There’s a show in the US called Operation Repo. The first time I saw it (my TiVo recorded it as a suggestion) I thought, “Something is not right about this”. I freeze-framed the end credits and discovered that the show is in fact fake. Although it’s shot like a reality show it’s actually completely scripted and acted (if you can call what these fat, ugly, obnoxious, white trash people do ‘acting’). They claim that they’re ‘based on actual cases’ but I doubt anyone is seriously vetting that claim.
Whenever a discussion about reality TV comes up I always like to mention the 70s film Network. Besides being a great film in its own right it is amazingly prophetic in terms of it positing TV becoming reality-blurring, trashy, totally-ratings-driven infotainment. In Roger Ebert’s review of it at the time he criticizes it for going too far and becoming too unrealistic. Who knew TV would not only equal its stuff but actually exceed it?
I’m only watching it these days for the lulz, it’s just so fake! Like the eejit telling someone else -on camera- not to let on to anyone else what they’re doing (borrowing someone else’s horse) and who walks in behind her…? Fake sounding argument ensues
Well, I think you’re right in that “scripted” is too precise a word.
The shows like Jersey Shore or the ones where it’s supposedly a cadre of co-workers, the conflict scenes are not scripted but they’re obviously outlined, and then the producers rely on the cast to be improv actors. It’s the really really bad improv acting that gives everything away, and it’s getting worse and more obvious with each successive entry.
Look at Jersey Shore this season. The big storyline arc was supposed to be about the big reveal, but it fizzled out like a wet fuse.
Is it really true that unscripted reality shows are cheaper because you don’t need to pay writers? Isn’t the money you save on writers going to be spent instead on all the extra footage you’re going to have to shoot and edit down in order to get something interesting and watchable? Camera, sound, and lighting crews and video editors may be cheaper than writers (I don’t actually know) but presumably you’re going to have to make them work (say) five times as many hours as on a scripted show, where you generally shoot only what’s written and leave very little on the cutting room floor.
Do we not remember when the “Reality” TV fad started?
I can’t remember the precise year, but it was basically during the
Writers strike-before-last – late 1990’s maybe?
It was a bad one, with the Screen-Actors Guild stepping out in support of the writers and a lot of acrimony between the creative talents and the management/business people.
Before that strike, the UK had Big Brother and MTV created a slightly-less-racy American version. One of the ways the networks and studios filled the time slots of shows that weren’t getting written was to put up more “Reality” shows like Big Brother and Real World. No script, no union actors? No need!
The schlock proved popular and inexpensive, and they’ve never gone away like they should have once the Writers ironed out new contracts.
Game shows have been around for eons, and Quiz Show (mentioned earlier) showed how even they could be corrupted. Barry/Enwright continued to produce game shows (e.g. The Jokers Wild; Name That Tune) even after their scandal. Mixing ‘reality’ camera work with grandoise game-show contests was just another easy way to tap the ‘reality’ market and still not pay writers or actors for quality work.
But it still generates viewers and, therefore, commercial revenue. I’d say we get what we (don’t) pay for: Roman contests diverting the attention of the masses from the Empire’s problems.
–G!
Curtain up let the camera roll
It’s automatic it’s in control
Got no script baby, ain’t no lines
Just me and you and a real good time
. --Def Leppard
. Action! Not Words
. High N Dry
