British Shows Make Me Feel Stupid: Only Connect
Honestly, this post is sort of a continuation of my series “the British are Better than Us,” but this show fits into so many categories. On BBC4, there’s a show called Only Connect. It takes a lot for a show to make me feel completely useless and stupid. No show in the US is really hard enough to do that. Some of the big quiz shows in England like Countdown or Mastermind don’t do it either. But Only Connect makes me feel like I’ve sat and picked my ears for the past few decades, not paying attention to anyone.
Only Connect’s premise is pretty easy. One to four items are given to your team; you just have to find how they are connected. It’s brutally hard, obscure connections. At least in the finals, which you see above (we’ll put the rest up this weekend). Nothing fancy here. Set’s barren, music’s standard, graphics are as opposite of flashy as you can get. I still feel like a moron watching, but I can’t stop. It’s almost hypnotic. Also, this show feels like a radio show they put on the air. I could completely see this on public radio.
What do you think of Only Connect?
Oooooh! I really wish there was a BBC GSN, I could watch stuff like this all day, even if I’m crap at it. Thank you for the sharing.
As far as the show’s concept, it’s great having all four clues in, as things like only 2 or 3 clue puzzles can lead to true but not intended connections.
I do think the hosts’ a bit crap, but then again how do you host this show without being a old jowly british man surrounded by dusty tomes and other academic paraphernalia? Maybe a bit a personality from her couldn’t hurt, as it really did kill the first “clever” bit.
Only Connect = Pyramid + Password Plus/Super Password + Last end game of Sale of the Century (80’s version) + brain food
Wow…this show makes Jeopardy look like a kid’s game! Sheesh!
Wow.
I really can’t say anything else.
Wow.
I’ve been a game show fan since I was 4, and I never seen a show quite like this one. It makes me, like A.D., look stupid, in fact, it makes me feel like I need to go back to school. This could be perfect to air in syndication or on network TV (yes, even NBC). And, word of advice: If there’s gonna be a U.S. version, please, pretty please with cheese on top, get a better theme music.
Wow wow wow. This is why I love British game shows. Seems like a solid format – looking forward to more clips!
Oh, that this could find a place with an American audience on American television. Perhaps – Discovery Channel? I feel like this could be a nice complement to Ca$h Cab.
I’ll brag – I got one of them before they did – “Pebble” showed up and I knew it immediately.
DeVares: I agree with you 100%. But, let’s face it…if this show came to America…especially NBC…it would be dumbed down.
I like it alot. It’s simple yet devilishly complex.
You’d have to be either like Einstein or just really sadisitic to watch it and some of the clues are as obscure as hell. Believe it or not I got the “Places where woman are not allowed” question right on the first guess and that was because I knew alot about Japanese culture but if you were a person of average intelligence you wouldn’t have gotten that right in a million years.
It’s like they made a game show and they said “What can we do make the average viewer feel as stupid as possible” and came up with this show.
WOW!
That’s true, Jay. NBC will put it at the level of 1 vs 100 (the second season). And ABC will put it at Set For Life or Duel. So I’m praying for either GSN or Syndication.
To Lex: Her personality (or lack thereof) did hurt. She tried to be like Anne Robinson and failed big time.
I definately agree with what Jay said it seems like a very difficult version of the Winner’s Circle on The $100,000 Pyramid
They’ll be no dissing Vicki Coren (writer, wit, awesome poker player) on my watch, thank you very much. I think the dryness is over your heads, clearly.
The questions were quite a bit easier in the early rounds, but there’s no doubt there were some very mighty performances throughout the series but especially so in the grand final.
I couldn’t agree more that this is a perfect example of why “The British Are Better Than Us.”
I don’t think anything like this could ever grab a foothold in the US, because (as has been said) it would have to be dumbed-down to reach a wider audience, and thus a bigger rating/share. The problem is that the difficulty is part of the charm. The difficulty is the main reason the format works. Lose that (in an American version) and the show becomes unwatchable.
But most significantly, this show could not work in the US, because Americans simply don’t like “the smartest kid in the class”. Americans look at people who have been blessed with intelligence as snobbish, elitist pansies who never do an honest days work. It makes no difference whether that talent was God-given or well-earned. Can you honestly tell me that it’s not difficult to become a solicitor or Oxford professor
These are the kids who sat in the front of the classroom…the ones who always raised their hands…the ones who always had their noses in a book. They’re the ones we teased from junior-high onward, and we still won’t pull for them. We refuse to be impressed by their talents. We’d rather marvel the big and flashy pick-a-case-game-of-luck…or a delusional girl who believes she can become an instant pop star…or a school superintendent who wins cash by answering questions her 5th graders should know………
Why wouldn’t Americans like this show There is no “American Dream” in it. There are no hard-luck stories from the supporters’ bench here. There’s no factory worker to root for here, and no single mom with 4 kids. Being smart is seen as the antithesis to achieving that dream, despite the fact that we know education is a cure-all for things like poverty, crime, and disease. Education is the key to unlocking the American Dream, and all we do is treat it like a liability.
