So he just made up his article based on previews? He's not writing for a small town paper, this is the Washington Post. I guarantee he's seen the first episode, why would we read a review he's written about it otherwise?Originally Posted by skwadim
As for the hook, I completely agree that the hook may be wrong to use for the show. And I agree that was his basic statement. But to review a show and see it at only the surface level, especially for a premiere, is very amateur for a major newspaper reviewer. Why did he ignore the friends introducing the babe to the quiter fellows? Or Dennis washing a friends shirt? Was that a freak show? I just don't like the complete disregard of the show as gimmick, when within the first episode there is a lot of motion away from the gimmick towards connection with the audience. That was ignored in this article.
Damn straight! And that's my whole point! Most of what is "insulting" are just things the guys did aired for the public. The worst the show does to "insult" the guys directly is claim it's more like "Beauty and the geeks". For most of the guys on the show, I bet they wouldn't mind that statement all that much. So how did the show insult them by airing them saying the wrong thing? It might be embarrasing, but it's not a public flogging, as Cowell's remarks often are in AI. The "insult" is made either by other contestents on the show (which is what reality TV is all about... social interaction) or it's apparently made within the viewer themselves who make value judgements based on what they see. So perhaps what's happening is that throughout the show some viewers do become emotionally connected with some characters, and then become angered about how they reacted earlier on to their favorite character, and they blame the producers for "forcing" this. Possible theory...Originally Posted by skwadim
I totally agree. That's why I prefaced my first statement in this thread with just such a disclaimer. But at the same time, if this article is to be believed, and the show was nothing but a joke about the guys, then shouldn't I be lambasting it and talking about how cruel it was to my poor brother or his newfound friends? I certainly agree that I likely have a very subjective view of this show, but it nevertheless is an interesting discussion about the makeup of a reality TV show. I find the struggle for a producer to transition from the hook to the emotional drama within one episode to be a fascinating venture. Then again, I am a Communication Arts major, and this sort of critical viewing of media has always been kind of fun for me.Originally Posted by skwadim
So I guess I understand the need for the hook. A show like the bachelorett or Temptation Island has it fairly easy to land the first show ratings. People are pretty eager to tune in and watch a bunch of sexxy singles parade around. This show could not use sex as a draw, so it had to move to other options. I believe in the end the core of the show will be a lot like the bachaloret, where drama and empathy rule. But without sex appeal, people just would not tune in to watch a bunch of average guys hang out with a babe and vie for attention, at least they would not make a point to see the first episode.
So the hook was needed. Was it wrong... perhaps, but it was necessary to be sure that people gave the show, and the guys a chance. At first people may be laughing at them, but before long, most will replace that with empathy, and a hit show is made. And with a group like this, the comic relief is already built in.
I think it will make for a very entertaining run.