GSN Releases Previews of the New “Lingo”
I’m starting to get nervous about the updated version of Lingo coming to GSN this June. When the rules were first leaked some of the changes announced were confusing and without any merit for change, but it was far from the end of the world. When it was announced Chuck Woolery wasn’t returning, it was equally confusing but we were told that GSN is very adamant on having A list hosts now, and we can see Bill Engvall doing well. GSN released two previews of the new show. After seeing it, I’m starting to get a very bad feeling. It’s blending in with the network’s current M.O. of solely host driven light-on-content shows too much.
I’ve got a few issues. First, yes, the set looks very nice. Having said that, it’s awfully empty and everything doesn’t look as cohesive as the old version. If you can’t afford to have a giant set and not have vast spaces of emptiness, why bother? But that’s nothing major at all. Big deal. I’m having larger issues with how Bill describes the show. I had to rewind the part where he said the show is more modern because they aren’t using small rubber balls for numbers anymore. Instead they are using racks of silver balls behind the players. Really? That’s all it takes to make it more modern?
More than that, though, I got nervous about the discussion of how much comedy was put into the show and how little was shown in the clip. It’s repeatedly mentioned how much comedy was added to the show. That’s fine and expected, but the reason people fell in love with Lingo the first time is the game play. The game is still there relatively unchanged and it’s working, but it seems like they are really pushing it to the background. If they aren’t, then re-editing the previews wouldn’t be a bad idea. Furthermore if you’re going to talk about how funny the show is, it would probably be wise to A: put an actually funny clip up or B: have a clip where the audience is laughing.
The point that made me most worried is when Bill said, “If you give us a shot, I think you’ll find it’s really fun.” People already gave it a shot and loved it, and that’s why the show is coming back. If you need to convince people to not turn away from a show they already know and love because it’s airing literally hours a day still, that’s troubling. Showing clips of the old version of Lingo, drawing up comparisons, probably wasn’t the greatest decision either. Even more comparisons are going to be made quickly and if they decide it doesn’t look as good as the old version, it’s over. Furthermore mentioning how you don’t need someone like co-host Shandi, who was a big fan and network favorite, probably won’t endear you to the core audience. The way Bill talks about her sounds like a guy breaking up with an annoying girlfriend.
I don’t know. The game play works, I appreciate the effort, and they are making some changes that were needed badly from the old version such as prize balls, audience, a bit of money, and that stuff. The old Lingo fell into a rut which ended the show. I’m getting a weird vibe from these clips. I’m looking forward to the show and I swear there is no prejudice because I didn’t think Chuck Woolery was all that great, nor was the old version all that good. But as I said previously, this version seems like mostly change for the sake of change and the network’s direction host driven light-on-content shows. Please tell me if I’m wrong.
I do appreciate the fact that they have added a live studio audience to the show. I don’t know if it’s just me, but having a live audience filled with emotion and reaction really drives the show. Canned laughter and applause makes it feel fake. I wasn’t blown away from the original series, but I’m all for a “new look” and new turn on any game. I just want to see how this pans out, but I’m not setting my expectations up high just yet.
I am going to give this show a chance. But if it lets me down, it lets me down.
I dont know if I completely agree with you – why was Shandi (and the others) there in the first place? She added nothing other than eye candy. Chuck – who I always liked – couldn’t liven up a dry show on his own….so they trotted out a cohost who , c’mon, just sat there and acted like she was necessary. (Okay, here’s your board. I’m clicking to load it up….all because I’m here!)
If Bill is funny enough, he’ll be fine on his own.
I do agree with comparing it though. Not wise.
For the record I agree with you on Shandi, and frankly didn’t like her. If they had to have the co-host I thought Stacey was much better. I thought either co-host was unnecessary, though. If Bill can carry the show himself, and I’m sure he can, fantastic. I’m just considering what GSN’s core audience, which still emails me about how they can apply for Power of 10 because of the reruns, will respond.
Well I think Bill’s quote talking about giving show a shot stems from the fact that many remakes of shows have come and gone in a flash. I think what he was trying to say there was that he doesn’t want the show to have the same outcome.
It looks to me that they took the money they would’ve paid a co-host personality and spent it on a more expensive set and to pay a studio audience. Both of these moves are probably not necessary, especially the audience. Lingo is not a high profile enough property to be able to fill a studio audience with tourists for free. Deal Or No Deal couldn’t even do that. I know GSN wants to produce it’s original programming on the cheap, but paying a couple hundred audience members twenty or so dollars each per taping may not be most cost effective decision.
Respectfully, Alex, I really think you’re over-analyzing these two previews. Part of the reason they’re focusing on the humor instead of the gameplay is specifically because the group of fans who loved it before know how exactly how the game works. The unique elements–those that differ from what the intended audience knows from the last iteration–are exactly what they want to emphasize in the previews, and so far, none of this makes me think they’re forsaking the foundation they laid with Woolery’s run. The potential endgame change scares me, but I’ll give it a viewing before making final judgment. Otherwise, this looks like what it says on the package: an updated version of the classic show.
