''Amazing Race'' is back tonight, are you glad to see someone traveling.

[ldubs]

9 hours ago, lenquixote66 said:

Perhaps one day the Amazing Race will be traveling by cruise ship and not by plane .

 

Haha, maybe they can have a competition cleaning cabins or running food to the main dining room!  

[ldubs]

4 hours ago, Aquahound said:

 

I know people who have been on Amazing Race and Bachelorette, and I myself have been on reality TV.  Trusted me, a lot of it is scripted.  On Amazing Race, while the contest is mostly real, they still need to script it in a way to keep them mostly together when traveling.  

 

Edit...I took out details as to not unintentionally spoil it for some.

 

My comment was based on what I'd heard from someone on that "yachting" show that another poster mentioned further down this thread.  Anyway, I have no reason to doubt you.  In fact, for some (most) of the housewife shows, I really can't believe anyone is really like that in real life.  I always refer to those shows as "A bunch of people I hope to never meet".  😄   I do think the "cast" understand the need for a lot of drama to keep the gravy train going.   😄

Edited October 19, 2020 by ldubs

[ilikeanswers]

44 minutes ago, ldubs said:

I do think the "cast" understand the need for a lot of drama to keep the gravy train going.   

 

It is a contractual obligation😂. The housewives must create an event, party or some sort of get together. They must film a certain amount of hours and certain housewives must be on screen together, which I am guessing are those who create the most drama. The housewives are paid much more than an average reality TV participant so it is not surprising producers have a lot more requirements 😜

Edited October 19, 2020 by ilikeanswers

[Cruzaholic41]

1 hour ago, lenquixote66 said:

I hope you are not implying that the winners are chosen by the producers .

All I’ll say is, do you really think it’s coincidence that the villains - aka ratings grabbers - always seem to stick around so long?  

[ldubs]

3 minutes ago, ilikeanswers said:

 

It is a contractual obligation😂. The housewives must create an event, party or some sort of get together. They must film a certain amount of hours and certain housewives must be on screen together, which I am guessing are those who create the most drama. The housewives are paid much more than an average reality TV participant so it is not surprising producers have higher expectations😜

 

I don't think anyone is surprised.  It is like 21st century version of soap operas.   And, these reality show folks technically may not be actors, but they sure are doing a lot of acting.    Should be called "fake housewives".  😄

[sanger727]

10 hours ago, Cruzaholic41 said:

My niece was on Survivor. I always knew reality shows were scripted to some degree but she really opened my eyes as to just how much is fake. Anyone who thinks these shows aren’t scripted is only kidding themselves. 
 

I seem to recall several months back someone on this board insisting that Below Decks is real. They just wouldn’t listen to the truth. 

 

Some of us know in the back of our heads that this is true; but still choose to believe that the shows show "reality" because that makes them more enjoyable to watch. I don't believe they are truly scripted the way a sitcom is. At least for a show like the Amazing Race, I would imagine they would face lawsuits and huge backlash if it came out that the contests were fake or the winner was picked ahead of time. I think they have the contests and are truly competing to achieve a winner. Now all the takes they do of the couples discussing what occurred might include suggested dialogue. Mostly because the average person isn't adept at speaking well in front of a camera. And I'm sure they may re-tape scenes from contests at times or edit to make it make it look like couples are together when they aren't or aren't when they are. But I wouldn't consider any of that making the show "fake". Just tv ready.

 

I've never been on reality tv  but I have done on air media interviews. They would interview me about a true situation where I told them what I wanted to say. The end product was somewhat different after they edited. they may switch around shots and have the reporter fill in dialogue. That didn't detract from the reality of the interview in my mind. If situation X occurs and they edit shots, the interviews, and suggest dialogue for the interview to make it more "tv ready", I don't think that detracts from the reality of the show. As long as the cast is free to actually compete in competitions and, for non competition shows, live their lives and make their own choices. 

[Aquahound]

2 hours ago, sanger727 said:

As long as the cast is free to actually compete in competitions and, for non competition shows, live their lives and make their own choices. 

 

Speaking of the non competition shows, did you know that on all the house hunting shows, the chosen house is already owned by the "actors" before filming evens begins?  So again, while there might not be a written word-by-word script to follow, the participants are still required to act in a way that portrays they are actually house hunting. 

[sanger727]

2 hours ago, Aquahound said:

 

Speaking of the non competition shows, did you know that on all the house hunting shows, the chosen house is already owned by the "actors" before filming evens begins?  So again, while there might not be a written word-by-word script to follow, the participants are still required to act in a way that portrays they are actually house hunting. 

 

yes, I'm aware of the fact that they sometimes own the house before the filming begins and that they sometimes shows houses that aren't even for sale. House hunting shows are not my favorites. I suspect the dialogue is especially unscripted in these because it usually is so bad. Though I do enjoy seeing how much different styles of houses cost in different areas, especially the international ones. 

