Marshall Hollywood Squares question

[Vahan_Nisanian]

I remember the narrator of the True Hollywood Story episode of Hollywood Squares saying that when GSN launched the Marshall version in 2002, the results from viewers were positive. So what happened? Why did they go from positive to negative?

[BrandonFG]

[quote name=\'gameshowlover87\' post=\'246287\' date=\'Aug 23 2010, 08:32 PM\']I remember the narrator of the True Hollywood Story episode of Hollywood Squares saying that when GSN launched the Marshall version in 2002, the results from viewers were positive. So what happened? Why did they go from positive to negative?[/quote]
IIRC the ratings were initially strong, but trailed off. I think a lot of it was because the show was pretty dry, esp. when Bergeron's version was still new in syndication (can't remember if it aired on GSN at that point). I wonder if by "viewers" they meant ATGS.

[TLEberle]

2002 would have been year five or six for H2, I think.

[SRIV94]

[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'246288\' date=\'Aug 23 2010, 07:44 PM\'][quote name=\'gameshowlover87\' post=\'246287\' date=\'Aug 23 2010, 08:32 PM\']I remember the narrator of the True Hollywood Story episode of Hollywood Squares saying that when GSN launched the Marshall version in 2002, the results from viewers were positive. So what happened? Why did they go from positive to negative?[/quote]
IIRC the ratings were initially strong, but trailed off. I think a lot of it was because the show was pretty dry, esp. when Bergeron's version was still new in syndication (can't remember if it aired on GSN at that point). I wonder if by "viewers" they meant ATGS.
[/quote]
Wasn't another part that they only decided to show about 150 episodes (all of which were non-straddling NBC prime time or syndicated episodes), and with several episodes showing per day they pretty much blew through what they were going to air fairly quickly?

/4200 strong.
//No, I said "4200," not "420."

[BrandonFG]

[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'246292\' date=\'Aug 23 2010, 09:49 PM\']2002 would have been year five or six for H2, I think.[/quote]
Season five.

[Matt Ottinger]

Despite its title, I'm also not sure I'd trust True Hollywood Story to have every vague platitude referenced and vetted.  Yes, of course, a lot of us classics fans were happy to see it, but my understanding was that the ratings were never particularly good, certainly not good enough to spend a lot of money making transfers of a lot of new ones.

[Neumms]

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'246312\' date=\'Aug 23 2010, 11:43 PM\']Despite its title, I'm also not sure I'd trust True Hollywood Story to have every vague platitude referenced and vetted.  Yes, of course, a lot of us classics fans were happy to see it, but my understanding was that the ratings were never particularly good, certainly not good enough to spend a lot of money making transfers of a lot of new ones.[/quote]

I don't disagree, but I wouldn't be shocked if ratings started out good and fell off.

It shocks me how slow it feels, even though they fit way more games in. Granted, almost everything was slower back then, and I wouldn't want to hear Jan Murray ramble on any longer, but Peter might have kept too tight a rein on things. There was too little spontaneity. If a couple stars did josh back and forth, Peter put a quick stop to it.

And nothing against Kenny Williams, but the $3500 worth of prize description for two or even three Secret Square games didn't help.

[Neumms]

DVDs would be awesome for this. Hell, Guthy-Renker could gin up a couple of infomercials for it with the gang who does the Dean Martin ones. And they wouldn't necessarily have to weed out the ethnic jokes GSN had to.

[Ian Wallis]

It shocks me how slow it feels, even though they fit way more games in. Granted, almost everything was slower back then, and I wouldn't want to hear Jan Murray ramble on any longer, but Peter might have kept too tight a rein on things. There was too little spontaneity. If a couple stars did josh back and forth, Peter put a quick stop to it.

And nothing against Kenny Williams, but the $3500 worth of prize description for two or even three Secret Square games didn't help.

As much as I enjoyed the show when growing up, when seeing all these episodes on GSN again it just didn't seem quite the same for some reason.  As others have said, I think with the craziness of the newer versions this seemed kind of tame by comparison.

I didn't mind Kenny's three Secret Square prize readings.  They got a good number of games in back then despite all the prize descriptions - that's what having fewer commercials will do!

Looking back, I almost wonder if Davidson's version might have gotten better ratings on GSN.

