Fix the Show

[GeorgiaRai]

Every day on my way to work I pass Big Pappa's house (ex-boyfriend of RHOA's Kim Zolciak) and noticed today it's being used (again) as a filming location for something.  It's rented for movie sets, etc. fairly often, and I thought - "Hey, this would've been great for MAFS!"  Each couple could have a private wing, but there's also common areas where everyone could interact & hang out.

 

Instead of putting the couples through the farce of finding an apartment, moving, etc., I'd like the show to try to make it a fun and rewarding experience, even if the couples don't stay together afterward.

 

I hadn't realized that The Experts weren't in constant contact with the cast members throughout the process of their journey through this social experiment ( <--- sorry, couldn't resist!)  That should definitely be changed to give everyone full access to whatever resource they need.

[Neurochick]

What they need to do is make sure both men and women actually WANT to get married, that they're not on the show to promote or produce themselves.  

 

As for stresses in NYC, every place can be stressful but in different ways than NYC.  I know people who, if you put them in the suburbs or in the middle of nowhere, they'd be looking to kill themselves.  So what's stressful to one person isn't stressful to another.

Legally they can not be married in Australia, here we need to sign an Intention of Marriage 30 days before the ceremony together with supporting documents in front of the celebrant who will preform the ceremony. So there was no way that could be achieved here.

For me I actually liked that it was not a legal marriage, for me I liked that if they got paired with a angry douche like Ryan D that they could walk away without legal consequences.

 

 

No offense but that sounds like some wackadoo shit the Catholic church does, or used to do, they wouldn't marry you unless you went to engagement encounter.

Edited June 24, 2015 by Neurochick

[Pollock]

Simple: They need to copy the Australian format. 

I've only seen the first episode yet but if they could copy the wedding ceremonies, it would be good. The settings of the american version always looked very depressing to me, as if they just took a closet and put neons on the ceiling, chairs and flowers in it and called it a day. The australians one take place in beautiful and bright settings, decorated with taste, so even if their marriage wasn't legal (thank you for the info to whomever posted it), it felt more like it. 

 

I say that as a woman who married the love of her life in a paire of jeans and Chuck Taylors with only the two witnesses we were obligated to bring. I'm not the princess type but come on, they could put in a little bit of effort in that so the show feels less cheap.

 

Oh and if our beloved socalledexperts can have the stupid bipping electronic board the australians experts got during the matchmaking process in the library, it would be gold. This phase is hilarious. I keep waiting for it to be like in SF movies where the only role of the woman in a spaceship is to repeat what's written on the computer screen. America should really go all in the "super scientific" aspect. "Look at that, this is a super serious experiment, the photos of the participants are making noises!" 

[algebra]

After seeing this list https://cms.sarasotaclerk.com/BenchmarkwebCAPS/CourtCase.aspx/Details/601646?digest=fCE9%2BPI1JvqbkNYUaCR46A

I think there was a lot more going on than just a DUI from a year ago. Normally with a DUI, the defendant pleads no contest or guilty, pays a fine, loses his license, (but is still allowed to drive back and forth to work) and that's it. he must have had repeated problems with the terms of his probation to be going back and forth in court a year later. And wasn't that court appearance of 12/19/14 during their honeymoon? Did he fly from Colorado during their honeymoon to appear in court in Florida or did his lawyer appear on his behalf?

[operalover]

The editing needs to be better and not focus on the issues of the participants to create drama. The editors also need to stop using the same interview clip in each episode -- the participants sound like they have been given a script and they read the same script out every episode. The participants should be told to stop talking about their histories at length and instead focus on the present on what is going on -- the show is not a therapy session.

This is not going to happen. Basically for every one hour of material they have, they get 4 hours of show out of it. Maybe more. The Experts(sic) seem to repeat themselves over and over: Marriage is very hard! Marriage is compromise! These couples just met! 

 

We are going to keep hearing the exact same thing from The Experts(sic) during the next season! And they are going to continue to replay and drag out and recap ad nauseum.

