The idea behind ABC's new Jerry Bruckheimer-produced game show, Take The Money and Run, is extremely cool: two "hiders" are given a briefcase full of cash and must stash it somewhere in a major metro area. Two "detectives" with help from two "interrogators" must find the briefcase. If the "detectives" find the briefcase, they win the money, and if the don't, the "hiders" win. Sounds decent, right? Then why is the show so awful?
I know Take The Money and Run will garner criticism from people who claim that it promotes criminality and scoffs at law enforcement. I couldn't care less about what the show does or doesn't promote -- that isn't why it sucks. Take The Money and Run is terrible because it's as if the writers dreamed up a novel IDEA for a game show, but decided their work was finished. Absolutely no thought seems to have been put into coming up with rules that would make the game interesting and challenging.
Here are the rules, as they are told to the audience: a pair of hiders have one hour to hide a briefcase worth $100,000 anywhere in San Fransisco. After that hour is up, the hiders will be taken into custody. While in custody, the hiders will be questioned by a pair of interrogators, whose job is to uncover information about the briefcase's whereabouts. The interrogators will pass any information gleaned to a pair of detectives (actual real life police officers), who have 48 hours to find the case. The hiders are given an SUV and a cell phone. The car is equipped with GPS, so the detectives will be able to track the route the hiders take. The detectives will be given access to the cell phone's call log. After 48 hours is up, if the briefcase has been found, the detectives split $100,000. If the briefcase is still missing, the hiders take the cash. Regardless of the outcome, the interrogators win nothing. Those are the rules. Nothing more, nothing less.
In tonight's pilot episode, two brothers, Raul and Paul, are the hiders and Cliff and Dean, two of San Fran's finest, are the detectives. When the hour starts, Raul and Paul hop into the SUV and immediately start calling their friends, telling them about the briefcase. They rush over to a restaurant owned by one of Raul's buddies, hoping to stash the case there, but the place is closed. Without a back-up plan, they decide to bury the case in a park and spend the rest of the hour driving around the city and calling random friends in an attempt to throw the investigators off the trail.
Once the hour ends, the brothers are brought to a "police station" and thrown in separate holding cells. The detectives hit the streets in search of clues and the interrogators begin asking questions. Here's where the show really begins to fall apart. The interrogators have nothing at stake, they win nothing and lose nothing regardless of whether or not they elicit valuable information from the hiders. Yet they are the ones that do all of the real police work. While the two detectives are driving around aimlessly, knocking on doors and staring at random names on apartment building mailboxes, the interrogators are putting together a timeline, scouring phone logs and coming up with possible briefcase locations. Basically, the interrogators are Lester Freamon and the detectives represent Herc. It makes no friggin' sense.
Nothing about the show makes sense, really.
The interrogators expect the hiders to lie, and the hiders, who should have no fear of repercussions (such as jail time or a phone book across the face), have no incentive to tell the truth. But the real question is why would the hiders even talk to the interrogators at all? Why not just stonewall them? Nothing in the rules states that they HAVE to talk.
The hiders realize that their movements in the SUV are being tracked, so they zig-zag and backtrack in order to throw the detectives off their scent. If the hiders know this, why drive the car at all? The rules, as they are explained to the audience, do not state that you must spend a certain amount of time behind the wheel.
The rules also don't mention any requirement that the hiders stay together. Why not split up? One guy should get in the car, the guy with the case should run to the corner and jump in a cab and they head in opposite directions. After the case is hidden, they should meet back up and the detectives would be none the wiser.
The hiders understand that their phone calls can be traced, so why in god's name would you even call anyone? The rules don't say you have to make any calls, so why involve more people than absolutely necessary. It's ludicrous, by making calls you are simply providing clues.
Take The Money and Run began at 9pm, it is now 11. I have been thinking about the show for less than two hours, and I have already come up with a handful of great (if I do say so myself) ideas that would make the show a million times better. And that's really the sad part: if Bruckheimer and company had put any thought -- just the littlest bit -- into getting the rules right, Take The Money and Run could be an awesome show. Here are my ideas:
The hiders should not be related, and in fact they should be complete strangers. And the interrogators should have a stake in the action. Here's why these ideas are important (and related): imagine one of the hiders doesn't have faith in his partner. He feels like his fellow hider is weak and might give up information that could lead to the detectives finding the case. He strikes a deal with the interrogators. If he tells the interrogators where the case is hidden, they split the money -- the detectives get nothing, the other hider gets nothing. This introduces the concept of betrayal to the show, and we all know how much reality TV producers love betrayal.
Or, take tonight's episode for example: the interrogators do a great job breaking down the psyche of one of the hiders to the point that he simply gives up the location of the case just so they stop hammering him with questions. But the interrogators, who do absolutely all of the work, get no reward. Why should the detectives get $100,000 for nothing more than picking up the phone and following directions?
The hiders must not leave the GPS-equipped SUV for more than 15 minutes at a time and both hiders must never be more than 10 feet away from the case at any point before the money is hidden. This would keep the hiders honest and give the detectives a better chance to uncover clues.
This last one is kind of complicated and has a couple of parts, so pay attention. The show needs to figure out a way to incorporate the accomplices into the investigation. As it stands right now, the hiders have no motivation to use the cell phone. Here's one way to change that: Hiders should be rewarded with more prize money for each new person they involve in the "crime". If they want a shot at increasing their winnings, the hiders would be required to call a friend, meet them somewhere, show them the contents of the briefcase and then give them a portion of the money inside. The accomplice will get to keep the money they are given and the hider will be reimbursed for any money given away at the end of the game at a rate based on the number of accomplices they involve, so long as the case isn't found. For example: If the hiders meet up with one accomplice and give him $10,000 from the case, not only will that accomplice win $10,000, but the hiders' total winnings at the end of the game will now be $110,000. If they meet up with a second accomplice and give him $10,000 of the remaining $90,000 in the case, the accomplice keeps the $10,000 and the hiders' total will jump to $130,000. For a third accomplice involvement, the hiders' total balloons to $160,000. And so on and so forth. It's important to note that the accomplices only get the money if the hiders win the game. If the detectives or the interrogators win, the accomplices get nothing.
Not only does this idea motivate the hiders to use their traceable cell phone (thus giving the detectives more clues), the fact that the hiders must show their accomplices the contents of the case will provide the detectives with an additional means by which to establish a timeline. For example: if Accomplice A saw $80,000 in the case and Accomplice B saw $70,000, the detectives would be able to deduce that the case was not hidden along the route from A to B. If the detective can determine the identity of accomplices using the phone records, they can bring these men in for questioning and possibly strike a deal with them. If the accomplices begin to feel like the detectives and/or interrogators have gained the upper hand, they may choose to provide helpful information in exchange for a cut of the prize money. Then again, the accomplices are free to provide the investigators with false information if they so choose.
I recognize that added complexity of the game will require additional time allotments for all parties. I would suggest that the hiders be allowed at least four hours to stash the briefcase, the detectives should be given three days to put the puzzle pieces together and the interrogators should be provided with two days to question the hiders and any accomplices.
By no means are my ideas for improvement perfect. There are certainly kinks that need working out, but again, I only thought about the game show for a couple of hours. Imagine how awesome Take The Money and Run could be if I had months to work on it and an ABC salary to motivate me. Bob Iger, holler atcha' boy.