If you’re a long time reader you might know that, truthfully, I’m not really a big fan of the oldies. However, there are four that I can always watch and they always entertain me: Password, Family Feud, Pyramid (Dick Clark version), and my favorite of the bunch: Match Game. That’s why it worries me a little bit when it has been reported that Fremantle is currently developing a Match Game revival.
They are currently in discussions with cable networks and should lock up a deal soon. GSN made a numerous amount of attempts at a revival under former CEO Rich Cronin’s watch, but never came to fruition. Maybe they finally made it work? I’d be a bit worried if GSN didn’t handle the I’ve Got A Secret revival so masterfully. If this is for GSN, please bring back Bil Dwyer, he’s made for this format.
I’m still under the mind frame that Match Game can’t be properly revived in today’s times, or at least it’ll be very very hard. You can’t really give naughty answers without being dirty now, and while I’m a big fan of dirty humor it just doesn’t work on Match Game. Most of the fun of the 70s version is just thinking “I can’t believe they’re saying that in the 70s.” If you watched Match Game for the game play, you are a bit off, you watched for the humor. If the new version can find a nice balance between dirty and fun, great. I’d just really rather not see a game that’s so dirty it makes my eyes bleed or that’s excessively watered down to appease the people who can’t take a dirty or naughty joke.
Well, it can’t get any worse than their last attempt, can it?
That’s a good suggestion to have Bil Dwyer host. But of course no one can replace the master known as Gene Rayburn.
Sadly since they are looking for a cable network, that probably means they want to make the show dirty for cable. You can say anything on cable these days.
How a Match Game revival could work:
First of all, forget about a five-days-a-week run in syndication. It didn’t work in ‘98 with the cheap prize budget and avenues for humor getting exhausted quickly. This needs to be once-a-week on network, just like MGPM (okay, that show was syndicated but you get the point). Monday on CBS would be good but Thursday on NBC would be great. With a Thursday slot, the show could attract bigger names for the panel who are promoting movies being released the next day.
As for prize money, MG is so silly that playing it for a million dollars would be way too much. A top prize of $25,000 a la Dog Eat Dog should suffice. It could even be worked into promoting the show. “Other nighttime game shows offer you a million dollars, we offer you a million laughs!” Then cue some funny sound bites and that legendary ’70s theme.
Finally, we need some good people running things on screen. Bill Dwyer would be an excellent host, but I’ve some ideas about panelists: Brett, Charles and Richard. Yes, I know two of them are no longer with us, but I’m talking about Brett Butler, Charles Barkley and Richard Kind. A pair of former sitcom stars and the funniest man ever to come out of the NBA could be a real treat to watch.
Here’s hoping for the best,
jtf10570
I believe a Match Game revival might work…just not necessarily on GSN. Comedy Central would be a good place for it…maybe Fox. (Though I remember Fox attempting a revival a few years ago called “What The Blank?!” hosted by Fred Willard.) Bil Dwyer would be a good host, but what’s scary to me would be the panel they could assemble. I can just see the panel stocked with no-name stand-up comics, fourth bananas on cable shows and castoffs from reality shows. Look at how 1 vs. 100 defines a celebrity…that’s pretty scary. But then again, who really knew who Brett Somers, Elaine Joyce or Patti Deutsch were before Match Game. Dawson and Reilly were both second bananas on sitcoms before MG.
I thought that Gameshow Marathon did a good job putting together a panel that somewhat reflected the 70s version. Kathy Griffin was a decent Brett. Bruce Vilanch did a good CNR. Adam Carolla was a cruder variation of Richard Dawson. I doubt that GSN’s budget would allow for celebrities of even this caliber to be regulars…but I could be wrong.
I actually wouldn’t mind a Match Game revival within reason. It’s been almost 10 years since the last one. If you’re worried about it being drastically dirty, it might be a quite a step up since the times have really changed since the 70’s naturally but I can trust GSN or whoever is in charge of this project to take some caution to the point where the FCC isn’t going to break down the studio door and give somebody a beating. LOL Well you get my point. I mean in the 98 version, I know that Coolio was quite in tune with the penis humor with his “I have a multiple card answer with every possible innuendo” idea. Even though that would be hard, it would be in the panelists’ best interest to use their best judgment in their answers so as not scare everyone from watching the show because it’s become a dirty porno dialoguewise. They would have to do what’s best for the ratings since more people have more of a funny bone than others and of course kids are watching.
For some reason, I don’t want this prophesy to come through. As much as I love MG, I’d rather not have the experience ruined by some modern rehash. (I should note here that I have not yet been exposed to the more recent attempts at this show, although from what I hear, that could be a bragging right.) There’s just something (pardon the cheese-factor) magical about ye olden Match Game ‘7x that (apparently) never happened in any of the newer versions, and I don’t want to lose that magic with another terrible update.
I’m actually weary of bringing back Match Game. If they did, they would HAVE TO steer clear of doing the dirty jokes…use innuendos or don’t do those jokes.
If Kathy Griffen shows up on another panel, I’m boycotting the show. Her humor and personality are things I don’t care for.
As for Bill Dwyer, maybe. Personally, I would prefer Todd Newton…but that’s just me.
However, comics need to steer clear of using the show for their schtick…to many shows have been victim of that…and all of them got cancelled because of it (remember “Identity”?).
Lastly, they need to boost the budget, and BRING BACK THE WHEEL!!! I know that Richard Dawson is quoted as saying that he didn’t like it…but the randomness adds to the fun. Plus, if someone that hardly matches helps a contestant win the the big money, that’s a really great moment.
Here’s an idea for the dollar amounts: $2500, $1000, and $500 respectively…the wheel would double the amount to $50,000, if they got the top answer…plus, if they implemented the MG PM rules, that would increase the potential jackpot to $100,000…just a thought.
I’m all for a revival, less the humor from the so-called version of 1998. As for what jtf10570 said about putting it in primetime, this would be the perfect time for that considering we don’t know how much longer this writer’s strike will last. As a result, the primetime game shows like “Deal or No Deal” are getting decent ratings. Bill Dwyer would be perfect for a revival. I say bring back the BLANK as soon as possible.
I can remember Gene Rayburn (may G*d rest his _____) having said many, many times how weak the format itself was; it was the chemistry of the panel that made it seem special (one could argue that same case for HOLLYWOOD SQUARES - the original, versus the second remake - despite its more recent five-year run). It’s enough that a million-dollar version of PASSWORD is a’comin’; I am not alone in my skepticism as to the Fremental, er, uh, Fremantle treatment of this classic. We have nine years’ worth of wonderful memories with Gene, Brett, Charles, (and five or so with Dawson). I can’t discount the notion that MATCH GAME could be GSN’s answer to “I Love Lucy.” There’s a DVD “Best Of” compilation on the market, with a second volume (supposedly) on the way. MATCH GAME is, for my money, one game show that is better left alone, thank you…
I think GSN is really the best place for a match game revival, because it’s already got the fans of the old show. I like Bill Dwyer as host, if he wasn’t already tied down with 2 shows I’d say Drew Carey would be great too. the prize money shouldn’t be a major issue since the show is really about the laughs but I think a $10,000 top prize (play the MG pm rules (pre- star wheel)) would be enough and that would fit with GSN’s budget. the major problem I see is celebs. because we all know that no a-list stars will do a game show anymore (just look at the last version of H2) if it goes ahead it might work with Jermaine, Suzanne, Frank & Billy from IGAS and 2 alternating celebs but then again, you don’t want it to be the same as IGAS (although that was good)
I agree with Marc Power about the IGAS panel, but I’d like to see Paula Poundstone appear as a panelist too.
