Jump to content

Complaints, Conspiracies & Flounces: Sharks in the Basement


  • Please log in to reply

551 replies to this topic

#1

palan

palan

    Loyal Viewer

Posted Sep 3, 2007 @ 7:20 AM

Now that BB has produced a season that flunks the first season test (if this were the first season of the show, would anyone want to see it picked up?), is it time to put it to rest? Has this show sunk so low that CBS would be better off replacing it with Temptation Island? Just how dysfunctional does it have to be, how many pledges to avoid watching does it need in order to expire and the plug pulled.

IOW, is there hope for the future of this show, or is this the season that puts a stake through its sad, wretched heart?

Edited by palan, Sep 3, 2007 @ 7:21 AM.

  • 0

#2

Stinger97

Stinger97

    Stalker

Posted Sep 3, 2007 @ 10:58 AM

With its ratings being as high as they are this season, I wouldn't expect to see BB cancelled anytime soon. Though there are people out there that pledge to never watch another episode, have signed petitions, and have phoned sponsers, the only thing CBS cares about is the ratings. And as long as the audience is there the show will continue.

While I've been unhappy with the turn of events this season and most of the contestants, I'll continue to watch.
  • 0

#3

Mommeee

Mommeee

    Video Archivist

Posted Sep 3, 2007 @ 11:03 AM

I'd be so bummed if the show were cancelled! Yeah, this years' cast is full of dull and/or despicable people, but I could have changed the channel.

I'm definitely still onboard.
  • 0

#4

punishinglight

punishinglight

    Couch Potato

Posted Sep 3, 2007 @ 11:27 AM

Personally, I'd love to see another season, but I'm torn. I think Dick, Eric, and Daniele are some of the worst houseguests that the show has ever had, and it midly horrifies me that they have all made it to the final six. Plus, throw in the double standards with the producers favoring Dick and the ridiculous Jen situation (I love the girl, and feel really bad for her). All of that being said, a cancellation after this season would almost be appropriate in my mind, and even though I've been watching since the first season, I wouldn't be too upset.

All that would change, though, if Dick is held accountable for his actions and CBS is somehow made to pay for their behavior this season (maybe by Jen slapping a giant lawsuit on them and Dick, which would make me squeal with joy). Basically, I'd be willing to watch season 9 religiously if the trainwreck that is season 8 ends with:

1) Either Jessica or Jameka winning (which seems highly unlikely)
2) CBS and Dick getting what is rightly coming to them once this season wraps up.
  • 0

#5

Jensplace

Jensplace

    Fanatic

Posted Sep 3, 2007 @ 11:28 AM

Since the first season of Big Brother flunked that test, I'm guessing this show will go on forever.
  • 0

#6

kinda sketchy

kinda sketchy

    Fanatic

Posted Sep 3, 2007 @ 12:09 PM

Other than Will, I've never liked the winner, and I didn't like Will because he was a fine, upstanding great guy, I liked Will because he was just that damn good. Nobody will ever play the game better, period. End of story. (Heh). I know that there's no way in hell Zach, Jessica or Jameka can pull off the win so I'm guessing this seasons winner will be someone I despise and someone who's last name starts with D.

Plus, throw in the double standards with the producers favoring Dick and the ridiculous Jen situation (I love the girl, and feel really bad for her). All of that being said, a cancellation after this season would almost be appropriate in my mind, and even though I've been watching since the first season, I wouldn't be too upset.

All that would change, though, if Dick is held accountable for his actions and CBS is somehow made to pay for their behavior this season (maybe by Jen slapping a giant lawsuit on them and Dick, which would make me squeal with joy). Basically, I'd be willing to watch season 9 religiously if the trainwreck that is season 8 ends with:

1) Either Jessica or Jameka winning (which seems highly unlikely)
2) CBS and Dick getting what is rightly coming to them once this season wraps up.

The producers have always had their favorites, this season is no different. I said way back when Dick was on the block the very first time that I had watched BB enough to know that there was no way in hell he was going home. Also, while I wasn't overly impressed with Erica last season I thought she fared far worse than Jen (whom I love!). CBS nor Boogie "got what was coming to them" so don't think for a minute it will happen with Dick either. Expect a finale full of Jen Sucks! clips and for Dick to insult her on live television like the producers had Alison do to Erica.
  • 0

#7

Melina Detroit

Melina Detroit

    Fanatic

Posted Sep 3, 2007 @ 12:18 PM

There seems to be something about the basic structure of this show that tends to produce unpleasant winners, compared to, say, Survivor or TAR. On BB, nice guys usually finish last. If I had a more analytical mind, perhaps I could figure out why.

