Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Pilot for the New To Tell The Truth - I was there

49 views
Skip to first unread message

AlanH220

unread,
Dec 17, 1999, 3:00:00 AM12/17/99
to
While in Los Angeles last weekend, I stopped by CBS Television City to see
if any tickets were available for upcoming shows. I was amazed to see that
there were tickets on offer for "To Tell The Truth". The very young ticket
agent, naturally, had never heard of the show (nor, tragically, of Garry
Moore nor Kitty Carlisle when I asked her) or whether it was in steady
production. I tooka ticket and decided to check it out.

The audience showed up at 1 pm on December 12 at CBS. There were only about
4 people with individual tickets; the rest were groups, mostly school groups
who arrived by bus. We were led through the metal detectors and into the
studio, which was constructed to look somewhat like a courtroom, with wood
paneling and those distinctive "police precinct" lamps. (I guess a play on
the old term "We'll start the cross-examination with Polly Bergen"?)
Audience members sat on both sides of the stage.

The announcer (can't remember hs last name; first name was Eric) jollied up
the audience and explained the show. I was really amazed to see how few
people in the audience had ever heard of TTTT. Am I getting old? The
audience's main reaction was "oohs" when told that there would be door
prizes at the end of the taping. We would be sitting through 6 games plus
the new "end game".

He also explained that this was a pilot, and that it would be "shopped" to
TV syndicators in January at some big TV convention. We got instructions on
how to applaud, how to react etc. The main thing we had to practice was
"faking" using the new audience voting mechanisms. They only had about 25 of
these handheld devices for the front rows, so we in the next few rows acted
as though we were voting. The real show will have actualy audience voting,
so instead of getting just 4 votes a member of a team can get 5 votes.

Then they introduced the panel. I was hoping for Kitty and Orson Bean, but
more on that later. Seated from left to right were Meshach Taylor (late of
Designing Women); Paula Poundstone (comedian); Richard Karn (from Home
Improvement) and "Supermodel" Frederique. The host was John O'Hurley, who
played Mr Peterman on "Seinfeld".

That was a pretty good start, I thought. Then things went downhill. The
producers are hyping the show as a talk show where the audience joins in (by
voting). So, the first team of challengers was a man who accepted a wager to
get female breast implants. (After his identity was revealed, he opened his
shirt and showed the audience and panel. Yecch.) The next team was a man who
invented a device called "Neuticals", silicone replacement testicles for
neutered dogs, cats, horses etc. (Why wasn't Bob Barker on the panel?) Next
was a woman claiming to be a "Flirtologist" who is an expert on flirting to
get what you want in life. After that, three men dressed only in aprons and
nothing else.. his business was as a "Butler in the Buff" - cleans houses
and serves at parties entirely naked. Next was a woman calling herself
Dolphina who was saved from drowning by 2 dolphins. And finally, a woman who
was a computer centerfold (her imnage appeared in Playboy software, and she
posed as a Playmate for promotional purposes).

The team of challengers wins $1000 for each incorrect vote, or $5000 if they
stump the panel and the audience (5 votes total as I mentioned).

So I really can't see Kitty Carlisle or Orson Bean appearing as panelists
anytime soon, if you get my meaning.

The new "end game" featured 2 imposters from each of the last 2 games. They
sit on stools opposite each panelist, and on a twist on "I've Got a Secret",
each panelist can question only the imposter seated across from him/her for
15 seconds. They then decide if the imposter is lying or telling the truth.
This team of 4 wins an additional $200 for each incorrect panel response.
For example, the statement was "one of these 4 people was married in an
unusual place". The panel the got to work.

The format is essentially the same as the old show; major chunks of the old
show script are intact. They eliminated the little man crossing his fingers
(but kept the hand with crossed fingers only). The 3 challengers walk onto a
stage, and there is still a podium with numbers 1,2,3 in front and "X"s that
light up in front when a vote is recorded. It also sounds like they are
using the same sound effects as in Bud Collyer's day! If the show is
purchased, they are working on a mechanism whereby the podium rises up from
the stage after the affidavit is read ("Panel, you follow along as I read.
I, John Smith, am a ...."). John O'Hurley does say "These three people all
claim to be..." and "Will the real xxxx please stand up?" but at the opening
the annoucer just says "What is your name?" instead of my favorite "What is
your name please?" He does add the venerable "Two of these people are
imposters..."

