Who Wants To Be An Emmy Winner?

[Dbacksfan12]

[quote name=\'johnnya2k3\' date=\'May 23 2005, 04:00 AM\'][quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'May 21 2005, 12:10 AM\']I'd go so far to suggest that the only reason Barker was NOMINATED is because he's 417 years old.[/quote]
Um, more like 81 years old.
[/quote]
Um, Chris was joking.

In order to keep the material fresh and variegated they have to broaden the scope of the material with categories about current films and rock 'n' roll.

That's wonderful.
Too bad a show doesn't exist nationally that stresses acadamia more than the movies.

[chris319]

Too bad a show doesn't exist nationally that stresses acadamia more than the movies.

Spelling would be a good category.

[TLEberle]

[quote name=\'Modor\' date=\'May 23 2005, 02:18 AM\']Too bad a show doesn't exist nationally that stresses acadamia more than the movies.

[snapback]86203[/snapback]

[/quote]

College Bowl did.  Gone now.
Wintuition did.  Gone now.
Studio Seven did, sorta.  Gone now.

The TV guys figured out that lots of people don't want to watch game shows with hard material anymore- the play along value is gone.  Sure, it was nice to knock down that $2,000 clue about the schematic diagram last week, but if things get way too hard, the viewers will watch other shows.

I don't know where you come up with Jeopardy stressing movies more than academia.  A good Jeopardy player must be able to deal with categories that span the whole of human knowledge.  News flash, they had movies, TV and music on the old Jeopardy too; it's not just these days.  Watch Jeopardy for an entire month.  Catalog the number of categories that are academic in nature, and those that fit your view of 'non academia'.  If you're honest, I bet it's at least three to one, and moreson in the second round.  Don't take backhanded shots like that when you can't back it up.

If you don't like it, don't watch.  I can't stand Celebrity Scoop week of Millionaire, so I turn to something else.  Come Monday, it's back on.  I don't like the turn that Wheel of Fortune took with their categories inaccurately describing what the (excessively long) puzzles are, so I watch something else.  For the most part, I enjoy Jeopardy, so I watch.  I've been doing it for 21 years now, I doubt something as minor as a category about NASCAR or the history of cosmetics will get me to change.  I just might learn something if I stick to it.

[Jimmy Owen]

There is no truth to the speculation that the working title for "Alumni Fun" was "Academia Nuts."

[Matt Ottinger]

[quote name=\'Modor\' date=\'May 21 2005, 02:52 PM\']Oh come on. Quotable movies 2004? 2005's Rock 'N Roll hall of famers? I'm sure a lot of thought went into those questions.[/quote]
You'd be absolutely right.  As much thought and effort went into those questions as go into any category the writers and researchers come up with.  

Oh, I'm sorry, that was supposed to be sarcasm, wasn't it?

[uncamark]

[quote name=\'TLEberle\' date=\'May 23 2005, 07:08 AM\'][quote name=\'Modor\' date=\'May 23 2005, 02:18 AM\']Too bad a show doesn't exist nationally that stresses acadamia more than the movies.

[snapback]86203[/snapback]

[/quote]

College Bowl did.  Gone now.
Wintuition did.  Gone now.
Studio Seven did, sorta.  Gone now.

The TV guys figured out that lots of people don't want to watch game shows with hard material anymore- the play along value is gone.  Sure, it was nice to knock down that $2,000 clue about the schematic diagram last week, but if things get way too hard, the viewers will watch other shows.

I don't know where you come up with Jeopardy stressing movies more than academia.  A good Jeopardy player must be able to deal with categories that span the whole of human knowledge.  News flash, they had movies, TV and music on the old Jeopardy too; it's not just these days.  Watch Jeopardy for an entire month.  Catalog the number of categories that are academic in nature, and those that fit your view of 'non academia'.  If you're honest, I bet it's at least three to one, and moreson in the second round.  Don't take backhanded shots like that when you can't back it up.

[snapback]86207[/snapback]

[/quote]

The 80s/90s versions of "College Bowl" (Art Fleming on CBS Radio, Dick Cavett on Disney, "Honda All-Star Challenge" on BET) had more pop culture content than the Ludden/Earle days, as does the current live equivalents.  Not overwhelming, but still present (as does "University Challenge" in the UK).

