an excellent point, I just wouldn't go so far as to call it a "conspiracy". Not every show can be like Jeopardy, and I think if you're making a syndicated show, with the limited budget that suggests, and you have a game where it's just the player versus the questions, you work yourself into a pretty serious corner pretty quickly if you're casting the people who do the best on your test.

Just guessing here, but my gut instinct is that with Jeopardy, how well you did on the test is most important, and how interesting you are as a contestant comes second. We really don't get much of a feel for who the Jeopardy players are, and the appeal of the game is the wealth of material. But for Millionaire, I'm guessing those criteria are reversed. They're looking for interesting people first, and the result of the test is a less important factor. I don't think they automatically rule out anybody who did "too well" on the test, but I do believe that the test itself is not what qualifies you, it's how you come across to the contestant coordinator.

clemon79 · « **Reply #3 on:** May 11, 2009, 05:21:58 PM »

[quote name=\'Stevini18\' post=\'215413\' date=\'May 11 2009, 01:39 PM\']One would think that if you "passed" the test, it means you got 100% (or damn near close) of the questions correct.[/quote]
I have no idea why "one would think" that.

Quote

How is it possible to not even get to $1000 yet pass that test?

Ever been under pressure?

Quote

Maybe it's vain - but we all thought perhaps we were too smart for the test. We had gotten too many questions right.

If that's what helps you sleep at night, by all means, go with that.

Quote

Is this too far off base? I say no.

You'd be wrong.

Quote

Is this "conspiracy theory" based on nothing more than our jealousy that we're not on the show?

Yes. (Well, there might be more than that, but it sure as hell looks like a indicator.)

Quote

And what are your suggestions to conquering the test this year?

Attitude adjustment, for starters.

clemon79 · « **Reply #4 on:** May 11, 2009, 05:29:13 PM »

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'215415\' date=\'May 11 2009, 02:21 PM\']I think our newcomer makes an excellent point, I just wouldn't go so far as to call it a "conspiracy".[/quote]
I don't agree. He seems to be representing like the personality part of contestant casting wasn't even an issue here. (And maybe it wasn't, but complaining that he did too well on the test sure raises a red flag there.) If you'll recall, one of our more minimally-exceptional members had his mom tell him exactly the same thing when he failed to get on a game show.

He's also representing like "we have a number" means that people who score ABOVE said number are disqualified. Which you know is not the case. (Wasn't there a Twilight Zone where kids were offed who scored higher than a certain number on a standardized test?)

Quote

But for Millionaire, I'm guessing those criteria are reversed. They're looking for interesting people first, and the result of the test is a less important factor.

This is hardly unique to Millionaire. I would suggest that if Jeopardy! does focus on test results over personality, they're by far the exception to the rule.

tomobrien · « **Reply #5 on:** May 11, 2009, 05:30:24 PM »

Your performance on an audition does not necessarily correlate to what your performance would be in the Hot Seat. No matter how prepared you are, no matter how smart you may be, it all changes when you're sitting there across from Meredith or Regis. Once the lights go up, the music starts, and the people start applauding, you're frankly lucky if you can remember your own name.

Ian Wallis · « **Reply #6 on:** May 11, 2009, 05:41:07 PM »

To be honest, I didn't find the Regis version of the show boring at all. In fact, there was a certain magic about it which seems missing from the Merideth version. Having said that, I do think the questions at times were way too easy and they gave away too much money.

I kind of liked the phone auditions because it gave you the sense that anybody out there could be in the Hot Seat. Now, with having to pass a test and impress the contestant co-ordinator, it likely leaves a lot of us "average" folk out.

Peter Sarrett · « **Reply #7 on:** May 11, 2009, 05:42:21 PM »

When I auditioned for Millionaire, a friend who had appeared on Jeopardy! went with me. We both passed the test. I got onto the show, he did not. Draw from that what conclusions you may.

A LOT of people passed the test in my group-- of the 200 or so in the room, anywhere from 12-20 passed (can't remember the exact number). And there were at least 2 more groups auditioning later that day. From that, it was obvious to me that the test was just a pre-screen, and the real deciding factor was the questionaire and meet-and-greet afterward. So while lots of the passers filled out their questionaire quickly and moved on to the photo and interview, I took a lot more time and tried to supply answers that would make me stand out and provide interesting conversational hooks. That effort paid off. When I met with the associate producer, he read through my questionaire and, after about 2 minutes of conversation, said he was surprised that I hadn't been on the show already, that I seemed like a great contestant.

To the original poster: if you weren't chosen by the Scantron, you didn't answer enough questions correctly. If you got every question right, they'd absolutely move you on to the next stage of the audition. But you don't need to get 100%. I know I didn't.

As to not knowing how many feet are in 50 yards... I'll just say that for many people, perhaps most people, the game is very different when you're there, in the hot seat, in the studio, under the lights, in front of the cameras and the audience with real money on the line. You second-guess your own name.

Jimmy Owen · « **Reply #8 on:** May 11, 2009, 05:46:46 PM »

Price Is Right is the same way. Instead of picking people who would know about the cost of things, they pick college kids who furnish their dorms with milk crates and eat in a cafeteria. How could a such contestant possibly know anything about the price of a can of tomatoes much less the cost of an armoire?

