Gordon Ramsay's new gameshow Bank Balance launched last night on BBC1. Slightly unusual BBC scheduling as it's on three nights a week for the next three weeks.
The concept is actually pretty good, a lot better than I was expecting although I can imagine it being hard to win and it's yet another show which is difficult to explain. The BBC seem to enjoy commissioning those at the minute (I'm thinking of The Wheel where they still seemed to be introducing format points weeks in).
Look's like it's been filmed in the old tardis set to save some money.
I thought it was kind of awful to be honest. Endless rules that even the contestants were getting confused about, extremely slow-paced with too much irritating chat, the first players were so irritating that I actively wanted to lose just so they would leave, the balance board falling when they weren't even in play so the whole game just ended even though they weren't actively doing anything at that point, and that set was very peculiar - why that shape? Why those weird crinkles in the pilar?
As I think Bother's Bar said, seeing Gordon Ramsey as host of a quiz sounded interesting and different in the run up to the show but actually once you're about two minutes into the show he's such an ordinary host that you almost forget that he's an unusual and different hosting and it kind of feels less special.
The set was horrible, that strange tardis like structure seemed to make it hard to film, with no shot comfortably fitting the contestants, or the host, or the question board, or the 'stacks' nicely framed. Everything was half cut off or half hidden.
When before the show airs, you think the host is going to be one of the worst aspects of the show, and when it airs, is one of the bright spots in the absolute carnage of the rest of the show (set design, pacing, format) then you know this show has problems...
Didn't help, that there was no studio audience for him to work off and work into the patter.
Not even sure those on Studio Ramsey's payroll were in the studio to add some applause of encouragement every now and then.
Any audience you heard were watching remotely and were shown the programme already edited and packaged up.
I absolutely disagree. I think he was an amazing host for a game show. Very normal and down to earth... I really enjoyed it
Maybe I just have high standards but I don't think "normal and down to earth" is enough. This is why we have over-complicated formats because we're running out of hosts with the charisma to carry a simple premise anymore.
Look at The Chase. Despite the whole "win cash but you haven't won it until you win at the end" clause, it's a pretty simple Q&A format carried by the chemistry between the host, the cast and the contestants. Then you have Strike It Lucky/Rich, a format that could easily be played through in 5-10 minutes but sufficiently carried by a host whose interpersonal skills is frankly unmatched in my opinion.
If they get a question wrong on a money stack they lose all the money, effectively reducing the jackpot - but yes, I only noticed them explain that in the second game in terms of the jackpot reducing.
Better than I thought it would be is my verdict but not enough for me to bother watching again. Felt unrewarding getting no winner or anyone close to winning in the first show - think the first couple had only just passed the half way mark - possible the series may see no winners at all consideringthe game they put up first. Preferred it to The Wheel though.
Ramsey was alright but scheduling is odd - this would make more sense weekly and actually think three nights a week may harm it as viewers may be willing to watch it again after a week but not so much after 24 hours. BBC1 hasn't really got anything anchoring Saturday nights at the moment and this could have done the job nicely.