Here’s what I hope the revival could be:
1) Have a panel of 6 stars (such as MG7x,PM,and ABC90) instead of 5(MG98).
2) Have the winning contestant recieve $1,000 per main game.
3) Bring back the wheel, but make it a double-style(Melody Roulette from “Name That Tune)with the outer wheel, parted by 8, showing bonus multipier range of 2x-5x with 1 spot for a CAR, and the inner wheel, parted by 6, with the celeb’s name for the winner to match in the 2nd part of SuperMatch. Also keep the first part of the SuperMatch as is: 1}$500,2}$250 & 3}$100 (the max chance bonus $25,000 or $5,000 with car range of $15,000-35,000)
I’m all for a MG revival. As for the panel maybe the Whose Line crew can make up some of the panel. Drew and the gang would be good at playing MG. Bill Dwyer would be a good host but not as good as the master himself Gene Rayburn.
My God - can’t FremantleMedia let the classic “Match Game” rest in peace? Don’t they remember the dreck known as “MG ‘98?” I’m sure that Gene Rayburn, Brett Somers, and Charles Nelson Reilly would want their legacies on this show to rest in peace, along with the idea of anymore revivals! It has been tried twice before, and since most of the classic panelists from the 70’s version are either retired, or have passed on to ‘the big game show in the sky’, let the memories from that version live on in repeats and DVD’s - don’t dredge up another half-assed remake not worthy of the Mark Goodson quality crown come up in the process!
It would be interesting to see if it could be done If you get the right panelists…maybe.
I dunno this a total fan wish, but Zachary Levi as a guest panelist would be funny. He’s a nut, if you’ve seen his interviews.
And Bil Dwyer would be a good choice for a host, I think.
I thin a good idea for panelists would be to have sitcom stars. This might be a little farfetched, but i think Roseanne Barr would be a perfect fit for a match game panelist. Will Smith would be hilarious.
OMG another Fremantle rehash. Now all of us game show people know the horror that Fremantle has put us through with their rehash of game shows. I would be fine with a MG rehash as long as Fremantle has NOTHING to do with it. I can only imagine to crappy budget, set with ridiculous flashing lights, and a really terrible theme song. And they might just get DENIIS MILLER to be the host. egh! Just let MG rest in peace. Most of us have forgot (or at least tried to forget) the 98-rehash and I would just like to have the images of the 70’s MG in my head.
Didn’t Fremantle rehash that absolutely horrible version of Card Sharks? (The show that I have been pushing to get back on the air! - with the original rules.)
As for host..Bill Dywr would be great! He has a way of working with the celebrities, which is hard with a panel of strong personalities. You have to some how let them have their cometic freedom while still controlling and moving the show along. I think he does it well.
As for a panel after reading everyones comments…
Rosanne Baar (Oh man that would be amazing)
Paula Poundstone (she has a great game show humor and could keep the show from not be a dud.)
Richard Kind would do great on the show.
I think that those would be a good set of permanent panelists with the change every week. I think that was one of the failures of the 98-rehash.
So in summary
- I like the idea of a Match Game rehash, but NOT with Fremantle.
- Didn’t they do the horrible Card Sharks rehash?
- BRING CARD SHARKS BACK WITH THE ORIGINAL FORMAT AND RULES WITH INCREASED MONEY.
- Rosanne, Paula, and Richard. Good miz!
I think the biggest reason why this will not work is because in the 70s the part of the show everyone liked was the dirty questions with the NOT dirty answers. That just wont work now. Give a dirty question, get a dirty answer. And if they dont give a dirty answer, we’ll know they’re faking it.
Unfortunately, Martin, Fremantle owns the Match Game (along with practically everything else Goodson-Todman did), so I don’t see how a revival could be made without thier involvement.
That being said, yeah, it’ll probably suck worms. (Although Bil Dwyer - it’s one ‘L’, by the way - would not be a bad choice for host.)
I must be the only person who browses this forum and doesn’t totally hate Fremantle Media. Do they screw up? Yes, they do, a lot. But that’s because they’re stupid. It’s okay if they’re stupid.
I’ve just gotten sick of all this “Oh, they killed $ale of the Century,” “Oh, they killed Card Sharks” “Oh, they’re going to kill Password” “Oh, they’re going to kill Match Game”. Well, if they do, so what? It doesn’t kill your memories of the best versions of the shows, and with some of them, we get to see them on GSN. Unless you’re totally bonkers, you’re not going to go “Boy, I loved Match Game… but there was this godawful version made in 2008! Now I can’t remember the good version fondly anymore, it’s ruined! AAIIEEEEEEEEE!!”. I watched the 1998 Match Game every day. I realized that the 70s format was better and appreciated it more after watching it on GSN.
I don’t apologize for the rant, because I mean it. I’m thankful that I was able and am still able to watch many game shows in their original forms, and while some revivals were unsuccessful because they’re badly done, that doesn’t take away from any memories of better versions or the show itself. Temptation didn’t kill my memories of $ale of the Century. The newest Card Sharks didn’t kill the memories of watching Eubanks’ Card Sharks with a deck of cards in my hands and screaming “Higher!” and “Lower!” at the TV.
If this is about wanting to introduce game shows we knew to a new generation, then I can understand and, either way, I wish that Fremantle would do a better job with most of the shows too. However, it seems as if most of us want the old ways for our own selfish reasons. We want the shows as we remember them best. If we don’t get our way, all hell breaks loose.
Bottom line to me: Fremantle Media only kills game shows if you THINK it does.
As for FremantleMedia Sam, just think of this - “Scrabble” and “$ale Of The Century” have been held hostage in vaults in Australia since they purchased them from Reg Grundy, plus they have reran episodes of “Press Your Luck” into the ground since they bought it from the Carruthers Company (where’s 1983 and 1986?) Least of all, don’t forget them letting Barker let loose his ‘reign of terror’ on all of the unsuspecting staff members on “The Price Is Right” before Drew took over last year - I’m sure that Mark Goodson wouldn’t have put up with all of the BS that Barker dished since he took over as executive producer of the show in 1987 - because of him, Holly Hallstrom, Janice Pennington, Kathleen Bradley, Sherrell Paris, Linda Riegert, Paul Alter, Claudia Jordan, and Deborah Curling all lost their jobs - now you know why I can’t stand FremantleMedia!
To Sam…you forgot to mention one other old Goodson-Todman show Fremental, er, uh, Fremantle turned to s**t…the Gary Kroger-hosted version of BEAT THE CLOCK (produced exclusively for PAX). And what about CARD SHARKS’ “Jim Perry” era?
