The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: wdm1219inpenna on August 14, 2024, 08:09:19 PM
-
My first choice would be High Rollers.
I realize it had three short-lived runs, 1974-76 and 1978-80 on NBC and 1987-88 in syndication, but it's very surprising that a simple yet exciting big stakes game show such as this has not been remade since Ronald Reagan still occupied the White House.
This game could very easily become a big money primetime ABC game show. They redid Press Your Luck, Card Sharks, To Tell The Truth, Supermarket Sweep & Pyramid, all of which were also on the air after 1988 in one form or another, so why not High Rollers?
I'd love to hear your thoughts and your ideas on how this could be made into a big money primetime program.
-
My first choice would be High Rollers.
...
I'd love to hear your thoughts and your ideas on how this could be made into a big money primetime program.
Off the top of my head: four contestants in each game, with the board resetting every time someone is eliminated. Stick with the three-column format of the '78 and '87 versions, but instead of prizes, each column is worth a cash jackpot that starts at a random amount between $2000-$5000 and increases by that amount every round it isn't won.
For the bonus round, bring back the original rule from Shut The Box that a contestant may choose to only roll one die if the 7, 8 and 9 are gone, and give them the option to stop and take $3K/eliminated number after every roll. Bad number loses everything, knocking off all 9 wins $100K.
-
Mine would be Concenttation It was NBC's lobgest-running game show for 15 years until WOF surpassed it and there has not been a revival since Bush #41 was president. I am still upset with NBC after they passed on a Concentration reboot in 2000 for a third hour of The Today Show.
-
I would do I've Got a Secret with the questioning style and mystery guest from What's My Line (but *not* the sign-ins).
-
I am still upset with NBC after they passed on a Concentration reboot in 2000 for a third hour of The Today Show.
It's really time to let go of this one. Really.
I dunno if I'd like to see a primetime High Rollers, but maybe GSN with another Catch 21 reboot.
Would love to see Blockbusters rebooted, either in syndication or on GSN. Keep the 2-vs.-1 format of the original, and it would probably have to be self-contained, so crossing the board wins the round and $250 for rounds one and two, doubled values each subsequent round. High score after four rounds wins, and if there's a tie play a sudden death question. Gold Run/Rush for $20K. Even if it's for GSN, because it's my hypothetical. :P
A few years ago, I also had an idea for a primetime $ale. Start each player at $500, with correct answers worth $100. I actually wouldn’t mind the Temptation model with a few :30 speed rounds and mini-games, with Instant Bargains mixed in. Throw in a Fame Game with spaces for $100/250/500. End the game with one final speed round.
Prize levels:
-Stainless steel kitchen ($1,500)
-Small trip, i.e. Canada, the islands ($1,575)
-Family car, i.e. Toyota Camry ($1,700)
-Luxury vacation to Europe, Australia, Africa, etc. ($2,000)
-Luxury car, i.e. Acura MDX ($2,250)
-250K cash ($2,500)
-The Lot ($3,000)
That allows a contestant to win the lot in a minimum of two games. Maybe do an hour-long show where the champ of the first half has the option to risk his or her winnings in the second half.
Or just bring it back for syndication, and let the contestant stay for as long as it takes.
-
You never know when someone in the forum will stand up and yell Jackpot.
Other possibilities are Blockbusters and Now You See It.
-
Cash Cab, Wanna Bet?, OG The Price is Right, Pro-Fan.
Cash Cab can work anywhere and people would be jazzed to get to play.
I thought Wanna Bet was a fun spin on TTTT, though there was one week that I think Tom Green bet all his money in round one, lost and was out of contention.
Pro-Fan would have to be on ESPN or maybe a local version, but I think a simple framework could be explored.
-
I'd love to see the team producing the current version of PYL take a crack at bringing $ale into the 2020s, especially if they carry over the whole personalized prizes gimmick.
-
"What's My Line" hasn't been remade in the U.S. for nearly 50 years. (Unless you count the live stage version.) That would be my choice.
