Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 8, 2016, 2:47 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Anyone watch E! True Hollywood Story: Curse of the Lottery show?

Topic closed. 21 replies. Last post 9 years ago by MissNYC.

Page 2 of 2
PrintE-mailLink
Avatar
Kentucky
United States
Member #32652
February 14, 2006
7313 Posts
Offline
Posted: July 30, 2007, 11:15 pm - IP Logged

Wow I guess you are a "glass is half empty" kind of person. It's interesting that you would automatically assume that the person would be a train wreck, why is that? Money is a blessing, in the right hands. Perhaps if a young 20-something-year-old with a good head on her shoulders and self-respect won a large jackpot, she could serve as an example of a "lady" and serve as a long awaited role model. And again, I think train wreck or not, this country loves money and loves to watch people with money spend money. The notion that an ordinary person has just hit it big would be a subject of interest to a whole lot of people and I think a show that illustrated that would be a huge hit on VH1, E, or even MTV. You could talk it down all you want, but those networks know what they're doing. They may not show the shows we all admit to like, but they show the shows many of us watch.

"It's interesting that you would automatically assume that the person would be a train wreck, why is that?"

I was just commenting on what the programming execs believe their viewers want to see; I made no assumption or comment on jackpot winners.  But I suppose those viewers interested in hearing what the talking heads have to say for hours about Paris, Britney, or Lindsay would be very interested in watching "A Year in the Life of a Lottery Jackpot Winner". The talking heads could discuss how they believe the jackpot winner should spend their money too.

"Money is a blessing, in the right hands."

The only way state lotteries could insure the jackpots would go into "the right hands" is to cheat. Is there a rule in your state that says "only the deserving can win"?

"And again, I think train wreck or not, this country loves money and loves to watch people with money spend money."

I believe if you look at the highest rated TV shows of all time, most of the Superbowls are listed right at the top. Wonder where "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous" fits into that list?

"The notion that an ordinary person has just hit it big would be a subject of interest to a whole lot of people and I think a show that illustrated that would be a huge hit on VH1, E, or even MTV."

I'm sure that "A Year in the Life of a Lottery Jackpot Winner" will be a huge success providing it's not aired at the same time as WWE wrestling, UFC, WSOP poker, Iron Chiefs, Trading Spaces, Ice Road Truckers, Little People, Big World, or Gilligan's Island reruns. 

"You could talk it down all you want, but those networks know what they're doing."

Of course they do and that's why shows like Deal or No Deal, 1 vs. 100, Who Wants to be a Millionaire, The Price is Right, Wheel of Fortune, Jeopardy, or even state lottery run game shows are so popular. But aren't those shows about people winning money?

If they ever make a show called "A Year in the Life of Ken Jennings", I'll set my VCR and replay it just before I go to bed.

"They may not show the shows we all admit to like, but they show the shows many of us watch."

I have a choice of over 70 channels so at any given time of the day there must be at least 70 shows that I'm not watching. How people spend their money might be interesting to you but the only reason it's related to a lottery discussion is because the money came from lottery winnings. What part of that is beneficial for those of us that actually play the lottery?

    Avatar
    Kentucky
    United States
    Member #32652
    February 14, 2006
    7313 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: July 30, 2007, 11:18 pm - IP Logged

    I think only Vinnie's watch made it into that commercial. Shocked

    Cool...an' I want you t' have it ... no..no..c'mere.

    Opps, that's right, Vinnie is sleeping with the fishes.

      MissNYC's avatar - diva
      Westchester, New York
      United States
      Member #49345
      January 27, 2007
      168 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: July 31, 2007, 5:31 pm - IP Logged

      "It's interesting that you would automatically assume that the person would be a train wreck, why is that?"

      I was just commenting on what the programming execs believe their viewers want to see; I made no assumption or comment on jackpot winners.  But I suppose those viewers interested in hearing what the talking heads have to say for hours about Paris, Britney, or Lindsay would be very interested in watching "A Year in the Life of a Lottery Jackpot Winner". The talking heads could discuss how they believe the jackpot winner should spend their money too.

      "Money is a blessing, in the right hands."

