Retread "Reality" Contestants

[Fedya]

I just found out on another bulletin board (sorry if this is old news, but I didn't see it here) that two of the retreads from a previous series of Survivor are going to be in The Amazing Race 7.  (For those who watch Survivor, it's Amber and Rob, which means nothing to me.)

Is anybody else really bothered by this?  (Yes, I know it's their show and they can have whomever they want as contestants.)  I can't precisely put my finger on it, but there's something about recycled contestants on 'reality' shows that really bothers me, much more than contestants who appear on traditional game shows.  I think it has something to do with the fact that on traditional game shows, contestants have usually had to take objective tests to show that they're good enough players, while "reality" show participants are for all intents and purposes cast.  Why else do we see so many models and wannabe actors on TAR?

I find that in the last several TAR series, I've really enjoyed the older teams, even though I'm only 32.  It's just that they seem like real people, unlike most of the model/actor teams.

[sshuffield70]

[quote name=\'Fedya\' date=\'Jan 23 2005, 01:45 PM\']I just found out on another bulletin board (sorry if this is old news, but I didn't see it here) that two of the retreads from a previous series of Survivor are going to be in The Amazing Race 7.  (For those who watch Survivor, it's Amber and Rob, which means nothing to me.)

Is anybody else really bothered by this?  (Yes, I know it's their show and they can have whomever they want as contestants.)  I can't precisely put my finger on it, but there's something about recycled contestants on 'reality' shows that really bothers me, much more than contestants who appear on traditional game shows.  I think it has something to do with the fact that on traditional game shows, contestants have usually had to take objective tests to show that they're good enough players, while "reality" show participants are for all intents and purposes cast.  Why else do we see so many models and wannabe actors on TAR?

I find that in the last several TAR series, I've really enjoyed the older teams, even though I'm only 32.  It's just that they seem like real people, unlike most of the model/actor teams.

[snapback]72522[/snapback]

[/quote]

More bitching about Amber and Rob?  They were "one-two" on All-Stars, having been eliminated in Series 2 (Amber) and Series 4 (Rob).  But they're better known for their on-air engagement just prior to the results on the reunion show.  They ran off with $1.1 million.  I'm surprised they're ready for another adventure.  I look forward to the two on TAR7.

[Little Big Brother]

For the most part I do agree with you.  Not only is it giving people who have already won on a show (Allison of BB4, Amber from Survivor All-Stars) a chance to win again, it prevents new people from having the chance to play.  However, at least with the TAR recastings, it is allowing viewers to see relationships that would otherwise cause people to scratch their heads.

*Mike and Krista, the formerly engaged couple from BB2, were supposed to be on TAR and were ultimately dropped.

*People finally got to see this Danny that Allison was pining over in the BB House, allowing for America to collectively go "I told ya so" when things failed miserably.

I will be curious to see how Rob and Amber do when manipulation is not the main tool for successfully completing the game.

[GS Warehouse]

[quote name=\'Fedya\' date=\'Jan 23 2005, 02:45 PM\']I just found out on another bulletin board (sorry if this is old news, but I didn't see it here) that two of the retreads from a previous series of Survivor are going to be in The Amazing Race 7.  (For those who watch Survivor, it's Amber and Rob, which means nothing to me.)

[snapback]72522[/snapback]

[/quote]
I remember that one or both told the media that the engaged couple would love to compete on tAR.  But this is hardly the first time we've seen repeat reality contestants:
- Alison, runner-up of Big Bother 4 (typo intentional), made a return visit to CBS on AR5.  (IIRC, she was eliminated early.)
- Kristen, one of the newest candidates on The Apprentice, appeared on Fox's Murder in Small Town X in 2001.
- Diana DeGarmo had much better success on American Idol in 2004 than she did on NBC's America's Most Talented Kid in 2003.  In addition, AI2 finalists Kimberly Caldwell (no relation to Jim) and Charles Grigsby were also finalists on The WB's Popstars 2.

Furthermore, Rob and Amber might not be the only Survivor alumni we may see on a future Race.  Ami Cusack, the lesbian who fronted the all-women alliance in the Vanuatu series, said she originally auditioned for Race, but CBS put her on Survivor instead.