-
Sale of the Century/Temptation and make it an hour-long show with two games, and the returning champion returns for the second part with 2 new contestants.
Others
1 vs 100
Blockbusters
Greed
-
With High Rollers mentioned, I imagine some of you here have seen this Japanese knockoff. It could work within a GSN-style budget. I find it charming. Instead of constant dice rolls, contestants set up traps for each other. The correct answer to a toss-up question forces the opponent to pick one of the 9 squares on the board, hoping to avoid getting knocked out. Surviving contestant plays the original High Rollers "clear the numbers" board (1-9) with two of the 9 numbers putting the player at risk of losing everything if picked back-to-back. From what I've read, this lasted about four years in Japan. A reboot of this could bring back some of the excitement of High Rollers with a different twist. They call it "Super Dice Q." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNnD1TZFQDk
-
The big problem with High Rollers as a format is figuring out a way to convince players to engage in the main mechanic of the show. Unfortunately there isn't much incentive to roll the dice on any given turn but a whole lot of disincentive.
Pacing is also a major consideration - even in the 1987 version, they struggled to fit a full match into one episode, and there were many instances of the time's-up bell ringing just before the Big Numbers could be played. I can only imagine how much less time is available to producers in a half-hour timeslot nowadays.
Building off Stackertosh's idea, I think Sale of the Century could work as a possible primetime reboot, but only with a major format overhaul. To wit, ditch the champion's journey up the ladder and instead have three new contestants each week. Offer a good-but-not-great cash prize to the night's winner ($50k, let's say) and then a much nicer cash prize ($500k, for example) if they can break a certain score threshold. Now, you take the prizes you would have offered in the shopping segment of the game, and you make those the Instant Bargains. Or, you do what they on PYL and offer personalized prizes as Bargains to really force the contestants to weigh their options between grabbing a sure thing now vs. trying to win the game and a significant cash prize vs. going for the brass ring.
-
Building off Stackertosh's idea, I think Sale of the Century could work as a possible primetime reboot, but only with a major format overhaul. To wit, ditch the champion's journey up the ladder and instead have three new contestants each week. Offer a good-but-not-great cash prize to the night's winner ($50k, let's say) and then a much nicer cash prize ($500k, for example) if they can break a certain score threshold. Now, you take the prizes you would have offered in the shopping segment of the game, and you make those the Instant Bargains. Or, you do what they on PYL and offer personalized prizes as Bargains to really force the contestants to weigh their options between grabbing a sure thing now vs. trying to win the game and a significant cash prize vs. going for the brass ring.
I like this. A lot.
Would this format have a bonus round as well, or would the game end after the Speed Round?
-
Would this format have a bonus round as well, or would the game end after the Speed Round?
I think it would be amusing to close the show immediately after the bell, the hosts says "everybody wins what they do, see you next time!"
Yes, I know that's not what you meant.
-
Would this format have a bonus round as well, or would the game end after the Speed Round?
Any bonus round where a jackpot is on offer in the front game is going to feel tacked on. Might as well end it at its most logical point.
-
I envision something where the winner of the day finishes with some amount, and can then increase her bank account by that figure by playing several different rounds and then decides on a trip, a car or bonanza, rather than you can win a quarter-million just for reaching $117 after the speed round.
-
I envision something where the winner of the day finishes with some amount, and can then increase her bank account by that figure by playing several different rounds and then decides on a trip, a car or bonanza, rather than you can win a quarter-million just for reaching $117 after the speed round.
My thoughts were along this line, because I do think the shopping element is important. Shorten the showroom and make it four prizes and the cash ($100k). The player can stop with their cash total from the front game and buy whatever prize is at their current score level, or they can wager their score money on a final question round (just take the 10 in 60 from Temptation since it's short). If they win, they get the prize at whatever level they jump to, and if they lose, they lose that wagered money and go down to the kitchen appliances. Either way they win something, but the 10 in 60 seems to have a win rate where it's a pretty well earned win.
