Welcome to donduk. A refuge for those who enjoy Deal or No Deal, the hit Channel 4 gameshow hosted by Noel Edmonds. The award winning gameshow Deal or No Deal has become a big hit for Channel 4 and marks a sensational return to our screens of Noel Edmonds.

Deal or No Deal is enjoyed my millions of viewers daily, where the contestants battle with The Banker to try and win a jackpot of £250,000. Here at donduk you will find full daily reports of each show, as well Deal or No Deal news and specials. Deal or No Deal although initially appearing very simple in format of just opening a few boxes for the chance to win some big money prizes, actually has some potentially complex decisions to be made at points throughout the show, the contestants occasionally try complex or simple gameplay in an attempt to give them an edge in beating the Banker.

Sunday, June 11, 2006

Is Noel losing it?

The previous two rants are about the show itself, and I have to say I agree, as I said in a comment.

My rant is about Noel. Now we all know that every show is the most exciting ever, or has the best board ever at any given point, or could be the biggest turn around ever. Maybe he gets commission for saying "ever" and "in the history of Deal Or No Deal."

But tonight was different. Tonight they had guests from the past (as a sidenote did anyone else think Jennifer looked bored and was only there out of what could be a contractral obligation? And that Gaz's "yeah I'm more famous, yeah" was a bit half hearted?)

They showed Gaz's game. He took out the £250k in the opening box, went all the way and won 100k (after doing a hundreds of thousands joke, which I found very apt). I literally don't think you can have a bigger turnaround - lose the top amount, win the 2nd top amount, how can it be better? Not 5 minutes later Noel says "Could this game be the biggest turn around we've ever had?" Well Noel, given that the top prize is currently £75,000 and the biggest lost in the first round was £35,000, no.

At the end of the show he explained how the phone in was going to work this week. The maximum it can now roll over to is £90,000. So he says "We could give away the most money ever given on British television" (I forget his exact words). Jennifer's in the audience, she won £120,000. ITV's The Mint gave away £105,000 ish. Hasn't millionaire given the top price away a few times? So again Noel, I'm gonna have to say no, it's not going to be the biggest ever given away on British television.

Does he actually think before he opens his mouth, or does he just say a few words and add "in the history of the show | tv | mankind | the universe" onto the end?
Sadly, combined with the points Iain and Chris have made below, DOND needs to have a look at itself and be careful not to fade into the background with fakeness.


And one more thing, since Aaron's game, Noel has repeated over and over "could this be the second all blue opening round ever?". Again no it can't, because the first belongs to Shell, the 9th ever player on 9th November 2005 (shockingly her first offer was £4,300). While I don't expect him to remember over 100 shows back, his "I remember everything, except not as much as I think" attitude is quite tedious. Thankfully he cut out "that's the highest ever offer at this point" after just a few shows.

Sorry Noel, I loved House Party -- hey, I was just a kid -- and I think you do a good job at advising the players most of the time, but your constantly repeated phrases are annoying enough without you stating facts that you think are right, but aren't.

4 comments:

√Ćain said...

Awe but its Noel, Bairy. Attacking Noel for getting his facts wrong, is like shouting at Santa Clause because he didn't get the bike you asked for. Can you imagine Santa back in his little wooden house in Greenland, crying his eyes out at all these unhappy kids? Well thats Noel that is, head in his hands, fishing rod off to one side, by his garden pond.

Noel is doing his best. He is a British institution, like Marmite, and if the facts are wrong, and the tone is overblown, its still Noel. I mean, when we were losing the war, we didn't go around blaming Churchill now did we (Ok with Maggie it was different), no, we blamed the Germans.

Its not easy being the host on DOND, and I can't think of anyone who could do it as well as Noel. Surely if his facts are wrong then there should be an Endemol researcher we could blame? Even better if he/she was German.

bairy said...

Oh I agree, Noel is a legend of British broadcasting. I know he's just trying to put himself back in the spotlight and that's great.
He's allowed to get things wrong of course, who doesn't, but not 5 mins after disproving what he's about to say and not every single show - that's dramatisation for the sake of dramatisation which only reduces it's effect to something almost comical.
Like saying the same old joke and still excepting people to find it funny 100th time round.

I admit I have a thing about getting facts just right when you relay them, and that bias is in my post. But my main complaint was the constantly repeated phrases.

Jonno said...

(icifm - please don't publish this first bit - sorry it's so long! i can edit it down if you like - my email address is jonnygilbert@aol.com - my actual post follows below the line)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think that to criticise Noel for doing his job is to miss the point.