Flame away…
I just want to point out that when the contestant said he was a “solicitor,” I thought he meant salesperson. Apparently, in Britain, a solicitor is some sort of lawyer. Oops! :)
To Neville: You learn something new every day. I didn’t know that either.
To Friar Simon: Who says that this can’t work here in the States? We embrace Jeopardy! and Millionaire, both of them have worked out for 25 and 10 years respectively.
And when I think of Oxford, I think more of Oxford, Mississippi, where the campus of Ole Miss is, not the University in England (not to knock England’s institute of higher learning).
To Brig Brother: We’re not dissing Vicki Coren (at least I’m not), but she needs to be less Anne Robinson and more Regis Philbin.
I happen to think Vicki’s style is perfect for this type of show – she knows that 99% of this is going to go way over everyone’s heads, so she hosts the game with a “just nod vacantly like you know what’s going on” sense of humor.
As for the game itself, I’d love to see more of it. Can’t find anything on YouTube, sadly.
I love Vicki on the show. She’s smarmy, smart, funny, just great. Not all hosts need to be warm and cuddly. Her personality is perfect for it. It’s not even close to Anne Robinson. I have to go with Brig; I think some people are just not getting her. Hence the title “the British are Better than us.”
It’s called dry humor, like Brig said. Watch some Britcoms (if you can find them anymore). Much better than a vast majority of our sitcoms.
Friar Simon hit the nail on the head.
When Alex and I auditioned for Password last year, the coordinators hinted that if you were a doctor or lawyer or someone perceived to be “well off” you would not fare well in being chosen as opposed to if you have some hardscrabble story — the example they used was actually “a janitor”! someone “America would cheer for” if they won a large sum of money..
This was such bullshit for me to hear, as why would we expect a JANITOR to be awesome at clue-giving? Forgive the elitism, but are janitors ever really known for their synonym-giving prowess and mastery of word games ? In the day (and I mean as recent as the 1980s) GAME PLAY was what drove ratings, not these stupid sob stories.. WHO GIVES A SHIT ABOUT THE PLAYERS’ LIFE STORY, GET ON WITH THE GAME! .. this is why I FF through Millionaire at light speed and skip past all the bullshit right to the $16,000 question and start there.. it takes me about three minutes to watch a full episode after blowing past the small-talk, the “who did you bring with you”, and the first eight stupid questions. …but taken an old ep of Password Plus, Pyramid, etc, it’s all game, and it were the INTELLIGENT people who got chosen who made these games fun to watch. Not these stupid jackasses who can prove that they can act retardedly excited and have a hard-luck story to share.
This is why a show like this SHOULD be a hit here but will NEVER be a hit here — unless it was on maybe PBS. I love the simplicity of this game as well as the complexity of the puzzles, it’s awesome. And while I know absolutely NOTHING about opera, I, for one, am very entertained watching three dudes discuss it as if they know exactly what’s up. THOSE are the people I root for when watching a game, not some sad sap janitor.
So how do we change this We must start at the top and let network execs know that there IS an audience for intelligent game shows and let that trickle down to the production companies to pump out good quality shows — as opposed to this mindless horseshit like Bingo America and 21. Who’s with me on this?!? :D
Looked back over the clip, and I realize that I was a bit too hard on the host at the first viewing. I just think the first joke about “going on too long” could’ve been done better, and then held a grudge through the rest of the viewing. She is a capable host, and I apologize for calling her “a bit crap.”
I do know the concept of British dry humor (or humour :P), and do enjoy some British wit (watched Spaced, working on listening to 8 gigs of I’m Sorry I Haven’t a Clue archives), so let’s not start an unnecessary culture war.
Speaking of culture wars, I’d like to comment about this show having no “rags to riches” element that is prevalent in US game shows.
For some reason game shows became inextricably linked with money and prizes, because why else would you agree to compete in “silly games” on TV? Since that connection, raising the prize money became an easy way to get eyeballs.
Once the jackpots started going above your average yearly salary, it became apparent that contestants could change their lives. Then the connection was made that game shows should somehow act as charities, rewarding people who need money but only if they do XYZ.
