Bad BOY/S Bravo execs!

[eldee]

I think the problem people are having is that James DID NOT know what he was getting into. It seems to me that he THOUGHT he was on the show to find someone special. He did NOT know that half the guys were straight, and many of us think that kind of "trick" on James was cruel. Obviously, NBC/Bravo don't really care how this "twist" affected James as long as it got the ratings. We can still feel sorry for him for being used in this way.

Did you hear about Bravo's new show, "DNA"? They take a young child who grew up in an orphanage and put him/her in a house with 12 couples. He/she has to try and figure out who the parents are by questions, comparing looks and likes, etc. These parents are also trying to find the child they gave up to adoption. There are twists. Some of the parents might have had children with another partner and don't know this child is the result. Or, none of the parents created the little rug rat! Ha, ha, ha! Isn't that hilarious. After all, it's all done in good entertainment fun to break stereotypes on trying to match people together.

Of course the above is not true, but you get the point.

If BMB is such a hit, why not let the next bunch of Gay men only try to hit it off without a twist. Or would that just be too boring for the public? Of course, gay men can't be of interest on their own merit without any help, rrrrrright?

[jsciv]

Eldee: In retrospect, I think that one of the reasons BMB got off the ground is because it downplayed the romanticism of guys with guys. Lolasdad can comment or not on this, but I know that romantic affection between guys on TV is still one of those areas that straight America isn't comfortable with. Even though there are gay characters and themed shows, it's not about the romance of two guys in most cases (I think Dawson's Creek's about the only show to have ever treated the subject seriously -- at least it's the only one that comes to mind). And I think that if the show had been pitched to Bravo as a simple gay dating show, it wouldn't have sold. The angle, it would be my guess, is what sold it. Still, I hope that it does open the door for more people to ask "why not one where they're all gay?", because that is a step closer to making it happen.

-- Joe

[eldee]

Thanks Joe, that makes sense and you provided a reasonable perspective on it. I guess I'm just stuck on the "it sucks" POV. I never saw Dawson's Creek, but if BMB helps open doors, then that part will be a good result.

[MrsDarling]

[QUOTE=Clif]While I'm glad that they did put the show on at all, I wonder what made Bravo think that it would be a show that would appeal to the female market they were seeking? Andra was essentially a supporting character, and there's no way that Dani Behr, or whatever her name was, could appeal to much of anyone except an audience that is attracted to slutty-looking bleached blondes with ambiguous Brit accents.

What makes anyone think women are watching the program to see the other women? IMHO it is all about eye candy, match making, and someone's romantic dreams coming true (however unlikely...)

How about a gay version of "Who wants to marry my dad?"

[Clif]

I was basing my comment on the theory that the women who were watching would identify with Andra as someone who was rooting for James to find true love. I guess I can see how straight women might identify with James or anyone seeking true love, but I think that shows involving straight couples might appeal to them more.

I think the primary audience for Boy Meets Boy is and will always be gay men and if anyone from Bravo thinks otherwise, they're kidding themselves. I also think Bravo should get over its fear of being known as a gay network, especially since their best-watched original programming has been that which appeals to gay people. They might as well come up with more programs to cater to this audience that they've already captured to build up viewer loyalty. Once they've established that core group, they can start focusing on other audiences. It just makes good business sense to do that.

There's nothing wrong with being known as a gay network, any more than there's nothing wrong with being known as a black network or a women's network. You start with what works and build from there. Bravo has latched onto a winning path and any executives or other employers who would shy away from that should be fired for stupidity.

[jsciv]

Clif, unlike others, it is still "okay" to be offended by homosexuals, and it's also a fact that cable operators CAN drop a channel or choose not to carry its programming during those blocks. It is NOT the same as being known as a black or women's network. It stinks that this is so, but that's the way the world is.

-- Joe

[Max Smart]

What I really don't like about this show is that unlike the other (major network) dating shows, there is little or no time for James to get to know any of these guys. I mean 15 guys in 10 days, and the one-on-one "dates" last for what 25 minutes? I mean we are down to six guys and Robb, Brian and Sean haven't even gotten their one-on-one time. This is less a dating show then pick out the straight guys.

[Clif]

I suspect there is more going on off-camera than we actually get to see, probably edited to fit in a six-episode time arc.

For example, we only got to see half of the guys go shopping for gifts with Andra, which suggests to me that the first group of shoppers wasn't nearly as interesting as the second, in which Dan was confronted by Andra for the first time.

Andra also frequently tells James that she conversed with Sean and Matt and others whom we haven't seen. Because the camera follows mostly James, we haven't seen much of a number of the current finalists, particularly Sean, and really, if you stop to think about it, not much of Franklin outside of his one-on-one and other group activities.

The ones who provide the most interesting plot twists (Dan and Brian and Michael, for example) or best sound bites (Wes and Robb) have received the most coverage so far, because remember, the purpose of the show, first and foremost, is to be entertaining.