Studio 7

[whewfan]

7 players, 77,000 at stake, 7 weeks, and a jackpot of 777,000... is 7 lucky?

The premise:
The premise is simple. The players answer questions, one at a time, on current events. If they don't know the answer, they can ask any of the remaining players for help. (this is done by throwing their ring in the "pool of 7" and "It is up to the player to decide if the star is giving a correct answer or bluffing, that's how they get the square"... well, wrong show, same idea.

The round continues until 2 players have answered questions incorrectly. Then the remaining players must vote off whom they consider... THE WEAKEST LINK... er, I mean, the person they wish to eliminate from the game...

Gameplay continues in the same fashion until the memorization round (Round 4), where the remaining 3 players have to memorize verbatim long lists pertaining to a certain subject. Then, in the most boring 5 or 10 minutes, each player tries to recall as much of the list as possible. The person that does the worst is eliminated.

The final round with 2 players involves answering rapid fire questions. The first player must answer 7 questions correctly, trying to set the lowest time, then the other must answer 7 questions in less time.


The host:
Who cares what his name is, but he takes on the "intimidating host with lack of personality" that might be reminiscent of the Inquizitor on Inquizition (only you can see his face), but at least that guy cracked a few jokes here and there.

The set and music:
Well, what can we expect? The set is dimly lit in dark blues and purples, and the lighting and music try to create the tension in the same manner as Millionaire (same producer of course) complete with the "heartbeat" pulsating. Nothing new, but still, it serves its purpose.

Reality meets quiz show:
We do get a sense of each player and how each player feels about another. It doesn't necessarily make the game any more interesting, but it doesn't interfere with the game either.

Overall:
Sorry, but Studio 7 is basically reinventing the wheel. It's nothing more than a retread of The Weakest Link, with borrowed elements from Hollywood Squares and Win Ben Stein's Money (in terms of the final round) and throw in a dash of Cram for the Memorization round.

Not totally awful, but because of a lack of originality, I give Studio 7 on a scale of 1-10..... a 3.

[goongas]

I think you are being too kind in your review.  If I didn't know better, I would think Michael Davies created a parody of reality TV.

[cyberjoek]

I think it's a halfway decent show which suffers from some problems:

1. Round Order
The question rounds provide the most tention and they are gone right at the top of the show, if the memorization rounds were preliminary rounds to reduce the total number of players to seven they would fit better.  This would also require the addition of a pair of rounds (perhaps change it to century -> decade -> sense 2000 -> 2004 -> Last 30 days -> Last Week).  

2. Eliminations
Instead of keeping playing until just two are on the block complete the cycle when the first person gets a wrong answer and everyone who doesn't make it is at risk, this may mean that there is no vote in some rounds but it also means that one person may have the whole groups fates in their hands.

3. Hosting
Either make him less stiff or make him more stiff, either make him this entirely mean spirited host or let him laugh with the players a little more.

4. Difficutly
Perhaps the questions shouldn't just be more recent in later rounds but how about harder?  Until the memorizations rounds I had a grand total of 1 wrong answer (I wouldn't have known the Top Gun question).
-Joe Kavanagh

[mmb5]

Dear . . . God . . . was . . . that . . . boring.  I sat through three interviews and had two meetings today, and those were all more exciting.


--Mike

[MCArroyo1]

Yeah, it was pretty clear that Davies' company was trying to spice up a VERY bland game by sticking in the "flashbacks" and pre-taped interviews.  This didn't seem to work.

I kinda liked the set, though.

[davemackey]

This is the kind of show that one of Davies' competitors would have done.... four years ago.

[weaklink75]

Did you also see the disclaimer in the credits that stated that the first round questions were multiple choice, though the choices were edited out?

It's an interesting show, especially with the material involved (I think The Challengers was the last show to focus so much on current events), but it can be a little tedious at times. The final round I thought was good with the players getting the same questions, but the reality stuff was kinda meh.

I'll give it a C+....since nothing else is on, I'll watch it, but it will probably make it one cycle of shows and then be done.

[Timsterino]

What did I think of this new show?

"I would like to answer the question please."

I was bored to tears,  it was too slow paced. It was like watching golf.

Tim :-)

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'Timsterino\' date=\'Jul 22 2004, 10:07 PM\'] "I would like to answer the question please."
 [/quote]
 Yeah, here's another hint for you budding format developers:

CATCHPHRASES FOR THE SAKE OF CATCHPHRASES ARE WAY LAME.