I’m of the school of thought that says watching a game show is fun because of the game, not because of the plight of the contestants. While seeing people win big jackpots on shows like Deal make me teary-eyed, it’s not the game that’s bringing out this reaction. Shows like “Extreme Makeover Home Edition” use the same mechanic, without having to worry about making a game for people to watch at the same time.
I think it’s a waste of a game if you just want to donate money to people who need it anyways, so you start skewing the odds more and more in their favor, making it less of a game. 5th grader is really just the world’s easiest scholarship application.
tl;dr In summary: Using big jackpots to up ratings helped ruin what I enjoyed about game shows, the game. I think that games can once again rule game shows, but only once the public stops tuning in to the ones that have the money but not the gameplay.
Didn’t plan on making this a culture war… I mean, I’m an American with my degree in English Literature and History…who happens to teach Broadcasting. So, there’s a bit of a culture war going in my head all the time. :-)
ANYWAY….
I came in to mention the great line from the film, QUIZ SHOW…
Martin Scorcese is playing Martin Rittenhome, the president of Geritol, the sponsor of “21″.
He says: “But even the quiz shows’ll be back. Why fix them? Think about it, will ya? You could do exactly the same thing by just making the questions easier. See, the audience didn’t tune in to watch some amazing display of intellectual ability. They just wanted to watch the money.”
I’m not sure where that takes this discussion…but there it is. I just wish I would have thought of it yesterday…
By the way….
Has anybody found any more of this show online
FriarSimon: UKNova.com has a torrent with the complete seres. Membership to UKNova is capped, so it might be tough to get in.
I have all 15 episodes. The previous episodes are tough, but not nearly as brutal as the final.
Friar — but you raised a great point earlier nonetheless that I really think deserves addressing to not only the producers of game shows but the network heads as well… Jeopardy! is the gold standard, the one game show still in existence (in the US) that weighs intellect over contestant excitability.. All the time you’ll see very drab unexcited people (and even people who are presumed to be well off, doctors, etc) who run the board and makes exciting television. You can’t say Ken Jennings is exactly exciting or charming for television but what made people watch was watching his supreme knowledge explode for 76 episodes. I would hope people care much more to see that than they care about how loudly and wildly they call out consonants on Wheel of Fortune.
I know we’re probably not about random links, but you might want to try looking up UK TV torrents on google if you’re looking for the full season.
This show has bumped ahead of both Countdown and University Challenge as must-watch-asap shows. The writing is brilliant, the host is excellent (don’t judge her on one joke, you can see her hitting her stride near the end of the quarterfinals), and the format is solid. It sounds like it got good ratings, and I’m sure with no prize money and very little fanfare, that the show is cheap as chips to produce, so I’m expecting a second season, at the very least.
In addition, it’s in tournament format. I don’t know what it is, but tournament formats just always were way more interesting to watch.
Speaking of ways the British are better than us – the new Countdown set looks awesome, and they’re about to have a Champion of Champions tournament coming up next week. Hint, Hint.
Very interesting show. Definitely one of the most academically-intensive shows I’ve ever seen, and the difficulty reminds me a bit of modern U.S. collegiate quiz bowl.
IIRC, BBC4 is typically home to “niche” programming such as this, while BBC1 and 2 is more likely to broadcast more general fare.
Would a format like this work in the U.S.? Maybe. You would have to pitch it to the right network — I could see Discovery picking a U.S. version to pair with Cash Cab. And what about PBS? It doesn’t do game shows often, but games they do are generally strong (such as the “Carmen Sandiego” games).
I can relate to “lobster” because I tried out for Password and too was informed that they were looking for contestants based not on ability but for “sympathy.” Because I’m an aspiring playwright, I got concerned when they said that they weren’t looking for showbiz types, even if my improv comedy skills would be useful in giving clues, because they expected “showbiz” people to become rich and famous. Don’t performers need to eat, too? They must not have heard this joke: What’s the difference between a musician and a stuffed turkey? A musician can feed a family of four.
I also understand why this country does not favor intellectualism. It’s why politicians refer to the public as “folks” instead of people, drop the “g” off words ending in “ing,” and attribute lack of knowledge to the fact that they’re not “privileged.” Sarah Palin is a prime example, who said that she neglected to obtain a passport after her VP nomination because she couldn’t afford prep school or expensive vacations, as if only the privileged do their job. And people actually voted for her.
This is why my favorite game shows come from the UK, where it is all about the gameplay, as in most cases the only prize to be had is a trophy for the year’s winner. And people have no qualms about rooting for the wealthier contestants because they might actually be better players. But on the other side of the Atlantic, “elitist” has a nasty aftertaste. Doesn’t elite mean the best? Don’t we want the best doctors performing our surgery, or the best pilots flying our planes? It’s a pity that “may the best man win” has given way to “may the average Joe we can relate to win.” Until the US realizes that there do exist people within its borders who prefer big challenges to big prizes, I’ll stick to imports.
