Slashdot Mirror
"MythBusters" Drops Kari Byron, Grant Imahara, Tory Belleci
rbrandis (735555) writes In a video announcement Thursday on Discovery Channel, MythBusters hosts Adam Savage and Jamie Hyneman revealed that longtime co-hosts and fan favorites Kari Byron, Grant Imahara, and Tory Belleci are no longer on the show. "This next season we're going back to our origins with just Adam and me," Hyneman said in the video, which explained that the change took hold as of the season's last episode on August 21. (Our interview with the original-and-remaining Mythbusters is one of my favorites.)
I won't mind so much. A shorter, more focused format will get me watching more again.
The only shame about that is losing Grant Imahara. He actually built mechanically neat rigs and such for experiments in a more advanced way than Adam and Jamie tended to.
It always seemed to me like Grant was hired to do some science, Kari was hired to be the tits, and Tory was hired to balance out the tits.
WTF?? Another female geek role model bites the dust. She's smart, she's gorgeous, she's clever, she's witty. We need way, way, more women like her on TV.
Bad fail, Mythbusters.
When it's all 3, I think it's a trimming of the budget thing. Or perhaps 2 of them really wanted to move on, and they didn't think they'd find a team that works on camera as well. If it were just say Kari, they could sub her with Jessy Combs. With 2 people, they'd likely collapse the team.
As with Tasha Yar, my view is, when you have a winning show, stay on as long as possible and ride it out.
...and the show "went back to its roots." Nothing to see here, move along.*
Posterity, my posterior.
Yes, because men need a pair of tits flashed in their faces before they'll do anything interesting.
It's really too early to tell, but it seems like they're taking this way too well and keep mentioning they're next adventure.
It's possible that they're going to star in their own show that Discovery is not willing to announce yet.
In Soviet Russia, Trojan exploits YOU!
I am a big fan of the show, but Ive stopped watching it because of the modern style of production - geared to those who have ADHD.
Modern shows now lead the viewers into the direction of the show... So, you have a few minutes of introduction, then a quick preview of whats coming up, then an ad break. Then after the ad break, they show you what you saw earlier, a quick little update, and then another flash forward to what you'll see coming up. Repeat repeat repeat.
With ads, it drives me mad. Without ads, its even worse. 10 minutes of real content gets padded out to a full 45 minute episode. So Ive quit watching - which is a pity, because the small bits of content embedded in the forward flashes and back flashes is usually quite good.
In Soviet Russia the insensitive clod is YOU!
My money's on "they asked for more pay for the next signing and couldn't reach an agreement". That will always boil down to some point between "you shouldn't have demanded more than you were worth" and "we probabably shouldn't have broken the cash cow's leg".
Only time will tell.
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
Has to be budget. Seeing as most comments here said the earlier seasons were better (I haven't watched in a couple of years as well), ratings are probably dropping. And with that comes reductions in ad revenue. And with that comes cost reduction.
In fact, IMDB ratings of the show, have fallen from 7.5 to 6.5 over the course of the show (turn on the Series Trendline):
http://graphtv.kevinformatics....
Why all three? Who knows? But they each have a kick ass resume, that's for sure.
BlameBillCosby.com
No they couldn't. Her time replacing Kari during her pregnancy was painful to watch. Not saying they couldn't replace a single person leaving, but definitely not with Jessy.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
But I think it's a good move. I always thought they were trying to do too much in one episode. And really, who can argue with focusing on two really awesome dudes who love to blow stuff up?
More isn't always better, sometimes its just more.
Nobodies Prefect
Tidbits for Techs Technology Blog
So, you have a few minutes of introduction, then a quick preview of whats coming up, then an ad break. Then after the ad break, they show you what you saw earlier, a quick little update, and then another flash forward to what you'll see coming up.
You left out the part where the flash forward is often misleading and designed to make the next part seem more interesting than it really is. So you start the show with an exciting preview, then a bit of content, then another exciting preview. Then ads. Then a recap, then the discovering that what looked interesting in the preview was entirely uninterested followed by another deceptive preview.
