Saturdays, 7pm,
ITV
Two groups of three friends take part in physical and mental challenges trying to hit target numbers ‘bang on’ in order to win up to £40,000 in what is being described as a party atmosphere whilst being cajoled by Kiss DJs Rickie Haywood Williams and Melvin Odoom (they both did Sweat the Small Stuff on BBC3 but we’ll always remember Melvin from Dick ‘n’ Dom In Da Bungalow and more recently The Xtra Factor).
It sounds like a more modern take on Friends Like These which we quite liked back in the day, and doing that evidently never did Ant and Dec any harm. Whether Rickie and Melvin will become the new Ant and Dec remains to be seen, but it’s nice to see some different faces in primetime. They surely can’t be the first black hosts of a primetime shiny floor gameshow in the UK but I’m struggling to think of others off the top of my head.
Anyway do share your thoughts in the comments.
Edit: Within ten minutes on Twitter Dave Benson-Philips, Reggie Yates, Ian Wright, Andi Peters, Ainsley Harriot, Jenny Powell, Sean Fletcher – all great responses, although of those Ian Wright is probably closest to primetime shiny floor (Friends Like These, Wright Around The World), with possible exception of Jenny Powell as assistant on Wheel of Fortune (although she did front Wordplay in the afternoons on Five)).
Edit Edit: Of course Craig Charles (Cyberzone, Robot Wars). And Charlie Williams on The Golden Shot!
Also just remembered Ashley Banjo, Can’t Touch This.
Always a day late and a dollar short, I’d add John Fashanu and Jeremy Guscott on Gladiators (and the latter on Body Heat).
I always assumed Melvin Odoom was a pseudonym, though only after learning that a melvin is the US name for a wedgie from Bill and Ted. There’s a Dis Or Dat round of “game show host or wrestling move?” waiting to happen.
Those are certainly some pretty big Pointless answers, especially considering how huge Gladiators was.
Can’t believe people are forgetting Kiddy Boyard host Andy Akinwolere.
Also bonus fact untangle was also the reward challenge on Survivor this week.
As for Bang on the Money it feels very like Friends Like These rebooted.
Also Geno Segers in the first season.
Really enjoyed the show, thought is was far better than ITV’s recent Saturday night game shows. Only really issues were Ricky and Melvin, who I thought were a bit amateurish in all honesty, and the music, which I guess might have been okay if you like that sort of thing?? But I don’t so I thought it was shit.
The games proper were all really well done. Even the blander ones had really attractive props to liven them up a little, much like Friends Like These all those years ago, I suppose.Main issue with the the show right now is the host challenges. They don’t really add anything to the show, and seeing as Ricky and Melvin aren’t to my liking as hosts I’d rather they be replaced with something more the,e appropriate, like a guesstimating question.
End game graphics bothered me a bit with how jerky they were. Doesn’t really seem all that fair to the contestants in. Game of timing.
While it’s still fresh in my mind and I’m sure Andrew Hain will ask, I’ll put down a full write-up of how the show works.
There are 2 teams of 3 with a pre-existing relationship. They sit off to the left side of the stage. On the right side are 9 suspended boxes, each with various pictures on (tonight’s were Tartan, Clouds, Sweets (or Candy for you American folks!), Lips, High Heels, Football Pitch, Teapot, Goldfish and Beans). Each one of these boxes contains a number between 1 and 9. To decide who gets to pick 2 boxes, the teams decide between the 2 hosts who won a particular game (Who managed to blag more free food off random people in the street, or who wins in a 100m race while they’re both dressed as chickens, and so on). After both numbers have been revealed, the winners select which of them will be their target number for a physical game, leaving the other team with the other number, the idea being that the higher the number, the more difficult the game will be.
The first game was a putting challenge. In front of a white line is a triangle of holes, 9 holes nearest the line down to 1 hole at the very end. The idea is to putt a ball into each of the holes that correspond to the target number within 90 seconds. If you manage the challenge in the time, you get the number. If you fail, it becomes a 0.