[vtown7]

I think that something should be qualified... IMHO, I have no problem with people on "talent" competitions doing several of them - IIRC we had one girl who made top 15 on CDN Popstars I make top 10 on Canadian Idol and a guy who made it to the "Toronto round" on Popstars III: The One up here that made the final 32 on CI II.

I have slightly less problems with repeat people such as Kristen - but can't we draw a line to someone being part of several game shows?

I think the line has to be drawn at being invited on a different reality show b/c of who they are, such as Alison & Donny and Rob & Amber.  C'mon, you've had your moment in the sun!   I think I would see it differently if there was some kind of "Race All Stars" and then they invited people from other reality shows to be on, just for variety sake.

However being good at one game does not make you brilliant on the other - anyone remember FF winners on TWL?

Cheers,

Ryan

[GS Warehouse]

[quote name=\'vtown7\' date=\'Jan 24 2005, 08:55 AM\']... can't we draw a line to someone being part of several game shows?[/quote]That's one thing I didn't mention in my above post.  When the same people start showing up over and over on reality shows, I'm starting to wonder if there aren't enough interesting personalities to go around.  Even if I wanted to, I couldn't get on any kind of reality show because I'm not television material, and I admit it.  The Apprentice received over one million applications, and all but a handful have never been on television before.  The factor here is personality.  Even if you no grasp of the rules at all, if the producers think you can stir things up on camera (Omarosa, Stacie J., Danny, et al), you're in.

Random thought: Assuming he's not above it, would the late Randy Amasia have made a good reality contestant--or at least a reality show casting assistant?  He said on Whew! he was majoring in behaviorial psychology, so he had a good grasp of human nature--which is what drives these shows.

However being good at one game does not make you brilliant on the other - anyone remember FF winners on TWL?

[snapback]72659[/snapback]

These are people who ate animal genitilia.  That can't possibly be very bright.  Or did NBC just want to save on the prize budget?

[Little Big Brother]

When the same people start showing up over and over on reality shows, I'm starting to wonder if there aren't enough interesting personalities to go around.

I believe the name for this would be Sue Hawk Syndrome.

[Gromit]

[quote name=\'Fedya\' date=\'Jan 23 2005, 12:45 PM\']Is anybody else really bothered by this?

I find that in the last several TAR series, I've really enjoyed the older teams, even though I'm only 32.  It's just that they seem like real people, unlike most of the model/actor teams.

[snapback]72522[/snapback]

[/quote]

No, you're not the only one, I hate all this stuff too. The reason why it's so bothersome is that it runs completely counter to the whole essence of "reality" programming: putting *normal* people into a situation, and seeing how they react.

Seasons 1 of the Mole, Amazing Race, and Survivor, etc were *fantastic*. As time has progressed, they "sexied" up the casting with actors, such that they're almost a scripted show now. When the Pizza bros sniped at each other, I could genuinely believe that. Now? I can't believe a single thing I see on any show is a genuine emotion.

If you like some of the teams on the current Amazing Race, make sure you watch the dvd of season 1 when it comes out. The show was *ten times* better back then.

[uncamark]

[quote name=\'GS Warehouse\' date=\'Jan 23 2005, 03:06 PM\']- Diana DeGarmo had much better success on American Idol in 2004 than she did on NBC's America's Most Talented Kid in 2003.  In addition, AI2 finalists Kimberly Caldwell (no relation to Jim) and Charles Grigsby were also finalists on The WB's Popstars 2.

[snapback]72529[/snapback]

[/quote]

And now she's trying--emphasis on "trying"--to be a host on TV Guide Channel.  She hosted the "Game Show Millionaires" special.  Boden and Laura didn't deserve that.

[vtown7]

If you like some of the teams on the current Amazing Race, make sure you watch the dvd of season 1 when it comes out. The show was *ten times* better back then.

Any links for this?  I saw the first four eps or so before I went on exchange to Europe.  I do remember vaguely seeing who won but I would love to the entire runaround.

This may open up a can of worms, but I think one of the parts that was better back then was the minimal (if any?) of bunching several times during the leg.  OTOH, I do like formula now - very few yields and very few fast forwards.  YMMV though.

It seems that everything does eventually get on DVD... Mole I will make its appearance in March.