      The only way state lotteries could insure the jackpots would go into "the right hands" is to cheat. Is there a rule in your state that says "only the deserving can win"?

      "And again, I think train wreck or not, this country loves money and loves to watch people with money spend money."

      I believe if you look at the highest rated TV shows of all time, most of the Superbowls are listed right at the top. Wonder where "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous" fits into that list?

      "The notion that an ordinary person has just hit it big would be a subject of interest to a whole lot of people and I think a show that illustrated that would be a huge hit on VH1, E, or even MTV."

      I'm sure that "A Year in the Life of a Lottery Jackpot Winner" will be a huge success providing it's not aired at the same time as WWE wrestling, UFC, WSOP poker, Iron Chiefs, Trading Spaces, Ice Road Truckers, Little People, Big World, or Gilligan's Island reruns. 

      "You could talk it down all you want, but those networks know what they're doing."

      Of course they do and that's why shows like Deal or No Deal, 1 vs. 100, Who Wants to be a Millionaire, The Price is Right, Wheel of Fortune, Jeopardy, or even state lottery run game shows are so popular. But aren't those shows about people winning money?

      If they ever make a show called "A Year in the Life of Ken Jennings", I'll set my VCR and replay it just before I go to bed.

      "They may not show the shows we all admit to like, but they show the shows many of us watch."

      I have a choice of over 70 channels so at any given time of the day there must be at least 70 shows that I'm not watching. How people spend their money might be interesting to you but the only reason it's related to a lottery discussion is because the money came from lottery winnings. What part of that is beneficial for those of us that actually play the lottery?

      Ok, if you are going to tear apart my post, let me make some additional points.

      "The only way state lotteries could insure the jackpots would go into "the right hands" is to cheat. Is there a rule in your state that says "only the deserving can win"?"

      I Never said that the state could, in any way, ensure that lottery money goes into "the right hands." All I actually said was that "money is a blessing in the right hands." What does the state, or even the lottery have to do with my statement? What I meant was that their are different types of people out there and how and what lottery winnings are spent depends on the type of person who wins. Nothing more.

      I believe if you look at the highest rated TV shows of all time, most of the Superbowls are listed right at the top. Wonder where "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous" fits into that list?

       I never compared a Lifestyle show to the Superbowl, which everybody knows has the highest of ratings, so it should not be compared to any show. I actually never mentioned ratings. What I meant was that this country has a generation, typically b/w the ages of I'd say 16-30 that LOVE and watch many shows on MTV, VH1, and E. My sister is 28, and all of her friends still watch MTV because their generation grew up with it. This same generation, unfortunately, likes to watch shows about people with money and/or celebrities. They are the same generation that reads US Weekly, Life and Style, People, OK, etc and who watch Entertainment Tonight, The Insider, etc, or who visit TMZ.com and the like. This may not be your generation, but it does exist, and yes, they like to hear stuff about Lindsay, Paris, and that whole bunch. This generation is a huge money maker for entertainment execs, and not many of them watch WWE wrestling, UFC, WSOP poker, Iron Chiefs, Trading Spaces, Ice Road Truckers, Little People, Big World, or Gilligan's Island reruns. In fact I'd bet none of them do.  (My whole point initially was that it would be great if the person who won was young and actually a good role model for a change, but that seemed to have gotten lost.)

      I have a choice of over 70 channels so at any given time of the day there must be at least 70 shows that I'm not watching. How people spend their money might be interesting to you but the only reason it's related to a lottery discussion is because the money came from lottery winnings. What part of that is beneficial for those of us that actually play the lottery?

      Very few shows are "beneficial" for any reason. And it wouldn't just cater to people who play lotto, in fact, it may not attract those people at all. Many people watch TV to be entertained. Again, this country likes to watch rich people and celebrities spend money. The shows that are aired on MTV, VH1, and E cater to that generation, which you are clearly not a part of.

      Now I'm not saying this show would be the next Seinfeld or Sopranos, but enough people would watch it to make it a hit. These same people keep those tv stations in business. But I guess if this kind of show ever comes about, you have 69 other channels to choose from.