[Truegem]

Look for the negatives. Is he a mama's boy? Could he have a bad temper? Does she just want fame? Did Ashley have a lobotomy? (Personally, I think Ashley DID have a lobotomy because she has no personality whatsoever.) Ask all these questions, plus more, in your minds, about each candidate.

Oh, and lie detector tests! Lol

[Wings]

If the experts feel a deep need to pop into the show  (taking head) to explain something, say something wise.  "In marriage you have to establish trust"  is not what I mean, for fuck sake.  So stop the banal interruptions unless you have something relevant to say.  They are so annoying. 

 

Set up furnished apartments for each couple and tell viewers you have done this.  We know you do. 

 

Do not allow them to spend a night apart.  Make that a contract point.  Sleep on the couch if you must but no running back to your apt to spend the night. 

 

Budget talks are silly.  They are not spending their own income on their apartments, you are providing them.  They can work out a budget on groceries, restaurants and entertainment.   David says, I will pay for it all.  Yuh.   They set that up because of his income. 

 

Send all of them on equal honeymoons.   Two get Caribbean islands and one gets Phoenix?  I live here and it does not compare to a tropical island!

 

Better yet cancel this and go get jobs at Home Depot.  

[ketose]

I think they should use the experts vs. eHarmony or match.com. That was, the professionals are proven to be worse than a website.

[operalover]

I

 

Set up furnished apartments for each couple and tell viewers you have done this.  We know you do. 

 

Do not allow them to spend a night apart.  Make that a contract point.  Sleep on the couch if you must but no running back to your apt to spend the night. 

 

Budget talks are silly.  They are not spending their own income on their apartments, you are providing them.  They can work out a budget on groceries, restaurants and entertainment.   David says, I will pay for it all.  Yuh.   They set that up because of his income. 

 

 

I think it is the opposite- that the show pays for the old apartments and the couples pay together for the new one. It makes the most sense. This way they get what they can afford if they really were married without worrying about the bill for their old places. The show pays that bill and they pool their money for the new place. The show would be too cheap to cough up $3500 for Dave based on his income but they have no problem paying the rent on his older- cheaper- apartment. 

[cpcathy]

How about, take all the manipulation away from the show. No "we are going to talk about finances now!" etc, pretense. Loose guidelines, they get married, have to stay in the same house, doesn't matter whose, and then, just FILM. A good documentarian would be able to do it. And yet, we have this show. Sociologists everywhere must be weeping.

[ethalfrida]

How about, take all the manipulation away from the show. No "we are going to talk about finances now!" etc, pretense. Loose guidelines, they get married, have to stay in the same house, doesn't matter whose, and then, just FILM. A good documentarian would be able to do it. And yet, we have this show. Sociologists everywhere must be weeping.

That would be the absolute best show and so worth watching. 

[okerry]

I wonder if *Engaged at First Sight* might work better. Match them scientifically with the same experts (yeah, I know) but instead of getting married, they have some sort of engagement ceremony. Then they've got three months (more realistic) to decide if they want to actually get married. They can live together or not, as they wish. If they do want to marry, the show can give them a splashy wedding and honeymoon. If they break up, no more show. If they just want to remain engaged but still think about it - not sure. Might still be fun to follow them. But if they're not married within a year, that's it - no more show!

 

The show could send them on all kinds of activities together, and for the TV factor provide plenty of opportunities to hook up with someone else - go to clubs, go to exotic places, etc. Maybe even send all four couples around together and see if they start hitting on each other, ha! But at least if it doesn't work out, there's no actual divorce involved.

[ketose]

The marriage thing Is designed to make the couples more serious about staying together. For example, they'd probably never put divorced people on the show because they've already crossed that threshold. But if marriage really doesn't mean much, it's not an incentive to make the thing work.

 

Match.com or E-harmony pitch the idea that you can't find someone on your own and they can. People like Tres and Ashley seem like they weren't looking for marriage very long, or at least didn't meet to many people before giving up and getting into this experiment.

 

Plus, we know the matches are BS. The experts never have a solid laundry list of reasons why they should be together, only a few things that might make it work. I think each person should get a dossier on why their spouse is a match. Right now, it'd probably be an index card with things like "you're both mixed race" or "he was one of the few Black guys who'd marry a Black woman."

