More revival: "Child's Play"

[chris319]

[quote name=\'uncamark\' post=\'134261\' date=\'Oct 12 2006, 09:41 AM\']
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'134230\' date=\'Oct 12 2006, 03:01 AM\']
From what I've heard, this was not a cheap show to produce as it was so production-intensive. Plus, it only ran for about a year on CBS daytime. The concept is OK but not inspired. Of all of the formats Fremantle owns, I can't imagine why they would choose this one for a revival. It would make much more sense to bring Blockbusters back -- it is cheaper and simpler to produce (= higher profit margin).
[/quote]
It seems to me that the format has been licensed elsewhere around the world.  Whether to any great success, I don't know, but perhaps there is enough that Fremantle thinks that it could be tried again.  (And perhaps the comedic element is on its side.)
[/quote]

Well, really, you're turning "Kids Say The Darndest Things" into a game show, right? That's the premise. And it's pretty much evergreen; there's always been a market for that sort of oh-that's-adorable entertainment, so I can totally see them trying to revive it.

Blockbusters has been licensed abroad as well, with much greater success.

With Child's Play you start with a list of words to be defined, go out and shoot the kids defining them (requiring the use of a crew), come back and cut them down to a series of playable definitions (requiring the use of an editor), repeat. It would be a little easier and cheaper to do today with a non-union crew and a non-linear editing system, but in 1982 they had to use union crews and editors from CBS (the kids were probably shot on 3/4"). They had probably been using 1" tape at TV City for only a year or two. On a conventional game show the writers write the questions, they are fact-checked and arranged into matches. No union crew or editor is involved in pre-production.

As successful as these two shows may or may not be abroad, I highly doubt Mimi O'Brien will see one red cent for legitimately creating Child's Play, nor Steve Ryan for Blockbusters.

[Jimmy Owen]

They could go cheap and have the schools themselves submit tapes of kids defining the words, (maybe in exchange for playground equipment or some such items) something that could not be done in 82.

From reading the casting call, though, it sounds like the kids are going to be more in-studio.  One problem with that is they might have more inadvertent reveals of the words (which was covered up by "oops" on the tapes.)  When the original show went to the "Turnabout" round, I think, at times, it was too much pressure to put on the kids.

[aaron sica]

[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'134280\' date=\'Oct 12 2006, 03:15 PM\']
When the original show went to the "Turnabout" round, I think, at times, it was too much pressure to put on the kids.
[/quote]

Not to mention when $5,000 was won, the contestant would sometimes hug the kids; I seem to remember some of those kids looking kinda scared at that.

[chris319]

From reading the casting call, though, it sounds like the kids are going to be more in-studio.

The only way that would work is to write out exactly what the kids are supposed to say and have them read off of cards, otherwise the producers have very little control over what the kids will say.

[GS Warehouse]

[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'134270\' date=\'Oct 12 2006, 01:28 PM\']
[quote name=\'mitchgroff\' post=\'134267\' date=\'Oct 12 2006, 01:13 PM\']
As long as it's not anything like Small Talk, or whatever that Family Channel show was called that aired after Shopping Spree or Wait Till You Have Kids...[/quote]It was Small Talk...made watching paint dry look compelling by comparison. [/quote]
Be careful what you wish for.  Guess who owns the rights to Small Talk.