Thoughts on Mike Fleiss' comments: Network, Freaky, etc.

CoolCruiser · 02-26-2009, 10:43 AM

Since the RS thread is over 14,000 posts long, I thought we could start an other one where we specifically discuss the perspective of the producers ie. Mike Fleiss and company.
They have said this is the MOST dramatic show, different than all the others, etc. Can we pick their brains about WHY?
What do we know for sure from their media commentary ?
What are TPTB hinting towards in their news releases?

I would like to start with the references by Fleiss to the movie "pure Network" and "Chayevsky-esque".

An online quote from a site ( not Wikipedia) that references the history of Network: (Network was released in 1976)

Quote:

It came to the attention of playwright and screenwriter Paddy Chayefsky that a major worldwide company was in negotiations to buy ABC. It occurred to him that once a multinational corporation took over a network, they might try to make the news division a profit center, enabling them to bastardize the news and turn it into entertainment.

Interesting connection that this hit movie came as a real-life result of conflict with the network that is now producing The Bachelor, and who Mike Fleiss works for....

The "Freakishness" could be the irony of this situation with RS....
Is Reality Steve a type of Howard Beale for the purposes of promotion?
Freaky coincidence?
IF so, then it is quite possible, that while the ending may be different than the show has ever had, the REAL drama has been with the viewers as it was in NETWORK. "We're mad as h*** and we're not taking it any more" being shouted out of the windows as instigated by Howard Beale/RS.

Thoughts... ?

Google · Sponsored Links

jlccaz · 02-26-2009, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoolCruiser

Since the RS thread is over 14,000 posts long, I thought we could start an other one where we specifically discuss the perspective of the producers ie. Mike Fleiss and company.
They have said this is the MOST dramatic show, different than all the others, etc. Can we pick their brains about WHY?
What do we know for sure from their media commentary ?
What are TPTB hinting towards in their news releases?

I would like to start with the references by Fleiss to the movie "pure Network" and "Chayevsky-esque".

An online quote from a site ( not Wikipedia) that references the history of Network: (Network was released in 1976)

Interesting connection that this hit movie came as a real-life result of conflict with the network that is now producing The Bachelor, and who Mike Fleiss works for....

The "Freakishness" could be the irony of this situation with RS....
Is Reality Steve a type of Howard Beale for the purposes of promotion?
Freaky coincidence?
IF so, then it is quite possible, that while the ending may be different than the show has ever had, the REAL drama has been with the viewers as it was in NETWORK. "We're mad as h*** and we're not taking it any more" being shouted out of the windows as instigated by Howard Beale/RS.

Thoughts... ?

Fleiss may well be Jewish be he is no Talmudic scholar. He gave an interview to a NYTimes reporter (the uncle of our poster sushifan in fact) where he came up with a film reference that he thought conveyed the notion of many moving pieces and characters coming together in an unplanned manner to cause an explosive and unexpected outcome.

Respectfully, to me, I see no sleuthing objective to applying the Talmudic method to quotes he gave to the reporter. The same is true for Howard Stern, Chris Harrison, ABC press releases, Jason in the media, or God Knows Reality Steve. Words are not necessarily chosen with sufficient intent, care, and precision that they are worthy of intense scrutiny.

But it is one of my favorite quotes about the season, in terms of building genuine anticipation of something other than PINKY RING GIRL GETS THE RING! ROLL CREDITS!

kikibibi · 02-26-2009, 11:06 AM

It is possible that Fleiss wants to go down in history like Paddy Chayefsky... noted as "one of the most renown dramatists." Perhaps Fleiss draws the comparison so that history will view him as this great producer (or rather producer of Greats), rather than a B-rate producer/manipulator?

Chayefsky's "naturalistic style of TV drama" helped shape an entire era of TV. Just as Fleiss's erm... manipulative slice-and-dice style of reality tv shapes this era? Chayefsky was also known for "intimate personal dramas"... which is a fitting description of The Bachelor series.