[PityFree]

Here is how I would fix the show: everybody would get a wedding but not actually be legally married. No one except production would know that the weddings have been a sham. At the six week mark, they would be told that they weren't legally married and then asked if they wanted to make it official and legal at that point.

[ketose]

That would work once.

[PityFree]

Yeah. But the current version of the show only worked once (for Jason & Courtney) in its current form anyway.

[ketose]

It looks like MAFS tried really hard not to get overemotional men like violent Ryan for S3. Instead, they ended up with dull women with social problems paired with very calm guys.

 

The answer for fixing this show is to spend a buck. I also think this not living in the same house crap should end. They need a contract where people get fined for not living with the spouse, even if it is separate bedrooms.

 

Also, they have to be together for 6 months, minimum. I spent more than 6 weeks with college roommates in a much smaller place. The thing that would really cost money would be to tell contestants like Ashley who don't do anything after 1 month is that they're done, she and David are off the show and her face will never be on TV.

[Liberty]

Yeah. But the current version of the show only worked once (for Jason & Courtney) in its current form anyway.

 

Sounds like the results of this 'social experiment' are in!

 

Strangely, they will be able to cast another season or two.

[Neurochick]

Legally they can not be married in Australia, here we need to sign an Intention of Marriage 30 days before the ceremony together with supporting documents in front of the celebrant who will preform the ceremony. So there was no way that could be achieved here.

For me I actually liked that it was not a legal marriage, for me I liked that if they got paired with a angry douche like Ryan D that they could walk away without legal consequences.

 

That's interesting because it sounds like it's harder to get married; and that also sounds like a heck of a lot of paperwork (too much big government for my taste, sorry).  On the other hand, what is the divorce rate down there?

[BBDi]

I think they should add a traditional matchmaker to the panel of experts, at least during the selection process.

It's weird - this season sucks as much as last season did - just in a different way.

[ketose]

I'm pretty sure a traditional matchmaker wouldn't put people together sight unseen. Unless you're talking about the really old fashioned type. They would just let the parents decide.

[AussieBabe]

Honestly, I think they should talk to the parents and friends off-camera to get a feel for these people, too. I think they need to check their social media pages, talk to exes (off-camera), etc. They don't have well-rounded POV. Anybody can tell you what you want to hear or be anything on paper. Clearly the participants can't be trusted because we end up with hot messes like Sam (hairbrushes are your friend; burn the daisy dukes) and cold fishes like Ashley. If you look back at the wedding, all of her guests looked unimpressed by David. It was one sour looking crowd, and they didn't even know him or his name.

They need new experts who will be more involved. When you have more fails than successes, it's time to change some things. It wouldn't hurt them to increase the amount of time, too.

The Aussie version was moderately successful. They renewed the series. There were four couples. One couple stayed together and went on to get married and buy a house. They were expecting, but she had a miscarriage. She wasn't attracted to him at all, but she came around. By week 3 or so, she was falling in love. Another couple split before decision day because they were incompatible. (The beauty of not being in a legally binding agreement.) The third and fourth couples stayed together until after the show. One of the brides went on to marry someone else. The groom of one of the couples that split is or was dating the bride who decided she wasn't compatible with her groom. The other groom is now on Farmer Wants a Wife. His "wife" was batshit crazy, and he was too good of a guy for all her BS.

Aussie experts didn't pair people based on garnering ratings or superficial reasons, and they tried to pair them based on compatibility. Meanwhile, our experts pair people based on people being able to tame them like zookeepers (Sam) and people being able to break people out of their shells (Ashley).

I only wish we could see them in a Big Brother type of setting where the cameras are rolling all the time.

I also believe they should have it written that living outside of the joint home will be a breach of contract or will forfeit any stipend. Outside of T and V, I don't believe any of these couples live together.

[okerry]

I also agree that the couple MUST live together or forfeit their paychecks. Married people live together, and that's what the show is *supposed* to be all about.

[Jack Sampson]

I'd have financial incentives and steep penalties for the couples...most of them based on audience vote.