Cheers,

Ryan

[uncamark]

[quote name=\'vtown7\' date=\'Jan 24 2005, 07:41 PM\']

If you like some of the teams on the current Amazing Race, make sure you watch the dvd of season 1 when it comes out. The show was *ten times* better back then.

Any links for this?  I saw the first four eps or so before I went on exchange to Europe.  I do remember vaguely seeing who won but I would love to the entire runaround.

This may open up a can of worms, but I think one of the parts that was better back then was the minimal (if any?) of bunching several times during the leg.  OTOH, I do like formula now - very few yields and very few fast forwards.  YMMV though.

[snapback]72820[/snapback]

[/quote]

It was inevitable that the bunching would become more frequent--when the last place team was still in Alaska when everyone else was in New York and finished on the first "TAR," something had to be done.  Also, I'm sure that they don't want to keep any stunt points going for more than a day for reasons of both expense and tying up businesses.  On the other hand, there have been those instances where the first place team has come running up to the Pit Stop just as they've got everything set and ready to go--I believe once Phil Keoghan barely made it to the Pit Stop ahead of the team, and he and his crew is supposed to be always ahead of the contestants.

[Gromit]

[quote name=\'vtown7\' date=\'Jan 24 2005, 05:41 PM\']

If you like some of the teams on the current Amazing Race, make sure you watch the dvd of season 1 when it comes out. The show was *ten times* better back then.

Any links for this?  I saw the first four eps or so before I went on exchange to Europe.  I do remember vaguely seeing who won but I would love to the entire runaround.

[snapback]72820[/snapback]

[/quote]

Latest news:

http://www.tvshowsondvd.com/newsitem.cfm?NewsID=2900

[Ian Wallis]

I kind of agree about having Rob & Amber on TAR, but if you're talking about the same people popping up on all these reality shows, is it really any different from the "glory days" when certain contestants would pop up on more than one traditional game show?  Besides, we all know it's ratings they care about, and having Rob & Amber there will likely draw some interest.

Also, does anybody really think these "Mole" and "Amazing Race" DVDs will sell well?  If reality series don't repeat well on television, why would they sell well on DVD when you already know the outcome?

Just as an aside, I find "Survivor" an incredibly boring show, and I can't really understand why so many people still like it.  I watched the first four editions, but have tuned out since then.  They're all the same - once you've seen one, it's "been there, done that".  On the other hand, I didn't get into "The Amazing Race" until the 5th one (so I might consider buying the DVD of the first series), and I'm hooked.  That's an interesting show that shows you all these different places of the world and doesn't get old.

Anyone agree, or disagree?

[uncamark]

[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'Feb 28 2005, 09:14 AM\']Just as an aside, I find "Survivor" an incredibly boring show, and I can't really understand why so many people still like it.  I watched the first four editions, but have tuned out since then.  They're all the same - once you've seen one, it's "been there, done that".  On the other hand, I didn't get into "The Amazing Race" until the 5th one (so I might consider buying the DVD of the first series), and I'm hooked.  That's an interesting show that shows you all these different places of the world and doesn't get old.

Anyone agree, or disagree?

[snapback]76462[/snapback]

[/quote]

I'm up and down on "Survivor."  Like most reality shows, it's harder to do the second or third (or tenth time) when there's less to surprise the viewer.  On the other hand, "TAR" works for me because it is a true competition, not a popularity contest, with clearly-defined winners and losers.  The fact that it is all over the world is a great plus, because they edit out almost all of the sitting around and whining and cut right to the chase.  And since Van Munster has said that the only two countries at this time he would not send contestants to are Iraq and Afghanistan, there's still places in the world they haven't been to and things to do.

Also, in the case of "TAR" a behind-the-scenes DVD would be to me very fascinating, because the whole process of keeping a step ahead of the players around the world would have to be compelling viewing in itself.

[wschmrdr]

Well, personally I can look past the relationships, fighting, and such to actually see a very good game in The Amazing Race.

I know Allison was on BB4, but isn't there a limit to game and reality shows in how often you can participate? (I would think there should be an exception if the player was playing for charity, of course.) Are Rob and Amber playing for charity as an invitational, or are they actually playing for their own money and this is simply a ratings grabber? That's one thing that has me peeved, where one stint on a popular reality show gets you what seems to be a free pass onto almost any game or reality show you want for your own money.