"Network" is described as a satirical send-up of television. A fictional story of a network who "sold its soul for ratings" and turned the news into a "goddamned amusement park." Is this entire Bachelor series a joke? a send-up? entirely made up? Or is Fleiss perhaps trying to imply as such, as a way to explain the failure of all but a handful of the "relationships" produced as a result of The Bachelor?

(informational source, one of many: Chayefsky, Paddy)

bizbachfan · 02-26-2009, 11:06 AM

Brad Womack picked no one and though it was dramatic most viewers were upset by it though now in hindsight most appreciate Brad was not forced into proposing. I have a few other minor bones to pick with him, but for the most part was cool he didn't propose or even try to date someone he wasn't really interested in.

Shayne was most likely a set up. Both Shayne and Matt wanted exposures and as far as I know they are both still in LA trying to get work. But Fleiss had to have a proposal at the end of that one.

D comes back and its pretty obvious Graham is the one she is most attracted to but he exits too early. They are pushing the single Dad on her but at the same time know they are keeping him back pocket for next Bachelor.

D surprises many choosing Jesse which creates a lot of controversy. But I do think she followed her heart. TPTB made her let Jason get down on one knee to stir up trouble and sympathy.

Jason's season. They play up Stephanie to the hilt even though its obvious they hav zero chemistry.

Jason is the type of guy who is so flattered all these girls are into him. He is a kid in a candy store tasting all the treats! He really can't decide between Molly and Melissa but they already had the guy who continued dating two girls, one who couldn't decide, one who gave a plane ticket, etc. They needed something new. They force Jason to not only choose but propose. He chooses Melissa and they fly in her parents. He asks for their blessing, proposes, etc.

They all get home and realize its a big mistake. Jason still has feelings for Molly. TPTB decide to run with it. They could/should have tried this with Trista and Alex was it? But in this case Molly is very open to taking him back. They run with it. They carefully craft the leaks to gain ratings. Two "after"shows are planned to explain the story and milk the ratings.

Fleiss has to keep the ending interesting. A ring and a happy couple is so boring. But did he make this happen or just allow it to ? I think allow it to. Jason was in love with both women plain and simple but he choose the wrong one at FRC or she dumps him soon after.

CoolCruiser · 02-26-2009, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlccaz

Fleiss may well be Jewish be he is no Talmudic scholar. He gave an interview to a NYTimes reporter (the uncle of our poster sushifan in fact) where he came up with a film reference that he thought conveyed the notion of many moving pieces and characters coming together in an unplanned manner to cause an explosive and unexpected outcome.

Respectfully, to me, I see no sleuthing objective to applying the Talmudic method to quotes he gave to the reporter. The same is true for Howard Stern, Chris Harrison, ABC press releases, Jason in the media, or God Knows Reality Steve. Words are not necessarily chosen with sufficient intent, care, and precision that they are worthy of intense scrutiny.

But it is one of my favorite quotes about the season, in terms of building genuine anticipation of something other than PINKY RING GIRL GETS THE RING! ROLL CREDITS!

Re; "The notion of many moving pieces and characters coming together in an unplanned manner to cause an explosive and unexpected outcome."

To me, just saying is all...

if Fleiss wanted to portray the above scenario with a movie reference he would have chosen the movie CRASH as his example. CRASH illustrates that theory even more succinctly AND is more relevant and identifiable to today's audience.

I am thinking this is much more than simply a reference to coincidence....at least in his referencing the "last hour".

BTW, is "last hour" last hour of the Finale, the ATFR or ATFR 2???

CoolCruiser · 02-26-2009, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Fleiss has to keep the ending interesting. A ring and a happy couple is so boring. But did he make this happen or just allow it to ? I think allow it to. Jason was in love with both women plain and simple but he choose the wrong one at FRC or she dumps him soon after.

So do you think that the "what if you pick the wrong one" comment by Molly to Jason was left in for that reason????
as actual foreshadowing
OR was it added into the edit AFTER and BECAUSE the RS allegations came out.
TPTB had time to include that into that episode's tape (shown on FEB. 16) because RS had already spilled the beans the week before?

corundogs · 02-26-2009, 11:20 AM

OK - I posted this on the Ring - Smart or Blunder or whatever it is called.