Yeah, this years' cast is full of dull and/or despicable people, but I could have changed the channel.

Me, too. But I haven't. Do you suppose they're beaming subliminal messages that make us keep watching when we know better? I hope so, because then I can blame them rather than myself for having such an embarrassing habit.

I don't see BB going away any time soon. In fact, from what I can tell, it's becoming more and more popular.

Edited by Melina Detroit, Sep 3, 2007 @ 12:19 PM.

  • 0

#8

NTLurker

NTLurker

    Fanatic

Posted Sep 3, 2007 @ 12:51 PM

I've already stopped watching the show when Jen left, I tunned in to see sequester footages of Jen and when I found out there would be none, I found other things to do during the time BB runs.

So far, I don't miss the show at all.

I think Maggie played as great a game as Will, just in a different way. As much as I hate her, I've got to give her props for being able to control half of the houseguests to the point that they'd make sacrifices for her.

Edited by NTLurker, Sep 3, 2007 @ 12:52 PM.

  • 0

#9

quaintirene

quaintirene

    Fanatic

Posted Sep 3, 2007 @ 1:01 PM

Also, while I wasn't overly impressed with Erica last season I thought she fared far worse than Jen (whom I love!).


I think Erika was treated really badly by the editors. Basically she was made out to be a mindless tramp. But even though Boogie played her like a 5 cent violin, she wasn't treated badly by him in person. He didn't make violent threats at her, nor did he assault her or taunt her. Her clothes were not vandalized.

Sadly, the audience seems to love becoming part of a huge collective bullying of Jen. I hate it, but the ratings seem to be up. So I expect the carnage to continue. And I guess I'll probably tune in to be outraged! However I have made a little mental note of sponsors. No one has withdrawn yet as far as I know, and I won't be patronizing any of their products from here on in.
  • 0

#10

evil jesus

evil jesus

    Fanatic

Posted Sep 3, 2007 @ 1:02 PM

It hasn't become more popular, but it is being hyped that way by CBS. It's still off in the ratings from seasons 3-6. I don't think the feeds are watched by many. CBS doesn't give us numbers on those, but if people really saw Dick's behavior for what it is, he would not be popular at all.
  • 0

#11

Valenti

Valenti

    Couch Potato

Posted Sep 3, 2007 @ 2:14 PM

I can see it going on for another 2 seasons and then maybe finishing. I haven't enjoyed this season or the one before, but Survivor has had sucky seasons and still managed to deliver some great entertainment. I just hope next time they pick the correct people.
  • 0

#12

palan

palan

    Loyal Viewer

Posted Sep 3, 2007 @ 2:37 PM

I'm used to reality tv that features awful, awful people. Heck, I've watched every iteration of Flava Flav and his collection of women-to-bring-shame-on-all-women. I've watched portions of seasons of Real [sic] World that were enough to make me turn off the tube.

But it just seems that even the most rancid show has drawn a line as far as assault, abuse and basically criminal behavior. I guess even after everything I've ever seen on tv, I'm a little shocked and bothered to see CBS take one step more toward lions vs. slaves in the coliseum.

I mean, promoting assholes is nothing new-- it's the lifeblood of television. But this season of BB feels something new to me, like CBS's protection and aggrandizement of Dick is something worse.

I have stopped watching, but it hasn't helped-- I feel as if I saw a woman being mugged on my front porch and the best I can do is go back inside and shut my door.
  • 0

#13

bear88

bear88

    Couch Potato

Posted Sep 3, 2007 @ 6:11 PM

I stopped watching after the cigarette incident on BBAD, and tuned in only for Jen's eviction. I haven't watched since, and have kept up with the show via this board and the recaps. I do want to find out how this sordid saga ends, even if I don't want to actually watch it.

For me, the trouble was that the producers' encouragement of Dick's behavior, and the behavior itself, was making me extremely angry. I would fume about it for hours after I had seen or read about it. It wasn't a "fun" kind of anger, the sort one often feels about reality show contestants, but a distrubing feeling about even being a tacit participant in the whole thing.