But MythBusters does it even more annoyingly: they'll combine Adam and Jamie doing Myth A with Tori, Grant, and Kari doing Myth B. So you end up getting those little recap, content, preview segments first for Myth A and then for Myth B, followed by a block of ads. It makes the entire thing completely disjointed and pads out what should be two mini-episodes into a single 45 minute episode.
I've kind of wanted to take a MythBusters episode as aired and edit it to remove the preview/recap stuff and merge Myth A and Myth B into a single block of content and see how much content I'm left with. Except I'm too lazy to bother pirating an episode to do that.
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
AGREED! I'm going entirely off topic here, but I don't know what American producer decided that this format was a good idea. It's repulsive. You don't see this on the BBC. If Top Gear ever did this, they'd be flushed down the toilet -- which is why the American version of Top Gear on the "History" channel is just so terribly unwatchable. The History channel is one of the top offenders promoting this kind of banality, and it's a shame that the Discovery channel and so many others have caught this same illness (I'm looking your way, "Science" channel). American television producers are farking idiots.
Blame Discovery (and History, and all the other copycats). It's a fucked up format designed by morons in order to pad minutes and fill out advertising when they otherwise have very little real content.
Wasn't 'solving problems with basic thinking' the long-discounted Aristotelean method of scientific deduction?
I liked Scottie
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Maybe. But their ratings are down so more likely they realized that 2 hosts makes for a much less expensive show to produce even if the other three aren't demanding salary increases, They might lose a few viewers for dumping Kari but they won't take a hit on the other two.
http://xkcd.com/397/
Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
This is what happened.
When Friends and Big Bang cast members decide to unite for higher paychecks, the executives cave. A few years ago, some of the minor stars on CSI tried to do the same and were canned immediately.
I think they were trying to set a precedent for 2nd/3rd tiet actors/participants in a show that such actions will result in a 100% paycut. I can't totally blame them either.
There are people who shorten these episodes to cut the repeats and some of the filler
http://www.reddit.com/r/smyths
"These 'Streamline' edits run shorter because they are missing teasers, cartoons, flashbacks, repetition, idents, history lessons, fun facts, "we're experts", and anything else that slows down the show."
Check out "Streamlined Mythbusters." It's a crowdsourced version of what you're lookng for.
..."we probabably shouldn't have broken the cash cow's leg"...
But, Grant could build it a new one, with a Ninja sword built in!
You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
Adam mentioned a shift in fromat in a Tested video a while back, this seems to fit along with that.
Were that I say, pancakes?
I'm surprised no one said it... I think they've just run out of Myths! A lot of the new shows - it really seems like they're reaching. And as other people did mention, they have about 15 minutes of content in an hour of show with the commercial->recap->brief content->preview->commercial->repeat format. Yeah, I just really don't think they can make another season of shows without halving the number of myths that they have to come up with..
Given their pay, royalties, and their appearance fees at just about any geek convention they wanted to go to (and probably still can for a while)... if they managed their money properly, they're probably set for life. Or would be in terms of what average folks try for.
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
I stopped watching Mythbusters last year when I found myself fast forwarding every episode to the end to see what happens. Too much fluff, and in some cases not enough rigor in their tests for my liking. I don't blame the hosts, though - they put a ton of effort into making the show and tried to make it entertaining.
That is an option but not my guess.
My money is on "studio offered much less than they were making last season and wouldn't budge" The three decided it was better to move on to something else either as a group or individually then to settle for less money. They are relatively young and fairly popular right now so it's a good time to move on to something else as Mythbusters won't last forever.
Jamie and Adam are both older and will NOT be seeking work after Mythbusters is done so even if they were offered less money for another season, they would be content to accept as it still would be decent money. I'm guessing Mythbusters gets one or two more seasons until it's canceled all together, nothing lasts forever on tv.
What an impersonal goodbye. Just an announcement from Adam and Jamie, some video clips, and a stock photo.
While I could believe Adam's thanks for all their work, he seemed strained somehow. I think the network did it, after the wrap of filming for the last episode.
It really lacked the warmth that a heartfelt goodbye, shot in the M7 workshop with a handheld camera, hugs, and tears.
I speculate that the network forced the reconfiguration of the show after filming of that episode ended.
Sad, really.
Except, of course, the show's been on for 11 years, not seven. The newest of the B team is Imahara, who joined in 2005, nine years ago. They've already renegotiated contracts at least once.
