The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: SuperMatch93 on August 04, 2024, 01:06:36 PM
-
Are there any shows you loved watching when you were younger, but your tastes have changed to the point where you no longer enjoy those same episodes?
When I was younger I loved watching Eubanks CS in reruns on GSN, but nowadays I'm not a huge fan (mainly because Bob's hosting style has soured on me) and am less inclined to watch it.
For the purposes of this question I'm not talking about shows that you felt have gone downhill over their run, I mean that the same episodes of that show don't entertain you as much as they used to.
-
I have to say mostly the Barry-Enright shows like TJW and TTD because today the questions strike me as so ridiculously unchallenging that I don't derive much enjoyment from them. And more so with TJW but Jack's hosting style hasn't worn well with me either with the bad scripted jokes for him in contestant intros and also the old "can you come back tomorrow?" bit of silliness. I think "Break The Bank" has proved to be the one Barry-Enright show I've watched most because with Kennedy hosting and celebs it just doesn't seem like the typical B-E show.
-
MG. I’ll watch it if it’s on, but I watched it so much on GSN that I’m kinda over it now. But my attention span in general has kinda waned over the years, unless it’s a rare pilot or something obscure that we didn’t know existed. LMAD80 and Pitfall come to mind for the latter.
-
For me, it's also the B-E shows. And I think aside from the very wordy but generally simple questions, the faux tension building gets on my nerves, especially the question is asked but before the contestant gives the answer. The shows are, however, visually interesting to watch, so I will watch them when they pop up, but I can't really watch more than 1 or 2 in a row, where I can binge watch the Price is Right Barker channel.
-
For me, it would be Dawson Feud. The kissing (on the lips), the showboating, arguing with Howard Felscher's judging decisions just got old. Plus his ever-growing ego and how he treated some of the staff off camera. I rarely watch it now.
-
Much as I adore the 1970s and the CBS version of Match Game, it's gotten a tad bit old and tired for me. For the record I was never a huge fan of the syndicated version from 1979-82. Say what you may about Richard Dawson but after he left the show was never the same to me.
Super Password I was never really in love with to begin with but liked it well enough I suppose in the 1980s but as time has gone by, I have cooled toward Bert Convy's hosting of that show. He was terrific for Tattletales but thought he clowned around a bit too much and gave away passwords and puzzle answers far too often for my liking on Super Password. That's not to say Allen Ludden and Tom Kennedy never did so with Password Plus, but it was definitely not to the frequency that Bert did so.
-
Go was a phase. Not sure what it was about it that used to appeal to me so much, but the idea of two people building clues one word at a time for a third person seems pretty tawdry to me now for a game show. The broken scoring format that rendered the third round useless most of the time didn't help either. I wish Kevin O'Connell had hosted another game show that sold so I could watch him host another game show, as I found him to be a pretty affable host and one that I wish did rise to more prominence.
-
Go is certainly something I'm glad exists for reasons, but one show is largely as good as the next, and I don't feel like I need to watch anything but the Jackpot Round.
-
I think "Go!" lost its status as a cult favorite once we got the entire run during the "Dark Period" and now we had a chance to see it unfold and see its shortcomings up close that aren't as obvious when you have just a few episodes to sample.
-
I've cooled off a bit in general with the whole genre, and can just call myself a "casual fan" at the moment.
Classics......well, if it's been on Buzzr or on GSN 2001-on, I've largely lost interest. It is a shame, though, that I haven't watched too much "Classic Concentration" since Buzzr picked it up (just casually tuned in once in a while), and I'd probably watch "Talk About", "Whew!", or Narz "Concentration" if they happen to come around. I guess it's just that I'm more interested in stuff I haven't seen in a while. (but isn't that what the YouTube is for?) But then, perhaps 20-to-25 year old me would not have been able to be pulled away from Buzzr.
First-run....."Jeopardy!"'s been my main jam for a while now. I cooled off on TPIR long ago, and the new season of PYL hasn't caught my attention as much as past seasons. I do hope "Pyramid" comes back for another season, but I also feel they jumped the shark a little (I guess with the move from NYC to LA).
-
For me, it's Tomarken's "Wipeout" and then "The Joker's Wild", both versions with Barry/Cullen and with Finn.