The second game was a 2-player game to lower a ring over 5 upright towers. The higher the number was, the closer to the towers the ring was. The idea was to clear all 5 towers in 60 seconds.
The third game was for all 3 team members. There were 3 tangled ropes attached to 3 belts. The team members had to untangle the ropes by going over and under each other and then all 3 had to hit separate buzzers at the edges of a large circular floor in the middle of the stage. The higher the number, the more tangles needed to be untangled. After all 3 games were played, the numbers (placed in decending order) were converted into pounds.
The next game had both teams picking a number from 1-9 of their own in order to fill the thousands digit of their prize. Again the higher the number, the more difficult the game would be. The game involved rolling a silver ball down a track with a number of holes that opened and closed at regular intervals. The higher the number you went for, the more holes would be open at any one time. Each team had 3 attempts (one attempt per team member) to complete the game.
In the Final, the amount of money they were playing for was placed on the edge of the circular area of the stage, and would move around the edge. In the centre is a large button, and to either side of the contestant and directly behind them were 3 ‘tunnels’. As the money moved around the edge, it could change direction after going into one of these ‘tunnels’. The idea of the game is to hit the button to make a gold line draw down from the base of the button and ‘hit’ the money target as it passes in front of them. If they managed it, the next team member could attempt the game at a faster setting for double the money. If they managed it, the third team member could attempt it at an even faster setting for double the money again.
Haha, you know me well enough now, lol! The reason I ask is because even after the first episode of each show airs, the format rundown is usually not completely up on Wikipedia yet, so no offense.
None taken, I was just pre-empting you after the first episode ended, so I thought I’d do it there and then 🙂
OK then, the challenges in the main were actually pretty good, Roll With It a particular highlight, but they didn’t half tie themselves in knots in trying to fit the games into the basic premise of the show, apart from the first game – Putt It, at no point are contrstants hitting a target bang on of any sort so much as selecting a relative difficulty.
I didn’t understand the timing of the endgame, why should there be a delay between them hitting the button and the cash stopping? How would you know what that is?
The scoring of the show is mildly clever, in that everything rests on the decider unless they both choose to go for the same target in which case early performance really matters, but it does also mean that a lot of the show likely isn’t going to count for much. Ties aren’t possible. It’s all a bit Italian.
It’s good to see new faces on television, Melvin more convincing than Rickie but I did ponder if really this is a show they’d watch given the choice. VT challenges irritating more than anything. I can’t believe we’re introducing and cheering boxes, imagine if they did that at the top of every episode of Deal Or No Deal.
Really nothing says you’ve misunderstood mainstream Saturday night audiences than yelling out ‘target number!’ every twenty seconds, it’s the sort of phrase that makes things sound complicated even if it really isn’t, and even then the significance of the numbers takes way too long to get across to the viewers – we are aware there’s a point to them but we don’t know what until it gets to the Decider.
So some things right, some things wrong, but unfortunately a lot of the wrong for me is in the production and the feel and that’s usually what’s going to turn people over before a dodgy challenge (which as I say were pretty good in the main). This was a very fast turnaround from pilot, it probably needed to be incubated a bit longer.
Not bad- nothing earth-shattering about it (I did like Roll with it), but harmless way to spend an hour..
I’m also watching that dodgeball thing on Pro7- pretty interesting, though I don’t think the variation of the game they’re using is the best one…the arena looks packed for it.
The phrase “Take It Or Leave It” springs to mind. Chiefly because the jackpot advertised in the EPG was £40,000, and the massive jackpot (as far as I can work out) is £39,948 (£9,987 doubled twice, although that’s really unlikely). That’s easy to fix – just top it up at the end (or even just ignore those numbers and go £10,000, £20,000 and £40,000).
My sister sat next to me during this, and summed it up nicely: “Rickie and Melvin are kids’ presenters, therefore should not be presenting adults’ TV because they cannot present to an adult audience”. As much as a duo is obviously essential (unless it was entirely rejigged), these two let down proceedings and, if renewed, could do without those two. In addition, I struggled to see how the higher number made things more difficult in some games. It’s certainly not a particularly bad game show (hell, it isn’t even the worst one I’ve seen today) but it is badly flawed, and could do with some flaws being ironed out.
