Oooh. What's this? The Chase has been replaced by a new 5pm quiz show. Fear not, The Chase will be back with new episodes from Monday 2nd September. In the meantime, lets see if the summer replacement is any good.
Take on the Twisters is the latest show produced by 12Yard. Given their history, they have produced some successful shows. In It to Win It, being the most successful National Lottery show lasting over 11 years. Their sister show, Who Dares Wins (The Rich List), BBC Two quiz Eggheads who will be 10 years old this November and Channel 4's Coach Trip. However, there have been some stinkers. Such as Channel 5's Double Cross (what the hell was that show all about?) and ITV's The Colour of Money. The devisers for this show are Josephine Brassey, Liz Gaskell, Chris Greenwood and John Lomax. You might recognise Josephine as the deviser of Sonority Girls (decent show but hated by the public here and in the States) and BBC One true or false quiz Perfection.
The main concept features eight giant egg timers, known as Twisters. Each one holding a different amount of sand. The game begins with four contestants who are trying to bank as much money as possible via playing against the Twisters. To determine who plays against the Twisters multiple choice questions are asked. The player who is in control only see the question. They can decide to "stick" and see the three choices, or they can "twist" and dump the question and choices on an opponent of their choosing. If they "stick" and answer the question correctly they can choose an unlit Twister. If they "twist" and the opponent gets the question right, they can choose an unlit Twister and will gain control. If the opponent gets the question wrong the person who gave the question will gain control and choose an unlit Twister. Whoever chooses the sixth unlit Twister will play against The Twisters to bank some cash. The contestant answers quick fire questions inside sixty seconds. After each correct answer given they can choose to "stick" and leave the sand running through all the Twisters or "twist" to turn over a Twister to avoid one running out. Once a Twister runs out it is eliminated from the round. After sixty seconds, any Twisters remaining are awarded with a cash value. In the first round the values are revealed for any in-play Twisters. They can range from £300 to £1,000. From the second round onwards, if a contestant decides to play against all Twisters that cash has yet to revealed and keep them active after sixty seconds, every Twister is doubled in value. After four rounds, whoever has banked the most money gets to play The Final Twist. The other three goes home with nowt. Similar to Tipping Point, others might have banked some money but if it's not enough they go home with nothing.
The Final Twist sees the finalist taking on all eight Twisters. The total money they banked in the previous four rounds is hidden inside one of the eight Twisters by an independent adjudicator (who are the reliable folk at Beyond Dispute). As before they answer quick fire questions in sixty seconds. Any sand running out of a Twister is eliminated. After sixty seconds they can choose either to "stick" and walk away with any lit Twisters that are worth £200 each or to "twist" to see if one of the lit Twisters contains their banked money. However, if neither of the lit Twisters contain the money they go home with nowt.
The massive bug bear I have is how the format is devised. With The Chase, the main concept features the player against the Chaser, we see this throughout the show. Tipping Point features their coin pushing machine. Again, that is used throughout the show. The Twisters are only used five times per show, each a minute long. Totalling five minutes inside an hour show with adverts. The rest of the show focuses on who gets to play against The Twisters, This is dragged out and boring. I can see the devisers trying to be a bit like their sister show, In It to Win It. However, this idea works on In It to Win It as each question is treated as ULTIMATE JEOPARDY. One wrong move and the contestant risks their place to play for some money and even to win a share of the prize fund. On Take on the Twisters a wrong move would cost the contestant nothing. Since it takes at least six questions to see the Twisters being used. It's a good 8-10 minutes wait to see the main concept being used. I would've preferred if they had more rounds by having at least 3-4 twisters being used per round and perhaps increasing to 5-6 for later rounds. Perhaps if they used buzzer rounds rather than multiple choice it could increase the pace. You can have an open question, someone answers it and light up a Twister then they hear the next question and could "stick" and play or "twist" and dump it on another contestant. I know this is used on Tipping Point but that is against one opponent, not three. Given the show only has four rounds, if you have a dominant player, they could win the show easily before the any remaining rounds are played.
Whilst The Final Twist does work in some capacity. There is a drawback regarding the gamb... sorry, the decision to "stick" or "twist". Given the Twisters are only worth £200 each. If you're playing for around £9,000 then you might as well go for it. Even if you have seven out of eight Twisters lit, you're only risking £1,400 to win over six times that. However, there is a catch. Given the independent adjudicator places the money in one Twister before The Final Twist is played. There is a chance (albet slim) the money could be placed in that unlit Twister. It's the classic Blackjack no-win situation. If your hand totals 14 and the dealer has a 10. If the next card is either a face card, 10, 9 or 8 then the dealer will win anyway. If you stick you will bust but if you twist then the dealer will win as it's more than your hand. Obviously, if you hardly kept any Twisters lit after sixty seconds then you might as well walk away. For those who remember the Chris Tarrant quiz show, It's Not What You Know. Tarrant would offer the contestants an offer to walk away before playing final question. It's usually a percentage on the money they can win after the final question. Perhaps it could work in a similar way with host Julia Bradbury offering the finalist a percentage rather than £200 per Twister.