With "Wipeout", as a kid, I enjoyed watching it because, well, it was a game show, and I loved Peter Tomarken. I also liked the running bonus round for some reason! But, I've watched a few episodes from the GameTV run a few years ago, and, while I haven't soured on Tomarken as a good host, I'm also not surprised at all that the show didn't last. It felt like so little game in an episode, but otherwise, if you didn't have much knowledge of a subject, you may as well have been picking numbers.
"The Joker's Wild" was a show I grew up with, specifically Finn's version, and I always liked it when I was younger. The weird dollar amounts on the wheels, tons of trivia questions, and frenetic pace scratched some kind of itch for me. I used to ask my mom to tape it for me when it aired at like 1 AM in first-run; that's how much I liked it. And, I liked it again when it was on USA in reruns. But, my god; watching it on YouTube many years later makes me think someone decided to take three separate game shows and mash them together in some sort of Franken-game that no one would stick with for more than an episode or two. That said, I don't think Finn was a bad host; he was just greatly constrained by the format.
Honorable mention: I loved the state lottery game shows when I was growing up ("Hoosier Millionaire", "Illinois Instant Riches", and "Megabucks Giveaway") and used to watch them every Saturday night, but feel they are so dull now when watching them in reruns on YouTube that I'm not surprised most of them have disappeared.
Anthony
-
For me, it's Classic Concentration. Loved it as a kid, but it's pretty obvious now that they never really found a groove for that show, with it's constant tinkering of the format, throwing every decoration they could on the set, and Alex's style waffling between detached and bored at times.
With "Wipeout", as a kid, I enjoyed watching it because, well, it was a game show, and I loved Peter Tomarken. I also liked the running bonus round for some reason! But, I've watched a few episodes from the GameTV run a few years ago, and, while I haven't soured on Tomarken as a good host, I'm also not surprised at all that the show didn't last. It felt like so little game in an episode, but otherwise, if you didn't have much knowledge of a subject, you may as well have been picking numbers.
Anthony
Looking back, Wipeout was a low budget game wrapped up in a bunch of chrome to make it look more presentable. It's still pretty fun to play, but there's a reason why the format's been a segment of several other shows but never been revived on its own.
-
Get the Picture (1991 Nickelodeon game show) gets my vote. Repetitive gameplay, hyper hosting by Mike O'Malley (who was much better hosting GUTS/Global GUTS), and sometimes dull Power Surges has gotten boring to me.
-
A lot of Nickelodeon game shows, but in particular Nick Arcade and Legends of the Hidden Temple. Both are just frustrating exercises to watch, especially Legends - watching it now makes it seem like the production company rigged the hell out of the temple.
-
A lot of Nickelodeon game shows, but in particular Nick Arcade and Legends of the Hidden Temple. Both are just frustrating exercises to watch, especially Legends - watching it now makes it seem like the production company rigged the hell out of the temple.
There are two sides to the coin; trips to Space Camp or Cancun aren't cheap, but also if nine out of ten teams retrieve and return the artifact the challenge would be too light. I recall the win rate was between one and four and one in three, and that feels right for a show where you can sign up to play early in the morning and be done as the park closes that day.
-
I was a champion of Brady-era LMaD for a while (and got ribbed for it here a few times), but eventually it just got to be annoyingly repetitive and boring. The way Wayne opens every...single...segment by shouting "WHO WANTS TO MAKE A DEAL???", asking every single contestant to show how "unique" they are by doing a stupid dance or singing a song, the drawn-out "comedy" bits between Wayne and Jonathan that make it seem more like Whose Deal Is It Anyway? than a proper game show...<sigh>
I get that they can't do LMaD exactly the way Monty did it in this day and age, nor are there very many (if any) people out there who could do the gig as well as he could. But it's still a disappointment.
-
I was a champion of Brady-era LMaD for a while (and got ribbed for it here a few times), but eventually it just got to be annoyingly repetitive and boring. The way Wayne opens every...single...segment by shouting "WHO WANTS TO MAKE A DEAL???", asking every single contestant to showboat by doing a stupid dance or singing a song, the drawn-out "comedy" bits between Wayne and Jonathan that make it seem more like Whose Deal Is It Anyway? than a proper game show...<sigh>
I get that they can't do LMaD exactly the way Monty did it in this day and age, nor are there very many (if any) people out there who could do the gig as well as he could. But it's still a disappointment.
I never minded it too much, but until recently it aired at 9am here in Chicago, which I felt was too early for a show that bombastic anyway. It now airs at 3pm but the second half is up against J!, which I'd pick over it any day.