-
^I had a bonus round idea similar to that a while back:
Your total at the end of the game is your baseline for shopping, with the same sale prices as the old show. The contestant is asked questions (more difficult than the main game ones) at $50 a pop and given the category before each one. A wrong answer gives them a strike, and three strikes ends the bonus round and forfeits any additional dollars won (leaving them with what their main game total could afford). Once they have two strikes the risk element comes into play: after hearing the category they could cash out at whatever level they were at, or go on.
I had a primetime version in mind sans returning champions for this.
-
Pacing is also a major consideration - even in the 1987 version, they struggled to fit a full match into one episode, and there were many instances of the time's-up bell ringing just before the Big Numbers could be played. I can only imagine how much less time is available to producers in a half-hour timeslot nowadays.
Blame some of it on those stupid mini-games they added as prizes. Especially when won in mid-match, they were such a momentum stopper in the overall main game.
As far as the other prizes they may have added to the columns each game, they could cut out the pre-taped modeling segments and just ramble off the prizes once won, ala Classic Concentration with the non-sponsored prizes announced by name only. You could also limit prizes in each column to either 3 or 4 prizes to save more time in the long run ‐‐ more full columns more often
-
I disagree - the mini-games were the only way they could incorporate premium prizes like high-end trips and cars into the mix. And since they always incorporated the dice into the mini-games, you could at least get more mileage out of your main gimmick that way.
No, the problem was that almost nobody was willing to risk losing the game. Even in situations where the only bad roll was a 3, even in games where the columns had nothing but cash ($1K in column 1, $3K in 2, and $5K in 3 was done several times over the course of the run), players could not be convinced to roll the dice. And it's not even that they were holding out for a bonus round with a big jackpot; even in 1987 a $10K bonus round was considered middle-of-the-road, and the odds of winning it weren't that great. So players were actively avoiding the game's primary mechanic to play a bonus round with maybe a 15% win rate. That's not good television, whether or not you have the mini-games.
-
I disagree - the mini-games were the only way they could incorporate premium prizes like high-end trips and cars into the mix. And since they always incorporated the dice into the mini-games, you could at least get more mileage out of your main gimmick that way.
No, the problem was that almost nobody was willing to risk losing the game. Even in situations where the only bad roll was a 3, even in games where the columns had nothing but cash ($1K in column 1, $3K in 2, and $5K in 3 was done several times over the course of the run), players could not be convinced to roll the dice. And it's not even that they were holding out for a bonus round with a big jackpot; even in 1987 a $10K bonus round was considered middle-of-the-road, and the odds of winning it weren't that great. So players were actively avoiding the game's primary mechanic to play a bonus round with maybe a 15% win rate. That's not good television, whether or not you have the mini-games.
As far as the early passes when there are only 1 couple of bad rolls, that's the fault of the contestant coordinators. The CC's should either weed out the "overly cautious" players in mock games in the tryouts, and/or emphasize "going for it" unless the odds are clearly not in the roller's favor.
In this day and age, that's all the current contestant coordinators want in a possible contestant -- over-caffeinated people who will go all the way, or wanna-be actors who will follow the rules given to them.
Instead if of the mini-games, offer the "premium prizes" if a player clears 2-3 columns in the same game (2 for trip, all 3 for a car or $10,000). That would also encourage players not to pass so early. You could also go first-incarnation of HR, and offer a ½ luxury prize space in the two columns that can't be cleared in one roll. Again, to spur more all-or-nothing rolls.
But if you do this on GSN, the mini-game for super prizes issue is pretty much moot!
-
It's even worse on GSN, if all you are playing for is 500 points and $1,000 for winning the game.
I guess you could give an insurance marker for each column cleared or game won.
-
I'm sure we covered a bit of this before, but regarding High Rollers, I can see why so many people passed. On Card Sharks, you might risk calling high/low on a 6. Odds are on your side, and your penalty for being wrong is a free play of the cards for your opponent, who might still be at the starting gate. If they fail, we go to another question.