I always loved TTTT but the guy sitting next to me remarked, after the
breast implant piece, "Mark Goodson must be spinning in his grave." It's
still a great idea for a show, but I was pretty disgusted by the downmarket
nature of the guests. No authors, feats of daring, designers, world
travelers, just breast implants, centerfolds and silicone testicles.

The good news is I think it can work if they bring in classier guests,
although this didn't help save the 1990 version of the show on NBC. John
O'Hurley made a fine host, very quick witted, sharp and clever. Of the
panelists, Richard Karn and Frederique, I thought, were the brightest and
most intent on playing the game, asking as much as they could within their
alloted time for cross-examination. Meshach Taylor was not all that into it,
and Paula Poundstone, although incredibly hilarious, used her questioning
time mainly to zip off filthy one-liners. Funny, but it's not a stand-up
gig., it's a game show.

Anyway, there's my review. If anyone else who was present can add anything,
please do. If you want to know more, please append and I'll answer as best I
can.

One last item.. apparently in attendance was the first announcer for TTT in
New York, who worked with Bud Collyer in the good old Geritol days
(America's Number One Tonic.. the high-potency tonic that helps you feel
stronger fast"). His name is Vern (something). If anyone recalls, please
append.

Matt Ottinger

unread,
Dec 17, 1999, 3:00:00 AM12/17/99
to

AlanH220 wrote:

Couple of things to add to this fascinating account:

> The new "end game" featured 2 imposters from each of the last 2 games. They
> sit on stools opposite each panelist, and on a twist on "I've Got a Secret",
> each panelist can question only the imposter seated across from him/her for
> 15 seconds. They then decide if the imposter is lying or telling the truth.
> This team of 4 wins an additional $200 for each incorrect panel response.
> For example, the statement was "one of these 4 people was married in an
> unusual place". The panel the got to work.

This is the end game to the 1980 syndicated version, which at the time was
called "One on One".

> One last item.. apparently in attendance was the first announcer for TTT in
> New York, who worked with Bud Collyer in the good old Geritol days
> (America's Number One Tonic.. the high-potency tonic that helps you feel
> stronger fast"). His name is Vern (something). If anyone recalls, please
> append.

Bern Bennett, a legend in the world of TV announcers. His presence there (even
as just an onlooker) is a welcome -- if somewhat surprising -- nod to the
original show.

--Matt
otti...@acd.net

Curt Alliaume

unread,
Dec 18, 1999, 3:00:00 AM12/18/99
to
>While in Los Angeles last weekend, I stopped by CBS Television City to see
>if any tickets were available for upcoming shows. I was amazed to see that
>there were tickets on offer for "To Tell The Truth". The very young ticket
>agent, naturally, had never heard of the show (nor, tragically, of Garry
>Moore nor Kitty Carlisle when I asked her) or whether it was in steady
>production. I tooka ticket and decided to check it out.

<snip>

Steve Beverly has a brief description that follows this on his Game Show
Convention Center site; it's nice to have someone with firsthand knowledge.
And I thought I was the first one with the idea of having the audience vote --
apparently it was used in the last year of the CBS version.

>Then things went downhill. The
>producers are hyping the show as a talk show where the audience joins in (by
>voting). So, the first team of challengers was a man who accepted a wager to
>get female breast implants. (After his identity was revealed, he opened his
>shirt and showed the audience and panel. Yecch.)

You get the idea. Pearson appears to be a few years behind the game show times
(along with GSN); the era of game show irony and sarcasm is over, and the
winner is Win Ben Stein's Money (which works not only because of the humor, but
because Ben is so competitive and *really* wants to win). I don't know if a
straight TTTT will work anymore, but this definitely won't. One would hope
Pearson would have learned from its last two revivals -- a smutty MG didn't
make the grade; a straightforward Family Feud is.

>The team of challengers wins $1000 for each incorrect vote, or $5000 if they
>stump the panel and the audience (5 votes total as I mentioned).