      "If you just keep believing, that dream that you wish will come true"

      Bed

       

        Avatar
        Kentucky
        United States
        Member #32652
        February 14, 2006
        7313 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: July 31, 2007, 10:03 pm - IP Logged

        Ok, if you are going to tear apart my post, let me make some additional points.

        "The only way state lotteries could insure the jackpots would go into "the right hands" is to cheat. Is there a rule in your state that says "only the deserving can win"?"

        I Never said that the state could, in any way, ensure that lottery money goes into "the right hands." All I actually said was that "money is a blessing in the right hands." What does the state, or even the lottery have to do with my statement? What I meant was that their are different types of people out there and how and what lottery winnings are spent depends on the type of person who wins. Nothing more.

        I believe if you look at the highest rated TV shows of all time, most of the Superbowls are listed right at the top. Wonder where "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous" fits into that list?

         I never compared a Lifestyle show to the Superbowl, which everybody knows has the highest of ratings, so it should not be compared to any show. I actually never mentioned ratings. What I meant was that this country has a generation, typically b/w the ages of I'd say 16-30 that LOVE and watch many shows on MTV, VH1, and E. My sister is 28, and all of her friends still watch MTV because their generation grew up with it. This same generation, unfortunately, likes to watch shows about people with money and/or celebrities. They are the same generation that reads US Weekly, Life and Style, People, OK, etc and who watch Entertainment Tonight, The Insider, etc, or who visit TMZ.com and the like. This may not be your generation, but it does exist, and yes, they like to hear stuff about Lindsay, Paris, and that whole bunch. This generation is a huge money maker for entertainment execs, and not many of them watch WWE wrestling, UFC, WSOP poker, Iron Chiefs, Trading Spaces, Ice Road Truckers, Little People, Big World, or Gilligan's Island reruns. In fact I'd bet none of them do.  (My whole point initially was that it would be great if the person who won was young and actually a good role model for a change, but that seemed to have gotten lost.)

        I have a choice of over 70 channels so at any given time of the day there must be at least 70 shows that I'm not watching. How people spend their money might be interesting to you but the only reason it's related to a lottery discussion is because the money came from lottery winnings. What part of that is beneficial for those of us that actually play the lottery?

        Very few shows are "beneficial" for any reason. And it wouldn't just cater to people who play lotto, in fact, it may not attract those people at all. Many people watch TV to be entertained. Again, this country likes to watch rich people and celebrities spend money. The shows that are aired on MTV, VH1, and E cater to that generation, which you are clearly not a part of.

        Now I'm not saying this show would be the next Seinfeld or Sopranos, but enough people would watch it to make it a hit. These same people keep those tv stations in business. But I guess if this kind of show ever comes about, you have 69 other channels to choose from.

        "All I actually said was that "money is a blessing in the right hands." What does the state, or even the lottery have to do with my statement?"

        Whose hands are the "right hands" is very subjective and lotteries are games of chance so it doesn't apply unless cheating is involved.

        "What I meant was that their are different types of people out there and how and what lottery winnings are spent depends on the type of person who wins."

        That is the same as saying a hungry man would buy food, an alcoholic would buy booze, or a woman would go shopping. It might be safe to say that no two people would spend exactly the same.

        "My sister is 28, and all of her friends still watch MTV because their generation grew up with it. This same generation, unfortunately, likes to watch shows about people with money and/or celebrities."

        To each his own, but has nothing to do with lottery discussions. It's even a stretch to say a jackpot winner would allow camera crews to follow them around for a year.

        "(My whole point initially was that it would be great if the person who won was young and actually a good role model for a change, but that seemed to have gotten lost.)"

        That is the same as a 20 something saying "I hope somebody in their 20s win the next big jackpot". Change the "20 something" to 30 something, 40, 50, 60, 70, or older and you'll get different opinions. I have no idea who a jackpot winner could be a role model for.

        It's a windfall (unless they cheated so "the right person" could win) gained from gambling so I doubt you'll hear about them in a sermon. A role model to me is somebody that works hard for their money, takes care of their families, and is helpful in their communities. That's not to say a person like that couldn't continue to be a role model just that jackpots are not usually split by thousands of people. 

