this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2023
218 points (97.8% liked)
Movies and TV Shows
6 readers
2 users here now
General discussion about movies and TV shows.
Spoilers are strictly forbidden in post titles.
Posts soliciting spoilers (endings, plot elements, twists, etc.) should contain
[spoilers]
in their title. Comments in these posts do not need to be hidden in spoiler MarkDown if they pertain to the title's subject matter.
Otherwise, spoilers but must be contained in MarkDown as follows:
::: your spoiler warning
the crazy movie ending that no one saw coming!
:::
Your mods are here to help if you need any clarification!
Subcommunities: The Bear (FX) - [!thebear@lemmy.film](/c/thebear @lemmy.film)
Related communities: !entertainment@beehaw.org !moviesuggestions@lemmy.world
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I honestly don’t understand why she is on the show in the first place.
Ken is the greatest Jeopardy player of all time and deserves the job.
Whether or not Alex Trebek was really smart, he certainly gave off that vibe like he knew a lot about the subjects he quizzed the contestants on.
I understand she is some sort of scientist, but they are a dime a dozen.
Why does being good at the game make you a good host? I'm not saying he isn't, but being a good host requires an entirely different skill set than being a good player. Bialik was there because her brand is intellectual nerdiness that Jeopardy wants to leverage, but also because she's been making TV off and on her whole life. That kinda feels more relevant to the skillset required to making TV.
Bialik's delivery of questions is really good. The only downside of her hosting is she sometimes has very long pauses before she says someone is correct. I'd heard speculation that it's because she made a slip up early on when she awarded points for an incorrect answer and the producers wanted to make sure that doesn't happen again.
Since Ken is arguably the Jeopardy goat*, he's much less likely to make this type of mistake.
*Brad Rutter should be up there because he beat Ken a few times in tournaments of champions and was unable to have Ken's streak because Brad was from the 5-wins-and-go-home era.
While I agree with your last paragraph, I also disagree. Yes, he was from the original format, but to me, that just shows how good Ken really is. I’m not saying he was unbeatable, as you pointed out some examples of his losses, but I honestly don’t see anyone ever coming close to his record.
It’s one thing to win 5 in a row, it’s a whole other thing to win 74. I can’t even comprehend that level of pressure.