As far as Fremantle’s revivals, It seems that they are staffing people who weren’t even alive during the shows’ heydays. I did play testing on Gameshow Marathon. Now, while it wasn’t a Goodson show, You would think they would have hired someone who was somewhat familiar with the shows they were going to present. I had to tell the producer the proper way to reveal the big deal. He was going to reveal the unchosen door first, big deal or not. As far as revivals in general, I think if the spirit is there, it can be considered okay:
Example 1 (good) - The 1990 Joker’s Wild: While a lot of people disliked the definition format, the main part of that show was the slot machine. You could have had hangman puzzles, word searches, etc. as long as that slot machine was the focus of the show.
Example 2 (bad) - Card Sharks 2000: On the original, the crux of the game was split between the high/low questions and the card predicting. When they brought it back, half of that equation was gone. And while I did enjoy CS2000, I didn’t think it deserved the Card Sharks name.
My final point is that if anyone really thought the ‘98 Match Game was bad, they should really try to see MG2, the Charlene Tilton-hosted disaster. I never thought anything could make Judy Tenuta look good, but I was wrong.
DENo1,
That sounds like a totally selfish reason to hate them. Yes, I don’t agree with it either, but the episodes are being “held hostage”? For what? From whom? Us?
And you’re clinging to the old models and the other members of the production staff? You’ve just proven my point. You want the way you want the show to be; you want it the way you remember it.
MrQuiz,
I actually enjoyed that version of Beat the Clock, thank you. Now, I think the Monty Hall version is the best one, thanks to seeing it on GSN. :P As for the Jim Perry CS era, I’m too young to have seen it originally. I’ve only seen it on GSN. Even so, I think the Eubanks one is slightly better, but Perry is a better host.
Hmmm…
Mixed emotions on this one, I have. I do still think MG could work in today’s TV world, on a cable network like Comedy Central or GSN, especially, where the likely overly raunchy panel won’t need to have 3/4th of their commentary bleeped out. Let’s also pray these raunchy celebs (and I do admit, I do like raunchy comedy, but not when it’s the ONLY source of humor from a show) aren’t lower on the celeb grade-list than what their blood type could possibly be…
Even in syndication on daytime networks, I can bet you, even if it’s only half as funny as any other prior incarnation, MG would bring in double the ratings of Merv Griffin’s Crosswords, just because of brand recognition. John O’Hurley would be a good host, IMHO, as well as Bil Dwyer. If somebody really wanted to go for the gusto, get Tom Bergeron, he has the best experience with celebs, don’t yah think?? ;)
For me, a dream panel could include any 6 of the following:
Betty White
Kelsey Grammar
Drew Carey (or any other current GS host who’s available, Sajak was on MGHSH fyi, and Bob Saget, Howie Mandell, Jeff Foxworthy, and Wayne Brady would be great comedic draws)
Kathy Griffin
Dwywer, Bergeron, or O’Hurley (whoever’s not hosting)
Brad Garrett
Wanda Sykes
Bruce Vilanch
Vicki Lawrence
Gilbert Gottfried
Jerry Springer (he won’t be as raunchy as on his show, I assure you)
Martin Mull
Ben Stein
Ray Romano
Ellen Degeneres
Do I realize most of these names are B-list or better, probably unaffordable and infeasible? Yes, but you gotta admit, if any group of people could make a new MG just as funny as the original, and not overly raunchy simultaneously, this would be the group. AND (big if) if the show was situated, time-wise, network-wise, and publicity-wise, well enough, some of them I’m sure would be willing to step in and do a week of eps or so…
I would have to think that they’d be able to get funny people on the show that people know.
I’d like to see what they come up with. I think that deep down in all our hearts, we want to see this done right, and it can be. With the crash that was Match Game 1998, I don’t think they’re going to do that format again.
I think Fremantle will do a fine job.They should do a better card sharks revival though.
At this day of age, IMO, the revival should have stricter rules for answering. No genital answers at all, and no swears, would keep it clean(er) and make the FCC happier.
Just as long there is no one million dollar offering or more, it may have potential.
Sam;
FYI, the Monty Hall version of BTC (like it or not) stiffed like a corpse; about halfway through (what turned out to be a only 13-week run) civilain contestants were replaced by celebrities playing for the studio audiecne (a la TATTLETALES). I remember BTC as far back as the Bud Collyer era (at least when the show went daytime in 1957); I went to two tapings of the show when it eminated from NYC during the Jack Narz era. To use a term I despise, but happens to be true, for my money the show “jumped the shark” just before Mr. Narz left he show. As good a host as he has been, Monty Hall was soooo wrong for this show; according to a new book titled TELEVISION GAME SHOW HOSTS, by his own admission, Mr. Hall loathed the show; loathed doing the show, and was happy it bombed. Jack Narz also wanted no part of it, although he reluctantly went through with becoming th show’s announcer, and associate producer. I respect yourright to your opinion, but quite frankly, BEAT THE CLOCK shares something very, very speific in common with MATCH GAME; like it or not, their respective times came and went. And when they were revived, whether Fremental, er, uh, Fremantle was involved or not, the results ranged anywhere from disappointing, to disasterous.
Sam -
As far as “Scrabble” and “$ale Of The Century” being ‘held hostage’, why don’t you have someone from the lovely FremantleMedia explain why no network can air these shows if they aren’t being held from us - before FM got their mits on these shows, they were played on the USA Network with no problem, and I never heard of Reg Grundy keeping them from being aired when he had ownership of them.
As far as “The Price Is Right” is concerned, the ladies should have had the right to retire on good terms with the show, and its audience. I’m sure I’m not the only one who thought that the ladies and other staff got ’stiffed’ by Barker and the management at Fremantle, as we never got a chance to say goodbye to any of them on camera - I’m sure there are others who agree with me that this was a BS deal the workers got on the show, and I’m sure that the new book coming out in the near future about the show will shed more light on this subject!
I agree with Mr. Quiz - “Match Game’s” time has come and gone, and it shouldn’t be attempted again. The chemistry with D-list celebs isn’t the same as it was with the regulars of the 70’s version - once again, I say let Brett, Charles, Gene, and Johnny O rest in peace, and keep their proud legacy in tact in the meantime!
I agree with the list of celebrities that Wheeloon suggested I’m thinking this someone different at the top left spot. wanda sykes where Brett was. Bruce Vilanch where charles nelson riley was someone different alot at the 4 spot. I would like Ray Romano where Richard Dawson was and the 6th spot rotate Betty White, Ellen Degeneres and another female celebrity. Also I think they should do like the rayburn version or even Ross Shafer version would be fine with me that way all celebrities would get to play in every round. Match are worth $100 the first round $200 the second round and $300 for third round. $2100 is a perfect score. Then in the supermatch top score is $2500 second answer $1000 and the third worth $500 times 10. After that then you would spin the star wheel and play for either $50,000, $20,000, $10,000 or $5,000 if you don’t pick any of the three. Also i like the thought of a revival someone was saying about having a Card Sharks revival but more like either perry, eubanks or rafferty version. I dont’ see why they can’t do it like the classic versions with the poll questions it would be interesting to hear what people think about certain things. If Fremantle reads this please bring back match game and card sharks more like the classic versions.
