The Game Show Forum

The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: byrd62 on December 29, 2005, 06:56:30 AM

Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: byrd62 on December 29, 2005, 06:56:30 AM
5 years ago, the success of Millionaire inspired other big-money quiz shows like Greed, Winning Lines, Weakest Link, and the remake of Twenty-One.

Then, the reality competition craze that started with Survivor inspired Amazing Race, Fear Factor, The Bachelor/Bachelorette, America's Next Top Model, and, most successfully of all, American Idol.

Now, with Deal or No Deal already enough of a hit for NBC to order up additional episodes next year, might it be too unique to inspire remaking old game shows of the past, like Card Sharks, High Rollers, and Whammy/Press Your Luck, by eliminating the question portions?  

[Historical note:  When Chuck Barris brought back Treasure Hunt in 1973, he originally wanted to do a quiz portion in the pilot, but then chose to cut it in favor of a jack-in-the-box selection round.]

Having no questions would save money on the production costs and those shows can avoid hiring writers for them, as well as all the union headaches associated with that.  But do you think old shows like these can have new lives without the questions?
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: Don Howard on December 29, 2005, 09:18:18 AM
[quote name=\'byrd62\' date=\'Dec 29 2005, 06:56 AM\']Now, with Deal or No Deal already enough of a hit for NBC to order up additional episodes next year, might it be too unique to inspire remaking old game shows of the past, like Card Sharks, High Rollers, and Whammy/Press Your Luck, by eliminating the question portions? 
[snapback]106123[/snapback]
[/quote]
How would you do those shows without the questions or surveys? I presume you wouldn't use clips or definitions either. But the anticipation factor would, I believe, be diluted (perhaps even eliminated) without those components. However, perhaps you have an idea I haven't thought of. Certainly you wouldn't just hand a contestant a pair of dice and tell them to have at it. Plus, a half hour or an hour of non-stop Higher! Lower! Freeze! Here's another card! Now let's talk to our surprise guest on the phone----your wife!!!!! Got any kids in the audience? would be like downing a bottle of Sominex.
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: Jimmy Owen on December 29, 2005, 09:59:59 AM
They could redo all those Jonathan Goodson lottery show concepts, this time with pretty people playing and the suspense cranked up to the tenth power.
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: Jay Temple on December 29, 2005, 10:21:48 AM
High Rollers would work with the host stopping a plunger, just as Chuck Woolery did on Greed.  The questions are just a way of deciding control.

On Card Sharks, the questions aren't essential to the game--that is, you'd still have a good game with a plunger--but they made the show more interesting.
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: tvwxman on December 29, 2005, 10:25:43 AM
[quote name=\'Jay Temple\' date=\'Dec 29 2005, 10:21 AM\']On Card Sharks, the questions aren't essential to the game--that is, you'd still have a good game with a plunger--but they made the show more interesting.
[snapback]106133[/snapback]
[/quote]

Wasn't this essentially tried in 2001 with CS? 2 players calling cards...occasionally watching videos....

That was a raving success.
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: tyshaun1 on December 29, 2005, 11:12:52 AM
Plus, they tried it with the reworking of PYL's first round on Whammy!, which didn't work either, and it was part of the reason why they added the "Big Bank" question in the 2nd season.

Tyshaun
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: uncamark on December 29, 2005, 11:22:57 AM
Oh, no doubt there'll be attempts to ride "DOND"'s coattails if the March run is successful.  But I'm not exactly sure what form they'll take.

I would only hope that Harry Friedman is dropping hints to his bosses at Sony about doing something with those H-Q formats they got with the MGM acquisition.  And I would feel pretty comfortable about Harry working with those formats, since he worked on them at H-Q--but I do have to remind myself about Gaby Johnston showrunning "Feud" right now, so just because someone worked on the original doesn't mean they can mount a competent remake.
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: tvwxman on December 29, 2005, 11:28:23 AM
[quote name=\'tyshaun1\' date=\'Dec 29 2005, 11:12 AM\']Plus, they tried it with the reworking of PYL's first round on Whammy!, which didn't work either, and it was part of the reason why they added the "Big Bank" question in the 2nd season.

Tyshaun
[snapback]106136[/snapback]
[/quote]

Not a good example. The issue is looking for revamped shows that completely dropped intelligence in favor of luck. Whammy's game outcome partially depended (though, barely) on having some success at answering (a few) questions leading into round 2. (PYL's a trivia game? My gawd, that's a stretch)

I have a feeling that round one's questions were eliminated just to save time and get to the board.

You get partial credit , though.
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: chris319 on December 29, 2005, 11:49:28 AM
Quote
I do have to remind myself about Gaby Johnston showrunning "Feud" right now, so just because someone worked on the original doesn't mean they can mount a competent remake.
I doubt Gaby is the problem. You forget that she works for Wyleen May.