[Dbacksfan12]

[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' post=\'246337\' date=\'Aug 24 2010, 11:49 AM\']Looking back, I almost wonder if Davidson's version might have gotten better ratings on GSN.[/quote]I'd have to think it would.  At least it would have had more recognizable names to the younger crowd...also, for people in that demographic, this version (at the time) would probably have been their first exposure to the show.

I always enjoyed it, even though I didn't "get it" back when it was on reruns on USA.

[BrandonFG]

[quote name=\'Modor\' post=\'246349\' date=\'Aug 24 2010, 04:54 PM\'][quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' post=\'246337\' date=\'Aug 24 2010, 11:49 AM\']Looking back, I almost wonder if Davidson's version might have gotten better ratings on GSN.[/quote]I'd have to think it would.  At least it would have had more recognizable names to the younger crowd...also, for people in that demographic, this version (at the time) would probably have been their first exposure to the show.

I always enjoyed it, even though I didn't "get it" back when it was on reruns on USA.
[/quote]
Agreed. In 2002, it was only about a decade or so removed from its USA reruns, and like Mark said, the key demos would've been more familiar with that version.

I now wonder if that could be part of the reason the 80s Pyramid last so long on GSN, compared to the $20K version, considering the 80s version got more exposure on USA up until the mid-90s...

[Casey]

[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'246350\' date=\'Aug 24 2010, 02:59 PM\']Agreed. In 2002, it was only about a decade or so removed from its USA reruns, and like Mark said, the key demos would've been more familiar with that version.

I now wonder if that could be part of the reason the 80s Pyramid last so long on GSN, compared to the $20K version, considering the 80s version got more exposure on USA up until the mid-90s...[/quote]
As a child of the 80s myself - Davidson's version is the first one I ever saw.  Going back to the original version - especially in the very early seasons, the show just seemed.... sedate.  It lacked a lot of the spontaneous fun that the later versions seemed to have.  I have wondered what Hollywood Squares would have been like with a host like Gene Rayburn.  Would it have had an atmosphere more like the later versions?  

As far as Pyramid goes - having seen both the 70s and 80s versions, the disconnect I've felt with Hollywood Squares doesn't hit me with Pyramid.  The 70s version is just as exciting to me as the 80s.  Perhaps even more so, as the audience seemed more into the game.

[GameShowGuru]

[quote name=\'isucgv\' post=\'246351\' date=\'Aug 24 2010, 06:10 PM\']As a child of the 80s myself - Davidson's version is the first one I ever saw.  Going back to the original version - especially in the very early seasons, the show just seemed.... sedate.  It lacked a lot of the spontaneous fun that the later versions seemed to have.  I have wondered what Hollywood Squares would have been like with a host like Gene Rayburn.  Would it have had an atmosphere more like the later versions?[/quote]

Speaking of Gene Rayburn I always felt that the Davidson Squares and Match Game '90 "flip-flopped" compared with their popular predecessors, in that Davidson Squares had the spontaneity that made Match Game '7X so popular, and Match Game '90 had the (relatively) sedateness that the Marshall Squares had.

It was the spontaneity of the Davidson Squares that really attracted me to HS as a whole, I had never cared for the Marshall version, between its humor being way too over my head for a single digit-aged tyke like me, and it being a much more calmer show compared to other daytime game shows that aired, it simply bored me.  With Davidson's Squares, between the spontaneity and Jm J. Bullock's freakout personality, I knew I would be in for a crazy half hour (that and the show fit my personality, in that I was a high energy teenager).  I never saw MG '90 when it aired, so I couldn't comment on that show at the time, so the comparison was made much later.

[Vahan_Nisanian]

I have to agree with some of the people here. Davidson's version probably would have had much better ratings on GSN than Marshall's. It also doesn't hurt that I have a soft spot for Davidson's version. Sure he wasn't the best host, but I enjoyed it nevertheless. And I'd much rather see most of the stars that were on his version, than most the ones on Bergeron's version.

Is there any explanation as to why GSN never showed Davidson's version? Did they try at one point to acquire it, but failed?

[Ian Wallis]

Is there any explanation as to why GSN never showed Davidson's version? Did they try at one point to acquire it, but failed?

Isn't it tied up in some legal red tape as to who currently owns that version?