Complaining about shows you don't like.: Shows Inspired By Mythbusters

This article has many problems.

1. For starters. It is Follow the Leader with only mythbusters examples.
2. The title is misleading. Supposedly is about shows that were "inspired". Yet the descriptions implies that these shows are Ripoffs. Ripoff=/= being inspired
3. The description is basically a Stealth Insult and a Take That! against this shows.According to the description all this shows are boring and not as good as the original.
4. Examples are blatant TakeThats some of them are simple complaints about not being as fun as mythbusters. And all the examples imply that they are simple Ripoffs.Let's not forget that being inspired and being a ripoff are 2 vastly different ( yet similar)things.
5. Examples full of Natter and Complaining about shows you don't like.

edited 23rd Feb '11 2:49:15 PM by FallenLegend

Edit out any stealth complaining from the description.

There is nothing inherently negative about the concept.

edited 23rd Feb '11 2:50:38 PM by EternalSeptember

^ It can be saved I guess. But there is no denying that there are issues

The description being Flame Bait and natterbait doesn't help at all

edited 23rd Feb '11 2:53:09 PM by FallenLegend

Essentially, this is just a subsection of Follow the Leader which gives a specific fandom a platform (or in their view, 'licence') to attack similar programmes.

Science programmes inevitably have to tread the same ground. There's only so much science you can feasibly do on television. As a result, it's fair to say that any programme which involves experiments is going to have done something similar to something that was done on Mythbusters. It's no more a trope than claiming that every film, book and game about space combat is a rip-off of Star Wars, or that every platform game is a rip-off of Super Mario Bros.

edited 23rd Feb '11 3:36:16 PM by halfmillennium

Can we wrap this back into the Who Wants to Be "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?" thread, please? They're the same issues, splitting the discussion seems pointless.

Well, it gets the banners in the right spot.

^^ I am ok with that.

I believe the page was made because it was originally on the Mythbusters main page under Follow the Leader. Because the example list was so freaking long, including brief homages like the Good Eats episode, they decided to just make it a seperate page listing other shows that have adopted much of the format and attempt to replicate the appeal of Mythbusters.

Now the description is a little bit negative, but that is mostly in describing why so many other shows fail to attract the same audience, bland hosts and explosions for the sake of explosions. Individual examples can be trimmed, but the page as a whole isn't just "I hate this show."

Mythbusters launched a genre. Lets give the genre a name.

How about Smashing Stuff For Science Show?

edited 23rd Feb '11 4:47:00 PM by DrStarky

that's a good idea

I think it should be cut. For one, Myth Busters wasn't the first show in it "Genre", read through the example for one that's older.

For two, I enjoyed this page, but it not exactly appropriate for the Wiki, many other pages I enjoyed were cut.

For Three, the gushing is annoying on a page where I want to read complaints, but entry pimps being what they are will still come to obviously unflattering pages and use them to promote "their" shows.

I like that plan. That oughta neutralize it, I bet.

It doesn't matter if it was the first show of its kind. It was the first popular one, and the one that arguably launched a genre.

Against cutting. It's just a Follow the Leader entry that's too long to be on the Mythbusters page. Nothing more or less. It has out-of-date info and a slightly bitchy tone, but that can be cleaned up, and I'll do just that tomorrow morning.

edited 23rd Feb '11 5:31:34 PM by Redhead

The page isn't broken and isn't hurting the rest of wiki by its existence. It's not even pretending to be a trope, it's merely a companion page to help make the main page cleaner, kind of similar to Tropes Examined By The Mythbusters. I don't see any real reason to cut it.

^If we keep the page,keeped we still would need some clean up

I vote for making a Smashing Stuff For Science page. It's a valid genre and we should have a page for it, but we don't need this near-duplicate if we do.

Not all of the follow-the-leader shows are mere "Smashing stuff for science" as Deadliest Warrior and Good Eats don't fit in that category. There are episodes of Mythbusters that don't feature a single explosion. It's the experimentation that's being replicated, with explosions put in more often.

Smashing Stuff For Science may be its own trope if you consider it a Genre Launch, but that's something seperate from this page.

And I went ahead and trimmed it of whining material. There are some page repairs that don't require a trope repair shop discussion to do. Natter is one of them.

We have Education Through Pyrotechnics (yoinked off the Mythbusters trope list), which is not the genre per se, but the concept.

How about Experiment Show for a name?

A page just for experiment programmes with no bias toward any of them would be a good idea; Emily D's suggestion would be appropriate for a title. It cuts the risk of fandom wars and permits the inclusion of science shows which haven't been accused of imitation.

edited 24th Feb '11 3:11:16 AM by halfmillennium

Gave it a shot. I wasn't sure what to do with the Deadliest Warrior entry, so I left it.

Shall we do a crowner? And can the Who Wants to Be "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?" debate go in the same one?

edited 24th Feb '11 6:17:11 AM by halfmillennium

By the way, Good Eats shouldn't be on the list as a Follow the Leader to Mythbusters, for two reasons. First, it debuted in 1999, 4 years before Mythbusters first aired in 2003. And the format is completely different:

• Good Eats:
  • one host;
  • occasional guest expert segments;
  • no experiments;
  • relatively straight-forward how-to and where's-why information.

• Mythbusters:
  • two main co-hosts and a "build team" of three others;
  • no guest experts as anything more than walk-ons to provide equipment;
  • experiments
  • the emphasis is on what happened with relatively little information about how and why things happened the way they did;
  • accuracy in the experimental process is sometimes sacrificed in favor of dramatic results.

edited 24th Feb '11 8:28:13 AM by Madrugada

Can a single episode be called Follow the Leader? Because if so, than it is. AB pretty much says so both on-camera and in the companion book to the series.

That would probably be an homage.