Stevini18 · « **Reply #9 on:** May 11, 2009, 06:00:59 PM »

Wow. A LOT of flamers out there. Seems like everyone's bashing me about personality and that there's two parts to the audition process, etc etc. I KNOW THAT. But getting past the test to the interview part is what I was posting about. Obviously, if you get to the interview part, they want you to be charismatic, have a story - something that would make for good TV. If you read my OP, you'd see that I said I work in the TV production world. I know what "sells". So STFU with the bashing of the interview process. I NEVER asked about how to be a good interview candidate, or what to do when I got to that stage.

ALL I WAS ASKING (and surmising about) is if you had to get 100% on the test to pass. Because it seems - from the majority of the contestants that make it on the show - nervous or not - that they simply could not have scored higher than maybe a 70 on the test. So flame on about attitude adjustments or whatever else you wanna throw at me. But half the people that replied to this thread confirmed my suspicions that you don't have to score 100% on the test to "pass."

And BTW, thanks to those who bashed me. Nice welcome to the forum I got... Maybe someone who averages over 2900 posts a year on a forum about game shows should examine their own life before commenting so harshly about someone else's.

BrandonFG · « **Reply #10 on:** May 11, 2009, 06:12:02 PM »

[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' post=\'215419\' date=\'May 11 2009, 05:41 PM\']I kind of liked the phone auditions because it gave you the sense that anybody out there could be in the Hot Seat. Now, with having to pass a test and impress the contestant co-ordinator, it likely leaves a lot of us "average" folk out.[/quote]
I think that's the charm that's missing from the show, along with the Fastest Finger. It allowed a better cross-section of contestants, and although there was a bit of controversy about the lack of minorities and women in the Hot Seat, it still had more of an "everyman" feel.

I like that the daytime version still has a very good variety of contestants, but it still misses a bit of the charm.

TLEberle · « **Reply #11 on:** May 11, 2009, 09:01:28 PM »

[quote name=\'Stevini18\' post=\'215413\' date=\'May 11 2009, 01:39 PM\']And what are your suggestions to conquering the test this year?[/quote]For starters, you should project the aura of "How cool! This game is so fun that I'm taking a day/weekend off to try out for it! And it would be awesome to get on, even if I don't win anything, because the experience will be one to share with my friends and family for generations.

[quote name=\'Peter Sarrett\' post=\'215420\' date=\'May 11 2009, 02:42 PM\']From that, it was obvious to me that the test was just a pre-screen, and the real deciding factor was the questionaire and meet-and-greet afterward. So while lots of the passers filled out their questionaire quickly and moved on to the photo and interview, I took a lot more time and tried to supply answers that would make me stand out and provide interesting conversational hooks. That effort paid off. When I met with the associate producer, he read through my questionaire and, after about 2 minutes of conversation, said he was surprised that I hadn't been on the show already, that I seemed like a great contestant.[/quote]Since I whiffed on the quiz portion, I didn't even get to that part, but the very idea of coming up with five conversation thumbnails that sound interesting but don't make me sound bizarre, creepy or a total dork is a daunting task.

That's the thing. The producers don't want "normal." Sure, they want people who are just like your neighbors or your work-mates, but they want people with interesting stories to tell also.

[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'215428\' date=\'May 11 2009, 03:12 PM\']I kind of liked the phone auditions because it gave you the sense that anybody out there could be in the Hot Seat. Now, with having to pass a test and impress the contestant co-ordinator, it likely leaves a lot of us "average" folk out.[/quote]But that's the rub: phone game gives you one breed of contestant, audition gives you another, with not a whole lot of overlap. The producers picked what they wanted, for better or worse-er.

PYLdude · « **Reply #12 on:** May 12, 2009, 12:14:08 AM »

[quote name=\'Stevini18\' post=\'215413\' date=\'May 11 2009, 03:39 PM\']Maybe it's vain - but we all thought perhaps we were too smart for the test. We had gotten too many questions right - that's why we weren't chosen by the ScanTron machine. Is this too far off base? I say no. I had a slight suspicion about this after the test, so I asked the lady in charge if you really had to get 100% on the test to go to the interview stage. She said "we have our number". I said, "so it's not 100 then?". Her response was "I can't give you any more information other than we have our number". So what's the magic number? 50%? 30%? 70%?[/quote]

You know, resorting to bullshit like that is a pretty clear reason why you didn't get through.

(Pardon my language, but as someone who's taken said test twice- AND PASSED twice- that offended me a lot.)

Matt Ottinger · « **Reply #13 on:** May 12, 2009, 01:24:52 AM »

[quote name=\'Stevini18\' post=\'215426\' date=\'May 11 2009, 06:00 PM\']Wow. A LOT of flamers out there.[/quote]
I'm sorry, but are we reading the same thread? I see two people who could be accused of "bashing" you, and I see you taking a shot right back at one of them. Everybody else seemed to be offering pretty reasonable, straightforward assessments. I really don't see this LOT of flames you're talking about.

clemon79 · « **Reply #14 on:** May 12, 2009, 01:41:45 AM »

[quote name=\'Stevini18\' post=\'215426\' date=\'May 11 2009, 03:00 PM\']But half the people that replied to this thread confirmed my suspicions that you don't have to score 100% on the test to "pass."[/quote]
Except you didn't say that. Your original rant was implying that you could "fail" the test by scoring OVER a certain amount and that you and your friends failed because you were Far Too S-M-R-T. Which is flat out false. You'll get no argument from anyone here that Some Number Less Than 100% is a passing score on ANY game show exam. Not even the Jeopardy! test requires you to get every answer right.

So, um, pick one.