Why don’t the boxes explode or go bang when selected?
Was a pretty poor show IMO. Although I agree the games themselves were fine the format tying them together was weak and for a one hour show not a lot seems to happen, and what did wasn’t the most exciting of television.
The final round had no tension either. We’re not American – we don’t need contestants to go home with something. The second and third attempts at the final round would have been much more interesting had the money they’d already won been at stake.
I’m fine with endgames that don’t have a gambling element, I’m not saying all gameshows shouldn’t put prizes at risk but there’s definitely a place for shows where it’s a case of will they/won’t they win more, rather than will they/won’t they lose everything.
The bizarre timing of the endgame ruined it for me. The delay between pressing the button and hitting the target felt very arbitrary and wasn’t clearly shown in vision either. It certainly wasn’t explained beforehand to the viewer.
It seems a shame that the first three games feel a little redundant aside from being a tiebreaker presumably should both teams choose the same number for the decider? What if the contestants can only choose from the three numbers they’ve won in the first games? Gives a much bigger incentive to go for the higher numbers in the opening rounds.
I liked the central idea, but found it quite a clumsy thing.
There’s too many choices. There’s a choice of heads/tails before the show, a choice between two hosts, a choice of box, a choice which number to play for, a choice of which team’s first, a choice of who plays the game…
My main disappointment was that the games hardly live up to the premise. I thought it was going to be like some of those old Crystal Maze games where successes count as +1 and failures count as -1, and you have to keep playing until you get the right total ‘bang on’ when time’s up.
Even if that’s not going to be the case, there needs to be more differentiation between levels 1 and 9 in the games. The ‘In the Loop’ game was torn apart by the team doing level 9, with time to spare. From sight, there can only have been 1mm or so between each ‘level’ of the discs.
It struck me that the end game would’ve worked better with physical thing (like rolling a ball) so that you could control the speed towards the money, rather than it being some pre-defined speed setting in the computer’s programming.
Glad I watched it – although the format does not help the show. Why the audience whoop at a number coming out of a box is beyond me?!!
I liked the three numbers becoming the last three numbers of their cash pot.
I guess that most teams would go for 9 as their last challenge simply to get more money at the end especially if they have not done so well in the three mini games.
No real flow to the show because of the ad breaks but guess ITV have to get their prize money somehow.
Still it beats any The Chase:Celebrity Special.
3.22m for this last night, losing out quite badly to Michael Mcintyre on BBC1.
Last year BGT had Ninja Warrior as a lead in and that was doing 4.5-5m by the end, so there’s your success benchmark.
I thought we already had the new Ant & Dec when they were Alexander Armstrong and Richard Osman
Me and my mother may well be the only people here who actually liked Rickie and Melvin as hosts; indeed, she even commented that in her opinion, this show had shown both hosts had “matured” somewhat while still keeping a cheeky persona, making them perfect for prime-time viewing. We do disagree on the idea that they are “the next Ant and Dec” though – I will admit I don’t see it myself.
I like Rickie and Melvin but I’m not sure this is the best use of their talents.
Even Stephen Mulhern must have turned this down.
Incredible scenes as one of the games actually asks them to hit a target bang on.
I think I understand the timing of the endgame a bit better, but it’s still far from intuitive.
Is it just me or does this show have a preponderance towards young people? I reckon there’s been no show so far that’s not featured at least one blonde woman, and that none of the six so far have had anyone non-white (save for the hosts) or anyone old (again, save for the hosts).
It’s very deliberately aimed at young people, it is no surprise the teams are all young. The lack of non-white contestants is a bit more interesting.
I recall from one of the first 2 episodes that there was a non-white team
Any news on a second series? Melvin hasn’t had a big hit since his Dick & Dom/The Slammer days.
It seems unlikely.