        The odds of a potential role model winning a huge jackpot happens to be exactly the same as anybody else buying a ticket. Thoughts of winning a jackpot have no age, sex, race, or moral boundaries; just buy a ticket and start dreaming. 

        "Now I'm not saying this show would be the next Seinfeld or Sopranos"

        Did you see the episode where Tony rigged the NJ lotto and the winnings fell into the Vinnie's hands and Vinnie bought an expensive watch?

        "Very few shows are "beneficial" for any reason. And it wouldn't just cater to people who play lotto, in fact, it may not attract those people at all."

        I play a Pick-5 game where jackpots start at $100,000, didn't hit the jackpot tonight, and want to know what benefit I could gain to help me win next time from watching or discussing how a jackpot winner spends their winnings? 

          MissNYC's avatar - diva
          Westchester, New York
          United States
          Member #49345
          January 27, 2007
          168 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: August 1, 2007, 10:45 am - IP Logged

          Wow, you either have an oppositional personality, or you just cannot grasp what I have been trying to say so you are picking apart different parts of my post.

          That is the same as saying a hungry man would buy food, an alcoholic would buy booze, or a woman would go shopping. It might be safe to say that no two people would spend exactly the same.

          OK What are you talking about and why make this point, just for the sake of writing something? Yes no two people would spend the money the same, that was my point. But maybe one woman would use any notoriety to show she was giving money to charity, maybe the next guy quit his job but now volunteers. Anyhow, that was my point, how money is spent depends on the winner, so what are you talking about?

          Whose hands are the "right hands" is very subjective and lotteries are games of chance so it doesn't apply unless cheating is involved.

          Once again, what are you talking about? All I said was money is a blessing in the right hands. I'll spell it out for you, if a bad guy has a lot of money, he may buy guns, traffic things for more money, do or sell drugs, etc, if a good guy has a lot of money, he may spend time with his family, donate to charities, etc. Understand? Yes, it is subjective, to an extent, but it has NOTHING to even to with a lottery or cheating. We all know who wins a jackpot is a gamble, I just meant that how the money is spent depends on the winner, but it seems you are having some trouble grasping what I am saying.

           To each his own, but has nothing to do with lottery discussions. It's even a stretch to say a jackpot winner would allow camera crews to follow them around for a year.

          Obviously they would have to give their permission, but I think a younger winner would be more willing than an older winner. And you are taking this out of context as in pertained to my point of a generation existing that would watch a show on a lottery winner.

           That is the same as a 20 something saying "I hope somebody in their 20s win the next big jackpot". Change the "20 something" to 30 something, 40, 50, 60, 70, or older and you'll get different opinions. I have no idea who a jackpot winner could be a role model for.

           What I meant was, that since the 20 something generation is looking at women like Britney, Paris, and Lindsay, if a respectable person was is the limelight who wears underwear, gets a driver, and doesn't do drugs was seen as "cool," that would be a good thing. There are a lot of girls out there who pretend to be or act like celebrities, they love money, etc, so a show like this would appeal to them. Once again, I guess I'm not speaking to your generation.

          It's a windfall (unless they cheated so "the right person" could win) gained from gambling so I doubt you'll hear about them in a sermon. A role model to me is somebody that works hard for their money, takes care of their families, and is helpful in their communities. That's not to say a person like that couldn't continue to be a role model just that jackpots are not usually split by thousands of people. The odds of a potential role model winning a huge jackpot happens to be exactly the same as anybody else buying a ticket. Thoughts of winning a jackpot have no age, sex, race, or moral boundaries; just buy a ticket and start dreaming. 

          Yes, we all no when a jackpot is won, it can go to someone who, in public opinion, would spend wisely or not. I NEVER said anything about guaranteeing it to any winner, so I still do not understand why you continue to discuss cheating. And another point, the "right" person could only win if they cheated, well in my opinion, a "right" person wouldn't cheat.

           

          I play a Pick-5 game where jackpots start at $100,000, didn't hit the jackpot tonight, and want to know what benefit I could gain to help me win next time from watching or discussing how a jackpot winner spends their winnings? 