Either they demanded more money, the ratings are down enough to want to cut costs, or they've got something else planned - they may get their own show.
Or, of course, they may all just be tired of filming 48 weeks out of every year, to get ten episodes.
"Top Gear" in the UK does not HAVE commercial breaks! It's made by and shown on, the BBC, whose main TV stations have no adverts at all (except for their own forthcoming shows).
When "Top Gear" is repeated on other, commercial channels, then yes, there are advert breaks.
"Absorbing your worst..."
First season TNG stunk so bad; we only watched because it was so good to have Star Trek back on the air. I could not blame Crosby leaving. It was the middle of the second season before the writing noticeably improved.
ah man...Mythbusters...
I'm a fan, for sure, but it seems that even casual fans like me can sort of see past the veneer of production. It's kind of in my nature to analyze a show (as it is w/ many on /. i'm sure) and pick apart their production decisions.
So, when it comes to Kari, Byron, and Grant...I think they should have seen this coming a decade ago.
They're great, and they added value to their presence over the years. I always liked their segments.
But if we're analyzing production decisions, it seems that they should have tried to get their agent to get them more work, or maybe a spin off...their presence was never going to be more than bit parts...part timer gigs. Even the popularity of the show can't make more time in the timeslot...it's just there was a maximum ammount they could physically contribute due to time constraints per episode.
I'm sure fans will remember the super-cool welder chick from, i'm guessing, seasons 2-5...she moved on and I figured the others would do the same, having a rotating cast of experts go in and out over the years...except for Kari...she seemed like a good foil for the guys.
Anyhow, Mythbusters was always better than it's show. You could tell that dumb network people were putting weird constraints on them...ex: voiceover narration from some random in Tasmania or w/e...and other parts...but it is always going to be great for what it is...
but yeah...IMHO the three of them should have seen this coming
Thank you Dave Raggett
I think they worry too much about what constitutes a good myth.
I'd like to see a lot more smaller myths tackled - that'd get rid of the 'fluff' and like some have mentioned, they spend too much time repeating stuff - at least 3-4 times they say what they are going to do.
They need to stop catering for an extremely low common denominator.
If they made the episodes available worldwide, DRM free 1080p with the ads and repetitions removed, I might find it hard to resist snapping them up even at $2 each.
Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
I disagree. It may be entertainment, but the show is a great model for amateur science. Being amateur does not mean it is not science.
You say, "Real scientists don't need to perform these shitty expriment and can solve the problem with basic thinking and most of the time basic arithmetic."
Wikipedia's article on the scientific method says, "To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning."
I say it is your concept of science that is flawed.
When you see the same scene replayed 5 times, before and after commercial breaks, and ten they flash back to it... It gets annoying. They could do the same show in 1/2 the time. Now they want to cut out 1/2 the crew and things they're doing? Doesn't bode well...
Twinstiq, game news
in some cases not enough rigor in their tests
That was the problem for me with Kari, Grant and Tory. Sometimes I think they actually failed to test the myth because of some issue with their setup. I wouldn't mind that if they used it to add discussion about what constitutes a real test, or maybe suggest some way that it still could possibly be true. Invariably, they would just claim that this is "totally busted!"
It's just annoying. It's like they don't want you watching the program if your standards are too high. Goddamn it, that's what science is about!
I can't expect them to be as good as Adam and Jamie - they've got a lot of experience in making things happen from working in special effects. Some of their setups are quite ingenious. But watching these other fools pretend to do the same thing is just sad sometimes.
And yeah, as people have been saying, the fluff factor is worse than ever. Those little acted out bits with silly music are horrendous. What a waste of time and effort. Just do the myths. Watching clips on youtube is far better than watching on TV.
--
You might find Mythbusters for the Impatient useful. It is a Youtube channel that edits each episode down to about four minutes.
I remember years ago when I first set up MythTV, and set it to record MythBusters. It eventually recorded the episodes from the first season, when they still did several myths per show, but finished one before starting on the next one. Watching those episodes was like heaven compared to the newer format. No "this is coming up later" and "this happened earlier" segments both before and after each commercial break. You have to wonder how much interesting footage they're leaving out so that they have time for all of those recaps.