-
There are two sides to the coin; trips to Space Camp or Cancun aren't cheap, but also if nine out of ten teams retrieve and return the artifact the challenge would be too light. I recall the win rate was between one and four and one in three, and that feels right for a show where you can sign up to play early in the morning and be done as the park closes that day.
I totally understand not wanting the win rate to be astronomical but at the same time, I watched an episode where Kirk Fogg asked the team if they were going to take the high entrance or low entrance - the team said "high" and LO AND BEHOLD THERE'S A F'ING TEMPLE GUARD AT THE ENTRANCE.
Like, come on man!
-
I totally understand not wanting the win rate to be astronomical but at the same time, I watched an episode where Kirk Fogg asked the team if they were going to take the high entrance or low entrance - the team said "high" and LO AND BEHOLD THERE'S A F'ING TEMPLE GUARD AT THE ENTRANCE.
Like, come on man!
What's the difference between a temple guard in the first room and one in the fifth room? It still takes two to take the first player out.
-
For me, it was "Jackpot" when it dropped the target number $50,000 multiplier and went from riddles to trivia questions. That's why the subsequent revivals didn't excite me.
-
There are two sides to the coin; trips to Space Camp or Cancun aren't cheap, but also if nine out of ten teams retrieve and return the artifact the challenge would be too light. I recall the win rate was between one and four and one in three, and that feels right for a show where you can sign up to play early in the morning and be done as the park closes that day.
I totally understand not wanting the win rate to be astronomical but at the same time, I watched an episode where Kirk Fogg asked the team if they were going to take the high entrance or low entrance - the team said "high" and LO AND BEHOLD THERE'S A F'ING TEMPLE GUARD AT THE ENTRANCE.
I think Kirk was just trying to make conversation. IIRC, that question disappeared after the first season, perhaps for optics. But I would think the temple guards and layout would have to be set before the episode started.
WRT the original topic, I lean towards the B&E series, but specifically Tic Tac Dough. As a youngster, I understood the concept and found the dragon amusing. I could even answer some of the questions! I now find the questions insipid and the bonus game uncreative.
-
There are two sides to the coin; trips to Space Camp or Cancun aren't cheap, but also if nine out of ten teams retrieve and return the artifact the challenge would be too light. I recall the win rate was between one and four and one in three, and that feels right for a show where you can sign up to play early in the morning and be done as the park closes that day.
I totally understand not wanting the win rate to be astronomical but at the same time, I watched an episode where Kirk Fogg asked the team if they were going to take the high entrance or low entrance - the team said "high" and LO AND BEHOLD THERE'S A F'ING TEMPLE GUARD AT THE ENTRANCE.
I think Kirk was just trying to make conversation. IIRC, that question disappeared after the first season, perhaps for optics. But I would think the temple guards and layout would have to be set before the episode started.
I can 100% confirm that question was dropped in season two (when Olmec started doing all the rule explanations), so you wouldn't know until the clock starts if the contestant will go in the Crypt (high entrance) or the Ledges (low entrance) first.
-
It's also possible that it allowed the cameras to be in position for the beginning of the run--by S2 when the contestant had to run up the steps through the gate and then choose you would always have the same establishing shot.
That may be giving them way more credit than they deserve, but it would be nice to assume that there was an actual reason for the dialog and not just filling time.
-
I recall the win rate was between one and four and one in three, and that feels right for a show where you can sign up to play early in the morning and be done as the park closes that day.
At the risk of sounding pedantic, the kids had to go through a bigger audition process. There's a good interview on YouTube with one of the producers, David Greenfield, where he talks about overseeing 1,000 contestants going through a range of mini stunts to test their mettle.
And you're pretty much right on the win rate -- 32 wins out of 120 shows, or 26.66%. David also said in a Reddit AMA that they aimed for 33%, and "unfortunately" got less.
-Jason
-
WWTBAM, but not for lack of a changing perspective, but because they've sunk my enthusiasm with relying on celebrities. As for a show I used to love but now no more, surprisingly, Bullseye. The bonus round could just drag way too long, especially if the player was going for the 10-spin win. Front game really a TJW category on a niftier set. Anyone out there know who else other than Jim Lange had a shot at the job? Anyhow, I'll always appreciate the cosmetic elements just as much as always, though :D
-
Pre-school me was awed by “The $1,000,000 Chance of a Lifetime” and its screen and keyboard. (I don’t think I was aware of or would’ve cared about the top prize at that age.) Revisiting on YouTube after 20 years . . . ouch. It was just hangman writ large, with a cash prize hugely out of proportion to the game’s difficulty, and ugh, those cheesy sound effects when the Stinger was revealed. (Someone in the studio audience should’ve hoorayed it just to be contrary.)