Oh it’s cool. Trust me, I know I’m over-analyzing. I’m just trying to consider GSN’s core audience which still sends me regular emails about why I canceled Power of 10 and Deal or No Deal and how they’ve responded to the slightest bit of change, which hasn’t been well. I don’t know how any of it will work out since GSN basically ignores everyone but the major outlets that pay no attention to them anyway. I’ve just got a relatively uneasy feeling gauging recent efforts, what I’ve heard from the set, and the previews.
The part about adding more comedy to the show is all fine and dandy, but considering the fact that I can’t stand Bill, it might be a bit hard to stomach if they try to make it the main focus. And if they have to have those silly racks, why not make the balls Golden Balls-esque? It seems like slowly opening a ball is more dramatic than just picking it up off a rack.
The new set looks OK and the matter of a co-host was more of a “want” and less of a “need”, if you know what I mean.
What I’m worried about is the addition of clues (a la Chuck’s old “Scrabble” show; http://buzzerblog.flashgameshows.com/rules-to-gsns-updated-lingo-leaked/).
As a former contestant, i am excited to see the new version of the show. However, this is one of those rare times I disagree with ALEX (Author). Although, watching at home i loved seeing Shandi on screen and the way she got along with Chuck, there were too many times during my episode, that they would interrupt us contestants so they could talk during gameplay. You may not have seen it, but there were a number of times when we would call out our Lingo ball number and would have to repeat it about 3 times, because Chuck & Shandi decided they wanted to trade anecdotes as we were actually in the middle of gameplay. Sometimes we would try to shout over them, but they would keep going, and that’s time wasted during gameplay. Which, in my opinion slowed the show down, and also put teams at a disadvantage especially in either a close game or a game in which a team is on a roll trying to mount a come back.
Yes the addition of a co-host helped boost the show and made it it’s own in comparison to the versions worldwide. And of course it harked back to the days of 80s LINGO with a co-host, only in a different capacity. At the same time I believe it became a hinderance as Shandi & Chuck became more comfortable with one another. But if you look at the first 2 seasons of Chuck’s Lingo w/o a co-host, the show was so much more focused on the game play rather than banter. More Chuck driven, so much that teams would have good battles (either solving more, getting more lingos, or even a great back & forth battles between two low scoring teams).
Alex, I truly believe that fans will fall in love with the show all over again. If the show’s faithful can get pass the changes and the gameplay still remains the same (with those special additions, prize balls & grand prize), this may be even more successful than the original. Of course, GSN needs to do well with promoting like they did for Chuck’s version. You know better than i do, Chuck became the face of GSN becuase of this, which as a viewer seemed to lead into their promotional campaign featuing different hosts, doing bumps. I just hope that we dont have a TPiR fanatism like we did after Bob left and Drew came in.
A-list hosts? I wouldn’t call Wendy Willams, Sherri Sheppard, Carrie Ann Inaba, or Bill Engvall, A- List Celebrities. I mean they are are all down on the D-List with Kathy Griffin.
You may not, but GSN does, and saying they are D list is a massive stretch. Wendy, maybe, but Bill is an very popular comedian (I don’t like his comedy, but he is), Carrie Ann is one of the primary faces on the most popular show on television and Sherri’s pretty popular for her the numerous stuff she does. They are B list if anything. Inside the game show circle? No one could give a crap about them. I had no clue who Wendy or Carrie Ann were before their GSN shows. But in the pop culture zeitgeist they are far more popular than Chuck which is what they allegedly cared about. The main point is that I’ve explicitly been told by my inside sources that GSN isn’t really looking at shows without a big name attached to it, and Chuck isn’t one to them.
That last line is just disappointing…not seeing Chuck as a big name. I understand that the big wigs want to get these “big” name hosts to bring in viewers that otherwise may not watch the shows, and maybe not as many people these days are familiar with the Woolerys, Eubanks and Martindales of the world but come on. A name doesn’t always sell a show and we’ve seen that time and time again not only on GSN but on many other channels. It’s like that blog post from Greg Scott you posted last week, Alex. No one looks talent that can actually help a show, it’s all about whether or not you’re a name.
Wow…Carrie Ann Inaba is on the most popular show on television AND she’s on Dancing with the Stars?!?! (Sorry, had to do it :-P)
People are still asking how to get on Power of 10 and Deal? I’ll just leave that alone. And while I understand GSN’s position on wanting some kind of name value for their hosts, Alex is right; the words “Wendy Williams” and “star power” should not be used unless “doesn’t have and never will have” are in between. :-D
Now, on point; as Narro said, they had to focus on the changes because anyone who watched Lingo in the past knows how the game plays (Chuck even eschewed explaining the game rules later in the run), so highlighting that is unnecessary. And as you’ve said, a co-host isn’t necessary either. So, as before, I will wait until the debut to pass final judgement
Some of the game show celebs of the 70s-80s were as much or more D-list than Bill Engvall, SHerri Shepherd, or Kathy Griffin
GSN hasn’t announced the actual debut date yet for Lingo?
They did, it is airing next month!!!!
The backdrop looks similar to baggage’s.