Does this strike anyone as a bit too much money for 10 minutes' work on a
parlor game?

>The new "end game" featured 2 imposters from each of the last 2 games. They
>sit on stools opposite each panelist, and on a twist on "I've Got a Secret",
>each panelist can question only the imposter seated across from him/her for
>15 seconds. They then decide if the imposter is lying or telling the truth.
>This team of 4 wins an additional $200 for each incorrect panel response.

Not dissimilar from the 1980-81 and 1990-91 endgames.

>The good news is I think it can work if they bring in classier guests,
>although this didn't help save the 1990 version of the show on NBC. John
>O'Hurley made a fine host, very quick witted, sharp and clever. Of the
>panelists, Richard Karn and Frederique, I thought, were the brightest and
>most intent on playing the game, asking as much as they could within their
>alloted time for cross-examination. Meshach Taylor was not all that into it,
>and Paula Poundstone, although incredibly hilarious, used her questioning
>time mainly to zip off filthy one-liners. Funny, but it's not a stand-up
>gig., it's a game show.

I'm surprised Frederique was this good, but stranger things have happened.
Taylor probably regards this as slumming. I've never been terribly impressed
by Paula Poundstone as a celebrity on HS, and this report seems to confirm my
opinion. I don't suppose Caroline Rhea would be interested in appearing...

>One last item.. apparently in attendance was the first announcer for TTT in
>New York, who worked with Bud Collyer in the good old Geritol days
>(America's Number One Tonic.. the high-potency tonic that helps you feel
>stronger fast"). His name is Vern (something). If anyone recalls, please
>append.

That's Bern Bennett. He's been a CBS staff announcer for ages, and appeared as
a contestant, I believe, on the 1990-91 NBC version.

-- Curt Alliaume
----------------------
Game Shows '75
http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Bungalow/2827/gameshow.html

TGBromley

unread,
Dec 18, 1999, 3:00:00 AM12/18/99
to
>
>Bern Bennett, a legend in the world of TV announcers. His presence there
>(even
>as just an onlooker) is a welcome -- if somewhat surprising -- nod to the
>original show.

Not all that surprising, since Bennett is employed at 7800 Beverly Blvd. -- he
can be heard five days a week saying, "'The Young and the Restless' will
continue".

(Could Bern Bennett and Don Pardo be the last of the vintage network booth
announcers? I seem to recall Pardo and previously, the late Bill Wendell, were
kept on the payroll at the network long after most of the other positions were
eliminated, probably due to union rules or something. I wonder if Bennett is
in the same situation at CBS?)


Tom Bromley tgbr...@aol.com

"Alone and bored on a thirtieth-century night
Will I see you on The Price is Right?
Will I cry? Will I smile
As you run down the aisle?"
-- Steven Page, "It's All Been Done"

Jason Compton

unread,
Dec 18, 1999, 3:00:00 AM12/18/99
to
Curt Alliaume <call...@aol.compoop> wrote:

: You get the idea. Pearson appears to be a few years behind the game show times


: (along with GSN); the era of game show irony and sarcasm is over, and the
: winner is Win Ben Stein's Money (which works not only because of the humor, but
: because Ben is so competitive and *really* wants to win). I don't know if a
: straight TTTT will work anymore, but this definitely won't. One would hope
: Pearson would have learned from its last two revivals -- a smutty MG didn't
: make the grade; a straightforward Family Feud is.

On the other hand, it might make a sufficiently intriguing pilot to get
picked up, whereas a pilot with more "staid" contestants might not.

:>The team of challengers wins $1000 for each incorrect vote, or $5000 if they


:>stump the panel and the audience (5 votes total as I mentioned).

: Does this strike anyone as a bit too much money for 10 minutes' work on a
: parlor game?

Not really. Even adjusting for inflation, I actually think the early 70s
version is kind of cheap, and given the general game show pots being spent
I think this is not beyond reasonable.

--
Jason Compton jcom...@xnet.com

Hap E. Holiday

unread,
Dec 18, 1999, 3:00:00 AM12/18/99
to

AlanH220 wrote in message ...