-
WWTBAM, but not for lack of a changing perspective, but because they've sunk my enthusiasm with relying on celebrities.
Yes, add WWTBAM to my list, too. Flooding the airwaves with it (wasn't it on like six times a week at one point?) and then the endless celebrity editions killed the show for me. Yes, other quiz shows (Jeopardy) are on five days a week, but they're fast paced - part of it was the amount of dead time in the show didn't help, which was ultimately resolved with the addition of a clock, but I had already tuned out by the time they made changes to the format.
-
I noticed when the entire Regis run returned to GSN that my viewing habits mirrored what they were back at the turn of the century. The 1999-2000 episodes were must-see, but by the time 2001 rolled around, it felt kind of like you'd seen all there is to see. I found myself fast forwarding through to the $64,000 question on every run.
I still wonder what might have been if they didn't decide to make WWTBAM a series, and stuck with the "Event TV" model.
-
I still wonder what might have been if they didn't decide to make WWTBAM a series, and stuck with the "Event TV" model.
Me, too. The whole country fell out of love with it. Maybe if they’d kept to once a week, say, Sunday, the biggest viewership night, it may have stayed big longer. Or not.
-
I'll add myself to the list who fell out of favor with WWTBAM. It was during the Regis years after they had a run of 3 or 4 grand prize winners in a span of only a few months. After that, my #1 pet peeve was the contestant on a low level question saying, "I think I know the answer but just to be safe I'll ask the audience." Well, that guy's not making it past $64,000...what else is on?
-
After that, my #1 pet peeve was the contestant on a low level question saying, "I think I know the answer but just to be safe I'll ask the audience." Well, that guy's not making it past $64,000...what else is on?
This is certainly a thing that when I see on stream I want to pull my hair out or bite my fist, but I also understand knowledge holes. I know I have them, I imagine you do as well? That's the point of the lifeline--since you're ostensibly getting fifteen questions from all realms of knowledge that you can't be expected to know everything.
To the point of overexposure, I get the point of "there's nothing else they can do," so even long running shows such as Dancing With the Stars, The Amazing Race, The Voice and such are constantly refining their final product. Millionaire really can't do that other than hitting the accelerator on the prize money.
-
Millionaire really can't do that other than hitting the accelerator on the prize money.
I don't have the ratings on hand, but I wonder if implementing the progressive jackpot had a noticeable effect on viewership (my guess is no, since it was still so overexposed at the time).
I think we've talked about this on here before, but a million dollars doesn't have the same oomph that it did as a top prize 25 years ago so that draw isn't quite there anymore. I remember thinking a while back that they could take a page from the 50s Break the Bank and increase the top prize by any money forfeited with a wrong answer (e.g. if a contestant got question 15 wrong, the next contestant would be playing for $1,468,000).
-
After that, my #1 pet peeve was the contestant on a low level question saying, "I think I know the answer but just to be safe I'll ask the audience." Well, that guy's not making it past $64,000...what else is on?
This is certainly a thing that when I see on stream I want to pull my hair out or bite my fist, but I also understand knowledge holes.
The one that always got me pulling my hair out was "I'm pretty sure it's A, but let me ask the audience." Twenty five years later, people are still doing that.
-
Add me to the list of most shows that Barry/Enright cranked out.
As a kid, the sets, colors, computer graphics, rainbow swirls and sound effects were what drew me into the games.
But when I started watching the shows as an adult, Joker's Wild was the biggest disappointment as the years went on, and it really came to light for me after GSN started airing the original CBS episodes. In the beginning, the show's difficulty level for questions was on par with Fleming Jeopardy and the Who What & Where Game. It really started going down the dumbing down trail when Tic Tac Dough caught fire in syndication and Bullseye soon after and when TJW added the audience and home games which took away time from the real game play. This was also around the time that B&E was regularly doing the "Reach $xxxx before hitting the ______" bonus round variant on nearly all their shows.
Break The Bank was one of their exceptions to the rule, despite the "$2000 or Bust" end game used on the syndicated version.