Someone please explain to me how it came to be that Wyleen May and Syd Vinnedge are currently working in the industry and Barbara Hunter and Jay Wolpert aren't.
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: chris319 on December 29, 2005, 12:08:03 PM
If CBS is on top of things, you'll have 60-minute Big Wheel and 60-minute Pl!nko by spring.
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: BrandonFG on December 29, 2005, 06:20:27 PM
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Dec 29 2005, 11:49 AM\']
Quote
I do have to remind myself about Gaby Johnston showrunning "Feud" right now, so just because someone worked on the original doesn't mean they can mount a competent remake.
I doubt Gaby is the problem. You forget that she works for Wyleen May.
[snapback]106141[/snapback]
[/quote]

Two questions:
1) What else has Wyleen FUBAR'd?

2) Feud's first couple of seasons had Michael Canter as exec. prod. I thought the show much better during those years, in spite of Louie and that flawed triple round. Would you agree?
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: chris319 on December 30, 2005, 01:43:17 AM
Quote
What else has Wyleen FUBAR'd?
One Hundred Percent.
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: Don Howard on December 30, 2005, 08:42:25 AM
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Dec 30 2005, 01:43 AM\']
Quote
What else has Wyleen FUBAR'd?
One Hundred Percent.
[snapback]106215[/snapback]
[/quote]
The late 1990s USA version of this show was never beamed to my town and I also never saw the overseas edition (though I do know the International champion for winning streaks--even beating Ken Jennings by a game--was a player on that program) so what got FUBARed on this side of the water?
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: Jay Temple on December 30, 2005, 09:37:47 AM
Quote
If CBS is on top of things, you'll have 60-minute Big Wheel and 60-minute Pl!nko by spring.
And on the latter count, my mother-in-law will have her first "appointment TV" in years.
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: uncamark on December 30, 2005, 11:29:35 AM
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' date=\'Dec 29 2005, 05:20 PM\']Two questions:
1) What else has Wyleen FUBAR'd?

2) Feud's first couple of seasons had Michael Canter as exec. prod. I thought the show much better during those years, in spite of Louie and that flawed triple round. Would you agree?
[snapback]106178[/snapback]
[/quote]

1.  Jay Wolpert had to report to her for "MG '98."  'Nuff said.

2.  I lost track, but I thought Bob Boden showran the first season before Canter took over.  Ultimately, though, Louie dragged things down way too much for me.  Structurally, the format is where it should be now, but the fact that Karn has not grown one iota as a host (Louie's problem, too) and unnecessary production decisions (like the whole you-know-what the points bit) have kept "Feud" on a low priority for me.  And now that WCIU in Chicago has moved the daytime run to 10 a.m. against that other Fremantle show, I don't really care at all.  (The combination of me being out of the house for the WCIU prime time airing at 7:30 p.m., the fact that it's not a tapable or DVRable when I get one item for me, not to mention it following "The Insider" with You-Know-Who, means I won't watch that airing, either.)
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: chris319 on December 30, 2005, 06:12:48 PM
Quote
I thought Bob Boden showran the first season before Canter took over.
Is "showran" a word you've "architected" to mean produced?

Boden produced FF under E.P. Canter during the first season with Louie. I say that speaking as the puzzlescrubber when Bobby Sherman showran Password Plus and George Choderker was shotcaller. Unfortunately our version did not have an etymologist to act as cluebuzzer.
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: chris319 on December 30, 2005, 06:14:32 PM
Quote
what got FUBARed on this side of the water?
It was allowed to see the light of day.
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: clemon79 on December 30, 2005, 06:38:44 PM
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Dec 30 2005, 03:12 PM\']I say that speaking as the puzzlescrubber when Bobby Sherman showran Password Plus and George Choderker was shotcaller. Unfortunately our version did not have an etymologist to act as cluebuzzer.
[snapback]106265[/snapback]
[/quote]
And this is why the hair on my arm raises whenever Horan tries to sound more inside than he actually is by using Varietyspeak like "bowed"...
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: chris319 on December 30, 2005, 06:46:13 PM
Quote
this is why the hair on my arm raises whenever Horan tries to sound more inside than he actually is
WHOA! WHOA! WHOA! HOLD IT THERE, CHRIS. HALT! STOP! CEASE!

"... more inside than he ALREADY IS"? ALREADY IS???

This implies that Zach is "inside" to begin with. Randy is "inside", SplitSecond is "inside", I'm "inside", but Zach? No!
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: clemon79 on December 30, 2005, 06:47:36 PM
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Dec 30 2005, 03:46 PM\']"... more inside than he ALREADY IS"? ALREADY IS???
[/quote]
Uh, go back and reread me. Actually. Not already. Actually.

