Author Topic: O'Hurley Tells the Truth (Read 11903 times)

BrandonFG · « **Reply #15 on:** June 13, 2007, 02:46:48 PM »

[quote name=\'SamJ93\' post=\'155081\' date=\'Jun 13 2007, 02:42 PM\']
That said, of course, all those shows were developed back when TV at least had some modicum of dignity about it...
[/quote]
My point exactly. The WML/TTTT/IGAS from the 50s through the 70s (honestly early-90s) were light-hearted talk shows with a game show thrown for good measure (I think I said that right).

The second season of this TTTT was "The Jerry Springer Show" with talk show elements, just no fighting.

Neumms · « **Reply #16 on:** June 13, 2007, 07:15:25 PM »

[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'155082\' date=\'Jun 13 2007, 01:46 PM\']
The second season of this TTTT was "The Jerry Springer Show" with talk show elements, just no fighting.
[/quote]

Which is the part that blew. I mean, who didn't want to see somebody finally take a swing at Kitty Carlisle after all those years.

Hey, it's something GSN hasn't shown before, so it's a good thing. Between that, Camouflage, Without Prejudice and Grand Slam, they have a pretty good slate going.

ChuckNet · « **Reply #17 on:** June 13, 2007, 08:57:54 PM »

Quote

The show was good its first season. The second season, it began to look like a talk show. All I remember was constant hootin' and hollerin', a lot of standing ovations, and some other talk show elements...

Yeah, that was downright annoying...also, the constant background music and rotating "Who is the real...?" graphics during the questioning didn't help either. Plus, who thought it'd be a good idea to have a ventriloquist (Jeff Dunham) on the panel?

Chuck Donegan (The Illustrious "Chuckie Baby")

SRIV94 · « **Reply #18 on:** June 14, 2007, 11:13:20 AM »

[quote name=\'ChuckNet\' post=\'155113\' date=\'Jun 13 2007, 07:57 PM\']
Plus, who thought it'd be a good idea to have a ventriloquist (Jeff Dunham) on the panel?
[/quote]
A dummy.

Scrabbleship · « **Reply #19 on:** June 14, 2007, 11:58:09 AM »

[quote name=\'MikeK\' post=\'154965\' date=\'Jun 12 2007, 12:00 PM\']
[quote name=\'Don Howard\' post=\'154952\' date=\'Jun 12 2007, 09:27 AM\']This I can live with. In spite of some of the oddball panelists, it was still a show I enjoyed very much.
For those of you with episode guides, approximately when can we expect the Kitty Carlisle appearance?[/quote]
Kitty's ep. aired in first run during November 2000 sweeps.
[/quote]

I thought it aired in mid-October 2000. I remember seeing it that October on a single-run station.

MikeK · « **Reply #20 on:** June 14, 2007, 12:11:29 PM »

[quote name=\'Scrabbleship\' post=\'155151\' date=\'Jun 14 2007, 11:58 AM\']I thought it aired in mid-October 2000. I remember seeing it that October on a single-run station.[/quote]
A quick search of that old place shows it first aired on October 5, 2000. I ~~stand~~ sit corrected. I didn't recall it airing three weeks into the show's run...

The Pyramids · « **Reply #21 on:** July 21, 2007, 08:31:08 AM »

I like what I see again. The show has a great host, set and treats the formatt with respect. Its odd how much better its stands against 'Card Sharks' and Anderson 'Feud' that it ran concurently with.