>The announcer (can't remember hs last name; first name was Eric)

God, I hope it wasn't Eric Waddell (sp?) of Extreme Gong infamy...

The
>producers are hyping the show as a talk show where the audience joins in
(by
>voting).

At the risk of offending some posters, if you think about it, TTTT is kind
of a talk show; the panelists give mini-interviews to the 3 players to try
and figure out who the real one is. And the kind of subjects Alan saw during
the pilots are just an illustration of how things have changed...

>So I really can't see Kitty Carlisle or Orson Bean appearing as panelists
>anytime soon, if you get my meaning.

Yep...it's probably better that way.


>
>The new "end game" featured 2 imposters from each of the last 2 games. They
>sit on stools opposite each panelist, and on a twist on "I've Got a
Secret",
>each panelist can question only the imposter seated across from him/her for
>15 seconds. They then decide if the imposter is lying or telling the truth.
>This team of 4 wins an additional $200 for each incorrect panel response.
>For example, the statement was "one of these 4 people was married in an
>unusual place". The panel the got to work.

This was "One-on-One", from the 1980-81 version.


>The good news is I think it can work if they bring in classier guests,
>although this didn't help save the 1990 version of the show on NBC.

I'll keep my fingers crossed...

Chuck Donegan (The Optimistic "Chckie Baby")

Jason Compton

unread,
Dec 18, 1999, 3:00:00 AM12/18/99
to
Hap E. Holiday <Cyber...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

:>So I really can't see Kitty Carlisle or Orson Bean appearing as panelists


:>anytime soon, if you get my meaning.

: Yep...it's probably better that way.

Yeah. Because I can't fathom how anybody would ever want to see Kitty
Carlisle in ANY context, and I really don't think Orson Bean is quite the
draw he once was. Mind you, their pilot lineup was not exactly
star-studded, but I would say that most people would recognize at least
two panel members on sight.

--
Jason Compton jcom...@xnet.com

StormSeeker

unread,
Dec 18, 1999, 3:00:00 AM12/18/99
to

Jason Compton <jcom...@xnet.com> wrote in message
news:83ge2h$sr6$2...@flood.xnet.com...

> draw he once was. Mind you, their pilot lineup was not exactly
> star-studded, but I would say that most people would recognize at least
> two panel members on sight.
>

The bigger question is though....did we really WANT to recognize the two on
sight that we would? ;-)

Matt Kaiser

unread,
Dec 18, 1999, 3:00:00 AM12/18/99
to
> the kind of subjects Alan saw during
> the pilots are just an illustration of how things have changed...

You'd think Pearson had learned their lesson from MG 98. Being CONSTANTLY
raunchy doesn't necessarily guarantee good ratings. Other than the subject
material, it looks as if TTTT COULD work in the year 2000.

>
>
> >So I really can't see Kitty Carlisle or Orson Bean appearing as panelists
> >anytime soon, if you get my meaning.
>

> Yep...it's probably better that way.
>
> >

> >The new "end game" featured 2 imposters from each of the last 2 games. They
> >sit on stools opposite each panelist, and on a twist on "I've Got a
> Secret",
> >each panelist can question only the imposter seated across from him/her for
> >15 seconds. They then decide if the imposter is lying or telling the truth.
> >This team of 4 wins an additional $200 for each incorrect panel response.
> >For example, the statement was "one of these 4 people was married in an
> >unusual place". The panel the got to work.
>

> This was "One-on-One", from the 1980-81 version.
>

> >The good news is I think it can work if they bring in classier guests,
> >although this didn't help save the 1990 version of the show on NBC.
>

AlanH220

unread,
Dec 18, 1999, 3:00:00 AM12/18/99
to
Welllll.... I don't want to get into a "Who my favorite game show panelists
were" discussion, but...

Kitty is a nice throwback to the days when the G-T panel shows were a
classy, charming TV representation of the kind of after-dinner parlor games
one could visualize going on in Mark Goodson's Manhattan penthouse with his
friends from the theater, publishing, and music worlds. Would certainly
provide a "bridge" with the traditional TTTT, assuming the new producers
gave a care about that. (I'm assuming they don't.)

