As a kid, those days between New Year’s and returning to school were excruciating. My brother and I tried to prolong the excitement of the holiday, but even we picked at the holiday goodies that only days earlier we gobbled like exotic delicacies. There were no more holiday TV specials to look forward to. Tinsel, ornaments, and other holiday cheer were packed away in cardboard boxes, stuffed in the back of closets. But the worst of it was that overwhelming sense of restlessness otherwise known as cabin fever.
It was in those days that we resorted to playing board games. We hated board games. Our mother, on the other hand, considered them the perfect indoor activity for children (she cursed herself the year she gave my brother a Nerf football and it was somehow thrown with enough velocity to knock over her favorite lamp). Board games, she said, were a good way for my brother and I to learn rules and how to play nice. When we were young, the games were Chutes and Ladders, Hands Down, Operation, and Sorry. As we got older, we moved on to Scrabble, Monopoly, Chinese Checkers, and backgammon. I’m embarrassed to say, my brother and I jeered when the new board game of the year was revealed on Christmas morning. It wasn’t till much later that it dawned on us that for some of those lean years, we were lucky to eat, let alone get a gift of any sort.
In spite of ourselves, we finally cracked open the game, just to see how it looked, and before we knew it, we were playing. I’m not sure how my mother endured us. We screeched and hollered, moaned about whose turn it was to get a certain game piece, whined like sore losers, accused each other of cheating, gloated when winning, and pouted when losing. My mother asked us why we couldn’t be civilized like the people on TV game shows. Did we think game show hosts like Bob Barker or John Daly would allow their contestants to behave like we did? We didn’t care about those people. We just wanted to win and the other person to lose. Eventually, the passion to win at all costs passed, the pleasure of spending time with one another fell over us like hush on new snow, and we settled down and played nice like my mother wanted all along.
We often made up our own arcane rules, which, in retrospect, seemed much more complicated than the game itself. Although we didn’t always play the games to the letter of the law, we did develop our own sense of fair play. Besides, if the sting of losing one round of a game was particularly sharp, we still knew there was always a chance for another go-round.
So maybe this is what makes the new crop of game shows — if you want to call them that — seem particularly dyspeptic to me. The goal is not simply to win cash and fabulous prizes, but to backbite, cheat, weasel, outsmart, and canoodle your way to the win. Consider these offerings in the new year:
The Mole (ABC): Ten contestants are taken away to a foreign place and encouraged to work together to solve a variety of “mental and physical challenges.” This all-for-one, one-for-all setup has one problem: There’s a “mole” among the players, actively working to undermine the group. Part of the game is to determine who the mole is. At certain tests during the game, contestants are asked questions to determine if they know who the mole is. If they answer incorrectly, they must leave the game. If they answer correctly, they continue with the game until the very end, when the last one standing wins the big money.
Similar to CBS’s Survivor, The Mole creates a game world where the idea of camaraderie is given lip service, when in reality, it’s every man and woman for himself. Of course, I’m going on memories of the original Survivor, which purposely reminded its contestants that they needed to work for the common good, when the reality was that buying into the group probably meant shaving off your chances at the big win. And winning is really the name of the game. But maybe The Mole is less cutthroat than it sounds on paper. You can find out for yourself when it premieres Jan. 9. Check local listings for air times.
Temptation Island (Fox). The Fox Network sure has a knack for taking an innocuous idea — in this case, a spinoff of The Dating Game and The Newlywed Game — and adding just enough bile to sour it into something unsettling. This “game” involves taking four couples whose relationships are on shaky ground and whisking them off to Belize to “test the strength of their relationships before making formal commitments.” During their stay, the couples are split, and each person is paired with an eligible single person — a temptation. This backhanded way to couples therapy is supposed to help each person in a relationship determine if he or she is ready for the ultimate relationship.
For the life of me, I can’t fathom anyone wanting to be a contestant in this game. Sure, there’s a free trip to Belize, but this game is worse than the airing of dirty laundry that goes on in those insta-courtroom programs like Divorce Court or The People’s Court. What do the participants think is gained by having their petty arguments aired in front of a TV viewing audience? Is it the satisfaction of having their ordeal witnessed by anonymous faces across America? As for affairs of the heart, it seems to me if you’re not sure, you’re not ready. Maybe it’s better than it sounds. See for yourself when Temptation Island premieres Jan. 20 on Fox.
Survivor: The Australian Outback (CBS). The big-daddy kingpin of the voyeur/reality challenge-fests returns following the Super Bowl. It should be interesting to see how contestants in round-two fare. Will they try to emulate Richard Hatch‘s strategy? Not a good idea, Hatch has said in print and television interviews. Now that the game has been laid out to scrutinize, it’s still going to take someone who can spin it in a whole new way. Will the big winner have to be a “snake,” as Hatch was, or a fuzzy koala bear? Find out when Survivor premieres Jan. 28.
Food Fight Rematch!
The Food Network recently announced an Iron Chef rematch between the Food Network’s celebrity chef, Bobby Flay, and “Iron Chef Japanese,” Masaharu Morimoto. This time, the battle takes place in the Tokyo-based Kitchen Stadium, where Iron Chef battles are usually held.
Flay and Morimoto first met in March of this year for Iron Chef: New York Battle. The two-hour special, filmed at Webster Hall, aired on the Food Network June 25. The surprise ingredient the chefs worked with was Dungeness crab. Morimoto was the winner in that go-round. If Flay’s shameless posturing in that battle is any indication, he’s probably gearing for a big win the second time around.
The rematch takes place Friday, Dec. 22. It airs in the states later this year. For more information, visit the Food Network Web site at: www.foodtv.com.
More Simpsons/Seinfeld Talk
Readers miffed about the Simpsons/Seinfeld programming at KTBC/Fox 7 should contact KTBC directly. Once again, here’s the e-mail address: programming@Fox7.com.
This article appears in December 29 • 2000.