DrBear · « **Reply #22 on:** July 22, 2007, 07:09:59 AM »

Well, there are fourth-grade productions of "Rent" that have better production than that Card Sharks, but that's beside the point.
Hurley wasn't the problem, the format was never the problem. They even had the sense to bring back the audience vote from the 60s version, and one wonders who in production had that good a memory. It's that the panelists - and to a point, the contestant bookers - wanted to turn the show into Jerry Springer Lite.

uncamark · « **Reply #23 on:** July 23, 2007, 01:00:37 PM »

[quote name=\'DrBear\' post=\'158189\' date=\'Jul 22 2007, 06:09 AM\']
Well, there are fourth-grade productions of "Rent" that have better production than that Card Sharks, but that's beside the point.
Hurley wasn't the problem, the format was never the problem. They even had the sense to bring back the audience vote from the 60s version, and one wonders who in production had that good a memory. It's that the panelists - and to a point, the contestant bookers - wanted to turn the show into Jerry Springer Lite.
[/quote]

Not to mention that whole "My name is Heather Schmeter and I like getting whipped" bit (followed by the cued/sweetened "OW!"s and "WHOO!"s). Not to mention having music under the questioning and the lower third with the Central Character's distinction staying up through the game.

Chelsea Thrasher · « **Reply #24 on:** July 24, 2007, 06:09:28 PM »

My biggest gripe with O'Hurley TTTT wasn't the panelists, nor the gratuitous T&A. My issue of contention was that they were simply making sloppy mistakes. One of the few episodes I bothered to record featured a mixed-gender panel - 2 men, 1 woman. And while reading the affidavit, doing the introduction, etc., lets slip a "she". And if my memory serves correctly this wasn't the only instance. (It also made alarmingly evident the fact that either Burton's read was added in post-production or that absolutely no one was paying attention, as there were still plenty of incorrect votes.)

Little things like that just made the production feel sloppier than it should have been

clemon79 · « **Reply #25 on:** July 24, 2007, 06:40:33 PM »

[quote name=\'Seth Thrasher\' post=\'158492\' date=\'Jul 24 2007, 03:09 PM\']
(It also made alarmingly evident the fact that either Burton's read was added in post-production or that absolutely no one was paying attention, as there were still plenty of incorrect votes.)
[/quote]
Burton's read? Did they stop John from reading the affidavits at some point?

Chelsea Thrasher · « **Reply #26 on:** July 24, 2007, 07:01:23 PM »

Quote

Burton's read? Did they stop John from reading the affidavits at some point?

In the second season of the show, they changed the structure of the first round around a little bit - Burton would read off the affidavit, then launch into the show open and panel introduction. (John still did the read for game 2). In the specific instance I'm citing, Burton is reading the affidavit, and mentions that the subject was once Yoko Ono's bodyguard, then refers to the subject as "she". If the affidavit was written in the first person, then Burton messed up, and no one caught it. If the affidavit was written in the third person in this instance - not only is the panel incredibly dense, but someone should have caught the giveaway pronoun before they even filmed the segment and replaced the 2 male impostors with two women. And as memory serves, this happened more than once, just from memories of the second season.

I actually found the episode *I'm* specifically referring...the segment pretty much displays each of the show's flaws in succession...I'll upload it to Youtube here as soon as I can.

Chelsea Thrasher · « **Reply #27 on:** July 24, 2007, 08:02:59 PM »

http://youtube.com/watch?v=8zTMnXYJPA8

Dbacksfan12 · « **Reply #28 on:** July 25, 2007, 04:10:24 AM »

Thanks for uploading the clips. I don't remember this opening format--I don't recall if a local affiliate picked the second season up.

Regardless, the sloppiness doesn't surprise me at all, although, it was still Pearson at the time, wasn't it?

BrandonFG · « **Reply #29 on:** July 25, 2007, 02:13:40 PM »

[quote name=\'Modor\' post=\'158542\' date=\'Jul 25 2007, 04:10 AM\']
Thanks for uploading the clips. I don't remember this opening format--I don't recall if a local affiliate picked the second season up.

Regardless, the sloppiness doesn't surprise me at all, although, it was still Pearson at the time, wasn't it?
[/quote]
In its last days, IIRC. I believe it switched to Fremantle right before its cancellation.

Author Topic: O'Hurley Tells the Truth (Read 11903 times)

uncamark