After that, my #1 pet peeve was the contestant on a low level question saying, "I think I know the answer but just to be safe I'll ask the audience." Well, that guy's not making it past $64,000...what else is on?
This is certainly a thing that when I see on stream I want to pull my hair out or bite my fist, but I also understand knowledge holes.
The one that always got me pulling my hair out was "I'm pretty sure it's A, but let me ask the audience." Twenty five years later, people are still doing that.
And that's the #1 no-no if you go to Ask The Audience -- DON'T give the audience any hint as to what choices you are torn between until AFTER the audience is polled. Otherwise, with rare exception, the popular answer skews more towards your initial choice and may push you in the wrong direction.
-
Disagree, telling the audience that you think the answer is D if you have already ruled it out means you'll get all of the people who don't have any idea and are just following the hot seat player, who will now have way more signal than noise.
-
I still wonder what might have been if they didn't decide to make WWTBAM a series, and stuck with the "Event TV" model.
One big aspect I still like about UK Millionaire. Still feels special, especially with Fastest Finger and contestants that generally qualified in some way. There's a dryness that still works for Millionaire over there.
I find that I'm a little Jeopardy!ed out right now. After all the tournaments, even with regular players, it still just feels like a lot. I think also too that everyone playing the Holzhauer "start at bottom, try to block or get DD" strategy just makes the game not as fun to play along with, and there's been a monotony to the presentation without the Clue Crew and company. It feels like everything is fast-based and text clues, and the game has no room to breathe at all.
25 Words or Less was a lot of fun when it first aired, and I was fine with the COVID zoom-cubes for a couple of years, but man, it feels like it's just being phoned in now by everyone. Needs a rule change, a real set/gathering or something to spice it up.
-
WWTBAM, but not for lack of a changing perspective, but because they've sunk my enthusiasm with relying on celebrities. As for a show I used to love but now no more, surprisingly, Bullseye. The bonus round could just drag way too long, especially if the player was going for the 10-spin win. Front game really a TJW category on a niftier set. Anyone out there know who else other than Jim Lange had a shot at the job? Anyhow, I'll always appreciate the cosmetic elements just as much as always, though :D
I like Bullseye, but when I think of fast-paced hosts, Jim Lange does not pop up at the top of the list. I'm sure someone will pop up to correct me, but for God's sake, the only show he hosted with a clock was Name That Tune, and that one stops for long periods of time every three seconds or so. It's the longest thirty seconds in television. I've seen NFL games at the two-minute warning end faster.
(I'm already wrong: Chance Of A Lifetime, but all he had to do was read letters as they appeared.)
-
As for a show I used to love but now no more, surprisingly, Bullseye.
I was never really a fan of the show. It premiered when I was around 6, and I remember cheering against a 5-question contract because I found having to wait for the contestant to answer 5 questions extremely boring. I had the same reaction when I watched the show as an adult. You're right about the bonus round too.
-
I think also too that everyone playing the Holzhauer "start at bottom, try to block or get DD" strategy just makes the game not as fun to play along with
So lessee. Forrest Bounce, pisses people off.
Fishing for Daily Doubles (arguably the best strategy for a strong player, by removing the element of chance from the game as much as possible) pisses people off.
So anything but a comforting, predictable, repeatable "take one category from top to bottom and then move to another one" is gonna raise hackles.
Definitely something to ponder here. Definitely.
and there's been a monotony to the presentation without the Clue Crew and company.
Fewer unnecessary video clues = more content making it to air instead of time running out. I'm down with that.
25 Words or Less was a lot of fun when it first aired, and I was fine with the COVID zoom-cubes for a couple of years, but man, it feels like it's just being phoned in now by everyone. Needs a rule change, a real set/gathering or something to spice it up.
I don't watch this (I'm not even sure when it's on here)....are they still playing it over Zoom, even today?
-
I don't watch this (I'm not even sure when it's on here)....are they still playing it over Zoom, even today?
They are indeed. My theory is that they want to keep it that way because if they went back to the in-studio setup, they wouldn't be able to mix in repeats as easily because they would seem dated.
-
My theory is that they want to keep it that way because if they went back to the in-studio setup, they wouldn't be able to mix in repeats as easily because they would seem dated.
Isn't that a feature? I honestly would rather not turn on new episodes and be reminded of why they went to playing over Zoom in the FIRST place.