Some are easy ways to get weekly bonuses:

The couples move in and live together for the whole week.

The couples met each other's parents (or friends or have a group party, etc).

They buy a pet, shop for furniture - anything a normal couple would do.

Have sex...I know, that one is controversial because you're being paid to have sex, but it's still a normal expectation in a real marriage.

Then the audience votes on each contestant's behavior for the week:

People think Ashley's being a bytch? She forfeits her bonus for the week.

Tres goes gets hammered at a strip club.

Neil hits on Sam's roommate.

Or even, Vanessa giggled too much this week.

And the audience has the option of taking the bonus away completely or giving it to the other party:

David made Ashley dinner and she didn't even call to say she would be late - the audience can vote her weekly bonus awarded to David.

A person who took the marriage seriously and really tried to make it work could walk away with several $100k while the other party gets nothing.

Call the show Married At First Sight - Instant Karma Edition.

[ketose]

Audience participation has been rejected since Big Brother Season 1. The audience chose to kick off the villains and the winners were considered too boring. I don't actually agree, but I doubt any TV show is going to bother listening to the audience.

 

Maybe we just need better actors. When Jamie froze Doug out, it was a little playful. He'd say something sleazy and Jamie would say something like, "no way, Jose." If David said something risqué, Ashley would run away screaming "Ouch, my virgin ears! I have to go home and study the reproductive system for my nursing certificate."

[Palomar]

It would definitely help in their selection process if they showed the pictures of the serious contenders for each person they are selecting for to at least say "swipe left or swipe right" .  They definitely need to get the physical attraction right. 

[Wings]

They need a bigger budget with cash incentives to attract a larger group in the casting call.  What we have now are people who applied to be on some kind of reality show and find this was the only one who chose them.  

[ketose]

Replace one or all the experts with Dr. Phil. At least there would be the entertainment of him berating Ashley and Sam.

[ProzacQueen]

They need an online "Big Brother After Dark" type thing to happen, with audio. I admit, I would watch the heck out of that.

 

I don't want to see their bedroom activities, if there are any. I want to see what happens, when the production team, isn't around. Do they hangout and watch TV together, or do they sequester themselves to different rooms of the house? Do they really share a bed, or do they just hop in together, when production wants a "morning wake-up" shot? Hell, what do they even talk about, since it's been 3 weeks, and they still call themselves "strangers"? 

 

The "experts" need to take some refresher courses. Seriously, on what planet, does fixing two people up with abandonment issues, seem like a good idea? Mind you I don't have a degree, in any of the fields the "experts" have. It just seems, that putting two people with trust and abandonment issues together, and making THAT the relationship's "selling point", is a recipe for disaster. As an aside, I totally expect Tres and Vanessa's relationship, to go out in a blaze of glory.

 

I am so down though, with a live feed of their houses. I can't be the only one, who is totally curious, as to what goes on, when the cameras leave for the day.

[stuckin60s]

if they haven't already started the Miami show there are a few things I think they could do to make it a better experiment and more enjoyable to watch

 

1.  Have the couples do things together as an exercise

2. Fishbowl questions are not sexual - things to get conversations started like favorite color, college, best friends, job  etc

3. have a party with 4 or 5 of each of their friends so they can see each other in social setting and learn more about them by their friends

 

the experts need to be more involved ( watching the weekly takes) or something where they really know what is going on

 

stop the use of the same talking heads, it is obvious by the backgrounds and clothes that these were done at a different time, maybe even after the experiment is over

[okerry]

I think the biggest problem with this show (among many) is that no matter how good they might get at matching people on paper, there's just no way to test for in-person chemistry. None. You have to be there because it's the sight, the feel, the energy, and even the scent of the other person that you'll actually feel a spark with. The only couple so far with any actual chemistry was Jason and Cortney, and they're the only ones who seem to have an actual relationship.

 

So, "experts:" How are you going to test for chemistry?

