Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: "High Rollers" question  (Read 6710 times)

alfonzos

  • Member
  • Posts: 1032
"High Rollers" question
« on: January 10, 2014, 08:43:38 PM »
It seems at one time High Rollers used a face identification format. When was this and how did the game work?
A Cliff Saber Production
email address: alfonzos@aol.com
Boardgame Geek user name: alfonzos

Matt Ottinger

  • Member
  • Posts: 13018
Re: "High Rollers" question
« Reply #1 on: January 10, 2014, 09:09:09 PM »
It seems at one time High Rollers used a face identification format. When was this and how did the game work?
Late in the original run, and less than two months before the original cancellation, they switched to a format in the main game where the numbers 1-9 corresponded to pieces on a game board that covered a famous face.  I have a vague memory of this, since I probably only saw it once or twice before its early-summer cancellation.  I don't recall the specifics of game play (for example, if the goal was identifying the face, what happened on a bad roll?) and the EOTVGS, which verified the narrow window when this format was used, did not offer details.
This has been another installment of Matt Ottinger's Masters of the Obvious.
Stay tuned for all the obsessive-compulsive fun of Words Have Meanings.

That Don Guy

  • Member
  • Posts: 1173
Re: "High Rollers" question
« Reply #2 on: January 10, 2014, 09:25:10 PM »
I remember a little about it.  I "think" that part of the game was called "Face Lifters".

In addition to each number having a prize (except that two had 1/2 of a larger prize), a photo of a person's face was hidden behind nine curved pieces (I think the higher the number, the more it would identify).  When someone made a good roll, they got a guess.  When someone made a bad roll, the other player got a guess, then revealed a piece, took another guess, revealed another piece, took yet another guess, and so on, until they got it right or the entire face was revealed.  I think that, in addition to winning the prizes on their side of the board, the winner also got all of the unrevealed prizes; I know this is true if it was won after a bad roll.  If nobody got it right after the entire face was revealed, Alex would ask questions about the person until someone buzzed in.

The one person I remember nobody getting: Alec Guinness - presumably, this was before Star Wars came out.

clemon79

  • Member
  • Posts: 27694
  • Director of Suck Consolidation
Re: "High Rollers" question
« Reply #3 on: January 10, 2014, 11:33:12 PM »
The one person I remember nobody getting: Alec Guinness - presumably, this was before Star Wars came out.

No excuse, considering he had an Oscar to his credit for Bridge On The River Kwai.
Chris Lemon, King Fool, Director of Suck Consolidation
http://fredsmythe.com
Email: clemon79@outlook.com  |  Skype: FredSmythe

dale_grass

  • Member
  • Posts: 1382
Re: "High Rollers" question
« Reply #4 on: January 11, 2014, 01:10:34 AM »
No excuse, considering he had an Oscar to his credit for Bridge On The River Kwai.

That doesn't mean anything.  Marty won for Best Picture in 1955 and Herb Stempel couldn't even... oh, never mind.

Adam Nedeff

  • Member
  • Posts: 1807
Re: "High Rollers" question
« Reply #5 on: January 11, 2014, 02:56:40 AM »
A very brief clip of this version of the show's format can be seen in this YouTube video at the 2:33 mark...shortly before the insanity begins.


BrandonFG

  • Member
  • Posts: 18600
Re: "High Rollers" question
« Reply #6 on: January 11, 2014, 10:41:39 AM »
Didn't this more or less become Battlestars' bonus round a few years later, with some tweaks?
"It wasn't like this on Tic Tac Dough...Wink never gave a damn!"

WarioBarker

  • Member
  • Posts: 1920
  • Mind Wanderer
Re: "High Rollers" question
« Reply #7 on: January 11, 2014, 11:18:56 AM »
Per the EOTVGS, "Face Lifters" debuted April 26, 1976 and remained through the show's end on June 11, a mere seven weeks. From what I can tell, the show was getting clobbered in the ratings against the second half of The Price Is Right and things didn't improve after the format change.

Didn't this more or less become Battlestars' bonus round a few years later, with some tweaks?
Yes, and in my opinion it fit about as well there as it did here. Not saying either was bad, and with some slight tweaking I think they'd be a good front-game/bonus round combo to try if Sony* gets an itch to revive The Face Is Familiar.

(*I think Sony owns the rights since they have the Bob Stewart library, but I'm not sure since I know Filmways was involved with that show.)
« Last Edit: January 11, 2014, 09:28:03 PM by Dan88 »
The Game Show Forum: beating the **** out of the competition since 2003.

I'm just a mind wanderer, walking in eternity...

Mike Tennant

  • Member
  • Posts: 989
Re: "High Rollers" question
« Reply #8 on: January 11, 2014, 07:18:52 PM »
Didn't this more or less become Battlestars' bonus round a few years later, with some tweaks?
Not only that, it was essentially a reworking of 1961's Double Exposure, also an H-Q production. Merrill and Bob seemed to like reusing their old ideas almost as much as Bob Stewart.

alfonzos

  • Member
  • Posts: 1032
Re: "High Rollers" question
« Reply #9 on: January 12, 2014, 05:23:22 PM »
Thanks. It was Adam's clip that inspired the question.
A Cliff Saber Production
email address: alfonzos@aol.com
Boardgame Geek user name: alfonzos

Tony Peters

  • Member
  • Posts: 240
  • Here is your first subject. GO!
Re: "High Rollers" question
« Reply #10 on: January 12, 2014, 07:09:39 PM »
(*I think Sony owns the rights since they have the Bob Stewart library, but I'm not sure since I know Filmways was involved with that show.)

Point 1: Filmways also co-produced Eye Guess, which (judging from GSN's long-ago airing of one of the - if not the only - extant episodes) is under Sony.

Point 2 (which I may be wrong on; if so, how so?): Filmways themselves owned Heatter-Quigley, whose formats - aside from Squares, currently a CBS property - (I think) were taken over by Sony during their brief time of control over MGM, judging by the facts that (1) Sony's takedown notice to Flashgames^2 (I don't know how superscript works here) covered the High Rollers Big Numbers game, and (2) Catch 21 had no involvement from MGM.
Sometimes I find myself missing the days when cats ruled the internet...