I get that we're still dealing with COVID and it's likely we will be in some form or fashion for the rest of our lives. But TV (especially game shows) is supposed to be an escape and most production has gone back to "normal" or whatever passes for it these days. Take the "W" where you can get it, I say.
-
I thought I read that it's back to the original setup, now that the show tapes in Atlanta. Could be wrong there.
-
Chris: I think early-midday on channel 13. GSN pairs it with Person, Place or Thing from 0900 to 1000.
-
I don't watch this (I'm not even sure when it's on here)....are they still playing it over Zoom, even today?
They are indeed.
FWIW, it's not Zoom. The contestants and celebrities have always been in the same studio, but in socially distanced "pods" where they can hear with earbuds and watch the others on monitors. Meredith herself was broadcasting from out east until things got better, at which time her pod moved to the SoCal studio with everyone else.
-Jason
-
I thought I read that it's back to the original setup, now that the show tapes in Atlanta. Could be wrong there.
Nope, it's still the pods.
-
FWIW, it's not Zoom. The contestants and celebrities have always been in the same studio, but in socially distanced "pods" where they can hear with earbuds and watch the others on monitors. Meredith herself was broadcasting from out east until things got better, at which time her pod moved to the SoCal studio with everyone else.
Huh, interesting. Then continuing with that format makes even *less* sense today.
-
I thought I read that it's back to the original setup, now that the show tapes in Atlanta. Could be wrong there.
Nope, it's still the pods.
Huh. Interesting. Figured they'd change things up with the new setting.
-
My theory is that they want to keep it that way because if they went back to the in-studio setup, they wouldn't be able to mix in repeats as easily because they would seem dated.
Isn't that a feature? I honestly would rather not turn on new episodes and be reminded of why they went to playing over Zoom in the FIRST place.
I get that we're still dealing with COVID and it's likely we will be in some form or fashion for the rest of our lives. But TV (especially game shows) is supposed to be an escape and most production has gone back to "normal" or whatever passes for it these days. Take the "W" where you can get it, I say.
I always just assumed Meredith wanted to keep the social distancing because she has an immunocompromised husband at home.
-
I understand Meredith wanting to stay safe given her husband's health, but after four years of this "faux-Zoom" setup, the show looks antiquated and silly -- like the producers and others working behind the scenes don't give a flip about the audience.
As far as the original question at hand ...
-- I agree with the peanut gallery about WWTBAM. I do wonder how the show would have held up as event programming 2-3 times a year if ABC opted to keep that strategy going.
-- There were shows I enjoyed when I was a child given the bells and whistles -- Bullseye, $1M Chance of a Lifetime, Battlestars -- that I find hard to watch today given the weak formats and poor gameplay.
-- I watch J! maybe once or twice a week these days depending on the contestants and such. The "Forrest bounce" strategy that every contestant uses now can be annoying, particularly since I'm so used to 30+ years of contestants starting from the top and wrapping up said category a minute or two later.
JD
-
I always thought Bill Rafferty was a better host than Bob Eubanks on Card Sharks. The thing that bugs me is when the contestant gives a long opinion/answer to the question.
The Steve Harvey version of Family Feud comes to mind. I was a huge fan in the beginning; I thought his shtick was funny, and I thought calling out the contestants on their bad answers was funny. The show quickly got annoying and repetitive, with Steve's opening line, Well, welcome to Family Feud everyone, I am your man, Steve Harvey." The cringy question writing and the sexual answers to get Steve's reaction.
-
I always thought Bill Rafferty was a better host than Bob Eubanks on Card Sharks.
I watched an episode of Rafferty CS after posting this thread and I'd have to say I agree; his wit added something to the show that Eubanks' delivery was lacking in. I also like the prize cards element.
-
I always thought Bill Rafferty was a better host than Bob Eubanks on Card Sharks. The thing that bugs me is when the contestant gives a long opinion/answer to the question.
+1
Something about the Eubanks' edition doesn't engage me as much as Rafferty's (and it wasn't until both were on GSN, later BUZZR, that could have reference points to).
The other show that seemed to pass along is "Wheel," but that could be biased from a former contestant's POV (or rather, assessing my life after watching those old shopping episodes).
-
LMAD started out as a wonderful game with a minimalist format based on Lady and the Tiger devised by Hatos and Hall.
Now it's unwatchable for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is the behavior of the contestants. The term "freak show" comes to mind. Most of the contestants need to be on serious medication IMO. It's a one-note song with endless contestant histrionics and screeching.