          Once again, it wouldn't help you or anyone else win, it would be of entertainment value to those who chose to watch it. If the person was young and it was on E, MTV, or VH1, I don't think your generation would have much interest in it, but a younger generation who watches those channels most of the time would.

          My whole point from the beginning is that there is a generation who would watch it, whether the person was a "role model" or not, but if they were, it would be even better. And role models don't necessarily have to work for their money if they have a lot of it, as you suggested. If my father won a large 100 million plus jackpot when he was growing us up, he would have still been a good man, but he probably would have spent his time traveling with his family as he would have no longer needed to work. There's plenty of people out there working 2-3 jobs who still have trouble with bills, so I know enough to know that work should not always be equivocated with money, but that's an aside.

          Listen, we obviously are from very different generations and don't see eye to eye, but just because you've missed some of the simple points I've made to express my opinion does not mean you should take things out of context and attempt to tear them apart. Bottom line, I think if a 20 something year old won 200 million dollars and was willing to let a camera crew into is her life, MTV, VH1, or E would likely go for it and people, maybe not you or people your age, but people would watch it. Take from that what you want and agree to disagree.

          "If you just keep believing, that dream that you wish will come true"

          Bed

           

            Avatar
            Kentucky
            United States
            Member #32652
            February 14, 2006
            7313 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: August 2, 2007, 3:37 pm - IP Logged

            MissNYC,

            "Listen, we obviously are from very different generations and don't see eye to eye"

            TV shows about rich and famous people have been on for over 50 years so it’s more of a matter of taste than a generation gap. Before TV they showed it on news reels at movie theaters. Is there really that big a difference between Liz Taylor and one of her 22 husbands showing off their fabulous home on one of the 3 or 4 networks in the 50s and watching somebody on MTV today?

            Whether or not there will be more documentaries about lottery winners depends on if the networks think that it’s the type of show its viewers want to see. The fact that I’m older just means I’ve probably seen more of the same types of TV shows. Hey, I sat glued to my TV set watching OJ’s low-speed chase and waited for him to get out of his car. 

            There was a show on last year about lottery winners; it was about an older woman that won a Powerball jackpot and a younger woman that won $1000 a week for life. I saw nothing extraordinary about either other than the older woman’s win was in the millions so she had more money to spend. 

            As for “money is a blessing in the right hands”, how about a TV show where an anonymous $200 million lottery winner hands somebody a tax-free cashiers check for $1,000,000 and we can watch them spend it. Maybe they could call it "The Millionaire".

              MissNYC's avatar - diva
              Westchester, New York
              United States
              Member #49345
              January 27, 2007
              168 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: August 3, 2007, 10:23 am - IP Logged

              MissNYC,

              "Listen, we obviously are from very different generations and don't see eye to eye"

              TV shows about rich and famous people have been on for over 50 years so it’s more of a matter of taste than a generation gap. Before TV they showed it on news reels at movie theaters. Is there really that big a difference between Liz Taylor and one of her 22 husbands showing off their fabulous home on one of the 3 or 4 networks in the 50s and watching somebody on MTV today?

              Whether or not there will be more documentaries about lottery winners depends on if the networks think that it’s the type of show its viewers want to see. The fact that I’m older just means I’ve probably seen more of the same types of TV shows. Hey, I sat glued to my TV set watching OJ’s low-speed chase and waited for him to get out of his car. 

              There was a show on last year about lottery winners; it was about an older woman that won a Powerball jackpot and a younger woman that won $1000 a week for life. I saw nothing extraordinary about either other than the older woman’s win was in the millions so she had more money to spend. 

              As for “money is a blessing in the right hands”, how about a TV show where an anonymous $200 million lottery winner hands somebody a tax-free cashiers check for $1,000,000 and we can watch them spend it. Maybe they could call it "The Millionaire".

              As you said, it's a matter of taste. Personally, I'd rather see someone trying to spend the 200 million as a million can help somone greatly, but it is not what it once was. And I think Liz Taylor is a classic icon, so I wouldn't really compare her to the celebrities of today, but that's meet, but hey, whatever at this point.

              "If you just keep believing, that dream that you wish will come true"

              Bed