The most miscast hosts

[SamJ93]

There’s been plenty of discussion the past few weeks about hosts (OK, mostly John Davidson) who were just plain bad, but what about otherwise-competent emcees who just didn’t seem to be a good fit with a certain show or type of show?

My picks: Monty Hall on Split Second ’86.  He was obviously rather uncomfortable handling a quiz show, especially compared to how Tom Kennedy hosted the same format.  Second place might be Wally Bruner from syndicated “What’s My Line?”—he seemed rather dry and boring on that show (again, especially compared to Larry Blyden), but I later watched some of his non-GS work and he wasn’t too bad.

[TLEberle]

Even though I like watching him work, I thought that Marc Summers was "miscast" on shows such as History IQ and Wintuition--dry serious quizzes that don't leave much for humor or ad-libbing and byplay as opposed to Double Dare which could be paced by the host's whimsy.

I'll also plump for Tom Kennedy and Bert Convy being "miscast" for Body Language and Super Password. I think both shows would have been improved if each host was hosting the other. Body Language would still work fine with Bert (since you have the same amount of game play each day) and Tom was familiar with the Super Password format.

[toetyper]

semiOT  but not worth a new topic

i often wonder if chuck woolery wouldnt be great host of the  new format of millionaire.

[Winkfan]

If we're gonna count "substitute hosts," my vote goes for Win Elliott when the subbed on Beat The Clock. He seemed too low-key for that kind of show.

For regular hosts, what was Jim Peck thinking when he agreed to the original Three's A Crowd? Then again, what was he thinking when (non-GS-wise) he did Divorce Court, for that matter?

Cordially,
Tammy

[clemon79]

For regualar hosts, what was Jim Peck thinking when he agreed to the original Three's A Crowd?

. o O (I'm a game-show host for a living and I like being regularly employed.)

Then again, what was he thinking when (non-GS-wise) he did Divorce Court, for that matter?

. o O (Nobody wants to hire me to be a game-show host anymore, and I like being regularly employed.)

[whewfan]

semiOT  but not worth a new topic

i often wonder if chuck woolery wouldnt be great host of the  new format of millionaire.

I can't see Chuck doing Millionaire. If you want to talk about miscasting, I thought he was wrong for Greed. He handled the show well overall, but the format left little chance for him to ad-lib or make any side commentary, both which I enjoyed on Wheel, Scrabble, Love Connection, and even Lingo.

How about this for miscasting... Blake Emmons on Chain Reaction. Blake was apparently a little known country singer, who previously had appeared as a contestant on TJW with Bill Cullen. Blake was DEFINITELY not game show host material. Granted Chain Reaction without celebs was quite dry, the set looked cheap, there was NO studio audience, and the stakes, don't get me started. Blake stumbled through a simple format, with a simpler scoring system than the original Chain Reaction (the only improvement to the game). He tried a little too hard to generate excitement, and came across as the stereotyped, plastic game show host.

Coming in at a close second, Dylan Lane on Chain Reaction. The original format, complete with "Go" bonus game, two teams of three, was very much intact. The only flaw, gameplay-wise was the final betting round. Geoff Edwards summarized Dylan best. Dylan was a stand up comic, yet he doesn't tell jokes! Dylan came across as just... blah. He wasn't TERRIBLE, he just wasn't interesting to watch. He could've used his comedy experience to at least make the game more fun to watch (and I've never seen Dylan's stand up) but instead he's just going through the motions of the game. However, I did find Dylan at least more TOLERABLE than Blake.

It also seems that replacement hosts for Nick shows don't fare very well either. Think Fast was entertaining enough to watch, but it did have some flaws. The Locker Room bonus game looked like chaos, and without a visible scoreboard, it was impossible to know how many matches the team got (this was fixed when Skip Lackey took over, one of the few things I LIKED about the Skip Lackey version). Michael Carrington had a very well trained voice for radio, but he did stumble quite a bit through the game. However, I did find him a couple notches better than Skip Lackey. Skip was just stereotypical game show host, and he was even more clueless about the gameplay than Carrington, constantly asking the judges who won, and didn't seem to connect too well with the contestants.