"Studio 7" wasn't really that intellectual a show.  Even if most questions were pegged to news events, it was still pretty pop culture-oriented.

The only difference is that in the 80s you didn't see a lot of "pop culture" categories in DJ!, unless it was foreign films, classical music (or maybe jazz), public television, etc.  (It's been too long since the Fleming days to recall board makeups back then.)  That is changed, but it's not anything I'd get excited about--to me, it's a balance.  Just like the kids can answer the first tier questions on "WWTBAM," the teen family member can knock off Lindsay Lohan (the category, that is, you dirty minds) while Dad or the smart Mormon nerd can knock off Presidential Trivia and everyone gets their chance to prove their superiority.

And don't forget:  In that photo from the early days of Fleming "J!" in the EOTGS, the FJ! clue in Vaudeville is something like "A NAME FOR AN EIGHT-GIRL CHORUS LINE."  That's not exactly ultrahighbrow, then or now--and since vaudeville has completely dropped off the pop culture map of most Americans, a clue they can't use today.  You always have to adopt to the times.

[passwordplus]

I am not downing Meredith, but I (and many others in the game show fan world) like Regis a helluva better on Millionaire than her. She is decent, she has improved since 2002, but I don't think it was quite her turn for the Emmy. If anybody(as far as a underdog winning does) deserved one this year, it was Richard Karn. Richard has done a helluva good job with the Feud(such as it is being different from other versions), and brought the ratings up on the show. Hell he has actually saved Feud from the dumper. Louie was about to put the show into the cancelled bin, and even said that it wouldn't last 6 months with Karn taking over. Well, RK has proved all that $hit wrong fro sure.

[PYLdude]

[quote name=\'passwordplus\' date=\'May 23 2005, 02:36 PM\']I am not downing Meredith, but I (and many others in the game show fan world) like Regis a helluva better on Millionaire than her. She is decent, she has improved since 2002, but I don't think it was quite her turn for the Emmy. If anybody(as far as a underdog winning does) deserved one this year, it was Richard Karn. Richard has done a helluva good job with the Feud(such as it is being different from other versions), and brought the ratings up on the show. Hell he has actually saved Feud from the dumper. Louie was about to put the show into the cancelled bin, and even said that it wouldn't last 6 months with Karn taking over. Well, RK has proved all that $hit wrong fro sure.

[snapback]86233[/snapback]

[/quote]

As much as I don't like Meredith, I don't think that Karn was deserving of an Emmy nomination, much less an award.

I don't think Karn has done anything special for Feud. I also don't think that the show should still be on the air. While Louie may have been wrong with his prediction (and it was a year, not six months), for all intents and purposes Karn should either have been replaced or the show should have been sent off to the scrap heap after the first two years with Richard at the helm. To me, Feud is now unwatchable. I can't understand why it keeps getting renewed (maybe Fremantle and Tribune don't have anything else to trot out?). The show has outlived its place on TV, and I think it's time for something new on those TV stations that carry Feud.

Maybe you're seeing something there that I'm not, but what I see, I don't like.

[uncamark]

Even if anyone thought that Anderson or Karn is worthy, Fremantle seems to have chosen not to submit this version of "Feud" for any Emmy recognition, so it's all a moot point.

And they keep doing "Feud" because it does well enough in its daytime and fringe time slots on the stations that carry it that the stations will still renew it and Fremantle and Tribune still make money off of it--more than they could from a less proven or untested format.  Whether or not you like what they're doing and whether or not the format's played out (and I could agree with you on that), that's the bottom line.

[tvwxman]

[quote name=\'uncamark\' date=\'May 23 2005, 02:04 PM\']And they keep doing "Feud" because it does well enough in its daytime and fringe time slots on the stations that carry it that the stations will still renew it and Fremantle and Tribune still make money off of it--more than they could from a less proven or untested format.  Whether or not you like what they're doing and whether or not the format's played out (and I could agree with you on that), that's the bottom line.

[snapback]86237[/snapback]

[/quote]

But oh how I wish Fremantle would once again use Feud to launch other shows as companions, and sell them as an hour, as opposed to just double running Feud. A little foresight could make em even more money, if they just invested in the genre.....For a while there (TTTT2000, CS01) it looked like that's what they were doing...