On that all-cash High Rollers board, I'm risking the one bad roll for the potential to clear a $5,000 column (if indeed that column totals 12 or less at that point). If I clear anything, I only keep it by winning the game. If I come up with the one bad roll, my opponent wins that entire game of the match, and the cash columns are gone, to boot. In the long run, I'd rather try to win my way to the Big Numbers, where I'm guaranteed to win SOME money at least, and then play another match. Perhaps the original recipe of "one prize to a number" fixes some of this.
If this gets into bigger gambling probability, the difference of High Rollers (or any game show) vs. the casino is one losing round at the craps table doesn't mean they send me home. Not unless I do this. (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13553379/Rebecca-Castillo-Silver-Legacy-Casino-Nevada-craps-table-flings-chips.html)
-Jason
-
Perhaps the original recipe of "one prize to a number" fixes some of this.
I wouldn't think so, especially since there were no insurance markers in that version of the front game.
I think $ale also suffers a bit of "the game discourages the players from playing," and it would likely only get worse with a modern adaptation. It's not that the format was entirely bad, but I feel like the biggest reason the show resonates with us because it asked a lot of questions quickly.
While I'm not terribly interested in seeing any game shows come back (I'd rather have new twists on old concepts) I feel like some formats would work in the current climate.
-Since hidden defector games seem to be all the rage, it would make sense to break out The Hustler or Dirty Rotten Cheaters
-With games like The Floor and 1% Club receiving acclaim, maybe another game of cleverness like Pass The Buck
-During the trivia app craze, I'm surprised no one really leaned into something like Paranoia
-
Perhaps the original recipe of "one prize to a number" fixes some of this.
I wouldn't think so, especially since there were no insurance markers in that version of the front game.
I was abbreviating because I tend to be verbose: I meant an overall changing of the main game to that mechanic, keeping what worked in the revivals (i.e. the insurance markers). In today's prize-lite world, if a revival had every number worth $x in cash, or if each concealed a mystery cash amount, at least you get the enticement of saying every number you clear is worth something (if you win the game).
-Jason
-
It's still "one fail ends the game and wipes the bank" for a majority of the time. If you did something like start players out with a marker and/or have markers end the turn instead of forcing another roll, then that might change player behavior.
Although after thinking on it a little more, we'll never really know how much of those risk-averse passes were strategy and how much were "people are bad at math under pressure."
-
Crazy idea I've always had to revive Line and Secret that is tough to execute apparently because rights are a mess: The Panel Show. Four celebrites, five games: lead with a round of TTTT, then Who's Who from WML, play a round of Line with one of the imposters, play IGAS with the other, then end with a mystery guest. Revives Line and Secret in pieces.
That doesn't work? Cross-Wits.
-
Crazy idea I've always had to revive Line and Secret that is tough to execute apparently because rights are a mess: The Panel Show. Four celebrites, five games: lead with a round of TTTT, then Who's Who from WML, play a round of Line with one of the imposters, play IGAS with the other, then end with a mystery guest. Revives Line and Secret in pieces.
I actually like this idea. Whether or not it can be executed . . .
-
…a good-but-not-great cash prize to the night's winner ($50k, let's say) and then a much nicer cash prize ($500k, for example) if they can break a certain score threshold.
If the stakes are that high—especially in cash—who would risk screwing that up to buy Instant Bargains?
-
…a good-but-not-great cash prize to the night's winner ($50k, let's say) and then a much nicer cash prize ($500k, for example) if they can break a certain score threshold.
If the stakes are that high—especially in cash—who would risk screwing that up to buy Instant Bargains?
that’s sort of on the prize buyers, yes? First class airfare and a week vacation with $5,000 cash would at least be worth a thought.
-
…a good-but-not-great cash prize to the night's winner ($50k, let's say) and then a much nicer cash prize ($500k, for example) if they can break a certain score threshold.
If the stakes are that high—especially in cash—who would risk screwing that up to buy Instant Bargains?
If the Instant Bargains are things like Corvettes...