How about Fleiss' comment about him letting the show go this season and not being that involved and then something happening and he had to take back control.

Do any of you think that has to do with that first preview we saw...where the pinky ring was spotted and Mel was called F1 before the show started...but then never shown again?

And that is what he was talking about? And he had to do some creative editing after that?

I wrote this on that thread, too.

Basically, that Molly was the one who got the great edit - because that is what they do. They give the F2 girl the "great edit" to make us think we are watching a Love Story and then we are "shocked" when he picks the other person because her edit wasn't so great.

So then when the pinky ring preview happened, Fleiss had to then change things around.

Give Mel the "Great Edit" and Mol the "Not So Great Edit" - to make us follow that the F1 was actually not the "Great Edit" person.

And that would then explain the whole really choppy/strange edits we saw???

I don't know, but this really fit in with that comment he made. I have NO IDEA where to find that - I am sure one of you experts do though. I just know I read it! LOL!!

kikibibi · 02-26-2009, 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlccaz

Fleiss may well be Jewish be he is no Talmudic scholar.

YES!! You are so right! As fun (hmmm, fun?) as it is to completely analyze and dissect every bit of info, and put our own spin on it, and tie a pretty bow around it, we do have to remind ourselves constantly that 99% of is said is probably unintentional! These folks ain't rocket scientists.

MamaAmyG · 02-26-2009, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlccaz

Respectfully, to me, I see no sleuthing objective to applying the Talmudic method to quotes he gave to the reporter. The same is true for Howard Stern, Chris Harrison, ABC press releases, Jason in the media, or God Knows Reality Steve. Words are not necessarily chosen with sufficient intent, care, and precision that they are worthy of intense scrutiny.

preach on!

like, if i see "it's not the WHO but the HOW" over-analyzed again, i do believe my brain will explode

CoolCruiser · 02-26-2009, 11:43 AM

Hey, I had no intentions of causing more "brain drain pain" for any of you.

I just have made a few observations...
And while I realize that "Fleiss is the man fans love to hate", I do think he is "smarter than the average bear" and is up there close to genius. With that being said,

1. Fleiss is NOT appearing to make any obvious negations to RS and his theory... merely letting it "do what it is doing". IF it is true, WHY would we not see more damage control by Fleiss? At least, some pertinent manipulations...

2. Not too many of the mags and rags are running with the RS theory.... if it is such a huge scoop, WHY NOT run with it?
You would think that these mags would WANT the scoop?
It's a reporter's dream to get the scoop.... they are LOOKing for the scoop.

3. The STAR mag has a bit of the promo on the cover and YET, on their website, does NOT dish on the story at all! And this is supposed to be over in just a few days.... Are they backing off?

4. The blue/gold dress photoshopping was done before the RS theory came out, before the alleged first ATFR was taped...

02-26-2009, 11:06 AM	#3
kikibibi FORT Newbie Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Northeast Posts: 19	Re: Thoughts on Mike Fleiss' comments: Network, Freaky, etc. It is possible that Fleiss wants to go down in history like Paddy Chayefsky... noted as "one of the most renown dramatists." Perhaps Fleiss draws the comparison so that history will view him as this great producer (or rather producer of Greats), rather than a B-rate producer/manipulator? Chayefsky's "naturalistic style of TV drama" helped shape an entire era of TV. Just as Fleiss's erm... manipulative slice-and-dice style of reality tv shapes this era? Chayefsky was also known for "intimate personal dramas"... which is a fitting description of The Bachelor series. "Network" is described as a satirical send-up of television. A fictional story of a network who "sold its soul for ratings" and turned the news into a "goddamned amusement park." Is this entire Bachelor series a joke? a send-up? entirely made up? Or is Fleiss perhaps trying to imply as such, as a way to explain the failure of all but a handful of the "relationships" produced as a result of The Bachelor? (informational source, one of many: Chayefsky, Paddy) Last edited by kikibibi; 02-26-2009 at 11:07 AM. Reason: grammar!