Picked up a little steam in the last two rounds. The "pods" would mean something if they were an isolation system, or pretty much anything but a tube for them to sit in. That little nod to indicate a correct answer was idiotic. All of the whispering made me wonder if this was M. Night Shamalayan's idea of a game show.

I was underwhelmed. I may watch next week. I may not.

[bwood]

This show doesn't air in my area until tomorrow at 11PM (WWHO, Columbus Ohio), I was looking forward to watching it but based on all of this it looks like a waste of my time!

[Peter Sarrett]

Jane, you ignorant slut.

I liked it.  I thought the difficulty of the questions was variable, but for the most part very good-- especially for their target players and audience.  I liked the "help me" element, and especially liked the way a player's willingness to help others could affect his fate if he wound up on the block.  I liked the fact that the show didn't dwell on the reality aspect of their living together, but referred to it when relevant.

The memorization round seemed both insanely hard and insanely boring television-- a monumental misstep.  The format of the other rounds were quite good.

I did NOT like the fact that the first round was multiple choice, but not only didn't the audience see the choices, we didn't even know it was multiple choice unless we stuck around for the credits.  Dirty pool old man.  Show me what the contestants are choosing among so I can play along.

I thought the host did a fine job for the format.

"The pool of the seven" and "I'd like to answer the question" should both be jettisoned, however.  I suspect the latter, just like "final answer," is there as a legal safeguard to allow no room for misunderstanding when a contestant has decided on an answer.

I'll be keeping my season pass active.

[SplitSecond]

[quote name=\'Peter Sarrett\' date=\'Jul 23 2004, 12:26 AM\'] Jane, you ignorant slut.

I liked it. [/quote]
 What, did Michael Davies cut you a check?

Oh, wait.

[whewfan]

I was trying to think of some ways to make this show better...

Some obvious editing had to be done to fit in the game and the reality elements. This means either they need to streamline the game, or cut out some of the reality bits.

The pacing is a little too slow. The "I would like to answer the question" does get a little grating. Perhaps they should just ANSWER THE QUESTION, if they wish to do so.

The round that needs the most fixing... the memorization round!!

Did anyone else get really bored watching that first player recall that list verbatim? He could've gone on, but he stumbled and said "actor" instead of "actress".
Instead of recalling the list from beginning to end, the host should ask questions about various parts of the list, until all the required parts are done. There should perhaps be a time element. Would 2 minutes be a reasonable time?

Still, these suggestions don't make the game anything we haven't seen before.

[tvwxman]

[quote name=\'whewfan\' date=\'Jul 23 2004, 04:50 AM\']
Still, these suggestions don't make the game anything we haven't seen before. [/quote]
 Yeah, but is that what we're really looking for ?

I'm serious, but haven't we all come to the conclusion that , aside from killing someone on a game show, it's all been done?

Yep, it reeked of Weakest link, Win Ben Stein, Hollywood Squares ,even the last round had hints of Scrabble.....But remember, for the 18-29 set, most of em haven't watched those shows before, let alone know S7 was 'borrowing' ideas from them...

But to me, it achieved what it set out to do...marry a quiz show and a reality show together....Was it interesting tv? not really.... My major complaint was  that it was too damn slow...

But it was different enough...IMHO.....

Give Davies credit for at least getting another show on primetime....if the demos are strong enough, there will be more....

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'Peter Sarrett\' date=\'Jul 23 2004, 12:26 AM\'] "The pool of the seven" and "I'd like to answer the question" should both be jettisoned, however.  I suspect the latter, just like "final answer," is there as a legal safeguard to allow no room for misunderstanding when a contestant has decided on an answer.
 [/quote]
 Fine and good, except "Final Answer" is there to prevent the agoziging TPiR moment when Helga can't decide what is less expensive between the Ex-Lax and the Swiffer, and keeps waffling back and forth when Bob is about to yank the price tag, while still allowing the player to ruminate aloud about which answer they want to select.

It's PAINFULLY obvious that "I'd like to answer..." is trying to capitalize on that. A player on the mic (yo yo, one two) has two choices when they're at bat: they either answer or they ask for help. There is no "game need" to inform anyone that they will be answering rather than seeking help, they can just DO IT.

I dunno. Too much ritual, not enough substance, IMO.