-
I don’t remember if it was this thread or another, but this is where the personalized prizes from PYL would be brilliantly devious. Would I give up my $15 lead if it meant I could buy that dream vacation to Barcelona or a fully-customized man cave for 12 $ale of the Century dollars? Very likely.
-
I know it's been brought up. The problem is that you can't overshadow what's in the shopper's bazaar. if contestants who lead by fifty bones didn't go for The Vault instead of pressing for the Cash Jackpot on Aussie Temptation, then there wasn't anything to be done.
I think when Jim would whip out twenty Benjamins (my favorite president!) on someone's Lot Night it was weak sauce against the glass case of currency.
-
The cool thing about Perry's IBs were that they offered prizes that a contestant would have a functional use for. So if I lose, yeah it sucks that I can't play for the Bimmer or the 300Z, but at least I get a Hi-Fi stereo with the turntable that's 8" deep! and maybe even a Sale Surprise for taxes. Occasionally they'd throw in a weekend trip to somewhere like Arizona. It's not the living room of furniture or European holiday offered in Teh Lot, but it wasn't a bad consolation prize.
If given the option of smaller prizes under $2,500 I think it works. So instead of the man cave, maybe a customized pool table with one of those mini Jumbotrons (https://www.minijumbotron.com/product-page/nanotron). Instead of Barcelona, somewhere like San Diego.
-
The cool thing about Perry's IBs were that they offered prizes that a contestant would have a functional use for.
(https://i.imgur.com/1KuYbAFl.png)
"Functional"
-
One thing I liked in the 1969 episodes of Sale that turned up a while back was the Open Sale round, where everyone had a chance to spend a few bucks on some smaller gifts. I think that remedies the "game discourages people from playing" issue brought up earlier since everyone gets the chance to take home something more than Lots Of Love.
-
The cool thing about Perry's IBs were that they offered prizes that a contestant would have a functional use for.
(https://i.imgur.com/1KuYbAFl.png)
"Functional"
I think you know what I meant.
-
I too think it's a little charitable to suggest the Instant Bargains were immune from offering the usual game show suspects. When the brass mirror or Catalina sportswear comes up, I'm buzzing in for the chance at a $ale Surprise over the actual item.
-Jason
-
That's fair. A rewatch might be in order but I'm willing to eat crow.
-
I too think it's a little charitable to suggest the Instant Bargains were immune from offering the usual game show suspects. When the brass mirror or Catalina sportswear comes up, I'm buzzing in for the chance at a $ale Surprise over the actual item.
-Jason
Or Jim just may reach into one of pockets and add some Benjamins to tempt the contestant.
Serious question, did Jim know which IBs had $ale surprises?
-
I think when Jim would whip out twenty Benjamins (my favorite president!) on someone's Lot Night it was weak sauce against the glass case of currency.
That's one place where the show messed up for me. Lot Night, for better or worse, was a straight-up Q&A game since the challengers knew they needed heroic performances and the champ wasn't going to buy two deck chairs with six figures on the line. If it were me, I would have automatically offered those bargains plus a cash reward of $1,000 per dollar of the sale cost.
Maybe you don't spend $17 on Tahiti, but if it came with a guaranteed $17,000 check? Now we're talking real temptation.
-
I think you know what I meant.
JasonA1 is also correct--the truth is somewhere in the middle. Yes, there's lots of imported European furniture or a layette, crib and such, but I recall Curtis Warren snapped up a Radio Shack worth of stereo equipment in his two weeks and a day. So you never quite knew if the gift shop would have something you cared about.
Million Dollar Minute, for better or worse, stripped everything back. Every cash-or-points question was straight across. Pay some points to win some bucks. But cash is not free either. As weird as it is to see "Grilled Cheese for Life" or "A Thousand Balls!" on the big board, they're memorable things that will get someone talking. Even if those "x for 20 years" prizes are converted to money it is eye-catching. Sale of the Very New Century would do well to follow that path.
-
Serious question, did Jim know which IBs had $ale surprises?
