I used to like game shows. They exercised our brains and we learned a little along the way. Now they're hosted by low-IQ idiots with even more vacuous "celebrity" contestants. Lord help the commoners who get on these shows thinking they are gonna win anything. They are there as a prop while the celeb gets a week's worth of face time for this stage of their career. I guess they derive some benefit from showing their fans how stupid they are. The cause of getting this off my chest today is a game where the celeb tries to get the 2 commoners to guess a series of words/phrases. In this instance, the thing was "oven mitt." The celeb's clue was "Take out." Then he stared intently. And this is a benign example of their intellectual prowess. The only redeeming part of it all is that in this instance the 2 female commoners on this guy's team are real pistols, and do not go quietly into that good night as this guy flushes their winning streak. Good for them. I guess the upside is we know that the shows aren't rigged. I want Allen Ludden back.
@John Brunner - I stopped watching any kind of award show years ago. Because if actors, they can not talk without a scripts.Um or maybe too much druggie stuff. Game shows do not watch but will tune in to a Steve Harvey one on occasion, briefly. Plus, maybe I am skeptic, but those to see probably rigged
I used to watch all the game shows when I was a kid: Truth or Consequences, Concentration, Password, etc. Even if they were rigged, the participants did not come across as being idiots. If today's shows are rigged, some of those people are in real trouble. And today's actors only "act" in 5 second spurts, then it gets cobbled together and a sound track added. Regarding Steve Harvey: last time his contract was up for renewal, they were talking about Micheal Strahan filling the spot.
@John Brunner - yes as a kid I did watch many of those shows. But they have changed over the years. I may find one next year to watch - just fer the heck of it
I haven't watched enough of Jennings to have an opinion on his intellect, but he was one of the top winners, wasn't he? I used to like Jeopardy, but haven't watched since Trebek's death. Of all the choices to replace Trebek, I think he was likely the best. The other guys were not as "personable," and probably had better things to do. I wonder if he was their first choice.
Yep, he seems bight to me and seems to actually know the answers to the questions without consulting the cheat sheet, as he sometimes adds details to the answers. They tried to put Mayim Bialik in the slot for mostly DEI reasons, but, although she actually has a PhD, she never seemed as smart as Jennings and couldn't relate to the contestants or the audience as well. Jennings was the biggest winner on Jeopardy and according the the link, he was on the show for 6 months, won 2.5 million bucks, and was on 74 consecutive shows. https://www.therichest.com/rich-powerful/jeopardys-biggest-winner-ever-ken-jennings/
I was shocked when Bialik did not get the job. I thought they may have also considered James Holzhauer and Buzzy Cohen, but James also seems to lack the ability to relate, and for some reason people did not like Buzzy when he was a contestant.
Alex was a tough one to follow, and not many can be as bright as he was and relate to the public like he did. Trebek was also a philanthropist, and one of his charities was the farm up here breeding musk oxen. He would visit at least a couple times a year. Holzhauer had almost no ability to relate to the audience and I don't think he liked most of the people he competed against either. I don't remember Buzzy Cohen, so I can't comment on him. I stopped watching Jeopardy for a while as I couldn't stand watching Holzhauer.