Kitty was interviewed here on New York TV recently, on Channel 7, as part of
a local story on NYC's role in game shows as a tie-in to WWTBAM's latest
run. She looked great, as classy as ever, dressed beautifully with that
signature jet black hair. She's still quick, has all her marbles
(apparently) and repeatedly called the reporter (Joel Siegel) as "My dear".
She's still quite active in New York society and fund-raising circles. I met
her once several years ago at a benefit in New York, and she was charming,
funny, smart and absolutely delightful.

As far as Orson Bean not being a draw... have you seen the new film "Being
John Malkovich"? Wildly creative, hilariously funny, and extremely well
acted by the cast, including John Cusack, Cameron Diaz, John Malkovich, Mary
Kay Place, and.... yup, Orson Bean! He was absolutely hilarious in that
movie, as irrepressible as ever.

Speaking for myself, I would pay for tickets to see a TTTT episode with
those two on the panel... on the condition the producers find equally gifted
and interesting central characters. Oh well, one can only hope.

Jason Compton <jcom...@xnet.com> wrote in message
news:83ge2h$sr6$2...@flood.xnet.com...

> Hap E. Holiday <Cyber...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>

> :>So I really can't see Kitty Carlisle or Orson Bean appearing as


panelists
> :>anytime soon, if you get my meaning.
>

> : Yep...it's probably better that way.
>
> Yeah. Because I can't fathom how anybody would ever want to see Kitty
> Carlisle in ANY context, and I really don't think Orson Bean is quite the

> draw he once was. Mind you, their pilot lineup was not exactly
> star-studded, but I would say that most people would recognize at least
> two panel members on sight.
>

> --
> Jason Compton jcom...@xnet.com

Jason Compton

unread,
Dec 18, 1999, 3:00:00 AM12/18/99
to
AlanH220 <Alan...@msn.com> wrote:

: Kitty is a nice throwback to the days when the G-T panel shows were a


: classy, charming TV representation of the kind of after-dinner parlor games
: one could visualize going on in Mark Goodson's Manhattan penthouse with his
: friends from the theater, publishing, and music worlds. Would certainly
: provide a "bridge" with the traditional TTTT, assuming the new producers
: gave a care about that. (I'm assuming they don't.)

I don't think there's anything nice, classy, or charming about her. I
find her repugnant, nasty, and insincere.

--
Jason Compton jcom...@xnet.com

AlanH220

unread,
Dec 18, 1999, 3:00:00 AM12/18/99
to
Brian - that's an excellent point you raise.

You're correct in that this pilot is something intended to attact the
attention of potential buyers. Perhaps the taste of those
buyers-of-syndicated-programs is sufficiently low that these central
characters would be appealing. Perhaps if the pilot dealt with authors,
athletes or designers as central characters the pilot would not stand out at
the TV sales conventions.

Thanks for helping put things in perspective. You're absolutely correct. It
would be great if, after the sale is made, TTTT reverts at least in part to
its classier past.

I'm hoping that the American viewing public is sick of the vulgar talk-show
genre and is looking for a bit higher-minded fare in 2000 and beyond.

Of course, I could be wrong....
:-(

Thanks very much for your comments. You've added a lot of value to this
thread.
LabsOnGo46 <labso...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19991218192930...@ng-fj1.aol.com...
> The thing we have to remember about the TTTT pilot is -- that's exactly
what it
> is, a pilot.
>
> Pearson doesn't have all of the details worked out for how the show will
work
> when and if it makes it to syndication. The format usually isn't
completely
> defined. They don't even know for sure who the regular celebrities will be
(I
> heard somewhere that Charles Nelson Reilly will be among the regulars).
>
> As for well-known panelists, who's to say that Orson Bean (now 71) and
Kitty
> Carlisle (now 84) *won't* appear? And here's another name of someone still
> around -- 78-year-old Tom Poston. I'm sure they would if they were asked.
They
> always study up on their topics and keep up with the times.
>
> Speaking of topics, who's to say they won't go with more straight-forward
> topics that were common on previous incarnations of TTTT? I'm sure if you
watch
> Garry Moore's version, there were a few topics that teased the lines of
> raunchiness (as well as the Collyer, Ward and 1990-1991 versions). And the
set
> will probably be revised as well (with the trademark "man-with-his-fingers
> crossed")
>
> I understand that many first impressions are based on pilot episodes. But
> remember that if TTTT goes into production in 2000 for syndication, not
> everything will be as it appears on the pilot that will be shown at the
trade
> shows.
>
> Brian Rathjen
> LabsO...@aol.com