I have watched the show from the beginning, and it's been pretty bad a lot of the time. I was bothered by the producers' failure to tell Monica about her family member's death in the Twin Towers, but decided to let it go. There have been many other contestants who I've hated, but it has usually been enjoyable to dislike them. That's the point, after all, to have entertaining villains.

If this were another type of show, one that didn't have live feeds and Showtime, I wouldn't know nearly as much as I do about Dick's behavior, and might be able to accept Dick. But I know too much, and can't accept it.

And this is the problem. Dick isn't just an aberration. He is the product of the current producing team. They not only knew what they were getting; they want it. And the edited version of Dick appears to be paying off for them in the ratings. And while there have been a few embarrassing stories, nobody really cares. The story has no media traction, and is unlikely to get it now.

I don't know if I want to get started on this show next year if Grodner remains in charge, because you know we are going to getting a steady diet of wannabe Dicks in addition to the usual collection of reality show freaks and famewhores. The show has, over the years, lost the balance that kept it grounded and entertaining. In recent years, it has relied on gimmicks, editing tricks, increasingly manipulative production tactics, and a decision to endorse the worst sort of behavior.

While I'm still "obsessed" with the show, or I wouldn't be reading and writing about it now on a message board, I don't miss watching the darn thing. The only way I watch again this year is if Jen can cast a deciding vote against a Donato - unless it's a vote for Eric.
  • 0

#14

palan

palan

    Loyal Viewer

Posted Sep 3, 2007 @ 8:12 PM

Agree on the trouble with this-- beyond the immediate bad taste of Dick's behavior is the clear message to future contestants-- There are no lines that we don't want you to cross, and if you want to be a "star" it's no longer enough to simply be an obnoxious asshole-- we're looking for people who will do the sorts of things that would get them restraining orders and arrest on the outside. Be constantly verbally abusive. Make vicious violent threats. Punch someone. Sneak a weapon in. Don't just give the viewers cartoon verssions of dysfunctional behavior that they see in the world-- give them the kind of stuff that really pushes the envelope, that crosses lines that are held by laws. Show them things they can't see in the real world unless police are involved.

And then get the home crowd to cheer for it. I doubt that I will even watch episode one next season. It's going to be ugly as hell.
  • 0

#15

bear88

bear88

    Couch Potato

Posted Sep 3, 2007 @ 9:23 PM

I don't think the producers would permit Dick to punch someone, although at this stage I'm not totally sure. And I certainly don't think people are going to be bringing weapons. One of the annoying things about Dick's "rebel rocker" pose is that it's just that, a pose. He is relentless in his verbal abuse, but outside of the drink-dumping and the burning cigarette, he is careful to stay just on this side of the producers' line in terms of actual physical violence. He's not a rebel. He's a teacher's pet, and the editing of him as some sort of rebel is just as phony as the editing of him as a caring father. The idiots on BB1 who threatened to walk out of the house were more rebellious.

The trouble I now have with the show is the obvious favoritism, and tolerance of unacceptable behavior from perceived "fan favorites." If Zach - for example - had done anything close to what Dick has done, he would have been gone. Future Dicks may find themselves kicked out for the same sort of behavior if they don't have a storyline the producers want to sell.

I was, in the end, uncomfortable with watching something that felt like what a lot of women in awful, abusive relationships go through every day. And I felt a powerful distate towards everyone else. They could have taken a stand against that sort of demeaning treatment. While I understand them not doing it at first, given that they were there to play a game, the fact that they didn't later made me feel comtempt for them.

I didn't really enjoying feeling that way, because it reminded me of all the self-righteous reality show contestants who huff and puff about people's morality. But the show turned into a morality play, with the producers acting as Dick's enablers and the other contestants standing aside and letting it happen.

I don't want to get on a high horse about this, because I understand why other people want to see how it all ends, and because distasteful behavior isn't exactly new on this show. But it stopped being fun for me. I honestly don't know if I will return to even sample next season unless major changes are made.

Edited by bear88, Sep 3, 2007 @ 9:25 PM.

  • 0

#16

leto

leto

    Couch Potato

Posted Sep 3, 2007 @ 10:06 PM

Seriously, as long as Les Moonves is the president of CBS and the Chenbot is married to him, BB is in no danger of being cancelled.

Nevertheless, I am out after 8 seasons of watching this craptastic show. The strong taint of producer interference this season has just totally taken all the fun out it for me.