DeNo1,
All this talk about “tarnishing the legacy” of celebrities who play a game seems very irrational to me. At what point does or has this legacy become tarnished? I’d think there would have to be three points where this would have happened: 1984, 1991 and 1998. It doesn’t seem like the legacy has been tarnished any point. Why do you talk like the legacy will become tarnished now when it clearly hasn’t been tarnished? Everyone regards the second Match Game series to be the best and we can regularly experience that joy on GSN. To me, that’s not a tarnished legacy. That’s a legacy that lives on. It’s not dead and it will never die.
As for The Price is Right, I honestly think that all that stuff you wanted is “feel gooderism”; it doesn’t serve any real purpose. Would it have been nice? Yes. Was it necessary? No. I would guess that lots of people in this world get treated like that. It’s a shame, but it happens.
I don’t like your snarky tone, either. I don’t know why they’ve decided to not show Scrabble and $ale re-runs, and I don’t know why you want to act like I know. However, they have a reason to do so. They’re not holding anything or anyone hostage. It could be a matter of money. But even if it is a matter of money, you’re acting like we’re being slighted when we have no control in the matter. You seem to believe, as game show fans, that we are entitled to see old game shows. We aren’t entitled to squat.
Sam,Sam, Sam…
If anyone is even remotely coming off as “snarky,” I’m sorry…but in my eyes, it looks like YOU.
I think DeNo1 is using the term “held hostage” as both a figure of speech, and as a form of rightous indignation. To be fair, Fremental, er, uh, Fremantle isn’t the only one withholding some classic game shows, for whatever reason. The late Ralph Edwards’ estate, for some reason, has been “holding back” all those classic episodes of TRUTH OR CONSEQUENCES, (the 1970’s versions of) NAME THAT TUNE, and THE (original) CROSS-WITS. Yet, there seems to be little complaining there.
DeNo1…As much as all of the controversy behind the scenes on TPIR when Barker took over as Executive Producer has swirled around him like a maelstrom, he may have been the hatchetman. But, could it be remotely possible that he was merely carrying out the whims & wishes of Fremental, er, uh, Fremantle? As I see it, I compare all of that happy horses**t with a bar, nightclub/danceclub, or restaurant in dealing with unruly patrons; it’s way easier to cop out by not taking whatever necessary action is needed, for the sake of maintaining/protecting a certain image, than it is just to simply do the right thing, and let come what may. I will say this; outwardly, what happened to Holly, Dian, and especially Janice, who was there from Day One, and Paul Alter, who had also directed the original TPIR (when Bill Cullen hosted it from 1956-65), shouldn’t have happened to a dog! But, as long as there’s this thing called “politics,” these kinds of things will invariably happen again and again and again.
Am I taking any sides with Barker & company. Not at all. But, bear in mind that behind the scenes, he had a reputation that reputedly in stark contrast to what we saw in public. Still, even HE had people to answer to, namely the mucky-mucks at Fremantle.
Looking back on the post, I realized that I was snarky. I get that way when I see something that angers me quite frequently. Truly, that is something I need to work on.
Snarky is a word, though:
snark·y (snär’kē) Pronunciation Key
adj. snark·i·er, snark·i·est Slang
1. Rudely sarcastic or disrespectful; snide.
2. Irritable or short-tempered; irascible.
So, yes, I was snarky, and I admit to it.
Fremantle seems to get a lot more crap than it deserves just because they don’t know how to put out a revival and seem to be screwing with the shows that are good already. I think it’s overkill, though, to assume just because Fremantle is trying to revive Password and Match Game that they’re going to screw it up. Even Fremantle got To Tell The Truth right. That was simple enough for them to do. I believe that it is the same way with Password; it’s too simple to screw up.
No one answered my question about Match Game’s legacy, though. What is it? Is it still alive and well, thanks to GSN’s reruns of it, or is it diluted because of the three unsuccessful (one bad) revivals?
I would gladly sign up to be a contestant…
I know everyone feels like this would be a syndicated format, so I have 3 versions…
The Syndie, The GSN, and the Prime-Time version
————-
Syndie:
6 Stars
2 Contestants
Standard Rules 6 stars to match for six points.
Celebs can’t play once matched.
Most points goes on to the supermatch.
With the amounts being
$2,000
$1,500
$1,000
And then they have a match with a star for 10x that amount for $20,000; $15,000; or $10,000
If they don’t match, they get $500 and continue playing for $5,000.
With the winner coming back for up to 5-days.
===========
GSN
Knowing GSN’s classic $5,000 budget. It would be like Match Game ‘98.
2 Contestants,
3 rounds
5 stars
First Round - 1 pt
Second Round - 1 pt
Third Round - 2 pts
The most points wins.
The SuperMatch does not change
$500
$250
$100
and they play for 10x that amount with the star of their choice.
But that is it. No Return, and probably a cheap looking set.
====
Prime Time Version
It would follow a prize tree format
Two Contestants. Up to $500,000 and 6 stars.
There will be 5 rounds of play. Instead of points, it will be cash (like Match Game 90s)
But in a Prize Tree Format.
1 match- $1,000
2 matches - $2,000
3 matches - $3,000
4 matches - $4,000
5 matches - $5,000
6 matches - $10,000
Whoever has the most money at the end goes on to play Super Match
With a possibility of $50,000 up for grabs, the supermatch is for the possible-
10x
5x
3x
If not, they are playing for 2x the amount won.
If they match the star of their choice, they win the money.
If they fail, they still leave with the amount won during the main game.
====
I know they all sound weird, but one of those could be the format.
Sam -
That’s just it - you answered your own question about “MG’s” legacy, as the ‘98 version was an insult to the CBS version of “Match Game” and celebrities like Vicki Lawrence (who appeared on the CBS and ‘90 versions), and Nell Carter (who appeared in the ‘90 version, which wasn’t as bad - at least they used the ’split screens’ for the intros, used on the Rayburn version for ticket plugs, plus they used a newer version of the original theme.) “MG” was an okay show in the 70’s and early 80’s, as people weren’t used to the double meaning questions - today, it wouldn’t work, as most people could figure out the humor before it was said.
As for the “TPIR” mess, it all started before Fremantle took over, as the situations with Holly and Dian happened during the All-American Television years, right after Mark Goodson passed on, so you be the judge from that who had the ‘upper hand’ in their firings. Pearson Television (which merged into FremantleMedia) was involved with the other firings, as well as Barker, for them not testifying in Barker’s behalf in Holly Hallstrom’s wrongful termination trial against him and the show (you don’t DARE ‘cross the Barker!’)
DeNo1,
I think the 1998 version is only an insult because you say it is so. I think the memory and the legacy of the 70s Match Game is only diluted if a person perceives it to be so. I don’t believe either of those things, and I think we’re going to have to leave it at that. Is that okay?
Like I said, an unfortunate situation, and it does reflect badly on both parties. That’s all I care to take out of that.
Fremantle brings another shipwreck to the tube!I am guessing it will end up in the grave.