LMAD has some of the worst directing I've ever seen on television.
Wayne Brady and Jonathan Mangum are OK.
-
So anything but a comforting, predictable, repeatable "take one category from top to bottom and then move to another one" is gonna raise hackles.
Definitely something to ponder here. Definitely.
Honestly, Forrest Bouncing and Daily Double hunting don't really bother me. It's that everybody is now playing the game this way because of one guy who "went viral" as a mega champ for doing so. Every Jeopardy! player is now trying to break the game, and the powers that are relish the competitive spirit by selling the game as "sport" now.
Fewer unnecessary video clues = more content making it to air instead of time running out. I'm down with that.
Seconded.
-
I know we've piled onto Barry & Enright in this thread but if you could please indulge one more.
When you're 5 and there's an electronic dragon roaring at you, or three screens swirling around in miles of neon, they've got you. You're the world's biggest fan. It's the biggest, sweetest Bubblicious bubble ever.
When you're older, you watch the shows a little more critically, taking notice of new things. You realize how easy the questions are: maybe $200/$400 Jeopardy! clues at their hardest. A lot of the charm is lost. Then you watch GSN during the Dark Period. Suddenly you realize how similar all three shows are. The Bubblicious starts losing its flavor.
Finally it hits you: Tic Tac Dough, Joker's Wild and Bullseye are not just similar...they're the exact. same. show. The formula is nearly identical: hit a certain dollar amount (or get 3 Xs or Os in a row), then go on to a bonus round you win by reaching a certain dollar amount or getting [Tic-Tac/3 bullseyes/dollar amounts], but avoid the dragon/lightning/devil. Ptooey. All that gum you've been chewing has been the same flavor, cleverly packaged in 3 different wrappers so you never noticed before. And the ingredients did not always change for the better: celebrities added nothing to Bullseye. The audience round on Joker slowed the game to a crawl, and then practically shifted it into reverse when Bill Cullen took over. And the new set and host for the final season of Tic Tac were about as effective as doing CPR on a corpse.
I don't chew a lot of gum these days.
-
Finally it hits you: Tic Tac Dough, Joker's Wild and Bullseye are not just similar...they're the exact. same. show. The formula is nearly identical: hit a certain dollar amount (or get 3 Xs or Os in a row), then go on to a bonus round you win by reaching a certain dollar amount or getting [Tic-Tac/3 bullseyes/dollar amounts], but avoid the dragon/lightning/devil. Ptooey. All that gum you've been chewing has been the same flavor, cleverly packaged in 3 different wrappers so you never noticed before.
When people criticize GSN for making the same show, I always point out B & E shows follow a much stricter template. I still enjoy Joker, but like others said it's still derivative and Bullseye cribbed the "Fast Forward" category to make an ironically much slower show.
-
I'll go along with Family Feud - both Harvey and Dawson.
In the beginning, Dawson seemed like a nice guy, but when his ego started getting out of control and he was slobbering over all the female contestants all the time, it got unwatchable for me.
For Harvey, as others have said, it's the stupidity of the questions. One thing about the Dawson and Combs versions was that at least the questions had some sort of quality to them. They weren't in the toilet as most of today's questions are.
-
Finally it hits you: Tic Tac Dough, Joker's Wild and Bullseye are not just similar...they're the exact. same. show. The formula is nearly identical: hit a certain dollar amount (or get 3 Xs or Os in a row), then go on to a bonus round you win by reaching a certain dollar amount or getting [Tic-Tac/3 bullseyes/dollar amounts], but avoid the dragon/lightning/devil. Ptooey. All that gum you've been chewing has been the same flavor, cleverly packaged in 3 different wrappers so you never noticed before.
When people criticize GSN for making the same show, I always point out B & E shows follow a much stricter template. I still enjoy Joker, but like others said it's still derivative and Bullseye cribbed the "Fast Forward" category to make an ironically much slower show.
As we've been discussing this - I do wonder how Bullseye would have been with Jim Peck hosting. Jim Lange isn't my cup of team for most anything I've seen him in, but Peck brought a much more energetic pace to Joker - I could see him doing the same for Bullseye.
-
As we've been discussing this - I do wonder how Bullseye would have been with Jim Peck hosting. Jim Lange isn't my cup of team for most anything I've seen him in, but Peck brought a much more energetic pace to Joker - I could see him doing the same for Bullseye.