Perhaps DOND's current malaise can be compared with that of 'The Weakest Link' and 'Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?' - i.e. that of their dependence on format as "entertainment dramas". If a game show is bleating about its status as drama, one of the most crucial elements is that of surprise, or "what happens next?". All too soon, Chris Tarrant's once-witty repartee with his contestants becomes the stuff of habit, once-dramatic statements become tired old catchphrases, and previously lovable quirks become annoying pillars, propping up the show far beyond its natural lifetime. Compare Chris Tarrant's schtick when going through the motions of 'Phone-a-Friend' with Anne Robinson's now-exhausted inquisition of what a contestant does for a living, and with Noel's stock phrases.

Chris: (looking up into space) Hello John? Chris Tarrant from ITV's Who Wants to be a Millionaire here!
Friend: Oooh, hello there!
Chris: (mocking) "Oooh, hello there!" We've got Brian here, and he's doing rather well actually...

Anne: So... Roger, what do you do?
Roger: I'm a (insert profession here).
Anne: Oh, are you now?
Roger: Yes.
Anne: And are you a good (insert profession here)?
Roger: I like to think so, Anne.
Anne: Oh, really? And yet you couldn’t even answer the question about (insert topic with a tenuous connection to contestant’s profession)? You can’t be a very good (insert profession), can you?

It becomes a situation in which the viewer could easily say the script along with the host, as if watching a Little Britain sketch for the 20th time, going through the motions in a pale shadow of what was once enjoyable, waiting for the catchphrases. In DOND, we've already had "the biggest game ever", "the biggest turn-around ever", "the highest offer ever", "the lowest offer ever", "the best opening round", "the worst opening round”, "you'll be back" and so on. Could it be that the catchphrases are now just a depressing imitation of what we once found genuinely exciting and funny? The problem is that the "drama" is now missing that crucial element, that of the genuinely unexpected.

Noel's strengths as a host are obvious from the first edition of DOND a viewer watches. As a confident, enthusiastic, positive, believing anchor of the programme, he managed to turn a potentially dull, simplistic gambling game - featuring relatively low sums of money - into one in which both studio audience and viewers are skilfully manipulated into actually caring. (I say that not in a negative sense... after all, it's what expertly made drama does best.) He did this by informing us, with a staggering sense of self-belief, and with a complete lack of subtlety or irony, that what we were watching was important. And we believed, because it was entertaining for us to do so, and because of the host and audience's almost cult-like resolute belief that positivity and support was somehow able to dictate the outcome of purely random events. It was, in fact, that very aspect that got me hooked on the programme. I was awestruck by Noel’s unshakeable belief in himself and the product, his skill in manufacturing the notion of importance to the show, and his subsequent return to the top of his profession through the power of positive thinking, self-belief and a nod to the heavens. And all this in an afternoon gameshow with no more inherent importance, weight, complexity or battling against adversity than Countdown or Fifteen-to-One.

The first inkling I got that something was wrong was a Wednesday a couple of months back. At the end of a fairly dull game, Noel advised viewers to tune in the following day as “something really big and important is going to happen”. I tuned in to discover the surprise: the top prize money had been raised to £20 000 or something. Well no, Noel, it wasn’t actually that important, since I’m not remotely interested in an unknown person winning money at ridiculous odds after presumably spending a great deal of money on phone calls.

I had tuned in especially for that edition, leaving me with the feeling that Noel’s over-hyped sense of what is “important” had rapidly lost its currency. If every single game is potentially important, nothing is important, nothing is a surprise. Aside from the winning of the top prize money (which ironically signalled the beginning of the end for ‘Who Wants to be a Millionaire?’ in its reducing the odds of surprise to zero – why is the scenario apparently so eagerly anticipated by Noel and DOND viewers?), there is little new of importance to expect, never mind the desperate gimmicks of early box-swapping and the increasingly arbitrary decisions of the “evil” Banker.

Not even the temporary publicity through the eventual winning of the top prize will help in the long term. Noel is an incredibly skilled game show host – the entire format depends on him and his reaction to events. But even he can only come up with a finite number of spontaneous reactions to a finite set of predictable events. Both the format and its host are obviously exhausted.

bal said...

i think the comments are a little harsh as i have seen 4 versions of the show and noel is by far the best host in the history of british game shows EVER!! lol i'm just kidding! but honestly though we need to give him a break as he is doing a good job and there is of course only so much you can say on a show with more than 200 episodes especially when some of the contestants are duller than brown wallpaper!