If he did, his poker face whilst trying to tempt contestants to buy was damn good.
-
Serious question, did Jim know which IBs had $ale surprises?
If he did, his poker face whilst trying to tempt contestants to buy was damn good.
I don't think he was, hence the bell and him sometimes asking where the money was located.
-
The time is right for The Money Maze. Add a couple more zeroes after the all-important 1 and you’d have ratings gold.
Also Scrabble. I realize the CW premieres a version soon, but I suspect that will be much more like the crossword game I’ve played all my life. I wonder then, could Reg Grundy (or whoever) legally remount the basic game if they retitled it and scrubbed away the tiles and board from the front game?
-
The time is right for The Money Maze. Add a couple more zeroes after the all-important 1 and you’d have ratings gold.
Quite honestly, I can agree here. They could certainly do the show nowadays in a massive Hollywood soundstage, and maybe make the maze 33 to 50% larger to really justify those extra zeroes.
Now my question is.......is George available and willing?
-
I am of the thought that a case can be made for Scrabble. What would make it easy is that they could easily resort to the self-contained format NBC went with from 1985 onward. And if time is tight, resort to a best-of-3 format instead of a best-of-5. Otherwise, the format can stay exactly the same, with bonus squares doubled from the original format ($1000 for blue squares, $2000 for pink squares - both upon immediate solves).
For the Bonus Sprint at the end, cash prize depends on format: for returning champions, $10,000 + $5000 for each day until hit (champions progression only), or a flat one-time $25000 prize for one-off champions ($2500 for winning the overall sprint playoff as consolation, if the $25K isn’t won).
The Inquisitive One
-
I am of the thought that a case can be made for Scrabble.
Especially if they call it Words with Friends.
-
Crazy idea I've always had to revive Line and Secret that is tough to execute apparently because rights are a mess: The Panel Show. Four celebrites, five games: lead with a round of TTTT, then Who's Who from WML, play a round of Line with one of the imposters, play IGAS with the other, then end with a mystery guest. Revives Line and Secret in pieces.
That doesn't work? Cross-Wits.
I like that idea, especially to fill an hour. I wasn't a fan of Anthony Anderson version of TTTT
-
if time is tight, resort to a best-of-3 format instead of a best-of-5.
I’d be tempted to do one sit-down game, the returning champ getting a bye into the sprint. Maybe then they could avoid going to Speed Word early.
I’d also like to see a longer bonus round. That or make it one dramatic final word and somehow draw tiles (or letters). The 10-second thing always felt rushed, especially for the high point of the show.
-
Based on my and others' machinations, if I were to do TV Scrabble, I'd replace the regular sprints with a head-to-head best-of-5 speedword (going from 5-9 letters). It shaves off about 2 minutes' of run time and is easier to manage logistically. Plus I find the drama factor to be on par if not better.
-
Based on my and others' machinations, if I were to do TV Scrabble, I'd replace the regular sprints with a head-to-head best-of-5 speedword (going from 5-9 letters). It shaves off about 2 minutes' of run time and is easier to manage logistically. Plus I find the drama factor to be on par if not better.
I think you would find, due to a need to take more risks when you are behind, that there would be more utterly anticlimactic situations than you would like, as the person up 2-Whatever gets to stand there and wait for the word to fill in after their opponent made an early desperation guess.
-
Anybody we know working on the Raven Scrabble revival?
-
I think you would find, due to a need to take more risks when you are behind, that there would be more utterly anticlimactic situations than you would like, as the person up 2-Whatever gets to stand there and wait for the word to fill in after their opponent made an early desperation guess.
Maybe the penalty for buzzing too early could one free letter and a free guess for the opponent. If he can’t answer, speed word resumes.
I’ve often thought it would be fun to see the sprint work like a chess clock, as on Grand Slam. Figuring out a wrong-answer penalty may be the fly in the ointment, though.
-
Figuring out a wrong-answer penalty may be the fly in the ointment, though.