Good thought. Shorter questions, since a game had so many, would have helped, too.
It’s struck me that I like the CBS run of Joker better than what came later. Players answered wrong once in a while, and three wins for the jackpot gave it more tension than five for a car.
They could have used more features like the Lucky Hundreds on CBS. It was lazy they never put anything different on the bonus wheels. It doesn’t have to be Dream Car Week, but geez, give away something special once in a while. Add a wrinkle to the “will you risk $575?” that makes the decision interesting. Maybe in the front game there’s a slide that offers a reward to skip your turn.
Tic Tac Dough is what it is. It only got exciting when a champ was on a roll, which makes a remounting without returning champions laughable.
-
Despite the similarities of the Big 3 B&E Shows, TTD did have games that ended in ties, which resulted in a new match with a larger cash reward -- a nod to the Twenty-One days -- instead of "first person to $xxxx wins".
Jim Peck would've taken the 25MPH pace of Jim Lange's Bullseye to a more comfortable 55MPH speed. The occasional eternal contract problems still would've prevented him from opening the throttle up to 65MPH+.
Dawson's original Feud was.harder to watch when it seemed like every family had to present Richard SOMETHING they made themselves (t-shirts, crafts, etc...) or got from their local municipality (keys, proclamations, etc...).
-
Wink's TTD was a must-watch for me growing up because of the possibility that games could go on forever and there was the possibility of a "super champion." Looking at it now, are the questions on the easy side? Yes. But this was, to me, a precursor to modern J! -- a show where a champion can win 10, 20, 30 times and garner tons of attention.
Back to J! for a minute -- it's not that I want every contestant to pick clues top to bottom. It's more that modern contestants are the human equivalent of lemmings. If one contestant "Forrest bounces" and hunts for Daily Doubles, then everybody does it. Several years back, we had a situation where every contestant seemed to be playing for ties, calculating Daily Double bets and Final J! wagers to maximize the chance that a tie could happen, etc. Eventually, the show brought in tie-breaker questions to end this strategy. Today's show strategy seems to be "do what that other contestant did."
JD
-
What's been said about the three B-E shows is true, but doesn't every producer do this to a certain degree?
When I first saw All-Star Blitz, it struck me as very similar to Hollywood Squares - especially in question style. Some might even throw Battlestars in there too.
Even G-T did this...there are a lot of similarities with the panel shows What's My Line, I've Got a Secret and even The Name's the Same. I'm excluding To Tell the Truth because that game play was very different.
Coming up with new ideas is a challenge, so it wasn't usual just to come up with variations on the same theme.
-
As we've been discussing this - I do wonder how Bullseye would have been with Jim Peck hosting. Jim Lange isn't my cup of team for most anything I've seen him in, but Peck brought a much more energetic pace to Joker - I could see him doing the same for Bullseye.
Good thought. Shorter questions, since a game had so many, would have helped, too.
One way I'd fix it -- other than chucking the format and using the set to play B&E's pilot Double Cross -- would be to re-spin and get a new contract if both players miss the same question. At least you'd be using the big set piece some more. Or, to help differentiate it from Joker and add some tension, put lightning in the front game that causes you to lose your turn, like the crosses on Double Cross.
Did I mention they should have just played Double Cross?
-Jason
-
What's been said about the three B-E shows is true, but doesn't every producer do this to a certain degree?
The thing that made B&E's situation unique was that all three of their copycat shows were on at the same time, probably even two back-to-back in some markets. Merrill Heatter had a few months between Squares and Battlestars, and a couple years between the second run of Battlestars and All-Star Blitz. And even then, Blitz had the word puzzle as a diversion.
Bob Stewart, arguably the king of this, took a more "modular" approach - a little bit of this format, some of that one and it's a whole "new" ballgame, as evidenced by how elements of Jackpot worked their way into the Twisters pilot (which was more a game of shuffleboard than baseball, but I digress).
Goodson-Todman's approach was a little different: for Secret, Allan Sherman basically convinced them to play What's My Line for laughs, and everyone was in on the joke.
-
Bob Stewart, arguably the king of this, took a more "modular" approach - a little bit of this format, some of that one and it's a whole "new" ballgame, as evidenced by how elements of Jackpot worked their way into the Twisters pilot (which was more a game of shuffleboard than baseball, but I digress).
So, Bob Stewart is the Taco Bell of game show producers. :P