[lavenderpenguin]

1. Better vettng of candidates -- find emotionally healthy, marriage-ready folks to pair up. 

 

2. Match them according to actual compatibility, not random shared experiences (bullying as a kid, single parent households, etc.) -- don't pair these people up according to similar psychological issues, or on the other end of the spectrum, according to vastly different personality types. No one should be "fixing" anyone's problem -- they need to complement (not supplement) each other's existing personalities. 

 

3. Give them structured activities to complete together, so that they can learn how to work together and start seeing themselves as a team/couple. Challenging people to work together to get something done will force them to interact, work together, or help them see how they can become a better/stronger team. For example, after the wedding/reception, they could complete a scavenger hunt (or some other kind of 'challenge') in order to find their honeymoon tickets. Give them a common goal to work towards together in the beginning to push along the process of getting to know each other.

Edited January 31, 2016 by lavenderpenguin

[still hoping]

I would love to see more of the selection process.....who else did they consider for Neil or Sam for instance?  Why oh why did they choose Ashley for David?

 

As I said on another thread (experts) I would love to "see" who the runner ups were then bring them all together with some other contenders - any any of the "marrieds" who decide not to stay married...heck even bring in some from prior season....and have a house party type show

 

if an engagement occurs - aren't they all supposed to be ready ready ready eager to marry.....then marry them on the spot.

 

I liked the Australian show (hated the dark haired shrew woman who was with the cute Farmer)....at one point they had all 4 couples get together at one of their "homes"...and they all interacted. That was really interesting - one of the women was sad cause she thought the other couples were so much more together than her and her rather disinterested hubby.

 

The couple who stayed together in Oz are adorable and wish them well...saw updates over the Holidays they are solid a love story there...one thing to note both are young, nice looking like Jason and Courtney. Maybe young is better - less baggage, less hang ups, more open to "scientifically" arranged Not that the us version is very scientific haha

 

However I will say the "experts" in Oz are not all that good either - one couple was very bad match, she was (or looked) older than him, had been married before, she was not all that attractive and he was just not into her (she is the one who got upset at the 4 couples dinner party)

[okerry]

1. Better vettng of candidates -- find emotionally healthy, marriage-ready folks to pair up. 

 

2. Match them according to actual compatibility, not random shared experiences (bullying as a kid, single parent households, etc.) -- don't pair these people up according to similar psychological issues, or on the other end of the spectrum, according to vastly different personality types. No one should be "fixing" anyone's problem -- they need to complement (not supplement) each other's existing personalities. 

 

3. Give them structured activities to complete together, so that they can learn how to work together and start seeing themselves as a team/couple. Challenging people to work together to get something done will force them to interact, work together, or help them see how they can become a better/stronger team. For example, after the wedding/reception, they could complete a scavenger hunt (or some other kind of 'challenge') in order to find their honeymoon tickets. Give them a common goal to work towards together in the beginning to push along the process of getting to know each other.

Ya know what might be fun - the "experts" could use the above guidelines to make several matches, but the contestants don't know who the matches are. Then the contestants spend a week or two at "Matchmaker Island" - an isolated place where the whole group does all sorts of activities together, and we can watch to see if they pick the person the experts thought they should have, or pick someone else, or pick no one at all. Bonus $$$$ if there's a wedding at the end.

[BBDi]

There is/was a show like that on another channel. My daughter watched it a couple of times but I didn't pay much attention to it.

It was geared to a younger crowd and was less 'serious' than MAFS tries to be. Lots of couples not just a few, at least at the start.

[lavenderpenguin]

Ya know what might be fun - the "experts" could use the above guidelines to make several matches, but the contestants don't know who the matches are. Then the contestants spend a week or two at "Matchmaker Island" - an isolated place where the whole group does all sorts of activities together, and we can watch to see if they pick the person the experts thought they should have, or pick someone else, or pick no one at all. Bonus $$$$ if there's a wedding at the end.

 

This is already a television show - it's called "Are You The One?" and it's on MTV. There are three seasons of it and it's super entertaining to see them try and pair up.

[ketose]

Maybe they trap the couples on an island and they won't be rescued until they consummate the marriage.

[qtpye]

Maybe they trap the couples on an island and they won't be rescued until they consummate the marriage.