Larry Tofler was okay on Finders Keepers, but he did convey a sense of not knowing how to handle himself during the house trashing segments, and even he admitted it when he was interviewed on Don't Just Sit There.

Robb Edward Morris on Make the Grade... talk about inept. He was nervous, terrible with the kids, and again, just acted like a game show host.

I am amongst the minority that liked Jason Harris on DD 2000. He's NOT Marc Summers, but I think he did okay. Slime Time Live segments cut into the gameplay, and it did seem that DD 2000 had a lot less content than the original.

[TLEberle]

How about this for miscasting... Blake Emmons on Chain Reaction.

What else did Blake (or for that matter, any of the other hosts you mention) host with any sort of competency, as asked in the original question?

[Twentington]

I agree with Chuck on Greed. His style was a perfect fit for early Wheel, Scrabble and Lingo, but his reputation as being loose and casual made him a poor fit on the tight, srs bzns feel of Greed.

[whewfan]

How about this for miscasting... Blake Emmons on Chain Reaction.

What else did Blake (or for that matter, any of the other hosts you mention) host with any sort of competency, as asked in the original question?

Good point. In that regard, I also shouldn't have included any of the Nick hosts I previously mentioned or Dylan Lane, since none of them had hosted game shows before. Sorry about that.

I know a lot has been said about Gene and BTB, but what about The Movie Masters? I don't remember much about that show, except it looked cheaply produced and featured classic panelists like Peggy Cass and Kitty Carlisle, and it had the feel of the original WML and other classic black and white game shows, but I think the youthful demographic would've turned it off quickly. Anyone remember the game itself and how Gene handled it?

[TLEberle]

I agree with Chuck on Greed. His style was a perfect fit for early Wheel, Scrabble and Lingo, but his reputation as being loose and casual made him a poor fit on the tight, srs bzns feel of Greed.

I disagree. I thought that Chuck was able to tailor his performance on Greed to whatever the moment was: fun and light during the early questions and introductions, and serious and down to business for the big money time.

[BrandonFG]

I agree with Chuck on Greed. His style was a perfect fit for early Wheel, Scrabble and Lingo, but his reputation as being loose and casual made him a poor fit on the tight, srs bzns feel of Greed.

I disagree. I thought that Chuck was able to tailor his performance on Greed to whatever the moment was: fun and light during the early questions and introductions, and serious and down to business for the big money time.

Agreed. Chuck injected the appropriate level of humor during the early questions. Once they got past the Terminator and got into the bigger money, he made things a little more serious.

I've said it before, but there were some pretty decent shows from the 1999-2000 class, better than the overblown tripe we got 5-10 years later. It's too bad they were all canceled early for not pulling Millionaire numbers.

[clemon79]

I've said it before, but there were some pretty decent shows from the 1999-2000 class, better than the overblown tripe we got 5-10 years later. It's too bad they were all canceled early for not pulling Millionaire numbers.

And Greed was certainly not one of them, simply because Pick The Four Top Entries In This Poll You've Never Heard Of Until Now does not good material make when you are playing for One Million Damn Dollars.

[Twentington]

And Greed was certainly not one of them, simply because Pick The Four Top Entries In This Poll You've Never Heard Of Until Now does not good material make when you are playing for One Million Damn Dollars.

This I agree with.

[TimK2003]

Ricki Lake for Game Show Marathon...

[PYLdude]

I've said it before, but there were some pretty decent shows from the 1999-2000 class, better than the overblown tripe we got 5-10 years later. It's too bad they were all canceled early for not pulling Millionaire numbers.

And Greed was certainly not one of them, simply because Pick The Four Top Entries In This Poll You've Never Heard Of Until Now does not good material make when you are playing for One Million Damn Dollars.

Wholly disagree. The whole point of Greed to me was that okay, we'll give away a top prize of $2M, but you're gonna have to earn your way to it. I thought they succeeded in doing that by making those questions as random as they did. How is it any different, then, from Millionaire asking questions like "Who was Uncle Sam modeled after" or "Who did Grant Wood base the farmer off of" or any of those questions that people normally would not have heard of unless they either a) knew the answer off the top of their head or b) had experience in something related to the question's subject matter? Other than the question formatting being different, which doesn't really matter, nothing.