Author Topic: Blockbusters 1987 (Read 6209 times)

Pyramid20000 · « **on:** May 09, 2010, 04:51:37 PM »

why was this version so short how come it only lasted 17 week i thouhjt the format was great i thought Bill Rafferty did a great job as host why did this happen?

Vahan_Nisanian · « **Reply #1 on:** May 09, 2010, 04:53:39 PM »

Two words: Classic Concentration.

snowpeck · « **Reply #2 on:** May 09, 2010, 05:06:04 PM »

Two more words: low ratings.

Dbacksfan12 · « **Reply #3 on:** May 09, 2010, 05:21:38 PM »

did joe nammath host family fued pilot?

Lirodon · « **Reply #4 on:** May 09, 2010, 05:48:20 PM »

[quote name=\'Modor\' post=\'240568\' date=\'May 9 2010, 04:21 PM\']did joe nammath host family fued pilot?[/quote]

no bull calen did

SRIV94 · « **Reply #5 on:** May 09, 2010, 06:22:51 PM »

[quote name=\'Lirodon\' post=\'240572\' date=\'May 9 2010, 04:48 PM\'][quote name=\'Modor\' post=\'240568\' date=\'May 9 2010, 04:21 PM\']did joe nammath host family fued pilot?[/quote]

no bull calen did
[/quote]
thats not funi

/nor was this

William_S. · « **Reply #6 on:** May 10, 2010, 02:40:38 PM »

Didn't we establish this already?

/BTW Ch.... No not doing it!

Steve Gavazzi · « **Reply #7 on:** May 10, 2010, 08:37:46 PM »

[quote name=\'Pyramid20000\' post=\'240564\' date=\'May 9 2010, 04:51 PM\']why was this version so short how come it only lasted 17 week i thouhjt the format was great i thought Bill Rafferty did a great job as host why did this happen?[/quote]
They wanted to piss you off.

BrandonFG · « **Reply #8 on:** May 10, 2010, 09:16:48 PM »

[quote name=\'Pyramid20000\' post=\'240564\' date=\'May 9 2010, 04:51 PM\']why was this version so short how come it only lasted 17 week i thouhjt the format was great i thought Bill Rafferty did a great job as host why did this happen?[/quote]
Serious answer: I think a lot of it was because Classic Concentration wasn't ready and was pushed back to May.

Silly answer: Because.

Jimmy Owen · « **Reply #9 on:** May 10, 2010, 09:49:12 PM »

Wish we could ask Steve Ryan, since he was involved with both shows to a degree. Maybe he could put an end to the speculation.

chris319 · « **Reply #10 on:** May 10, 2010, 10:19:45 PM »

Think about it: Why would a network mount another show to act as filler until another show is "ready"? Right now we know As the World Turns is on the chopping block. Why would a network go to the trouble and expense of putting on a game show such as "The Rice Is Fried" or whatever for six weeks until the real replacement is "ready"? Why not just keep ATWT on the air for six more weeks and not bother with an interim filler show?

Jimmy Owen · « **Reply #11 on:** May 10, 2010, 11:15:41 PM »

[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'240624\' date=\'May 10 2010, 10:19 PM\']Think about it: Why would a network mount another show to act as filler until another show is "ready"? Right now we know As the World Turns is on the chopping block. Why would a network go to the trouble and expense of putting on a game show such as "The Rice Is Fried" or whatever for six weeks until the real replacement is "ready"? Why not just keep ATWT on the air for six more weeks and not bother with an interim filler show?[/quote]
The only plausible reason is that paying all those actors and writers of a lame duck soap is quite costly compared to mounting a game show. Of course, with the salaries of some of these "game show hosts" nowadays, maybe not. Dick Clark had mentioned on a radio interview that the "Scattergories" show (and it can be inferred the Scrabble revival) was only there to fill time between "Santa Barbara" and "John & Leeza"

tyshaun1 · « **Reply #12 on:** May 10, 2010, 11:23:15 PM »

[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'240624\' date=\'May 10 2010, 10:19 PM\']Think about it: Why would a network mount another show to act as filler until another show is "ready"? Right now we know As the World Turns is on the chopping block. Why would a network go to the trouble and expense of putting on a game show such as "The Rice Is Fried" or whatever for six weeks until the real replacement is "ready"? Why not just keep ATWT on the air for six more weeks and not bother with an interim filler show?[/quote]
Besides, there have been plenty of examples of short-lived shows airing slightly more than 13 or 26 weeks, such as Blockbusters '87 which was getting creamed up against Card Sharks by the way, presumably because its replacement needed a couple extra weeks of prep time. Time Machine aired 16 weeks, Second Chance aired 19, Hot Potato aired 23 weeks, etc.

Tyshaun

tyshaun1 · « **Reply #13 on:** May 10, 2010, 11:25:29 PM »

[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'240626\' date=\'May 10 2010, 11:15 PM\']Dick Clark had mentioned on a radio interview that the "Scattergories" show (and it can be inferred the Scrabble revival) was only there to fill time between "Santa Barbara" and "John & Leeza"[/quote]

I also believe that's the excuse a lot of producers give when their show produced lousy ratings.

Tyshaun

chris319 · « **Reply #14 on:** May 11, 2010, 02:10:12 PM »

Quote

The only plausible reason is that paying all those actors and writers of a lame duck soap is quite costly compared to mounting a game show.

Do you know how much it costs to mount a game show? Between the set and the music alone it ain't cheap, and no game show packager is likely to agree to an initial cycle of less than 13 weeks. Cheaper to keep the soap going and write some of the characters out of the story arc.

Quote

I also believe that's the excuse a lot of producers give when their show produced lousy ratings.

Far more likely.