Been thinking about The Final Twist this week. It could be improved if the finalist plays against all eight Twisters answering questions over two minutes. However, for any Twister the contestant lose then one-eighth is taken off their total and what is kept after two minutes they would leave the show with that amount. For example, Monday's contestant walked away with £9,100 by finding the chase in five twisters. Had she played under my suggested rules then she would leave with £5,687.50 but that is after sixty seconds and not two minutes. There is the drawback if one Twister remains they can win some money but the contestant still has to answer questions correctly. There is a chance they can have an unlucky run of questions and the final Twister runs out of sand, leaving them with nowt.
Going back to the main game. I suggested it could be improved if they have more rounds with less Twisters then increasing to more Twisters towards the end. The only thing I can think of if they use the Twisters in more capacity. On Tipping Point they use an elimination format. Perhaps it could work for Take on the Twisters? I don't know how it can be done but perhaps having different rounds could keep the viewer from being bored from the main game.
Julia Bradbury is a competent host and doesn't fluff up her questions. Given her TV experience she is easily relaxed into her role, given she hasn't hosted many quiz/game shows in her career. While the questions used are the standard you would see on In It to Win It. Meaning the producers weren't looking for people with good general knowledge. The set is quite spacious. Compared to The Chase and Tipping Point where their sets are very compact.
Overall it's a decent format on how the Twisters are used in the sixty second rounds. I wonder if they got the idea from constantly spinning plates on poles and the video game Tapper? However, it's hampered by the long, boring main game to determine who plays the Twisters. An opportunity has been missed to use the Twisters in a longer, much larger capacity. That said, shows that are recommissioned can make tweaks. Simply look at BBC Two's Breakaway and ITV's early 2000 quiz show The People Versus.
One final note. I think they've missed a trick by not calling it Lets Twist Again or Lets Do the Twist rather than Twisted/Take on the The Twisters.
EDIT: Something else to mention. I don't like how Julia gets to reveal if the Twister holds the money of not. I know this is a producer tactic to inject tension but it's obvious the money will not be in the first few Twisters. I would've preferred if the contestant choose the Twisters one by one.
Saturday, 27 July 2013
Friday, 12 July 2013
Just Read: Client (Stanley Hastings #5) Parnell Hall Double Part 1
It's been a while since I updated my reading traits. I'm currently reading "thriller of the year", Gone Girl by Gillian Flynn and into the last 150 pages. I will blog about that book soon. After reading Pudsey: My Autobidography, I spent reading a Parnell Hall double bill with two of his three creations.
UK readers might not have heard of Parnell Hall. This could be because he is an American author where some of his books are out of print and not available to buy in British bookshops. You can either buy his books from the likes of Amazon and The Book Depository in print or in ereader format. You can read about his past and current work by visiting his website. You can also email him with any questions and yes, he does reply and doesn't bite.
Client (Stanley Hastings #5) by Parnell Hall
Stanley Hastings is a New York PI. A Philip Marlow-like PI he is not. He is simply an ambulance chaser working for an accident law firm, signing retainers and taking photos of the accident scene. However, Hastings seems to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, bumping into murders, being interrogated by the police and he is the only person to get himself out of the mess. The book begins with Hastings admitting his bad teeth and with high dental prices, needs something to pay the bill. Enter Marvin Nickleson, an actual paying client who is asking Stanley to keep an eye on his wife, Monica Dorlander. Who thinks she is having an affair in her workplace. Suspicions arise where Nickleson would only contact Stanley at work at a certain time. Whilst juggling with his retainers and calls from the office. Hastings hunts down Monica to her workplace with one evening following her to an out of town motel. The next morning Monica is found dead in her motel room with Stanley being quizzed by the authorities once again as the number one suspect. On all of top of this, Nickleson does a runner and is nowhere to be seen, also the deceased is not all it seems.
I was disappointed with the fourth book, Strangler I read last year. Simply it was mostly stuck in Richard Rosenberg's office and Stanley hardly had any interaction into solving the case. However, Client is an improvement and it goes back to the early books like Detective and Murder where Stanley has to prove his innocence to find the accused. Given the book was published in 1990, there are many cultural references. I especially loved the scene where Stanley and his son Tommie play the original The Legend of Zelda for the NES. The whole chapter is very accurate to the actual game and inspired Stanley to find a clue to prove his innocence. With it being 1990, there is a side story where his wife earns money via computing. In Stanley's eyes this is going over her head but he learns that Alice's IT skills plays a key part to capturing the killer. When the author gives Stanley Hastings the freedom of travelling across New York and beyond the story becomes entertaining. Like so in Client, Stanley ends up in Trenton and actually gets lost, but due to spoilers I cannot say how he ends up in Trenton. As with most books featuring private detectives, this is written from the first person. Unlike the Philip Marlowe series. The Stanley Hastings books are slightly humorous. Given the character tends to put himself down in the narrative, the reader will want him to achieve and to win.