02-26-2009, 11:06 AM	#4
bizbachfan FORT Fogey Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: sunny florida Posts: 1,408	Re: Thoughts on Mike Fleiss' comments: Network, Freaky, etc. Brad Womack picked no one and though it was dramatic most viewers were upset by it though now in hindsight most appreciate Brad was not forced into proposing. I have a few other minor bones to pick with him, but for the most part was cool he didn't propose or even try to date someone he wasn't really interested in. Shayne was most likely a set up. Both Shayne and Matt wanted exposures and as far as I know they are both still in LA trying to get work. But Fleiss had to have a proposal at the end of that one. D comes back and its pretty obvious Graham is the one she is most attracted to but he exits too early. They are pushing the single Dad on her but at the same time know they are keeping him back pocket for next Bachelor. D surprises many choosing Jesse which creates a lot of controversy. But I do think she followed her heart. TPTB made her let Jason get down on one knee to stir up trouble and sympathy. Jason's season. They play up Stephanie to the hilt even though its obvious they hav zero chemistry. Jason is the type of guy who is so flattered all these girls are into him. He is a kid in a candy store tasting all the treats! He really can't decide between Molly and Melissa but they already had the guy who continued dating two girls, one who couldn't decide, one who gave a plane ticket, etc. They needed something new. They force Jason to not only choose but propose. He chooses Melissa and they fly in her parents. He asks for their blessing, proposes, etc. They all get home and realize its a big mistake. Jason still has feelings for Molly. TPTB decide to run with it. They could/should have tried this with Trista and Alex was it? But in this case Molly is very open to taking him back. They run with it. They carefully craft the leaks to gain ratings. Two "after"shows are planned to explain the story and milk the ratings. Fleiss has to keep the ending interesting. A ring and a happy couple is so boring. But did he make this happen or just allow it to ? I think allow it to. Jason was in love with both women plain and simple but he choose the wrong one at FRC or she dumps him soon after.

02-26-2009, 11:20 AM	#7
corundogs FORT Fan Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 153	Re: Thoughts on Mike Fleiss' comments: Network, Freaky, etc. OK - I posted this on the Ring - Smart or Blunder or whatever it is called. How about Fleiss' comment about him letting the show go this season and not being that involved and then something happening and he had to take back control. Do any of you think that has to do with that first preview we saw...where the pinky ring was spotted and Mel was called F1 before the show started...but then never shown again? And that is what he was talking about? And he had to do some creative editing after that? I wrote this on that thread, too. Basically, that Molly was the one who got the great edit - because that is what they do. They give the F2 girl the "great edit" to make us think we are watching a Love Story and then we are "shocked" when he picks the other person because her edit wasn't so great. So then when the pinky ring preview happened, Fleiss had to then change things around. Give Mel the "Great Edit" and Mol the "Not So Great Edit" - to make us follow that the F1 was actually not the "Great Edit" person. And that would then explain the whole really choppy/strange edits we saw??? I don't know, but this really fit in with that comment he made. I have NO IDEA where to find that - I am sure one of you experts do though. I just know I read it! LOL!!

02-26-2009, 11:43 AM	#10
CoolCruiser FORT Fogey Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: On the high seas Posts: 1,128	Re: Thoughts on Mike Fleiss' comments: Network, Freaky, etc. Hey, I had no intentions of causing more "brain drain pain" for any of you. I just have made a few observations... And while I realize that "Fleiss is the man fans love to hate", I do think he is "smarter than the average bear" and is up there close to genius. With that being said, 1. Fleiss is NOT appearing to make any obvious negations to RS and his theory... merely letting it "do what it is doing". IF it is true, WHY would we not see more damage control by Fleiss? At least, some pertinent manipulations... 2. Not too many of the mags and rags are running with the RS theory.... if it is such a huge scoop, WHY NOT run with it? You would think that these mags would WANT the scoop? It's a reporter's dream to get the scoop.... they are LOOKing for the scoop. 3. The STAR mag has a bit of the promo on the cover and YET, on their website, does NOT dish on the story at all! And this is supposed to be over in just a few days.... Are they backing off? 4. The blue/gold dress photoshopping was done before the RS theory came out, before the alleged first ATFR was taped... __________________ You never get a second chance to make a first impression.