(Unless you fixed it for me, in which case it now says what I meant to say in the first place. Trust me, I do not for a second accuse Zach Horan of being "inside" anything, unless it's his house or the unbearable hell of his own pathetic existence. :))
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: chris319 on December 30, 2005, 06:51:10 PM
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Dec 30 2005, 03:47 PM\'][quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Dec 30 2005, 03:46 PM\']"... more inside than he ALREADY IS"? ALREADY IS???
[/quote]
Uh, go back and reread me. Actually. Not already. Actually.

(Unless you fixed it for me, in which case it now says what I meant to say in the first place. Trust me, I do not for a second accuse Zach Horan of being "inside" anything, unless it's his house or the unbearable hell of his own pathetic existence. :))
[snapback]106272[/snapback]
[/quote]
OK, ACTUALLY is. My point still stands. You can't be MORE something unless you are already that something to begin with.
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: clemon79 on December 30, 2005, 07:06:40 PM
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Dec 30 2005, 03:51 PM\']OK, ACTUALLY is. My point still stands. You can't be MORE something unless you are already that something to begin with.
[snapback]106273[/snapback]
[/quote]
And I'm agreeing with you. "Already" implies some level. "Actually" does not. And you can certainly be "more" than zero, where the latter is exactly what Zach is, and the former is what he would like to be.
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: SplitSecond on December 30, 2005, 07:19:44 PM
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Dec 30 2005, 04:46 PM\']Randy is "inside", SplitSecond is "inside", I'm "inside"
[/quote]
This sounds like it requires a special trip to Bed, Bath, and Beyond.
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: chris319 on December 30, 2005, 07:25:24 PM
You can't be more "something" than you actually are unless you are already that "something" to begin with. I can't be more Jewish than I actually am because I'm not Jewish to begin with.
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: tvrandywest on December 30, 2005, 07:32:29 PM
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Dec 30 2005, 04:25 PM\']... I can't be more Jewish than I actually am because I'm not Jewish to begin with.
[snapback]106277[/snapback]
[/quote]Is that why you're not a showrunner?

Randy
tvrandywest.com
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: Robert Hutchinson on December 30, 2005, 08:20:01 PM
I'm amused at its modification to "showran", as well as its application to game shows, but "showrunner" is a perfectly valid word at this point, even if you hate Variety-speak. It's certainly been the only job title I've ever seen associated with certain employees for various TV dramas. It's not like "yeah, he's our showrunner, look at these skeds", it's "the creator, showrunner, and producers had a quick meeting".
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: chris319 on December 30, 2005, 08:28:27 PM
Quote
it's "the creator, showrunner, and producers had a quick meeting".
If the showrunner and producer are one and the same, how can he/she have a meeting with him/herself?

So you don't like my term "shotcaller"?
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: chris319 on December 30, 2005, 08:31:49 PM
[quote name=\'tvrandywest\' date=\'Dec 30 2005, 04:32 PM\'][quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Dec 30 2005, 04:25 PM\']... I can't be more Jewish than I actually am because I'm not Jewish to begin with.
[snapback]106277[/snapback]
[/quote]Is that why you're not a showrunner?
[snapback]106278[/snapback]
[/quote]
There is a story involving Mark Goodson and Paul Alter during a meeting with NBC which I will tell you the next time I see you.
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: tvrandywest on December 30, 2005, 08:34:41 PM
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Dec 30 2005, 05:28 PM\']If the showrunner and producer are one and the same, how can he/she have a meeting with him/herself?
[snapback]106285[/snapback]
[/quote]
A lot of people I work with talk to themselves. I wonder if I'm the cause.


[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Dec 30 2005, 05:28 PM\']So you don't like my term "shotcaller"?
[snapback]106285[/snapback]
[/quote]
I love it. It's a person who specifies his drink requests to the bartender, right?

Randy
tvrandywest.com
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: chris319 on December 30, 2005, 08:59:22 PM
If you need to have a couple of teeth extracted in a hurry, walk up to a network T.D. and call him a "button-pusher". Hold my watch!

Is it true that DOND does not have a head prop person but instead has a "case-stuffer"? Or do case-stuffers only work on courtroom shows?
Title: Luck-Based Game Shows
Post by: Robert Hutchinson on December 30, 2005, 11:41:23 PM
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Dec 30 2005, 08:28 PM\']
Quote
it's "the creator, showrunner, and producers had a quick meeting".
If the showrunner and producer are one and the same, how can he/she have a meeting with him/herself?[/quote]

He/she cannot. Good thing I put an S on the word, huh?

As long as we're throwing out non sequiturs, how much wool could Chuck Woolery chuck?