I think the show deserves a chance, but as I’ve pointed out in the past, and much more sarcastically, if GSN wanted a funny host they shouldn’t have picked Bill Engvall. As you said, Alex, they could have picked some actual funny moments to show if there’s any humor to be had. I mean, is it supposed to be funny that the one guy threw up while hiking? And is contestant banter supposed to be a new, modern idea? Because Chuck already did the contestant banter and did it quite well. And when contestants have a personality and can relate an amusing story, you get funny. When they don’t, you don’t. If contestant banter is going to turn into “tell us an embarrassing story so we can laugh at you,” it will truly be the show’s low point.
All that said, I think the core gameplay is what will still matter. Some how, some way, the addition of clues will have to not ruin things completely, but I’m not very hopeful of that. The increased top prize should hopefully draw more attention too, so maybe in the end it will all balance out.
I seem to remember that, yes, Woolery did contestant banter, but only very little, and that was when he was actually in the part mid-round when he got to know them.
My own thoughts on Lingo:
Not a bad game, but a little slow. Co-host completely worthless.
The biggest problem I had watching the old Lingo was the bonus round. A great two minutes when they bothered to fill in the letters with any speed, but then it just came to a crashing halt to see if the players would win anything, with the big prize (gee, a whopping $5000 in the beginning) being rarely won.
If they don’t have Bill Engvall trying to overpower the show, I think things will be just fine. As far as his comments on making it modern, well we have to realize he doesn’t know anything about game shows in the first place, he’s just another comedian who wants a steady paycheck shoved up there because the morons that currently run GSN don’t know anything about game shows either.
Kinda looking forward to seeing how this will be.
I while I don’t like the whole “dark set with neon lights” trend that started due to Who Wants To Be a Millionaire, I really like the way the new Lingo set looks.
I’ve always said that having a great game show consists of just two simple things – a great game and a great host. As far as Bill Engvall goes, I’ll give him a chance and see if he fits the role or not.
Remember that a game show doesn’t run solely based on the host itself. As we’ve all seen with Improv-A-Ganza, GSN tried to attract viewers by hosting a comedy program with what many people deem to be an A-List celebrity – Drew Carey. Even with Drew at the helm of it, Improv-A-Ganza’s ratings have been significantly lower than expected, because it wasn’t a game show.
Also, take a note of Install Recall, which GSN aired with host Wink Martindale. That show didn’t last long either. Wink is a great host, but he was paired with a boring hidden-camera program.
Most importantly though, I think a good game show has humor, but not forced humor. A good host knows how to think on his feet and react instantly to something funny a contestant says.
Is it just me, or did they add a bunch of stuff to the Baggage set that looks like it doesn’t belong there?
You mean like the show itself? Yeah, I think you’re right lol.
It’s not a good sign that it’s taken them umpteen seasons to do the obvious — adding prize balls, tweaking the scoring, etc. Visually, the changes look nice in this preview. But if they wanted to go “A list” in terms of host, they certainly lowered the bar. Chuck is always welcome.
I don’t think you’re wrong, I believe you are right on some respects: It did feel like that Chuck’s hosting abilities was starting to take it’s toll. I too think that it was time for change to an already proven format, though the change I was expecting were the addition of a toss-up word (ala Wheel’s Toss-Up Puzzles). Even though Stacey & Shandi did great, I can live without a co-host, after all, there was no co-host when the first GSN version started anyway.
Now, about this upcoming version, I don’t know if I can be really excited or down right disappointed. Now don’t get me wrong, the set looks nice, and there are some similarities between this set & the one on Baggage, but I am not appreciative of the fact that they’re focusing less on the bingo portions of the game and focusing more on the guessing of words which isn’t that really terrible IMO, it just needs balance; I liked digging into the bowl for balls rather than going to a rack & take a ball, but with big balls like that, I can understand why; and I can definitely do with the playing for money for each word & prize balls as well. All in all, I’m just going to have to watch the new show & see what happens.
I hope Lingo will be a good show, and I also hope that it will last longer than the last edition did (2002-2007). I hope Bill Engvall will stay with the show for as long as he can since he is not doing a lot these days.
I feel that the top prize of $100,000 is an overkill considering the players are just guessing five letter words for 30 minutes. I think the top prize should be a set $50,000. I say “set” because in the old version, they raised it by $1,000 everyday someone didn’t win. That extra $50,000 should have gone towards a new season of 1 vs. 100 (which I watch, but the new season would not be with Carrie Ann Inaba), and some of that $50,000 should go to higher cash prizes on Catch 21 (which I don’t watch, but is a very good show in its fifth season). I say that Catch 21 should raise there prizes because I hear other fans complaining about it, and 1 vs. 100 season 1 (GSN) was a very cheap show.
I hope Lingo is on at either 5:30, 6:00, or 8:30. Those are all East Coast times. Hopefully GSN releases a date very soon and time when it will air since it is going to be aired in a month.
shandi was like an annoying ex girlfriend!
shandi was like an annoying ex girlfriend! Glad she’s gone, the new show looks good, but o keep missing it :(