Here’s something else to consider about MG’98. What time did it air? In lots of markets (including WGN in Chicago) it was on at, say 2am, 3am, whatever. Why do you suppose that?
Well, for one thing, the “tone” (re:language/content, etc.) of the show was by no means suitable for being aired at practically any other time of day. Sometimes, program scheduling issues are the reason. Or, some shows are sold to local stations at a package price; included with a predominatly more attarctive show. The latter two are hypothetical examples. However, even in the wee hours, how many of the masses will fall over one another for [in this case, a classic] game show that has traded on [what at one time, was just cons "racy," for what has since been considered] “politically incorrect,” for outrightly scatoliogical humor? After all, we’re not talking Def Jam comedy on HBO, here. Any questions?
Fremental, er, uh, Fremantle almost nailed TO TELL THE TRUTH. But, once again, the producers made that fatal mistake by getting B-List celeb’s; and worse yet, only Mescach Taylor was smart, or at least estute enough to understand HOW this game was to be played. More times than not, the rest of the panel either never “got it” when it came to playing the game as it was supposed to be played, or, they seemed more interested in spewing one-liners (arguably, the guiltiest of the lot was Paula Poundstone). Speaking of Miss Poundstone, she was involved in a controversy over alleged mistreatment of either some foster or adopted children (I can’t remember exactly) of hers, and beacuse of the media attention surrounding it, she became poison to the show. Evidently, whatever action the producers took appeared to be too late. While, this unto itself didn’t kill TTTT, it didn’t help much, either.
Match Game aired right before The Price is Right in my market, so I never had any trouble watching it.
It’s true, Poundstone really wanted to get in those one-liners. Even with the ninny celebrities, it was still a good revival. I think the heavy lifting was still done by the stories.
Granted, overall the TTTT revival wasn’t all that bad. It wasn’t good enough to get past two seasons, however.
As I’ve said before, I’m “old skool.” This hardly makes me an expert. However, age sometimes has its advantages, and having grown up watching game shows since I was barely old enough to understand them (being inspired by them and the DJ’s I grew up listening to on the radio to want to persue a career in broadcasting), and seeing them “evolve” over the course of several decades, I’m hardly a dummy, either.
It’s not so much that we want to keep these shows as we remember them (GSN has taken care of that for us). It’s that we don’t have the creative resources via the Mark Goodsons, the Bob Stewarts, the Merv Griffins, even the Chuck Barris’ and the people associated with their respective organizations; brainstorming, free-associating, building, rebuilding honing, tweaking, and polishing what became the classic game shows that have become part of our lives.
As (passionate) game show fans, we rip into the Fremantles of the world, who in their (well-meaning) attempts to update our old friends for new audiences, they somehow overlook, ignore, or just plain don’t “get it,” when it comes to these shows. In the end, what they’ve done is deconstruct a classic.
What might they “not get?” Depending on the show, it may be that they disregard a certain “dynamic” that made that show run like a Swiss watch in the first place. It may be that they feel compelled to do anything from a tweak to a wholesale reinvention of that show, for the sake of pandering to that coveted 18-34 demographic, (and in the case of the most recent versions of CARD SHARKS, BEAT THE CLOCK, and above all, MATCH GAME) with disasterous results. Fremantle’s track record is such, that it’s no wonder that people (like me and those of a certain generation, for instance) have become leery of them when they bring back an old game show, especially if it’s one from the old Goodson-Todman library.
The other thing is, game shows like MATCH GAME have had their day, and while time has opened a new generation to Gene Rayburn & company, it has also shown to be more of a liability, rather than an asset to revival. (one can also make a similar argument over the remakes of some movies-sometimes more than once over.)
I would like to see Bil Dwyer as host of the Match Game revival.He’s quick-witted and can act wacky from time to time.(Remember Bil Playing air guitar in an episode of I’ve Got a Secret).Gene Rayburn did wacky ,unscripted stuff and that was just a part of the appeal of the original.Dwyer could definately bring that kind of spirit to the show.The panel would need to known performers that are great ad-libbers like Betty White,Jim J Bullock,Vicki Lawrence,Steve Martin,and some younger celebrities to draw in new viewers.
So I am watching ‘To Tell the Truth’ on GSN right now and I am really thinking that Paula Poundstone would be great on a re-make of Match Game.
MrQuiz,
I understand all your points, and I agree. Maybe I just don’t take it as hard because I didn’t grow up during any of those show’s heydays.
Sam;
It’s not that I take it “hard” (I may have of overstated that), but you finally understand my point. But, even so, you’ve seen the shows in reruns. They haven’t changed since when they originally aired. It’s not unlikely that in the attempts to update these shows, the current generation of producers and creative people apparently fail to understand that co-called “dynamic.” While in the case of MATCH GAME, one can’t “create” the chemistry between the host and celebrities, as that was nothing short of serindipity; on the other hand, they do need to understand that shows like TO TELL THE TRUTH are more “cerebral,” and shouldn’t book celebrities who don’t understand that these (kinds of) shows aren’t supposed to be an extension of a comedy club (as in the case of Paula Poundstone), where their “schtick” upstages the game play. They also need to make sure the stars also understand HOW to play the game. In the sase of PASSWORD, (on the surface, anyway) the idea of simply attaching a million-dollar payoff seems both out of place; not to mention questioning the need for every other game show has a million-dollar payoff. IMO, despite its popularity (I watch it), it seems DEAL OR NO DEAL is getting old; by now, SOMEONE should’ve won the million bucks!
Hey, I gotta agree with Sam on some of his points - especially the ones about bad revivals not ruining the originals. It always ends up making for good conversation. Sure they are largely disappointing, but I can’t count how many times I’ve talked about how Match Game ‘98 stunk up the place. Match Game ‘90 was better than ‘98 - but of course, it was still no Match Game 7x. Temptation. ZZZZZ. New Card Sharks. Stinker. There will be more in the future!
I think Bil Dwyr (or however the hell you spell it) might be alright as a host, but I don’t think Todd Newton would work. I think you need a funny man to host MG, and while Todd can be amusing at times, I don’t think it would be a great fit. Drew Carey would be a good panelist from time to time, but he’s not on my list as possible host. Why don’t we get Mark L. Wahlberg?????? Just kidding. I’m not sure who would be the best choice to host the MG revival…
I still find this speculating on who’d be “perfect” for a new MG revival very interesting.
Despite what I said about the sad truth being its time has come and gone, let’s pretend all’s hunky and dorry in Gameshowland, except for the following fact: you can plug in the name(s) of any celebrity for a MG revival. But you are all overlooking something that’s been pointed out, time and time again: what made MG7_, and MG-PM work the way it did, was…
A) the chemistry between the emcee and panel (sometimes the right contestant was gravy); you
can’t just throw six stars and add a Bil Dwyer, or whoever to emcee the thing, and hocus-
pocus-abracadabra-alakazam-VOILA! A NEW GENERATION OF MATCH GAME that can at least
rival, if not surpass the iconic ‘73-’82 version.