[cruisemom42]

2 hours ago, Aquahound said:

 

Speaking of the non competition shows, did you know that on all the house hunting shows, the chosen house is already owned by the "actors" before filming evens begins?  So again, while there might not be a written word-by-word script to follow, the participants are still required to act in a way that portrays they are actually house hunting. 

 

The British version, "Escape to the Country" is a lot better because there is no forced choice at the end of the show. Sometimes there is a sale, sometimes the buyers say they will go back and take another look, and sometimes it is just a "miss" and they say they will keep looking.

 

Also the show is an hour, so there is time to show something about the area where the buyers are looking as well as showing them 3 houses. Bonus for me is that a lot of the houses are very old and charming.

[ldubs]

4 hours ago, Aquahound said:

 

Speaking of the non competition shows, did you know that on all the house hunting shows, the chosen house is already owned by the "actors" before filming evens begins?  So again, while there might not be a written word-by-word script to follow, the participants are still required to act in a way that portrays they are actually house hunting. 

 

I did not know that.  What always bugs me about those shows is how the realtor completely misses the buyer's requirements.   And of course, always blame it on price, which could be valid.  

 

Buyer: "We need a minimum of 3 Bedrooms"

Agent: "You will like this place.  I picked it especially for you"

Buyer: "How many bedrooms?"

Agent: "One"

[Aquahound]

24 minutes ago, ldubs said:

 

I did not know that.  What always bugs me about those shows is how the realtor completely misses the buyer's requirements.   And of course, always blame it on price, which could be valid.  

 

Buyer: "We need a minimum of 3 Bedrooms"

Agent: "You will like this place.  I picked it especially for you"

Buyer: "How many bedrooms?"

Agent: "One"

 

So, earlier I mentioned having been on a reality show.  It was one of those.  In addition to filming the house already owned, they also need to find 2 more.  It's harder than one would think to get sellers to give up their houses for filming.  That's because it's an all-day (10 hour) event and the homeowner is not allowed to be there.  Plus, the film crew takes down all artwork.  Throw in the fact they know their house isn't the chosen one, and they rightfully assume it'll probably be bad-mouthed a little.  We told the producers what our criteria was when shopping (the show's more of a re-creation), but they had a hard time getting owners of the right houses to agree to filming for all the reasons mentioned above. 

[ldubs]

4 minutes ago, Aquahound said:

 

So, earlier I mentioned having been on a reality show.  It was one of those.  In addition to filming the house already owned, they also need to find 2 more.  It's harder than one would think to get sellers to give up their houses for filming.  That's because it's an all-day (10 hour) event and the homeowner is not allowed to be there.  Plus, the film crew takes down all artwork.  Throw in the fact they know their house isn't the chosen one, and they rightfully assume it'll probably be bad-mouthed a little.  We told the producers what our criteria was when shopping (the show's more of a re-creation), but they had a hard time getting owners of the right houses to agree to filming for all the reasons mentioned above. 

 

That really explains things.  I doubt I will ever relocate to another house, but if I do, I'll bring a camera crew with me and sell the pilot! haha

[dickinson]

Years ago I read that any house with furniture is not the one that was picked.  Only two times since then have I seen all three houses with furniture so I couldn't figure out which they picked. I have also heard that not all the houses are actually for sale and that many are not but people who agreed to have their home on the show.  Note that the vast majority of homes have no real for sale sign outside.  Every now and then you will see the white posts where the sign was (but the sign is not there).  Most times there are no posts.  I figure, but don't know for sure, that a lot of the prices on the homes they don't pick are made up numbers.

 

I still enjoy watching the show to see what other houses look like.

Edited October 19, 2020 by dickinson

[lenquixote66]

19 hours ago, ldubs said:

 

Haha, maybe they can have a competition cleaning cabins or running food to the main dining room!  

Towel animals would be another one.

[lenquixote66]

18 hours ago, Cruzaholic41 said:

All I’ll say is, do you really think it’s coincidence that the villains - aka ratings grabbers - always seem to stick around so long?  

I know people who were on Survivor and Amazing Race.While I never personally discussed anything that you have suggested I find it hard to believe that these people would damage their reputations by being on a show that was fixed.

[sanger727]

3 hours ago, Aquahound said:

 

So, earlier I mentioned having been on a reality show.  It was one of those.  In addition to filming the house already owned, they also need to find 2 more.  It's harder than one would think to get sellers to give up their houses for filming.  That's because it's an all-day (10 hour) event and the homeowner is not allowed to be there.  Plus, the film crew takes down all artwork.  Throw in the fact they know their house isn't the chosen one, and they rightfully assume it'll probably be bad-mouthed a little.  We told the producers what our criteria was when shopping (the show's more of a re-creation), but they had a hard time getting owners of the right houses to agree to filming for all the reasons mentioned above. 

cant really blame them for that. If you got $500 for 60 hours of filming I wonder what’s in it for the home owners of the other houses. The show will certainly air too late to get them traffic if they house is still for sale.

