Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueA survey of the nation's intelligence through scientific questions testing brainpower, not school knowledge or memorization. The questions lead to entertaining answers.A survey of the nation's intelligence through scientific questions testing brainpower, not school knowledge or memorization. The questions lead to entertaining answers.A survey of the nation's intelligence through scientific questions testing brainpower, not school knowledge or memorization. The questions lead to entertaining answers.
Parcourir les épisodes
Avis en vedette
Lee Mack of UK version is way funnier than Oswald (and still without being mean or snarky like host of Australian version). Questions on UK version are much better. More varied, interesting and fun, and more original ideas. American version questions are overloaded with boring wordplay puzzles. Many of the questions are word puzzle types that will be familiar to many people (and will give those people an advantage). Like a lot of game shows other than Jeopardy, there is a fair amount of filler, such as explanation of how the game works, and music that goes on too long before results are revealed.
I like the concept of this game but was bored with the filler moments. Apparently the producers wanted a show to cover an hour time slot when commercials are added. But 42-45 minutes is too much. If the filler time were reduce this could be 30 minutes per episode. It starts with the chatty talk with contestants. Plus they go back to the same people too much. They have 100 people sitting there and they concentrated on just a few too often. It got old before the end of the first episode. The rolling total for the jackpot is slow, just show the number. Also, the delays to try and add suspense get old too. For later episodes, I just press the 10 second advance to bypass the useless nonsense and stop when I get to the next question. Patton is fine as a game show host but it does seem too scripted. Rating: 10 stars for the game itself, 0 stars for the fillers...so make it 5 stars.
I agree with some of the reviews here regarding Patton Oswalt. I do find him likeable in stand-up, television and movies, but it almost seems as if this gameshow-speak was written for him and he's not crazy about it. It's not completely horrible, but seems a bit forced and rehearsed.
I'm not sure why he has to say, "Let's take a look" before every single question, but it gets old quickly. Again, I think it was written that way, and not Mr. Oswalt's creative choice.
It's an interesting premise, and the questions ranged from super easy to difficult (depending on how your brain works!) But when they gave a drum-roll effect to "revealing" what's happened to the pot since 4 people are out (simply meaning $4000 has been added to the pot), I found myself saying, "UGH, come onnn".
I'm not sure why he has to say, "Let's take a look" before every single question, but it gets old quickly. Again, I think it was written that way, and not Mr. Oswalt's creative choice.
It's an interesting premise, and the questions ranged from super easy to difficult (depending on how your brain works!) But when they gave a drum-roll effect to "revealing" what's happened to the pot since 4 people are out (simply meaning $4000 has been added to the pot), I found myself saying, "UGH, come onnn".
I would have rated this a 9, but was so upset that the final question was terribly phrased. The question referred to a "password" made up of 6 letters, from 4 letters shown on a keyboard. Obviously, some of the letters were repeated.
An actual password can be made of many different characters, but in this case only letters were used. Actual passwords are better if they don't use an actual "word", rather use random letters.
The answer was based on an actual "word", but the instructions didn't mention anything about the password having to be a "word". The instructions only asked for a certain arrangement of those letters - in which case, there could have been many correct answers.
Hard to believe this question was allowed to be used the way it was worded. Someone should have caught the error. I guess the staff that works on the show are far from being 1% themselves!
An actual password can be made of many different characters, but in this case only letters were used. Actual passwords are better if they don't use an actual "word", rather use random letters.
The answer was based on an actual "word", but the instructions didn't mention anything about the password having to be a "word". The instructions only asked for a certain arrangement of those letters - in which case, there could have been many correct answers.
Hard to believe this question was allowed to be used the way it was worded. Someone should have caught the error. I guess the staff that works on the show are far from being 1% themselves!
I like Patton Oswalt but he can't make a 100 fake smiling laughing people interesting. There is a ridiculous amount of filler asking the contestants "get to know you" questions. They are randos - I don't care to know them. Every question just drags out to the point where I just fast forward in between each question. Patton isn't funny enough to carry this if this is the format they are sticking with.
Password, another recent gameshow in comparison is filled with laughs and good times. This is just people smiling, fake laughs (password too) and bad conversation.
The questions and concept of show seem fine, it's just not entertaining.
Password, another recent gameshow in comparison is filled with laughs and good times. This is just people smiling, fake laughs (password too) and bad conversation.
The questions and concept of show seem fine, it's just not entertaining.
Le saviez-vous
- ConnexionsRemake of The 1% Club (2022)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
Détails
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant