IMDb > "I've Got a Secret" (2006) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb

Reviews & Ratings for
"I've Got a Secret" More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]
Index 18 reviews in total 

8 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

If Bill Cullen could talk...

Author: Kinravip ( from Connecticut, USA
11 May 2006

...he'd adore this update. As someone who's been a massive game-show fan and student for more than 40 years (as well as three-time contestant), I stand by that statement. Cullen had a mischievous sense of humor, as evidenced by various asides on his own shows, as well as his appearances on the various Merv-Mike-Dinah-era talk shows.

If he could have gotten away with it, he would have rivaled the current cast for wit, innuendo, and double-entendre.

Kitty Carlisle may be spinning in her grave (hmmm... so it was a rotisserie spit she had up her butt all those years... that explains a lot...), but Arlene Francis is definitely smiling down from Heaven.

As to the current cast: "Loudmouthed" and "feminine"? Um, Damien? They're all gay. Does that answer your question? A gimmick, I'll grant you, but the four do play off each other very well.

Did you miss the flashing-neon clue? For the first few weeks, the host, Bil Dwyer, was introduced as "playing straight man to the panel." Then, once they figured America had 'got it,' they got more creative with Dwyer's intros.

Speaking of Bil, he's doing a creditable job of filling Garry Moore's shoes with his own quick barbs. (He did stand-up, too.)

Panelist Billy Bean was a pro baseball player (Tigers, Dodgers, Padres) who came out publicly to massive hubbub in '99.

Suzanne Westenhoefer was the first openly gay comic to make big headlines by playing to straight audiences and had her own HBO special back when that meant something.

Frank DeCaro (God love him) wrote many hysterically funny pieces for TV Guide, and did movie reviews on Jon Stewart's "The Daily Show." (Aside to Frank: I'd beat my mother for a collection of those pieces on DVD.) My only gripe with Frank?'s bio says he secretly hopes to one day play Batgirl in the movies, which explains his Jack-Nicholson-as-Joker wardrobe. Rod Roddy is dead, Frank. Let the man rest in peace.

Jermaine Taylor? You got me, Damien. Even IMDb has no idea who this guy is, but, to his credit, he's damn good at the game. GSN says he was an east-coast stand-up, so I'm guessing this is his first TV gig.

This show is always good for several laughs, especially to the quick-witted. The original show paid $80 to those who stumped the panel. Now, a winner can expect "dinner for two in Beverly Hills and $1,000." If you haven't seen the new "I've Got a Secret," I recommend checking it out, even if you live in a red state.

Was the above review useful to you?

14 out of 25 people found the following review useful:

Where's Kitty Carlisle when you need her?

Author: Damien V. ( from United States
19 April 2006

This tacky reproduction of a great show is annoying. Who are these panelists? What is their claim to fame? Why is the broad such a loudmouth and why are the men so feminine?

I realize that I am mixing shows with my Kitty Carlisle reference in that she was a panelist on To Tell The Truth, but allow me to make another off-kilter reference. I think that Dorothy Kilgallen had a vision of the future and what she saw was this show -- so she popped a few extra Secanols.

Can you imagine Betsy Palmer watching a guy break pencils with his ass? Can you imagine Bill Cullen watching Betsy Palmer watch a guy break pencils with his ass?

Henry Morgan would have walked off and so will I.


Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

On its own merit, a hopeful sign for the future of game shows.

Author: Christopher jones ( from South Florida
25 June 2006

When the 2006 version of I've Got A Secret(IGAS) premiered, I was as uninterested as the most critical of those commenting on this site (except the hate mongers). I had to be honest with myself and admit that it wasn't this version itself that I disliked- it was the fact that Game Show Network stopped showing the Gary Moore 50's re-reruns to accommodate it. I love old game shows and stay up til 3:30am to see What's My Line, so there's no way I was going to give this new IGAS a chance. Stop comparing this to the original IGAS and it looks a lot better. In my opinion, it's encouraging to see a game show that relies on witty banter and hokey, sometimes slightly racy tricks rather than the bug-eating, pain inflicting degradation of Fear Factor or the mind numbing simplicity of choosing suitcases as in Deal or No Deal. Panel shows are so much more engaging and civilized. Civility, by the way, was what John Daly, 50's host of What's My Line, promoted along with literate panelists like Bennett Cerf and Dorothy Kilgallen. (If only shows featured perfect grammar and diction, people shook hands and treated each other with respect- but that's another story). I see what Game Show Network was aiming for- a return to the panel format that thrives on personalities rather than jackpots or gross-out stunts. They chose a gay panel because they hoped for a team of Paul Lyndes- as a gay man myself, I have to agree that 'my people' are reliable for racy quips and frequent sarcasm. The four they chose are personable but lack the 'gay quips' needed to bring laughs. Still, I think it's a good first effort, especially considering the network's relatively small production budget. I enjoy seeing the ordinary contestants and their silly stunts because it does remind me of the good old days. It really deserves a chance and yes, maybe a change in one or two of the panelists might help. (though Frank DeCaro should stay) If all else fails, maybe they could write some comic lines for the panel.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

Why all the hate?