[lenquixote66]

7 hours ago, Aquahound said:

 

Speaking of the non competition shows, did you know that on all the house hunting shows, the chosen house is already owned by the "actors" before filming evens begins?  So again, while there might not be a written word-by-word script to follow, the participants are still required to act in a way that portrays they are actually house hunting. 

The son and daughter in law of one of my neighbors were on one of the house hunting shows.My neighbor said that as you indicated the house they picked was already selected prior to the show airing .In addition they received a sum of money to appear on the show.

[lenquixote66]

3 hours ago, ldubs said:

 

That really explains things.  I doubt I will ever relocate to another house, but if I do, I'll bring a camera crew with me and sell the pilot! haha

When I was a mere lad my parents brought me to audition at an American Idol type show.They believed that I had a wonderful singing voice.Alas I did not get that far into the show.

[Cruzaholic41]

33 minutes ago, lenquixote66 said:

I know people who were on Survivor and Amazing Race.While I never personally discussed anything that you have suggested I find it hard to believe that these people would damage their reputations by being on a show that was fixed.

Thats ok. I actually wish I didn’t know what I know about those shows. It kinda ruined it for me. 

[ilikeanswers]

33 minutes ago, fyree39 said:

 He wouldn't take too kindly to reality "stars" being members of SAG. I don't imagine any SAG member would appreciate it.

 

But actor guilds also don't want actors being underpaid or taken advantage of by production companies by being classed as reality show participants. It is why they make such deal about defining the roles of actors and reality show participants 🙄

Edited October 20, 2020 by ilikeanswers

[ilikeanswers]

28 minutes ago, fyree39 said:

I'm sure you know more about SAG than I do. Sounds like it.

 

I wouldn't say I'm an expert in SAG as that is an American organisation but I have spent some time in behind the scenes television industry so have had dealings with similar groups in Australia. They do inquire into some productions of reality shows to make sure that participants aren't doing what they define as acting work while only being paid reality show stipends. 

Edited October 20, 2020 by ilikeanswers

[Aquahound]

1 hour ago, ilikeanswers said:

 

I wouldn't say I'm an expert in SAG as that is an American organisation but I have spent some time in behind the scenes television industry so have had dealings with similar groups in Australia. They do inquire into some productions of reality shows to make sure that participants aren't doing what they define as acting work while only being paid reality show stipends. 

 

I went back and looked at my contract.  The word you got right was "participant."  Reality tv stars are participants of the show, not employees.  However, the part you got wrong is "acting work."  Reality tv stars, aka participants, still respond to the direction of the producers and still follow a scripted format.  Numerous "takes" are filmed, which is part of why it takes 10 hours to film what results in a 5 minute segment of the show.  On my show, during the cut out scenes showing me or DW commenting, our comments were based on specific questions asked off camera by the director.  If our answers didn't satisfy the director, we cut and started over.  

 

So if you say 10 times there is no acting work in reality tv, you'll be wrong 10 times.  

[electro]

20 hours ago, Aquahound said:

 

So, earlier I mentioned having been on a reality show.  It was one of those.  In addition to filming the house already owned, they also need to find 2 more.  It's harder than one would think to get sellers to give up their houses for filming.  That's because it's an all-day (10 hour) event and the homeowner is not allowed to be there.  Plus, the film crew takes down all artwork.  Throw in the fact they know their house isn't the chosen one, and they rightfully assume it'll probably be bad-mouthed a little.  We told the producers what our criteria was when shopping (the show's more of a re-creation), but they had a hard time getting owners of the right houses to agree to filming for all the reasons mentioned above. 

Did you and your SO have totally opposite criteria? That also seems to be (one of the most annoying) criteria of these house hunting shows.

[Aquahound]

2 minutes ago, electro said:

Did you and your SO have totally opposite criteria? That also seems to be (one of the most annoying) criteria of these house hunting shows.

 

You nailed it.  The show wants there to be some conflict.  Pre filming, the director brings out what we individually wanted in a house.  We were then told to exaggerate those differences and to act them out on camera.  On our episode, my wife wanted modern so I jokingly said on camera she wanted the Starship Enterprise.  In reality, I like modern too so I wouldn't have argued with her.  But I also like the red brick federal style, so they made me que in on that.    

[lenquixote66]

16 hours ago, fyree39 said:

I have an acquaintance who, on a whim, auditioned to be an extra on the first "remake" of Planet of the Apes being filmed over at the Pinnacles in Trona. He got hired as a "human" and absolutely loved the experience. Being the networking little fool that he is, it wasn't long before he was acting regularly and had enough speaking parts to be accepted into SAG. He even lasted through the writer's strike. He's been in two or three of the Pirates films and showed up regularly in the old HBO series Deadwood.  He wouldn't take too kindly to reality "stars" being members of SAG. I don't imagine any SAG member would appreciate it.

I was an extra in two movies but I did not get the acting bug .A very good friend of mine is a retired movie Director .I think I will discuss this with him.

Edited October 20, 2020 by lenquixote66