Announcement

Collapse

Welcome to the www.Britmovie.co.uk forum

If this is your first time on the new forum since March 7th, 2017, please re-register with us once more.
Paypal contributions for the care and feeding of the forum may be made here:
PayPal Donations

The old bulletin board archive can be found here:
http://filmdope.com/forums/
See more
See less

Why are they still making reality television?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    The expression 'Reality Television' is rather like the expression 'Politically Correct'.

    It's designed to be pejorative and it's not accurate.

    I think it more sensible to use the expression 'Unscripted Television' rather than 'Reality Television'

    Comment


    • #17
      I don't mind reality t.v if it is informative for the viewer, i.e 'Come dine with me' (some of the recipies are quite good!). But most of it is junk, especially that farce in the jungle! you have got to be desperate to go onto that surely? I've never seen the only way is Essex and nor do I want to. I'm sure these people get recognise wherever they go but I wouldn't know them! It seems you don't have to have a talent to be famous these days, so celebrity doesn't interest me.

      Another thing, I'd be more than embarrassed if a son or daughter of mine ended up on one of these rubbish shows and then called themselves 'a celebrity'! A lot of these programmes are crude to say the least and make fools out of the contestants for the viewing figures.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Faginsgirl View Post
        I don't mind reality t.v if it is informative for the viewer, i.e 'Come dine with me' (some of the recipies are quite good!). But most of it is junk, especially that farce in the jungle! you have got to be desperate to go onto that surely? I've never seen the only way is Essex and nor do I want to. I'm sure these people get recognise wherever they go but I wouldn't know them! It seems you don't have to have a talent to be famous these days, so celebrity doesn't interest me.

        Another thing, I'd be more than embarrassed if a son or daughter of mine ended up on one of these rubbish shows and then called themselves 'a celebrity'! A lot of these programmes are crude to say the least and make fools out of the contestants for the viewing figures.
        I don't see it tht way, we have a friend who's nephew is a total moron but "reality TV" has made him a very rich moron. It will take a young up and coming Doctor years to get anywhere near what he has already earnt. Thats the really sad thing with TV now, the ICGMO is guaranteed in the region of £5 million for what?
        If only people would wake up and stop paying for this crap. The truth is acting is not work in my eyes.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Soap Talk View Post

          The truth is acting is not work in my eyes.
          Wrong, on two counts. Firstly: appearing on a Reality TV show does not qualify as 'acting'.

          Secondly: acting can be very hard demanding work. Try it yourself sometime.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Faginsgirl View Post
            I don't mind reality t.v if it is informative for the viewer, i.e 'Come dine with me' (some of the recipies are quite good!). But most of it is junk, especially that farce in the jungle!.
            I agree completely, plus the complete misnomer of this genre. Could there be any LESS "reality" than putting a bunch of strangers in a confined space for a time, eg a jungle or a camera-festooned house, and giving them silly things to do? In "reality" most people's lives are not like that.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Judge Foozle View Post
              ... complete misnomer of this genre...
              Yes, it is a complete misnomer. Which is why sensible people in the profession refer to it as 'Unscripted Television'.

              Comment


              • #22
                Oops I opened a silent can of worms! The fact remains that what can you not get on television that is not on Youtube which is the proper place for this junk, I will admit that there are talented people on the web and have indeed used their sites to save money for an item to be fixed. or a d.i.y query but that's it nothing more. I tape all the shows I want to watch as I cannot bear to view live tv anymore, that's it I'm officially becoming an old git.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by narabdela View Post

                  Wrong, on two counts. Firstly: appearing on a Reality TV show does not qualify as 'acting'.

                  Secondly: acting can be very hard demanding work. Try it yourself sometime.
                  Best laugh of the night for me.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Soap Talk View Post

                    Best laugh of the night for me.

                    That speaks volumes.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Volumes of ?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by jamal.nazreddin View Post
                        The expression 'Reality Television' is rather like the expression 'Politically Correct'.

                        It's designed to be pejorative and it's not accurate.
                        True. Lazy, sloppy terms.

                        Originally posted by jamal.nazreddin View Post
                        I think it more sensible to use the expression 'Unscripted Television' rather than 'Reality Television'
                        I prefer the term "Voyeur Television".

                        As others have already pointed out, it's cheap and easy. Depressingly, we get the television programming we deserve I suppose.

                        How on earth that preposterous "Gogglebox" gains any kind of viewing figures is beyond me. That we can turn the telly on to watch people slouched on a sofa passing opinions about what they in turn are watching on their own TV set is surely quite bewildering. To think that we have dumbed all the way down to this. And the people featured on these programmes now being promoted as "celebrities" in their own right is simply ludicrous.

                        OK, so we've always enjoyed seeing Joe Bloggs having a stab at his fifteen minutes of fame, whether trying to cast a clay vase at the potter's wheel on The Generation Game or avoid the gong during Yes/No in Take Your Pick. But the novelty factor was what made these appealing...to think that some milkman from Plymouth and his mum were right there hamming it up on the box with Brucie, hahaa it was funny...at first. And at least these shows were held together by genuine household names and the rest of the evening's schedule would be carried along by professional entertainers and broadcasters.

                        Nobody seems to care any more since everyone even within the same household nowadays buggers off to their own room and chosen viewing device.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          One of the many advantages of 'Unscripted Television’ is that the audience can often contribute to how the drama unfolds.

                          The audience can also take on the power of choosing new stars instead of that power being in the hands of faceless money-men like John Davis.

                          And the audience can do it all much more quickly. For instance, Alexander Korda foisted Christine Norden on to us in 1947 but it took two years for him to realise that we weren’t interested.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by jamal.nazreddin View Post
                            One of the many advantages of 'Unscripted Television’ is that the audience can often contribute to how the drama unfolds.
                            Or are given the impression that they can contribute

                            The audience can also take on the power of choosing new stars instead of that power being in the hands of faceless money-men like John Davis.

                            And the audience can do it all much more quickly. For instance, Alexander Korda foisted Christine Norden on to us in 1947 but it took two years for him to realise that we weren’t interested.
                            All those twits using Twitter

                            Steve


                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Steve Crook View Post
                              Or are given the impression that they can contribute



                              All those twits using Twitter

                              Steve

                              Ah! I always thought it was 'tw*ts'.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Tonch mentioned the shows of yesteryear and he's right you even had the Sunday night play or the Wednesday play even Armchair theatre. I wonder on average how much it would cost to put on a new drama, Sky arts made a yeoman attempt with its Playhouse presents, I especially loved Nosferatu in love with Mark Strong. As for the reality shows being unscripted I highly doubt that as I've known people a few collectors actually who have featured on one of these shows and they have been paid to "sell / lend" while the so called expert rumbles on about their knowledge, if you want a clue: You pay on time you get the item back U.S show. Even the ghost / Bigfoot shows claim to be alone in the cellar or woods yet you can clearly see that they have a production crew following, and a pet hate I have is why are we always looking at their faces I want to see what they see turning a corner.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X