Author: Jess from United States
31 May 2006

I came here to see if there was any interesting trivia or anything about this show. Instead, I was surprised to see the majority of the comments bashing the show. Personally, I love it. No, I hadn't heard of any of the panelists before (I was familiar with Bill Dwyer), but so what? You think people like Brad Pitt and Rachel McAdams are going to sign onto a television show like this? I've come to love all the panelists - I haven't seen Jermaine or Suzanne do stand up (I assume that's what Jermaine does), I haven't heard Frank on the radio, and I haven't seen Billy play baseball - but I still like them. They mesh well, are clever, entertaining, and amusing to watch. As for the prize being cheap.. this show seems to me like it's more about trying to have fun that being your standard 'win and get tons of cash' game show. On a show like Who Wants to be a Millionaire, people get money because they're smart and can answer trivia questions. What are these contestants doing? Absolutely nothing. I just saw a contestant last night whose secret was that she was a cheerleader with Sandra Bullock. The panel didn't even come close to guessing it. Does that mean the woman should have won a million dollars just because she happened to cheerlead with a girl who would go on to be famous? Are you kidding me? Dinner for two and a thousand dollars seems like a perfect prize to me.

I gave this show a nine instead of a ten only because some of the hints are too telling. Otherwise, I think this show is fantastic. If I'm watching TV at 10:30, this is it, every time. It's my favorite show on GSN.

Was the above review useful to you?

proud bigotry online!

Author: lastmidnite2 from United States
27 February 2008

stebon47 writes that he's happy this was canceled because it had a gay agenda. He writes that it went the way of Brokeback Mountain. What way is that? Brokeback got an Oscar nomination for best picture, and won the best director award for Ang Lee. He then goes on to slander the good name of Bill Cullen, who he professes to like, by saying that Cullen was an intolerant homophobe. Why are ignorant hate spewers always so proud of their own stupidity? As far the show goes, it was alright, but I still prefer the nostalgia of the original, which was nothing great either, by the way! The secrets were lame a lot, Gary Moore said "marvelous" every 2 seconds, and in general, it was a pretty obvious attempt to cash in on the success of What's My Line?. But it was good fun nonetheless, as was this redo.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Way beyond sucks ...

Author: ChiefBones from United States
14 January 2008

To say that the new I've got a secret sucks, is the biggest understatement I have EVER heard. A bunch of idiots took a masterpiece game show, and made it into a mockery. Now I don't know about the panelists being gay, but for sure they are some of the worst panelists I have ever seen. From whats-her-name making inane comments to the 'suggestive' language that is used, they took a family show and made it into some wannabe burlesque strip show, with baggy pants clowns as some of their guests and a wannabe host that doesn't hold a candle to Gary Moore. I refuse to lend this 'show?' any credibility by watching it ... I would rather watch a rerun of the Adam's Family or set through another season of political campaign debates.

The best thing that could happen with this 'new and improved' version of a much beloved game show, is to cancel any more of these programs and to burn any copies of these putrid pretend games.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

A Poor Imittation

Author: grandma_ducky from United States
6 November 2006

I enjoyed the original version of I've Got a Secret. When it came back on the air on the GSN I was very pleased. I turned it on recently and was very disappointed to see what they had done with the show. It was a clean show fit for any audience in it's original version, but, the newer version shows men's rear ends and comments by the panel that I do not care for. Perhaps the younger generation might find this entertaining, but to a lady who does not care for risqué humor it is not entertaining. I wish the GSN would also offer the original version for those of us that enjoyed it. Some of the contestants would seem to be better shown on a What's My Line show, such as those whose secret is related to their employment. Regarding the panelists, I have never heard of any of them and do not find them especially entertaining. All in all, I find this a poor imitation.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:


Author: lecanis from United States
29 July 2006

Before I begin, I must admit that I have never seen the old version. I have never been a game show person until seven years ago, when I met my husband, who loves game shows. So I don't really have an opinion about whether the current I've Got a Secret is as good at the old one.

That said, it's pretty darn funny. While I find myself trying to guess whether the panellists are going to figure out the secret, it's just as much fun for me just listening to them chatter. I didn't have the "Who are these people?" reaction that a lot of posters seem to have had, because I had seen both Suzanne and Frank before, though I still have no idea what Jermaine is supposed to be famous for. Nor do I care, honestly: he's good enough on the show by itself.

The only real annoyance I have with this show is the host: he often answers questions for the contestants, or tries to twist their answers around to lead that panel. He should really keep his mouth shut a bit more.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Funny and Informative

Author: tmightydawg from United States
2 June 2006

Terrific idea to have an all Gay (out) panel to fit the title of "I've got a Secret". Adds a fun,new spin to a game show. The wide range of secrets from contestants are very entertaining and informative.It is also great to see the celebrity contestants and learn things about them we never knew.The host is pretty good at keeping the panel on track without revealing too much information but the one thing they should change is the audience comments. Perhaps they should allow the viewers to hear the audience but not the panelists. I believe it often helps give away the secret which isn't fair to contestants. The prizes should be better also. A dinner for two should be given just for participating.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:


Author: GiniR from NORTHERN CA
13 May 2006

Silent observer sure has it right. I understand times do change but it is usually for the better! These 'stars' seem to lack some common sense when it comes to the questioning. I see the most intelligence coming from Billy. And they seem to think that every one has something sexual the in the nature of their secret. Some of the secrets have been interesting but ... I also think sometimes the 'stars' don't guess so the contestant can win the $1,000 and the dinner, i.e. the guest from Palo Cedro with the beard made of bees. The last 'star' had it made, easy but wasted time and therefore the contestant wins.Please let them find other worthwhile jobs and bring us the entertainment we deserve.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Ratings Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history