P.S. Speaking of British game shows, have any of you seen the new Krypton Factor? It’s on youtube, if you wish to look.
PBS did have a few game shows, such as “We Interrupt This Week,” “Top of the World,” and “Think Twice,” in addition to the two “Carmen Sandiego” shows. I enjoyed Think Twice, because no other game show had the “Imagination” round, where you had to improvise a story that disguised nine clues to the identity of a person, place, or thing. Also I enjoyed the “Intuition” round, which was like Hot Potato with the twist that one team would vote on whether to accept or challenge their opponents’ answers. And I’d rather see Think Twice on the air. It’s a shame that it didn’t get the respect it deserved because critics thought game shows didn’t belong on PBS (it debuted in 1994, possibly in response to Newt Gingrich’s attacks).
The UK is the new center of the game show universe. That was made complete when the G-T library went to FremantleMedia. GSN has a handful of hits to point to, but the Brits demonstrate that a show can be entertaining without giving away a zillion pounds. American game shows used to be very entertaining to watch, but network suits got so greedy, that pretty much killed game shows as a form of quaint entertainment.
And yes, it would be wonderful if there was a British version of GSN to watch on these shores!
A follow-up thought: one of the reasons that it’s harder for game shows to “work” in the U.S. is the whole instant gratification thing. Everyone has to be telegenic, young and perfect, and every show has to offer huge amounts of money. Intellectualism has experienced a long, slow, agonizing decline in the U.S. for decades. It seems that very few people are impressed by book smarts anymore (unless it can get ‘em laid or make ‘em filthy rich). As long as the networks continue to gun for the so-called 18-49 demographic (I really suspect they’re after 18- to 25-year-olds) who, en masse presumably want to be superficial and laid, game show offerings will be dumb, dumb, dumb.
Those of you 18-25 who disagree, for F’k’s sake, speak up!!!
Well said, illiniwatcher! I agree with you about the decline in intellectualism and how game shows appeal to getting rich quick while disenfranchising older viewers. But how exactly do you propose that members of the younger generation with greater concerns than getting rich, famous, and laid “speak up”?
Anyway, when I think about how the public didn’t want sitcoms and game shows on their beloved PBS, even if they enjoy them on other channels, and how other countries have public broadcasting systems full of sitcoms and game shows (the British have elevated both genres to almost an art form), I conclude that if the US took some tips from the Brits they would have something there. Otherwise, I’ll be converting my money to pounds and ending my alphabet with Zed.
In responce to illiniwatcher: I am 16 and I take the most difficult classes at school. When I watch Jeopardy, I can usually get 1/4-1/2 or so of the answers right an episode. Only Connect was wayyy harder, but if it was on the air in the US (or if i could get access to the UK versions) I would probably learn something from the show and eventually be able to answer questions like that.
The problem is, like everyone else said, if it was brought to the US it would be dumbed down or very few people would watch it. Unfortunately, I doubt there are people in the 18-25 demographic that does care enough and would watch a show like this.
I have a question for people on this site: When u watched this clip, what were u thinking about/what did u get out of it?
See, if I were to watch this show and I never knew any answers ever, I would probably stop watching. I watched this show in hopes that I would pick up on the way to answer the questions and then be able to do it myself. I did it to learn which is why DOND is the biggest show in America today. Americans don’t want to learn, they want to choose numbers.
It bothers me when I see these great shows and have no access to them. I will try to get on that UK torrent site but I doubt it will happen. Until then I’ll just watch some of the videos on youtube.
I don’t really see what you all like about this show. I watch game shows because of the play along factor, myself. When there’s a show about something I don’t know very well or I don’t do well at, it doesn’t hold my interest long. That’s why I’ve never really liked Name That Tune, because I’m not a big music fan. Game shows IMO are supposed to be fun, and it’s not fun to struggle and feel dumb. If that makes me “The Ugly American”, then so be it. The low production values aren’t too impressive, either. I guess the British way of doing things doesn’t appeal to me.
I agree with CarShark. I enjoy game shows that you can really get into, and while it is indeed interesting to attempt the connections made in Only Connect while simultaneously being informed, I cannot get into a show that has no excitement factor regardless of whether you get the answer right or not. Intellectually stimulating? Yes, I would say so. But is it interesting? Quite the opposite, in my honest opinion.
In addition: I’m a huge fan of the Ca$h Cab and Japanese game shows, as you can probably tell.