A few weeks ago, Entertainment Weekly did a puff piece on a popular new prime-time game show hosted by Howie Mandel, Deal or No Deal. Apparently, answering questions a la Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? was too brainy; now contestants just have to point at numbered suitcases with money in them and pray for wealth.
Seriously, this is how the game works: A player picks one of 26 numbered suitcases. The player either gets however much money is in that case, which could be anything from 1 million to less than 1 thousand dollars, or an offer from the Banker, a hidden dude who calls down to Howie with offers to which the contestant can say “deal” or “no deal.” They generate these offers by pointing at certain models to open their cases. If the models open small dollar amounts, the Banker’s offer can go up, because there’s a greater chance your case is full of big money, but if the models reveal large sums, his offer decreases. People can walk away with essentially nothing.
The casting director of the show clarifies its intent: “I love people who never stop talking, says Neal Konstantini. “I want to keep watching them jump around and go nuts.” Yes, dance, dance for the rich Banker, you poor bastard! If you possessed any knowledge or skill, you’d be as fabulously wealthy as Howie Mandel! But you have nothing to offer save your histrionics, so how about you make an ass of yourself for the country’s amusement while we try to screw you with lowball offers from The Man?
I have to say one of the moving picture’s most notable achievements is the elevation of debasement to a mainstream career path. It used to be you’d have to toil away in a carnival side-show or as a magician’s assistant, but these days you can go on any reality TV show or game show and earn a shitload of money during or after just for playing the dunce. Deal or No Deal manages to take this idea to a new level.
Meanwhile, after noting how berserk the audience gets when the models arrive on stage, Howie Mandel says, “I don’t know what it is. There is something incredibly powerful about 26 stunning women dressed exactly the same.”
Mmm, yeah, a total lack of individualism is fuckin’ hot! I hate it when teh bitchez remind me of their personality and stuff. I just want to abstract them into service-oriented Fembots, and the best way to do that is to just make them dress scantily/identically while moving in unison. Then I can just concentrate on what I’d do to them.
Naturally, the show’s a huge hit.
Howie Mandel says, “I don’t know what it is. There is something incredibly powerful about 26 stunning women dressed exactly the same.”
Nice of him to start a dialouge. Where do we email our theories as to “what it is”?
I have to say one of the moving picture’s most notable achievements is the elevation of debasement to a mainstream career path. It used to be you’d have to toil away in a carnival side-show or as a magician’s assistant, but these days you can go on any reality TV show or game show and earn a shitload of money during or after just for playing the dunce. Deal or No Deal manages to take this idea to a new level.
Well, it’s a progress of sorts. At least there’s real money in it, which sweetens the deal.
Interesting, the original Uk version of this put a lot of emphasis on creating a team feeling between the current contestant and the ppl holding the boxes (who were all waiting their turn to be a contestant, rather than nameless bimbos) – lots of back&forth chatter and support, opinions, & so on.
If one watches the show, as I sadly did a few times, one realizes that for all the excitement and strategy and skill that might be implied in the game, there’s a simple formula that determines the offers made to the contestants.
In other words, in financial-opportunity-cost terms, every single choice offered to the contestant is essentially 50-50. You can’t beat the house because there’s not really a choice given.
The only choice is “which hottie do I get to smile at me next?”
AUguste: that’s interesting, in the UK version, the offers from Teh B(w)anker are pitched so low*, that there’s actually real choice about how much risk you want to take
*typically 40% less than break-even