Kari was in episode 2 and randomly through season 1, Season 2 was the first trio (Kari, Tori, and Scotti)
I stopped watching when I saw an episode where they were challenging the assertion that, given a vehicle moving at 30 mph, with a rear-facing air cannon that would shoot at tennis ball at 30 mph, the ball, when fired from the moving vehicle, would simply drop.
Really? I mean, I'm not going to challenge your assertion that the show has gotten pretty bad lately, as it's certainly gotten bad since season two began, but I wouldn't criticize them for testing something everyone thinks they know just because it is actually true.
One of the most interesting episodes I saw was when they were testing something Jamie said in an earlier episode: That if two trucks collide at 55 MPH, it's like one truck hitting a brick wall at 110 MPH. At first I thought "duh, everyone knows that's true" and I continued to think that as they set up experiments, right until they were about to let two clay blocks swing into each other at which point a light bulb lit up above my head, and so I quickly hit the pause button and thought about what was going to happen, and realized that since each block of clay was simply going to stop the movement of the other, each was going to end up in the same condition it would have been in had it simply slammed into the "immovable object" instead, and thus two vehicles each going 55 MPH in a head-on collision is exactly like just one vehicle hitting a brick wall in a 55 MPH collision. ...and I suppose it's solvable with math too, given e = m * v, and so if two objects slowing down one unit of speed yields two units of energy, or one unit per object, then one object slowing down two units of speed yields four units of energy, which is four times as much, even though the difference in speeds is identical in each case. ...but I was certainly misinformed about how it worked, and I don't think I was the only one, so it was totally worth doing an episode on, indeed it was one of my favorites since I actually learned something.
Who knows, maybe the tennis ball episode was someone else's favorite, as it showed them something they either didn't know, or just hadn't really ever thought about.
What annoys me is when they start testing movie myths that I'm pretty sure no one would believe anyway, or when they perform experiments in stupid ways, or omit basic information to try to make it seem like the outcome isn't as predictable as it is. I don't mind that they do the experiments, I just hate that they play dumb about the outcome rather than look for some way to inject some intelligence into the experiment despite the predictable outcome.
Can't exactly say I'm disappointed they're leaving. They were not what the show really needed. This is a good opportunity for them to rethink the show's format and improve it. The current formula they've been following since season one has grated my nerves to the point I can no longer watch or enjoy the show. The piece-to-camera filler with the "oh-so-witty" worksafe quips and filling in at least 20-35% of the show's runtime with recaps of footage we've already seen is just agitating more than entertaining to me. I'd honestly prefer it if Mythbusters moved away from the "youth science variety program" format into a more serious, documentary-style science show aimed at mature young adults. They could focus more on the details of the scientific approach, explain their reasoning with scientific facts, explain the history of the logic they use in their approach, and give us raw cuts of footage of their experimentation. It'd not only be more informative but it'd shift the target audience to those actually interested in science rather than kids & teenagers who just like seeing things blow up or catch fire. Those kinds of things may be seen as entertaining by television executives, and it may help the show get good ratings and attract the interest of big companies willing to pay for advertising slots alongside the program, but concentrating mostly on big explosions and great balls of fire doesn't really help make the show be seen as a "learning" program.
Worse, on BBC America, they actually edit out large portions of the show.
Remember that the original show is nearly an hour long without commercials. So for the US version, they edit it down to the standard 44 minutes so they can include 16 minutes of ads. Which means you're missing anywhere from 12-20 minutes of content depending on original. (Based on Netflix run times.)
They've started showing the initial airing of a new Top Gear in hour 20 minute blocks, but repeats are always the edited versions. There's some stuff that's simply never been shown on US TV because it was edited out for ads.
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
I'd like to see a lot more smaller myths tackled
One of my husband and I's very favorite myths is one of the simplest, and it's one of the ones you can do at home too: Phone Book Friction, asking if you interleave the pages of two phone books together, can you pull them apart again?
The answer (spoilers ahead): Yes, but it takes a great amount of force. Even two cars couldn't pull them apart. It was a simple myth where everyone, hosts included, thought it wouldn't take that much force -- they're just two phone books! The episode was excellently paced as they tried test after test, each time upping the ante until finally they used two TANKS to finally separate the phone books!