 

That mean Sam, Neil, Davina, Ashley, David, and Sean would be stuck on the island forever.  Particularly, Sean, since he thinks assembling Legos and glow in the dark stars make him Christian Grey sexual.

 

Edited February 2, 2016 by qtpye

[Jack Sampson]

3. Give them structured activities to complete together, so that they can learn how to work together and start seeing themselves as a team/couple. Challenging people to work together to get something done will force them to interact, work together, or help them see how they can become a better/stronger team. For example, after the wedding/reception, they could complete a scavenger hunt (or some other kind of 'challenge') in order to find their honeymoon tickets. Give them a common goal to work towards together in the beginning to push along the process of getting to know each other.

They did this in the first 2 seasons. One of the experts (Pepper maybe) gave them things like furniture to assemble.

[AussieBabe]

After seeing tonight's episode, they seriously need to require independent therapy. Not with the experts but real experts because there's nothing about any of the women that says ready for marriage.

[okerry]

After seeing tonight's episode, they seriously need to require independent therapy. Not with the experts but real experts because there's nothing about any of the women that says ready for marriage.

I agree. It may turn out that anyone who would go on this show in the first place is not ready for marriage, no matter how ironic that may seem.

[MrHufflepuff]

They could import ideas from other shows:

 

The Bachelor/Bachelorette:  One guy marries fifteen women who he's just met, or one girl marries fifteen guys she's just met.

 

Jersey Shore/Party Down South/etc.:  A bunch of couples who get married the first time they meet are put in a house to live together--with a lot of free alcohol.

 

The Biggest Loser:  A bunch of couples who get married the first time they meet have to compete to lose the most weight for cash prizes.

 

Bad Girls Club/Tool Academy/etc:  A bunch of jerks and assholes get married to other jerks and assholes who they've just met.  I can imagine the "therapists" saying stuff like "Jonathan has anger issues stemming from his steroid abuse, while Joanne is a mean drunk who is a borderline alcoholic, which is why we thought they would be a good match together."

[sleekandchic]

They could import ideas from other shows:

The Bachelor/Bachelorette: One guy marries fifteen women who he's just met, or one girl marries fifteen guys she's just met.

Jersey Shore/Party Down South/etc.: A bunch of couples who get married the first time they meet are put in a house to live together--with a lot of free alcohol.

The Biggest Loser: A bunch of couples who get married the first time they meet have to compete to lose the most weight for cash prizes.

Bad Girls Club/Tool Academy/etc: A bunch of jerks and assholes get married to other jerks and assholes who they've just met. I can imagine the "therapists" saying stuff like "Jonathan has anger issues stemming from his steroid abuse, while Joanne is a mean drunk who is a borderline alcoholic, which is why we thought they would be a good match together."

This is so damn clever and hilarious, I had to tell you and thank you for making me lol. :) Edited February 4, 2016 by sleekandchic

[suzeecat]

The "experts" obviously need to do more in the way of screening, given that there is so much talk and speculation about how (some of) the individuals are putting on their best behaviors and acting differently in front of the cameras.  We are also seeing different sides coming out on social media versus what is shown to us by the editors. 

 

Maybe have a shorter season BEFORE the weddings where a larger group of the top contenders are put into random smaller male/female groups for interactive, NOT-DATING activities like sex-ed classes, cooking classes, spirituality classes, party planning,  Have each one prepare a dummy dating site profile and get feedback from others in the group.  Maybe throw in some field trips to bars, concerts, cultural events.  Observe how they interact with opposite sexes, how they are with larger groups of strangers.  You may even observe some pairings just through these activities - the introverts will go off and find other like-minded types for deeper conversations without the PRESSURE of HAVING to fall in love.  This could also weed out the jerks and closet gays (coughSeancough).  They could even have audience ratings and pairing suggestions to elicit viewer feedback. 

 

That's all I got for now.  But I'm just brainstorming for a more accurate way to vet these personalities beside just paper questionnaires and personal interviews that can be "acted out".