B) One big reason MG’90 failed after one year & change, was that the suits at ABC in
their infinate wisdom, felt compelled to (over)expose their so-called “stable of
stars.” Unlike the CBS version, ABC never understood the need to “diversify”
the mix. Just because Charles Nelson Reilly was essentially the “anchor,” and
occasional appearances by Brett Somers, Vicki Lawrence, and Betty White were attempts
to “balance things out,” as well as attract the old fans of the show, you still had
all-to-frequent appearances by such show-biz legends as Bill Kirkenbauer (or
whatever the hell his name was), Pam Stone (I admit it; at the time, I thought she
was H-O-T!), and the rest of that B-through-Z-List of forgotten castmembers of ABC shows. I
mean, where are they NOW? And, how many off the top of your head (you’re on your
honor, here) can you rattle off? (BTW, I also liked that ventriloquist, Ron Lucas.)
I’d be remissed if I didn’t say something about Ross Schaffer: Despite the fact
that he’d never be able to fill the shoes that were left him, DAMN, HE WAS GOOD!!!
I thought of this…but, frankly, even if you took the Paula Poundstones, Roseanne
Barrs’, Jm J. Bullocks, etc, and could coax the likes of Betty White (and nobody,
but NOBODY bothered to mention: FANNIE FLAGG, PATTI DEUTSCH, ELAINE JOYCE,
nor guys like SCOEY MITCHLLL. Hell, I bet even DAWSON would consider wanting in),
you still have no guarantee of a “great” mix, here. And even so, the bar
has been lowered to the floor since the ‘98 version. “Potty” humor has replaced
merely politically incorrect (by today’s standards, anyway) humor.
Oh, and one more thing, you need the right WRITERS. Nobody can replace
Dick DeBartolo (who was head writer going back to the original sixties-era version
of MG).
So, speculate all you want. Fantasize all you want. Just remember…be careful of
what you wish for. What’d happen if there WERE a revival, only for it to be cancelled
because it too, stunk like an outhouse in July.
Well, we’ll have to see what the future holds.
As far as the other incarnations go, Match Game Hollywood Squares Hour wasn’t too interesting. For one, the set looked like a cheap, futuristic studio. Also, many NBC affiliates (like KTAL in Shreveport) dropped the show midway through its run (so you knew it wouldn’t last long). MG ‘90 was good, problem was ABC put it in the noon/11c timeslot where most affiliates (particularly in the East Coast) were airing the news. they couldn’t put it at the 11a/10a time slot because it would’ve gotten clobbered by The Price Is Right. And there was no help for the ‘98 version, problem with that was many station (including KTBS in Shreveport) put it on real late at night so nobody would be able to see it unless you had a VCR and recorded it (TiVo wasn’t around back then, I think). As for the new version I think there should be 2 versions of MG, one for GSN, the other for syndication. The syndicated version would be a perfect companion for Family Feud (which, ICYDK, is a spinoff of Match Game). As for the panel, some of you have some good names like Martin Mull, Wanda Sykes, Ben Stein, and (my favorite) Jerry Springer, who wouldn’t be bad as the host. But, whoevers in the panel, i assure you that Fremantle will do a great job.
To Martin, Fremantle didn’t revive that version of Card Sharks. It was revived in 2001, a year after they took over the Goodson-Todman library. And, as for the game shows that are “held back”, here are a few others, like Classic Concentration (NBC has those right, so you know that show will never be revived unless NBC airs it), The Price is Right, although GSN have aired every version except the ‘94 version in the past, that’s now property of CBS Paramount, and the John Davidson version of the $100,000 Pyramid (again, CBS Paramount). Although most game shows, like Three On A Match and the 1972-75 version of Passwords (both are before my time) couldn’t air on GSN, thanks to the networks wiping them (IOW, taping other game shows over them). As for the classic game show I would love to see on GSN, I would love to see Scrabble (Both Versions), and Name That Tune on GSN.
There is one surviving episode of the 1971-74 version of PASSWORD which has aired twice on GSN.
(I’m aware of there being one lone surviving 1975 episode -the last episode of the series- on the trading circuit, but I don’t count that one, because it was from the post-PASSWORD ALLSTARS era, which is just about universally agreed upon that P-A-S had “jumped the shark”)
Who would you want on the panel?it would need to be 6 people that all have good chemistry and are great at one-liners.The show would need to loosen up in its game playing so more fun could be had by the panelists just being themselves.
The 1990 and 1998 revivials faied for a number of reasons-
poor choices for hosts,
Bad airtimes
,Some bad panelists Like Judy Tenuta
,Too much emphasis on game play and not as much on just having fun.
Bringing in wacky game show panelists like Betty White,Jim J Bullock,And Vicki Lawrence would move the show into the direction of humor as the primary reason for the show.’Bil Dwyer would be the perfect host as he gets wacky at times and is a quick wit, So What Panelists would you like to see on the show?
Bill Dwyer would be good as a host - but here is some real out of the box thinking: how about getting Match Game on NBC in Prime Time and getting Keith Olbermann as host???? Seriously! Whether or not you agree with him, he is smart, humorous, and while no one will ever replace Gene Rayburn, he would add the charisma needed to make the revival a success! And PLEASE - no second rate celebrities on the panel! Dwyer would be good as host, but what I do NOT want to see is a second rate version on GSN - it would last a year if they are lucky, if thats the case, then leave it alone. If they do it, do it RIGHT, get it in syndication or network TV.
Keith Olbermann… Y’know, that’s not a bad idea at all. My only concern with Olbermann hosting is he might be a little too sarcastic for the job. If this would be a primetime show, it would likely air at 8 PM Eastern, against himself on MSNBC. I can’t see NBC/Universal liking that very much, particularly if Match Game isn’t on NBC.
Well, I would agree that NBC would not or should not put it on against Olbmermann’s MSNBC gig at 8 pm eastern - why not another timeslot? And why not if it is in syndication? If syndication, odds are it would be either 7:00pm or 7:30 pm or later in the evening. Just think - another forum for him to use his comedy material on Bill O….and about being sarcastic, wasnt that the charm that Gene Rayburn brought to the role? I know this maybe just a pipedream, but think about it, Keith has the name appeal, the charm, and the “sarcasm” might not be such as bad thing.
You know what - the more I think about the Keith Olbermann idea the more I like it. To anyone reading this post - I think we should let Fremantle know that is someone they should think about asking! (He can have a part of the show dedicated to the “worst answers in the world!). All kidding aside, this to me is really intriguing. If anyone reading this is a true Match Game fan and wants this to work, I think this is an idea to pursue! And this could be a nice ratings winner for NBC if done right - in a day and age of new and revived game shows and reality TV, this could be a lot of fun.
Here’s the 64 bazillion dollar question…if asked, would Keith Olbermann WANT to do it?
We wont know unless we try! Worth a shot! Pay him the money, tell him he would have fun, why not try? No harm no foul.
I dunno ’bout that. But, hey, if you’re gonna go that route, then why not try Bill O’Reilly?
If you’re a regular viewer of COUNTDOWN, y’know that O’Reilly’s always good for a laugh…NOT!!!!
