'Chelsea Settles'

'Chelsea Settles' is the new MTV reality show about a 324 lb 23 year old recent college graduate who settles into an apartment 2000 miles from her home. Do you think that this idea is inspirational, exploitive, or no more exploitive than making people eat bugs for money.

It may be one of the most inspired business decisions by MTV. People are very interested in "fat" and it is increasingly a part of television.

It does seem to me that quite a number of fat people have had some success on TV in movies or as directors. They immediately lose a lot of weight.

I first saw America Ferrera 9 years ago as a chubby teenager in "Real Women Have Curves". It seems like the first thing she did was lose weight.

You need to have a "Moronic" option in your poll.

Quote: PapaChubby

You need to have a "Moronic" option in your poll.

Moronic, exploitive, arrogant, nonsensical, demented ... the only adjective that is relevant is "profitable".
The shows are cheap to produce, you market the heck out of the product placement and publicity and web-fan sites, you keep the masters in the vault for endless re-runs ... next reality show: Paint Drying. And don't think it won't happen if someone really thinks he has some headline making gimmick that will get an audience to watch someone who really is sitting there watching paint dry.

An option for all future polls on "reality" shows ought to include "Why would anyone want to watch this trash anyway?"

Quote: Nareed

An option for all future polls on "reality" shows ought to include "Why would anyone want to watch this trash anyway?"

The Biggest Loser regularly pulls in 8-9 million viewers, and unlike scripted TV, this show literally screams out for product placement.

I have no problem with the concept of reality shows. However, they have become too...unrealistic. Everybody knows that to get chosen for one, and stay on, you have to be constantly starting fights and stirring up other drama. The Housewives shows are a perfect example. An example of a well-done reality show is Morgan Spurlock's "30 Days" show, especially when he stars in it, which unfortunately is the case only about 1/3 of the time.

Twice this year two reality shows have approached me about doing a new show in Vegas. Both times involved lots of long conversations about my role is such a show. Both times they asked me to send in a video of myself answering some questions. That seemed to be the kiss of death. As soon as I took the fuss to make the video and send it in I never heard back. Watching a video of me talking to myself in an empty room is not my idea of exciting either, to be honest with you.

Either make a decent demo video or refer them to an existing clip wherein the background is a casino, there is casino-related hubbub in the background and you are actually interacting with a person who is also on camera. Otherwise you are just wasting your time because if it doesn't have the look and feel of a casino you don't stand a chance. They are probably milking you for your ideas and then just asking you for a video to keep you hoping... and not charging them for your time.

Quote: Wizard

Twice this year two reality shows have approached me about doing a new show in Vegas. Both times involved lots of long conversations about my role is such a show. Both times they asked me to send in a video of myself answering some questions. That seemed to be the kiss of death. As soon as I took the fuss to make the video and send it in I never heard back. Watching a video of me talking to myself in an empty room is not my idea of exciting either, to be honest with you.

I liked your interview with SBR. I think you should play the "voice of the God of gaming analysis" in a reality show. The idiots on the show could come up with their theories (like switching machines every 5 minutes) and then they could cut to your voice who would provide an analysis of the strategy. Then they could cut back to the idiots who would say that they don't care what you say, they are going to do what "works".

I assume that woman in the interview was on a different continent. How were you transmitting your voice? Was it just skype? Your speaking voice was better than hers, very few pauses and broken sentences.

That might well fly... it depends on how well the commentary was edited in to create a balance between The Players, their emotions, their reasoning .... and The Voice of God intoning Thou Shalt Not Hedge.

Think of a Real World type conglomeration of conflicting personalities. The Casino or the Wizard gives them an introductory lesson for the game. Then the Wizard gives them a brief summary of Basic Strategy for that game. Then they play and we see the Dice bouncing, the chips being moved, the Bimbos bouncing up and down with glee but then there is Freeze Frame as the Voice of God comes in to comment on such things as poor money management, improper bets, bouncing up and down with glee when the bet lost rather than won, etc.

Just as Dealers are often encouraged to Talk Their Game so too would these Real World types be encouraged to Talk Their Game showing their whims, reasoning, confusion, alcohol consumption, etc. It would have to have some "Super-prize" such as a charity donation for the winning team or elimination of a losing player each week. Perhaps that 'Undercover Boss' type thing where he played a roulette dealer who was putting his hands in his pockets. ... That might be a side issue for the running commentary as dealers without recent experience suddenly get shifted onto a game without warning or something like that.

It would probably have to be Teams, probably neophytes versus self-proclaimed experts or Boys versus Girls or something like that.

Who knows?

Quote: Wizard

I have no problem with the concept of reality shows. However, they have become too...unrealistic. Everybody knows that to get chosen for one, and stay on, you have to be constantly starting fights and stirring up other drama. The Housewives shows are a perfect example. An example of a well-done reality show is Morgan Spurlock's "30 Days" show, especially when he stars in it, which unfortunately is the case only about 1/3 of the time.

Sadly this concept seemed to start turning up in "Food Network Star" this year. (They seem to have dropped "The Next.." from the title?) If anyone watched the woman "Penny" was a constant troublemaker. And they played that drama up. Now, they have a good concept, namely fill summer hours with contestants for a real show and actually show the viewers how TFN makes a new show,what they look for, etc. Must not have been good enough so they add the drama.

I kind of divide "Reality TV' into a few catagvories. First there is "exploitive and stupid." Anything on MTV or where the people need to eat or do things they otherwise would not want to do falls here. I never watch this crap. Then there is "reality TV with a purpose." Here I put "Food Network Strar," and "Shark Tank" for two I watch. They have elements of game shows, sports, and some other things but nobody is forced to make a jerk out of themselves to advance. Finally there are the "workplace reality" shows. "Pawn Stars," "American Restoration," and others. The "reality" varies but at least part is real and part not. The key to enjoying this kind is just be a good smark and watch what you like. Just don't believe it is any more "real" that professional wrestling.