People who have grown up on American versions of Jeopardy!, ponder me this:
These days, would the show work, would it be the same if they suddenly dropped the "answer in the form of a question" rule? Is there enough of a format in the show to see this as an extraneous gimmick? Is there enough of a drawcard in the questions, personalities, drama, strategy, risk-taking, etc. to put this rule into the "bizarre" category?
I'm not trying to stir the pot or make groundbreaking suggestions, I just ask your opinions on it because twice there have been productions of J! here in Australia. The first time, in the 70s, it was a show for teenage contestants and there was no "answering in the form of a question". The second show, in 1993, flopped badly and one of the most frequent comments from viewers and media commentators was that it was just too bizarre to have contestants starting answers with "Who is" or "What is".
In Tony Barber's (host of the 93 version) memoir, he says that he tried to pitch the show to another network a few years later and was insisting that every other part of the show worked and could get a following as long as they dumped the "bizarre" rule. I remember being in year 9 at the time that Tony's show aired, and much as I thought it was a crappy version of it, I found it so eerie that one of the main reasons for the show being so famous in the US was what made so many over here say it was "strange", "stupid" and various other words.
Your thoughts?