But, seriously, just because the likes of Julie Chen has no compunctions about compromising HER image (even if she IS the boss’ wife), what makes you seriously think Olbermann would trade in his role as a pundit, and sell [himself] out to become (as Lou Grant once rubbed the topic in to Ted Baxter, on an episode of THE MARY TYLER MOORE SHOW)”…a QUIZZZZMASSSSTER?”
Keith Olbermann as host? Granted he was funny when he was paired with Dan Patrick on SportsCenter,and especially funny on MSNBC, but he’s not a game show host. He would, however, be perfect on the panel. Plus, the show would be better on CBS, not NBC. CBS would put it on at a good time slot, like Saturday Nights when nobody (except Fox and My Network TV although i don’t consider the latter a real network) airs programming.
The one bit from MGHSH they should incorporate in this new version (if they can) is the multiplier cards in front of the panelists: the first part of Super Match was played for $1000, $500, and $250 (or $100 if the player didn’t match on any of the three lines). They would then pick a star for the one-on-one part, and they’d flip the card around to set the potential jackpot at 5x, 10x, or 25x the prize won in the first part. Either do what MGHSH did, or have a board that says MATCH on it (like the old WOF prize card holder) with two 5s, two 10s and a 25 under the letters.
Bil Dwyer could be a good host (he was perfect for Dirty Rotten Cheater (on PAX, by the by (?))), Jerry Springer might be OK, Keith Olbermann would be better on the panel, Meshach Taylor might do some justice in either role (!); syndication will probably win out as a M-F strip, tho once a week on Comedy Central might be a good outlet (remember Make Me Laugh in the 90’s, not to mention Win Ben Stein’s Money (ANOTHER potentially massive choice for panelist)), better than GSN and their $5000 fetish.
But for Godsakes KEEP THE ORIGINAL GAME THE SAME FROM THE CLASSIC 70s SHOWS!!!!!
I agree with MikeSant318 about one thing, for Match Game’s revival, increase the jackpot in the Super Audience Match round to $1000, $500 & $250, but I think in line with the times, just like the 70’s syndicated nighttime version, there should be two of those, so the winning contestant will have a shot at a possible $20,000 jackpot(winning contestants should stay on as long as 5 days). Forget the Star Wheel, having two Super Audience Matches with an increased jackpot will likely work. Sticking with the 70’s format of 6 panelists and with an increased jackpot will be in line with the times for Match Game. Now, for the talent, since no one can duplicate what Gene Rayburn, Charles Nelson Reilly and Brett Somers brought to Match Game in the 70’s and early 80’s, you don’t attempt to. You can’t ever replace talent like them, you can only follow in their footsteps and succeed them, that’s right, SUCCEED THEM, with the talent you have available. Look at Bruce Vilanch- his idols were ironically Charles Nelson Reilly and Paul Lynde. After seeing him on Hollywood Squares in the late 90’s, he would be good for Match Game. Kathy Griffin is outrageous enough(she and Bruce feed off each other) for MG, if she can knock off the anti-Jesus commentary and settle down. She’s not Brett Somers, but why should she be. Brett had her own personality and Kathy has hers- they’re entirely different, but somewhat similar. The rest of the panel should consist of talent like Sherri Shepherd, Wayne Brady, Colin Michrie, Tracy Morgan, Wanda Sykes, Kathleen Madigan and various current TV & music stars, fan favorites and legends. Now, for a host who acts as if he’s a member of the panel. I’m talking about Craig Shoemaker(he’s hosted VH1’s short-lived game show My Generation in ‘98), who like Bruce and Kathy, also appeared on Hollywood Squares in the late 90’s. He can interract with the panel, go into his impressions when reading the questions and create his own characters. Shoe would host Match Game his way and not attempt to be Gene Rayburn, and the way Gene interracted with Charles and Brett, Craig Shoemaker would do the same with Bruce Vilanch and Kathy Griffin. Now, since Fremantle is still looking for someone to be executive producer of Match Game, they should just consult with Syd Vinnedge(Exec. Prod. of The Price is Right) about being MG’s E.P. and bring back Dick DeBartolo to be the head writer. Fremantle should first pitch Match Game to Comedy Central and then, other cable networks, but it’s bound to be picked up and perhaps broadcast networks and/or local stations might take notice as well, only time will tell. Match Game can work again, it’s just a matter of sticking with the same format of the 70’s show with some modifications and getting the right kind of talent to carry it. Something to think about.
Forgot all about My Generation - Shoe WOULD be good!
Wouldn’t the whose line guys be great on the show,
Let’s Meet The Stars
Wayne Brady, Tim Allen, Colin Mocharie,
Ryan Stiles, Bill Cosby, Betty White
And Now Your Host, Billllllllllll Dwyerrrrrrrrrrrrrr!
For MikeSant318,
Imagine this intro:
Rich Fields: Get ready to match the stars, Bruce Vilanch, Kathy Griffin, Phil LaMarr, Sherri Shepherd, Patton Oswalt and Amy Yasbeck, as we play the star-studded, big money Match Game. With the host and star of Match Game, the Lovemaster, himself, Craig Shoemaker!
Shoe would make his entrance after the sliding doors open up, then unhood his microphone from its stand(as long as Drew Carey’s on The Price is Right) and greet the panelists, the two contestants and the studio audience in his own special way.
Craig Shoemaker: All right, thank you, Rich, thank you, friends and welcome to Match Game…
In case you’ve seen Craig Shoemaker before, he sports a moustache and goatee. As host of Match Game, he should continue to sport his moustache and goatee, since there are hardly any game show hosts sporting moustaches, goatees and/or beards, nowadays, with Jeff Foxworthy being the latest and both Richard Karn and Alex Trebek being the most recent. At the same time, aside from his flamboyant comical routine and his interracting with the panel as well as the contestants and the studio audience(just like at the comedy clubs where he gives his stand-ups), Shoe’s hosting while sporting his facial hair might also draw up a female audience as well. BTW, I don’t know what anyone would think of Rich Fields possibly announcing on Match Game, but that’s still something to think about.
Correction on that last posting, I meant to say unhook the microphone.
Probably becuase Fields was the first host that cacme to mind; what about the other Goodson/Fremantle announcer, Burton Hillier (or whatever his last name is - he’s still doing Feud)?
Hey, how’s about they pull an 80’s H-Squares bit ala Shadoe Stevens, and have the announcer be one of the panelists? Fast-talker John Moschitta dad a few ronds on Tom Bergeron’s Squares near the end of its run, so why not? Example…
Get ready to match the stars…
Kathy Griffin…Bruce Vilanch…Wanda Sykes…
Adam Carolla…Brooke Burns (Dog Eat Dog)…and me, John Moschitta…
’cause it’s the return of the star-studded, big money MATCH GAME!!!
(I still like the 5-10-25 on the Super Match, even though MGHSH was 10-20-30…)
MikeSant318, the announcer you’re talking about is Burton Richardson, and I agree, he could probably announce on Match Game. I know Rich Fields can announce on Match Game, as can Shadoe Stevens. Let’s keep those possibilities coming.