LabsOnGo46

unread,
Dec 19, 1999, 3:00:00 AM12/19/99
to

Jason Compton

unread,
Dec 19, 1999, 3:00:00 AM12/19/99
to
DE-SPAMIFIC...@bigfoot.com wrote:
: On 18 Dec 1999 20:52:46 GMT, Jason Compton <jcom...@xnet.com> ... with some
: huge kinda chip on his shoulder ... wrote this, about Kitty Carlisle-Hart:

:>I don't think there's anything nice, classy, or charming about her. I


:>find her repugnant, nasty, and insincere.

: Which must be why she is well-known as a philanthropist. She has donated a very
: good percentage of her income and her free time to various charities over the
: years. And, at her age, she's still doing it.

: Nope, Jason, there's no valid reason I can see to despise Kitty.

Except that I find her...well, do I have to say it again? Bill Gates
gives away a lot of money too, but I don't kiss his boots.

--
Jason Compton jcom...@xnet.com

Richard Hudson

unread,
Dec 19, 1999, 3:00:00 AM12/19/99
to
OH PLEASE LET THIS POST BE A TROLL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


OH PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE LET THIS POST BE A TROLL!!!!!!!!!!!

My god, this just CAN'T be true.

I'm going to be sick to my stomach if it is.

Richard Hudson

Randy Amasia

unread,
Dec 19, 1999, 3:00:00 AM12/19/99
to

LabsOnGo46 <labso...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19991218192930...@ng-fj1.aol.com...
> The thing we have to remember about the TTTT pilot is --
that's exactly what it
> is, a pilot.
>
> Pearson doesn't have all of the details worked out for how
the show will work
> when and if it makes it to syndication. The format usually
isn't completely
> defined.

The purpose of a pilot is to demonstrate how the game will
work, including the format details -- that's why they *tend*
to be somewhat or thoroughly scripted. If the format
elements are not in place, they have no business making a
pilot.

- R
http://www.thehungersite.com/

Jim

unread,
Dec 19, 1999, 3:00:00 AM12/19/99
to
>I'm hoping that the American viewing public is sick of the vulgar talk-show
genre and is looking for a bit higher-minded fare in 2000 and beyond.


Remember, this is the same public that reads People magazine, and prefers
Cody&Cathy Lee and Oprah to PBS.

Jim

unread,
Dec 19, 1999, 3:00:00 AM12/19/99
to

AlanH220 wrote in message ...
>Welllll.... I don't want to get into a "Who my favorite game show panelists
were" discussion, but...Kitty is a nice throwback to the days when the G-T

panel shows were a classy, charming TV representation of the kind of
after-dinner parlor games one could visualize going on in Mark Goodson's
Manhattan penthouse with his friends from the theater, publishing, and music
worlds. Would certainly provide a "bridge" with the traditional TTTT,
assuming the new producers
>gave a care about that. (I'm assuming they don't.)


Kitty and Orson would be great to see again. Orson was the funniest
panelist on the 90's version. Kitty was also more laid back, and got some
jokes off, in the 90's version as opposed to the Win TV version, where she
sometimes looks a bit put off by the whole thing. Some days, she appears
more into the spirit of the game than others.
Did anyone catch the show a few weeks ago when Peggy interrupted Kitty
to note that the ancient Greeks did not used sealed tin cans for food
storage? Kitty glared at her and snapped, "Of course I know that." Or the
time one of the Pillsbury judge imposters rebuffed at great lenghth a
statement Kitty made, and Kitty wanted to move on. (thank you #3, thank
you, yes, yes, thank you - each response more terse than the last) If looks
could kill. I got a good laugh out of those.
Having met her in person, though, she was very polite, told witty
stories, and was very generous with her time after the speech in holding one
on one conversations and signing autographs.


0 new messages