Edited February 4, 2016 by suzeecat

[okerry]

Bad Girls Club/Tool Academy/etc:  A bunch of jerks and assholes get married to other jerks and assholes who they've just met.  I can imagine the "therapists" saying stuff like "Jonathan has anger issues stemming from his steroid abuse, while Joanne is a mean drunk who is a borderline alcoholic, which is why we thought they would be a good match together."

LOLOL I'd watch that! But come to think of it, that's pretty much what MAFS already is!

[rab01]

honestly, the Biggest Losers at First Sight could be a compelling show.

[crgirl412]

I think the biggest problem with this show (among many) is that no matter how good they might get at matching people on paper, there's just no way to test for in-person chemistry. None. You have to be there because it's the sight, the feel, the energy, and even the scent of the other person that you'll actually feel a spark with. The only couple so far with any actual chemistry was Jason and Cortney, and they're the only ones who seem to have an actual relationship.

 

So, "experts:" How are you going to test for chemistry?

Maybe they could do small mixers beforehand so it wouldn't really be married at first sight but close.  They would take a page out of Millionaire Matchmaker (reality show on Bravo) where the experts pick 2-3 people per person that they think will be matches and have a mixer then the contestants pick 2 people and they will marry one. The experts use their "expertise" to have the final say of who they will marry. 

 

Something needs to give.  These experts and their tools are not working!!  Some people have not just been mildly incompatible as a couple but individuals who have real emotional/mental health needs and not ready for dating let alone getting married.

 

It really is professional malpractice for a licensed clinical psychologist to use such highly-regarded personality tests and his own personal PhD-educated analysis of each participant and we still see such a high level of dysfunction.  I believe that the tests' data show what truly is going on with these people but he thinks his own (and the other professionals) personal analysis of each contestant outweigh the data.         

I remember telling my sister when reality tv started that all these contestants go through psychological testing and they pick the ones that are the most emotionally unbalanced, are narcissists yet have a very unclear sense of self, are prone to emotional and/or violent outbursts or are on the other side of the scale and can't show emotions at all and many other issues found in the DSM and some not.  The producers know they make the best tv, not well-balanced, health individuals.               

[Nancybeth]

Maybe they could do small mixers beforehand so it wouldn't really be married at first sight but close.  They would take a page out of Millionaire Matchmaker (reality show on Bravo) where the experts pick 2-3 people per person that they think will be matches and have a mixer then the contestants pick 2 people and they will marry one. The experts use their "expertise" to have the final say of who they will marry. 

I'm kind of liking this idea!  Because all of their stupid tests and questionnaires and insight can't predict being physically attracted to someone or having that spark of chemistry.  Or maybe there's a mixer that that experts watching on hidden camera to at least get a sense of how people are interacting. 

[Evil Queen]

I'm kind of liking this idea!  Because all of their stupid tests and questionnaires and insight can't predict being physically attracted to someone or having that spark of chemistry.  Or maybe there's a mixer that that experts watching on hidden camera to at least get a sense of how people are interacting. 

 

While I would love to see something change. This wouldn't work since the show is suppose to be that the couples are married without ever seeing each other. I just think they need to find different experts and even if they don't show us whatever talk to family, friends and coworkers of the people. See where they hang out and maybe catch them off guard in those places so they can see for themselves the type of behavior they might show in certain situations. Either way though the so called experts are the problem with the show. They don't pay attention at all to what each person wants and is looking for at all. They match for the worse reasons...for them to fix each other. They ignore the answers that are given to them in the applications and tests. Plus can't seem to weed out the nutjobs. 

[stuckin60s]

On the Social Media thread there have been discussions on how to fix this show.

 

I would like to add my thoughts

 

The beginning process for picking participants needs complete overhaul.

 

I would like to see the participants involved in activities chosen by both partners.  things they like etc.  I am sure this would cost production more if they have to pay for location etc. but it would be better for the participants and bring much more interest from the viewers

 

I think they should HAVE to live in the same house, not just for filming. 

 

the fishbowl game is good, but they only show the sexual questions, these people are new to each other and the viewers, I think it would better to have the "get to know you" questions first.

 

And of course if they would stop showing a scene, reshowing the scene, having a TH about the scene and reshowing it again. This is just filler, more interesting things could be shown