Ok, so I know I am the one with the big idea about Keith Olbermann (an idea I still love! - even though I know it is way out there in terms of the realm of possibilities) - but I have another one. Think about it - who owns Match Game - Fremantle? And who owns American Idol - Fremantle? How about a host who seems to do everything, and definitely attracts viewers - Ryan Seacrest???? Hey, they’ve got Regis Philbin doing Password, why not Seacrest for Match Game???? And he already has the association with Fremantle. Intriguing thought….
Yeah, but would he do it for GSN?
Rich Fields announce on “Match Game” - come on now! I’m sure Johnny O would be turning in his grave knowing that one! The man may be a nice person, but he can NOT announce a game show - he is the ‘Patrick Wayne’ of game show announcers, as he gets overhyped over nothing. I think FremantleMedia should have given the job to Burton Richardson instead, as he is not as ‘manic’ in his announing style as Mr. Fields is - that’s why I stopped watching Drew Carey host the show after his first two weeks - not cause of Drew, but because of Rich!
Who said it would have to be GSN? I would hope that would spur a major network to pick it up. If CBS is picking up Password, why not Match Game? And Seacrest himself would attract an audience and top flight celebs…
Seacrest is WAY too overexposed now as it is! (”American Top 40″, “American Idol”, “Dick Clark’s New Year’s Rockin’ Eve”, producer of “Keeping Up With The Kardashians”, ‘almost owner’ of the E! Network) One show with Seacrest is already WAY too many! However, I do like the Keith Olbermann suggestion, even though I don’t think a remake of “Match Game” needs to be made.
Forget about Ryan Seacrest- he’s not Match Game hosting material. I’m sticking with Craig Shoemaker. Burton Richardson and Rich Fields, that’s right, THAT RICH FIELDS, and I don’t care what anyone says about him, announcing on Match Game makes sense, because they’re right now, the best game show announcers in the industry, today. Having Craig Shoemaker hosting and both Bruce Vilanch and Kathy Griffin on the Match Game panel also makes sense, considering how well they interract with each other(all three also appeared on Hollywood Squares in the late 90’s). It depends on the level of talent available that would be suitable for the show. At the same time, I think Match Game should first be pitched to Comedy Central, then maybe Spike TV, TBS Superstation, among cable networks, before any broadcast network or local TV station even picks up on it.
Does anyone have specific information on when the pilot will be shot and how to apply to be a contestant ?I think it would be a great to be a contestant on Match Game.
TBS? Hmmm…
Hey Dosen’t Anybody think $50,000 or $100,000 Would Be Good For A Match Game ‘08?
GUY, what do you think about this? It’s just like MikeSant318 pointed out early on, the jackpot in the Super Match round should be increased to $1000, $500 & $250, but my suggestion is to have two of those to increase the top jackpot of the day to over $20,000, and to add to that, winning contestants can stay on as long as 5 days. BTW, the winning contestant would pick up $500 for winning the game with the most matches after round 2, the money that contestant would pick up from the 2 Super Matches before the Head-to-Head match for 10x as much as they’ve initially won, if you know what I’m getting at. This bonus game format, along with MG’s standard format in which two contestants match each panelists, once per round, same as the 70’s program, would definitely be in line with the times. So a winning contestant, after five days, could walk away with total winnings up to $112,500. Does that make sense to you, especially in line with the times? Let me break it down for you:
Winning the initial game: $500
Two Super Audience Matches: Up to $2000
Head-to-Head Matches: Up to $20,000
One Day Total: Up to $22,500
Final Five Day Total: Up to $112,500
This is definitely something to think about.
Not bad, Michael; taking your suggestions, I have a tweaking to my earlier posts:
Five day limit for the champion, $500 for the game, only one round of Super Match with the 1000/500/250 setup, multipliers like on MGHSH (3 panelists have 5, 2 have 10, one has 25). If a champ makes the fifth win, DOUBLE the game to $1000 and the Super Match to 2000/1000/500, making the top jackpot for the fifth win day $50,000. (How’s that strike you, “GUY”?)
In summary: Game = $500, Max for Super Match = $1000, Max for head-to-head = $25,000. Max Total for day = $26,500. Four days max = $106,000.
Fifth win: Game = $1000, Super Match max = $2000, head-to-head max = $50,000.
(fifth day total = $53,000)
The extremely lucky player that can win and max out all 5 days leaves with $159,000.
As for another host possibility, how about Chris Rose from BDSSP? He sounds happy and lively enough, and could import John Salley or Amanda Beard to the panel…
Interesting thought, MikeSant318! Now, let’s talk about panelists we would like to see on Match Game 2008, aside from those I’ve already mentioned:
1. Rondell Sheridan 2. Caroline Rhea 3. Gilbert Gottfried 4. Charlie Sheen
5. Gabriel Iglesias 6. Leah Remini 7. Lynn Toler 8. Kermit the Frog
9. ALF 10. David Spade 11. Michael Winslow 12. Penn Jillette
Now, who else do you have in mind? Chime in.
2 Things
Panel Definatley Ryan Stiles or Drew Carey
And I like your Super Matches But What About This
2,500
1,000
500
And A Double Wheel and second match so $100,000 Can Be Won.
$1,000 For Winning A Game
$250 For Matches ($2,500 Possible)
But Both You Guys have Great Idea
So 5 Days Equal Possible $527,500
Or Shorten It To $50,000
So 5 Days Have Possible $287,500
No offense, but is ALF still relevant?
Maybe a better choice would be Triumph, the Insult Comic Dog, if he can replace his cigar for a marker so he can write…
I agree with Ben Stein (how about a WBSM/Man Show combine with Adam Carolla and Ben Stein on the panel, with Jimmy Kimmel hosting?), Richard Karn, and some of the others; Rosie O’Donnell is too toxic right now, and the entendre of the classic MG may be too adult for Elmo’s furry little head to take; get some people from Reno 911 ain there, too (I could see Carlos Alazraqui (Garcia) or Niecy Nash (Williams) fitting well).
Now that I think of it, change my multipliers to 10-15-25…
I’m sticking with the same format I posted. BTW, ALF also appeared on Hollywood Squares in both the late 80’s as well as around 2002-2004, so yes, it’s relevant to have ALF there.
I also need to point out that the $1000, $500 & $250 multipliers with 2 Super Matches before the Head-to-Head match with the champion staying on as long as 5 days is very reasonable, especially in the mainstream game show formats. At the same time, there’s really too many game shows that test the really high money limits(Power of 10, 1 vs. 100, Deal or No Deal, etc.), so we need to steer clear of that. Personally, as far as the Star Wheel for Match Game 2008 is concerned, I’m out of favor for that- it has passed it’s prime as far as I’m concerned. Time to go back to selecting one of the 6 panelists for the head-to-head match. To me, that’s more enjoyable and the contestant will once again have a choice. When the Star Wheel was on MG, only the wheel decided whom the panelist was for the contestant to match-there was really no choice, and that took the fun out of that particular bonus game. Stick to the format of the 70’s Match Game with a reasonably increased jackpot and 2 Super Matches(same as the 70’s nightime program)-I believe it will work, this way, especially in line with the times.