They already had it, although I thought ten seconds was a bit stiff. So do the Whew! thing and run off five, and the audience can count along. At the end of the five the next two letters pop in and play continues.
-
They already had it, although I thought ten seconds was a bit stiff. So do the Whew! thing and run off five, and the audience can count along. At the end of the five the next two letters pop in and play continues.
I meant figuring out a fair penalty. I like yours better.
-
I was explaining to the kids about "Win Ben Stein's Money," and then 🤯 "hey, they should totally reboot that!"
I always thought that "The Challengers" would be a decent reboot for a cable news channel, but then that risks preemption too much.
-
I am of the thought that a case can be made for Scrabble. What would make it easy is that they could easily resort to the self-contained format NBC went with from 1985 onward. And if time is tight, resort to a best-of-3 format instead of a best-of-5.
I think I've got a fix that eliminates the uneven round timing issue- just play the front game with three people.
Same format, just another person to go down the line. Scoring could stay the same or just play for the word's official Scrabble score since Hasbro seems to want to stick closer to the actual game. Play the crossword round for the first two segments, with the top two scorers moving on to the Sprint.
-
I was explaining to the kids about "Win Ben Stein's Money," and then 🤯 "hey, they should totally reboot that!"
I'm going to repeat what I said in August in the "Great, but forgotten, long-running shows" thread:
While I quite like WBSM, I don't think it could be revived, largely because it seems to me to be completely dependent on Ben Stein's persona. I doubt he would come back, and I also doubt the show would work if you swapped Ben out for a Jeopardy superchampion or whatever.
As for my answer to the question which game show I think is overdue for a remake...I'm honestly having a hard time coming up with one, largely because in the revival boom of the past ~10 years, pretty much every game show I would want to see revived has been. I would go with my username and say WITWICS, but I honestly get the feeling a 21st century kid would just see that show as a 90s relic. It also doesn't help that the 2019 Carmen Sandiego cartoon on Netflix missed the point so completely that I've taken to calling it CASINO, for CArmen Sandiego In Name Only.
-
Dunno if I agree about it not working just because Ben is too dry. The Chase showed that you could have a charismatic nerd to root against, although I wasn’t a big fan of just how much they played up the villain role in the second season of the ABC version. You’re not supposed to like the Chaser obviously, but I felt The Beast and Ken/James/Brad had some charm to their cartoonish villainy.
There was also Win Beadle's Money in the UK. But for a US reboot, I always liked the idea of Neil Degrasse Tyson. Maybe Brad Rutter?
-
I've argued in some other threads here that I think Hit Man -- not the video game chrome, but the conceit of answering questions on a couple-minute clip/article -- could have fit right in with the E/I requirements. Not that networks are making their own original weekend kids' programming, but I'd also think their news divisions might have enough archive footage for it.
-
Dunno if I agree about it not working just because Ben is too dry. The Chase showed that you could have a charismatic nerd to root against, although I wasn’t a big fan of just how much they played up the villain role in the second season of the ABC version. You’re not supposed to like the Chaser obviously, but I felt The Beast and Ken/James/Brad had some charm to their cartoonish villainy.
There was also Win Beadle's Money in the UK. But for a US reboot, I always liked the idea of Neil Degrasse Tyson. Maybe Brad Rutter?
Also, Ben being dry was his on-screen persona- people knew him as the Ferris Bueller teacher and the Clear Eyes guy.
Ben is also a perfect example of how you don't need to have a bubbly personality in that role- you just need to be really really good at the game. In retrospect, when Marvel did the last two Avengers films, Thanos probably got the least amount of villain orgin story time than any previous MCU character. But he was effective because he was so incredibly good at simply beating people up.
-
Also, Ben being dry was his on-screen persona.
That was also one of the central jokes to the show: instead of a high-energy and/or charismatic emcee, you have a dude who talks like he's half-asleep citing rap lyrics that make him sound about as white as a snowdrift. For a new version of the show to succeed, you would need an appropriate anti-host, one who is smart yet canny enough to play up that they got no rizz.