Author Topic: Game Show Sets (Read 7614 times)

beatlefreak84 · « **on:** June 21, 2003, 08:54:31 PM »

Hello,

I thought I'd bring up a topic that I'm sure has been discussed before in different threads, but I think is worth bringing up again.

Thanks to GSN, we get to contrast old sets of the '50s and '60s with the neon sets of the '70s, the flashing-light sets of the '80s, and the dark sets of the '90s and 2000's. As I'm sure we've all noticed, most game show sets seem to be getting darker and darker with a bigger emphasis on big spotlights rather than rows of small flashing lights.

Now, my question is: Do you think this change has made game shows take on a whole, new appearance? Or is it just a technicality? I, personally, am of the opinion that a bright set conveys a lot more than a dark set, which is why I am particularly attracted to the PYL set (one of the brightest and flashiest I can think of). How about you?

Anthony

Jimmy Owen · « **Reply #1 on:** June 21, 2003, 09:21:10 PM »

I think it's a cyclical thing. Shows of the 50's like \"Twenty One,\" and \"64K Q\", had very dramatic lighting that was very close to what we have now. Eventually there will be a new phenom that will use primary colors of the 70's and everybody will want that kind of set design. The game is still the thing, and a good game will transend the set design.

DrBear · « **Reply #2 on:** June 21, 2003, 10:11:04 PM »

Actually, I don't believe game shows have scratched the surface of what they can do with video walls, virtual studios, and so on.

TheInquisitiveOne · « **Reply #3 on:** June 21, 2003, 10:32:50 PM »

I agree with Jimmy that it is a cyclical thing. Let's think about this for a minute. These dark sets can be considered a throwback to the big money quizzes of the 1950s. However, bright and warm sets seem to be making a comeback with The Price is Right, Family Feud, Hollywood Squares, Jeopardy, and Wheel of Fortune. My point is, these sets are using the glitzy sets that were definitive during the 70s and 80s.

I can be wrong about this, but expect these same sets in any game show revival within the coming years, with 21st century technology strewn about.

The Inquisitive One

Robert Hutchinson · « **Reply #4 on:** June 22, 2003, 03:04:47 AM »

[quote name=\'beatlefreak84\' date=\'Jun 21 2003, 07:54 PM\']I, personally, am of the opinion that a bright set conveys a lot more than a dark set, which is why I am particularly attracted to the PYL set (one of the brightest and flashiest I can think of).[/quote]
I always noticed the darkness in the background on PYL more than I did the illumination of the board and players.

I think the problem isn't so much darker sets as it is darker sets plus ill-defined, asymmetric sets. WWTBAM? is usually considered the originator of the current set design trend, but it looks a hell of a lot better than the sets for Greed or Pyramid: the lights go up and down in a single fashion, the set is symmetrical, and there isn't the useless \"wouldn't a girder set at an angle right here in the middle of the floor look soooo kewl\" mindset cluttering up the stage.

Pyramid in the '70s and '80s put differently-colored and -designed walls and backgrounds behind its set pieces for a reason, Pyramid '02.

Neumms · « **Reply #5 on:** June 22, 2003, 02:44:11 PM »

Quote

I think the problem isn't so much darker sets as it is darker sets plus ill-defined, asymmetric sets.

Great point. To me, it's not a bad thing that Pyramid modernized the set. It's that they came up with such a dull, derivative one. (I think the same is true for the music. That it's modern doesn't bother me; the trouble is that it has no melody, unlike \"Millionaire.\")

Also, a dark set only works if it fits the game. It works on \"Millionaire\" and could work on \"Pyramid,\" but it was just plain wrong for Doug's TPIR and the Louie Anderson \"Feud.\"

clemon79 · « **Reply #6 on:** June 22, 2003, 06:15:27 PM »

[quote name=\'Neumms\' date=\'Jun 22 2003, 11:44 AM\'] Great point. To me, it's not a bad thing that Pyramid modernized the set. It's that they came up with such a dull, derivative one. [/quote]

Spot on. I don't mind new sets. Heck, I ENJOY new sets. It's when the creativity that went into thenew set is nonexistent that I get annoyed.

Quote

(I think the same is true for the music. That it's modern doesn't bother me; the trouble is that it has no melody, unlike \"Millionaire.\")

\"Pyramid\" needs a fanfare. Again, you can redo the music all you like, but without the fanfare, it just isn't Pyramid.

Quote

Also, a dark set only works if it fits the game. It works on \"Millionaire\" and could work on \"Pyramid,\"

It works in the Winner's Circle. The set and lighting for the front game should be light and airy, because it's not a deep, intense game...they're playing Word Charades, fer Pete's sake.

Quote

it was just plain wrong for Doug's TPIR

Naw. I defend that set. Black floors do not a dark set make.

davidbod · « **Reply #7 on:** June 22, 2003, 07:59:08 PM »

I've always thought US sets were very stuck in their ways - comparing the UK and US versions of Family Fortunes/Feud gives you a good comparison.

In a similar way, the UK is some way behind most of Europe (I'm mainly thinking Netherlands and Germany here) - particularly in the use of graphics, scoring displays, motorised elements and virtual elements.

David

DrJWJustice · « **Reply #8 on:** June 22, 2003, 08:02:11 PM »

I agree, too, with the cyclical thing. It bears pointing out that some older sets dated back to the days of B&W TV, so dramatic lighting is all they really had to make an effect. Most of those sets used wood colours, since those translated best to the B&W format.