Edited by leto, Sep 3, 2007 @ 10:07 PM.

  • 0

#17

Vajram

Vajram

    Loyal Viewer

Posted Sep 4, 2007 @ 12:10 AM

I think the first season blew even worse than this one. Let's face it, this is the kind of show that was born on the other side of the shark cage. It's appeal is all base and prurient and guilty. In some ways I think it's a distillation of the competitive reality format in its purest form. An elimination show nt based on any kind of skill or talent or even personal appeal, but purely on high school level cliques and social pecking orders, eventually giving way to lying, betrayal and treachery as the established social divisions collapse on themselves. It's like a controlled Lord of Flies experiement. That's competitve reality television at its most naked.

Usually there is some comfort in knowing that the cool kids always have to eat each other in the end, sometimes sooner, sometimes later. That's really when the show is fun to watch. Unfortuantely, we also know that the show is not meritocratic or fair. There's no guarantee that the "good people" will win. If we didn't learn that with the Friendship, we should have learned it with Boogie.

I guess there is a difference this year with at least the appearance of interference from production. I can see why people might be able to live with the knowledge that the worst scumbags might win on occasion, but it becomes rather more intolerable if production is actually helping the scumbags win.

Personally, I think the AP twist is more to blame for helping the D's than production is. The AP vote kept Dick in the game when he should have been a goner against Dustin. Without that vote, both D's would probably be gone now.

Conceptually, I can see where the frustration of consecutive seasons of worms like Maggie and Boogie winning the show would make the twist of giving the audience a secret hand in things seem very appealing (imagine if we could have made Will evict Boogie or Ivette evict Maggie), but the whole thing has backfired because the vote is coming in for the wrong people. How much that has to do with the sanitized and deceptive edits CBS has been giving to Dick, I don't know. It may just be that the D supported have figured out a way to tamper with the vote. Either way, I think it was a well-intentioned idea that just didn't work.

Not that they could do it again anyway. If there's another season, everybody in the house will suspect every other player of being AP. No one could be sly enough to pull it off except for Will (who would probably tell everyone h was AP on the first day and they'd refuse to believe him), and I doubt he's going to do any more seasons.
  • 0

#18

palan

palan

    Loyal Viewer

Posted Sep 4, 2007 @ 5:55 AM

<He is relentless in his verbal abuse, but outside of the drink-dumping and the burning cigarette, he is careful to stay just on this side of the producers' line in terms of actual physical violence>

I think if cigarette burns are this side of the line, then the line has been shifted ever so slightly, which is what I find disturbing. Next season will the producers say, "Well, he only punched her once, and not toooo hard."

It sends a clear message to future contestants-- abuse and some actual violence toward other players will not only be tolerated, but can help you win, so go for it.
  • 0

#19

Cometmonkey

Cometmonkey

    Channel Surfer

Posted Sep 4, 2007 @ 7:15 AM

I've stopped watching the show, canceled the feeds (with complaint), and only know what's happening by reading the recaps here. However, I would be happy to watch again if they would simply cast more interesting people and give them more interesting things to do. It doesn't have to be this boring and pathetic....the producers are simply incredibly uncreative and have resorted to recruiting violent, mentally unstable people in the hopes that that alone will draw our attention. Sorry, but that just works for Jerry Springer.

They could increase the prize money for a start, which would hopefully draw a wider selection of applicants. They could stop recruiting directly from LA bars. They could get rid of the slop angle (which serves no purpose other than to make half of the HGs despondent and tired for a week) and have more luxury competitions. They could give the HGs stuff to do in their spare time that would actually be worth watching-- art supplies, jump ropes, sidewalk chalk, another pet (tarantulas don't count)-- so that it doesn't turn into endless beer pong and bitching.

It could be a show I'd watch again. But honestly, I don't have high hopes that it will be.
  • 0

#20

Melina Detroit

Melina Detroit

    Fanatic

Posted Sep 4, 2007 @ 8:05 AM

Let's face it, this is the kind of show that was born on the other side of the shark cage. It's appeal is all base and prurient and guilty. In some ways I think it's a distillation of the competitive reality format in its purest form. An elimination show nt based on any kind of skill or talent or even personal appeal, but purely on high school level cliques and social pecking orders, eventually giving way to lying, betrayal and treachery as the established social divisions collapse on themselves. It's like a controlled Lord of Flies experiement. That's competitve reality television at its most naked.