I gave Client 4 out of 5 stars on Goodreads.
The Stanley Hastings books are a fun series to read. The books are only 250ish pages long and can be read in a few days. I will stress that Stanley is not one to keep his swearing under control and uses the f-word to express his stress. In addition, some murder scenes can be blood thirsty and grotesque, As the books were written and published throughout the 1980s and 1990s. I do suggest picturing them to when the book were originally published, as the cultural references makes sense to the time period it was written. Given the books in this series are mostly out of print, you can now purchase them for Amazon Kindle and e-readers for under £2.00. If you would like to try the first book, Detective, then you can purchase the Kindle version for only 49p. That's less than most national newspapers. I do suggest reading the books in order as Hall's narrative slowly introduces the major characters. From Alice and Tommie in Detective to homicide cop, Sergeant MacAullif in Murder.
Next to review: And a Puzzle to Die On (Puzzle Lady #6).
UK readers might not have heard of Parnell Hall. This could be because he is an American author where some of his books are out of print and not available to buy in British bookshops. You can either buy his books from the likes of Amazon and The Book Depository in print or in ereader format. You can read about his past and current work by visiting his website. You can also email him with any questions and yes, he does reply and doesn't bite.
Client (Stanley Hastings #5) by Parnell Hall
Stanley Hastings is a New York PI. A Philip Marlow-like PI he is not. He is simply an ambulance chaser working for an accident law firm, signing retainers and taking photos of the accident scene. However, Hastings seems to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, bumping into murders, being interrogated by the police and he is the only person to get himself out of the mess. The book begins with Hastings admitting his bad teeth and with high dental prices, needs something to pay the bill. Enter Marvin Nickleson, an actual paying client who is asking Stanley to keep an eye on his wife, Monica Dorlander. Who thinks she is having an affair in her workplace. Suspicions arise where Nickleson would only contact Stanley at work at a certain time. Whilst juggling with his retainers and calls from the office. Hastings hunts down Monica to her workplace with one evening following her to an out of town motel. The next morning Monica is found dead in her motel room with Stanley being quizzed by the authorities once again as the number one suspect. On all of top of this, Nickleson does a runner and is nowhere to be seen, also the deceased is not all it seems.I was disappointed with the fourth book, Strangler I read last year. Simply it was mostly stuck in Richard Rosenberg's office and Stanley hardly had any interaction into solving the case. However, Client is an improvement and it goes back to the early books like Detective and Murder where Stanley has to prove his innocence to find the accused. Given the book was published in 1990, there are many cultural references. I especially loved the scene where Stanley and his son Tommie play the original The Legend of Zelda for the NES. The whole chapter is very accurate to the actual game and inspired Stanley to find a clue to prove his innocence. With it being 1990, there is a side story where his wife earns money via computing. In Stanley's eyes this is going over her head but he learns that Alice's IT skills plays a key part to capturing the killer. When the author gives Stanley Hastings the freedom of travelling across New York and beyond the story becomes entertaining. Like so in Client, Stanley ends up in Trenton and actually gets lost, but due to spoilers I cannot say how he ends up in Trenton. As with most books featuring private detectives, this is written from the first person. Unlike the Philip Marlowe series. The Stanley Hastings books are slightly humorous. Given the character tends to put himself down in the narrative, the reader will want him to achieve and to win.
I gave Client 4 out of 5 stars on Goodreads.
The Stanley Hastings books are a fun series to read. The books are only 250ish pages long and can be read in a few days. I will stress that Stanley is not one to keep his swearing under control and uses the f-word to express his stress. In addition, some murder scenes can be blood thirsty and grotesque, As the books were written and published throughout the 1980s and 1990s. I do suggest picturing them to when the book were originally published, as the cultural references makes sense to the time period it was written. Given the books in this series are mostly out of print, you can now purchase them for Amazon Kindle and e-readers for under £2.00. If you would like to try the first book, Detective, then you can purchase the Kindle version for only 49p. That's less than most national newspapers. I do suggest reading the books in order as Hall's narrative slowly introduces the major characters. From Alice and Tommie in Detective to homicide cop, Sergeant MacAullif in Murder.
Next to review: And a Puzzle to Die On (Puzzle Lady #6).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)