The 1% Club

I'm a big fan of this show and the only person I could think of who would be better than Patton Oswalt at hosting "1% Club" would be Louie DiPalma (heh heh heh). Oswalt got better each week in 2024 and upon seeing a new host blasted on us this year,I didn't have a good feeling. It turned out my suspicion was right on the mark.

Joel McHale talks like a phony,he gives off poor vibes for THIS show and I basically tuned out his between questions banter. It was a mistake going with a new host,imho.

The questions were interesting--as last year--and on the first episode of 2025,I managed to get to the 10% level. I give it a 6 rating--10 for the show and -4 for McHale.

I like Patton Oswalt but he can't make a 100 fake smiling laughing people interesting. There is a ridiculous amount of filler asking the contestants "get to know you" questions. They are randos - I don't care to know them. Every question just drags out to the point where I just fast forward in between each question. Patton isn't funny enough to carry this if this is the format they are sticking with.

Password, another recent gameshow in comparison is filled with laughs and good times. This is just people smiling, fake laughs (password too) and bad conversation.

The questions and concept of show seem fine, it's just not entertaining.

I would have rated this a 9, but was so upset that the final question was terribly phrased. The question referred to a "password" made up of 6 letters, from 4 letters shown on a keyboard. Obviously, some of the letters were repeated.

An actual password can be made of many different characters, but in this case only letters were used. Actual passwords are better if they don't use an actual "word", rather use random letters.

The answer was based on an actual "word", but the instructions didn't mention anything about the password having to be a "word". The instructions only asked for a certain arrangement of those letters - in which case, there could have been many correct answers.

Hard to believe this question was allowed to be used the way it was worded. Someone should have caught the error. I guess the staff that works on the show are far from being 1% themselves!

As someone who is so used to the UK version, I have to say, this version just feels like a bootleg. Like, a lot of the questions on this version aren't anywhere near as interesting. Yes, just like the UK version, this one does have filler too, with conversations with the contestants in between the questions and what not, but at least there was entertaining banter in the UK version, something this version is lacking. The contestants here just feels like NPCs by comparison, if you ask me! Also, admittedly I've never heard of Patton Oswalt before, but he's just not a good host for a show like this, just... no. Surely they could have found someone better?

If this whole show, so far, is anything to go by, I don't expect it to be anywhere near as successful.

My husband and I watched it and really enjoyed it. Our college-age son lives with us so the next day we asked him to watch it. THAT was so much more fun. He got every question right and we were so proud. Granted, there were some easy questions that everyone should have gotten right. I thought Patton was a great host. He spent just the right amount of time with the contestants so that you didn't feel isolated from them in that "I don't care who wins." way. I don't understand the reviewer who commented that the host was mean and put people down. I grew up with a narcissist and watched "Match Game" with Alec Baldwin so I know what putting people down sounds like. Patton was funny, friendly, and, yes, joked around but you can tell none of it was mean-spirited. I thought the questions were comparable to Celebrity Week on Jeopardy - where they dumb down the questions a bit, but you can solve them and feel smart. I hope the show makes it. We'd be regular watchers.