Excellent post, Vajram.I have to agree with almost everything you said, including your thoughts on AP, which I agree probably seemed like a good idea at the outset. I also agree we'll never see it again.

I like your point that it's not like this show started on a high level and has headed straight downhill ever since. It's been what it is since day one, like it or leave it. Some seasons are better than others, but none are exactly Shakespeare, or even Survivor. I think a lot of us have hated the mysogynistic trend of the last two seasons, and I can totally understand (and even admire) people who refuse to watch. Still, even if this aspect is eliminated, we still won't be dealing with entertainment at its finest. I think the main reason a lot of people watch at all is that it's on in the summer, and people think, like me, "Well, it's better than nothing." (We may be wrong there.)
  • 0

#21

Kulfi

Kulfi

    Couch Potato

Posted Sep 4, 2007 @ 8:49 AM

Adding to the Vajram praise of post - ITA. I also agree wholeheartedly with Cometmonkey and think that more activities, luxury and no slop could help things.

BTW, My new favorite phrase is "born on the other side of the shark cage." I'm going to go find other places to use it....

Edited by Kulfi, Sep 4, 2007 @ 10:07 AM.

  • 0

#22

moonvine

moonvine

    Couch Potato

Posted Sep 4, 2007 @ 10:36 AM

Every year, people cancel the feeds and protest. I haven't seen any signs CBS cares.

This is the first year I don't care at all since Season 4. So if you had asked me at the time, I would have said it jumped the shark after Season 4. But we got 3 more seasons I enjoyed after Season 4.

So I'll wait and see what happens.
  • 0

#23

evil jesus

evil jesus

    Fanatic

Posted Sep 4, 2007 @ 10:42 AM

This is the first season that's so obviously rigged. It's the only one I stopped watching completely.
  • 0

#24

VAHokies

VAHokies

    Fanatic

Posted Sep 4, 2007 @ 10:56 AM

I don't believe this season is rigged at all. The DR asks leading questions, but they don't force the HGs to vote the way they want. Example: Jen. If Dustin is stupid enough to keep Eric in the house, that's Dustin's fault.
  • 0

#25

evil jesus

evil jesus

    Fanatic

Posted Sep 4, 2007 @ 10:59 AM

They cut Jen's screen time down to nothing when she became more popular than Dick. They've made the show all-Dick all the time, and used the AP to reinforce that.
  • 0

#26

bear88

bear88

    Couch Potato

Posted Sep 4, 2007 @ 11:23 AM

I also agree with the praise of Vajram's post.

A few thoughts, and then I'll leave it alone:

-- Season One was awful, in terms of sheer tedium and a plan that went awry. The whole show was revamped afterward. That was the only other season that involved viewer voting. They should have learned.

-- The "born on the other side of the shark tank" line is both funny and true. Even the seasons people seem to remember fondest, such as Season Two, had the dreadful refusal of the producers to let Monica know about her cousin after the Sept. 11 attacks.

-- The show crossed the line, for me, not because I didn't like the winners. And while the appearance of producer interference bothers me, that accusation has also been made before. This ain't a fair show and really, the fun seasons have been about the moments along the way - not the final winner.

-- I usually am unnatrually loyal to shows I watch, and will stick with them even after they have gotten hopelessly bad. But I couldn't stick with this season. It wasn't producer interference, although it's been worse this year because of AP. It was the relentless misogyny, its endorsement by the producers, and acceptance by the players. Boogie was a distateful jerk, and the producers made things a lot worse by portraying Erika as a slut in the finale, but there just isn't anything that approaches Dick's treatment of Jen - and the others studiously ignoring it or gleefully joining in - for weeks on end. The producers could have told the guy to cut it out a long time ago, and he would have, because he's a good little poser and will do what his masters want, but they didn't. They never kicked Dick out, encouraged his behavior, and then denied and twisted the truth of what was happening so that Jen looked like the crazy one.

One of the important things about a guilty pleasure is that's fun, even if you don't want to admit you watch the show to your friends. But this stopped being fun, and started making me sad or angry. That's when I knew it was time to stop watching.
  • 0

#27

Lady V

Lady V

    Fanatic

Posted Sep 4, 2007 @ 1:06 PM

If there's another season, everybody in the house will suspect every other player of being AP. No one could be sly enough to pull it off except for Will (who would probably tell everyone h was AP on the first day and they'd refuse to believe him), and I doubt he's going to do any more seasons.


I don't know. Smart players could use the suspicions to advantage, and since everyone would suspect everyone--it could get interesting in a different way. Also, they could have a few "players" and people might assume there is only one. They could set up competing tasks, for example, Alpha would be told to get Beta nominated, while Mutt would be told to get Jerry nominated, and at the same time, Popeye would be told to get Donald Duck evicted.

We did a "group" thing once, where participants were all given conflicting tasks. It went on for 7 hours, and while we knew we had a task, we didn't know what the others had been told, if anything. Meanwhile, the entire group was given 4 tasks to complete (design a flag, uniforms, choose a leader, whatever.) It became quite a tense situation. Why? As it turned out, one person was told something like, "under no circumstances let the flag be green," another, "make sure you have a green flag," or "disrupt every meeting, make sure no decisions are reached," or "support all the male opinions expressed" etc. I was given no instructions about the tasks, just told, "Get yourself elected leader."

Big Brother could do something similar, and it might work well. Having BB give the contestants individual tasks, with the chance of picking up another $5000 periodically, could shake things up a bit. If this were done well--it could be a cool twist.

America could vote on what the player would do, without knowing which player would be chosen. The top two vote getters could be given to TWO different players each week. Conflicting goals would be best, but either way--more would be happening in the house.

Edited by Lady V, Sep 4, 2007 @ 1:09 PM.

  • 0

#28

liqidclark

liqidclark

    Fanatic

Posted Sep 4, 2007 @ 1:59 PM

No. If I'm going to watch this show next season, I need to see all twists that allow production to manipulate the game in the favor of specific houseguests removed. I don't really care who wins or how horribly the houseguests humiliate themselves and each other (to an extent, of course, DICK!). It's when the game is heavily influenced by favoritism from viewers, production, and viewers being manipulated by production's editing that I become irritated enough to stop watching. I know it's not supposed to be completely fair, but at least allow the game to unfold on its own, and if BB is going to screw with the hamsters then screw with them all equally. I also know there will always be some level of manipulation involved in making locked up crazy people into compelling television, but it's obvious that BB production isn't capable of pulling it off without us noticing. So quit it.

Edited by liqidclark, Sep 4, 2007 @ 2:00 PM.

  • 0

#29

CerebralFitness

CerebralFitness

    Couch Potato

Posted Sep 4, 2007 @ 2:21 PM

Every year, people cancel the feeds and protest. I haven't seen any signs CBS cares.


That's ironic considering the PSAs on CBS have the motto "CBS Cares". They should change it to "CBS, eh, waddaya gonna do?"
  • 0

#30

Lady V

Lady V

    Fanatic

Posted Sep 4, 2007 @ 2:23 PM

I agree that the current producers would not impliment this, which is too bad, because I do think it would be a good twist, if not used to show favoritism by the producers to one or two HGs.

However, I would prefer that all the contestants rotate in the role of America's Player, if they are going to keep the concept.

Some wouldn't risk their game to get the extra $5000 or $10,000 bucks, but some would.

To make this more fair, they could easily also have voter's choose which player(s) would be up each week before announcing the task and allowing the vote. You could only choose from remaining players, then start the rotation again, so everyone got the chance.

Frankly, I would rather watch that than endless beer pong or cooking.

There are ways they could help reassure people about game manipulation, for example, have a group of tasks, and have each on a bingo ball. First the viewers vote on which player is to have a turn. Then the pre-season loaded tasks would be spun and Julie would choose the random task. Then the viewers could vote on the "target" player involved, if any. Same deal there, once one player has been the target, only remaining players are available for vote. Faces, faded to black and white, so people could see who is left, then start over will all of them after the task is done.

I think it could work, and could be done fairly, if they wanted to, and they could keep the "you get to vote" factor.

As far as votes for eviction? I don't know if they would need that if they did something similar to the above. That's the part I don't really like, but making it an option, "here is the name (again, random draw from Julie's bingo machine or whatever) and if you cast your vote this way, you get $X amount of money, but you don't have to." The amount of money should increase as the game gets tighter and more risky.

Would people betray "alliances" for $1000? $2000? $10,000? At which stage of the "game?"

The "bingo" system would keep producer interference in the outcome minimal. Since people in real life have agendas too, I think this kind of thing would reflect the spirit of the premise.
  • 0