On the Lot

FOX (ended 2007)


No Editor

User Score: 0


On the Lot Fan Reviews (32)

Write A Review
out of 10
252 votes
  • misses the mark

    when i heard that this show is also produced by mark burnett. i really got so excited that there's going to be a brand new show just like survivor. me and my mates saw the first episode and we were all disappointed. this show is just awful. it's got nothing exciting in it. it just doesn't work like the other shows made by mark burnett. the whole hour felt like we were sitting in my flat hour ages, the show is so boring, i can't believe how bad this show will end up becoming. all great tv producers create good shows, once in awhile they make a bad one.
  • not that good

    this show suffers the same trappings as other reality shows. shows like amazing race or fear factor can beat on the lot in terms of watchability and quality. on the lot looks so promising with spielberg attached to it, but this show lacks the umph needed to make it a likable weekly series. the three judges are so annoying, once in awhile they bring in a star director, but that's all that interesting with it. the ryan seacrest like host is so annoying that it ruins the atmosphere of every episode. carrie fisher is like a donald clone, it feels like her reason being in this show is to emulate donald trump. the american idol look of the show is what's killing this show.
  • boring

    Watching the commercials for this show looks so promising. I was so excited to see this show, since it looks as if I'm going to see something big. I felt this is the best reality show ever. Then the first episode came out. I was totally duped. This show was so boring. What I saw on the commercials for the show were deceiving, it's not that good at all. The host is terrible, the judges are terrible, even the show is terrible. There's nothing in it that made me want to see the next episode. This is awful, I'm not even going to watch the ending. The show is so bad, I don't even care who wins.
  • Full of hype but low on content.

    I was expecting so much from this show after all steven spielberg is a part of this show. but boy was i disappointed, spielberg is attached to on the lot just by name. Spielberg's creative artistry wasn't showing with this show, it was a Mark Burnett reality show. It's American Idol meets the apprentice. This show just doesn't cut it. The apprentice looks a lot better than this. Why did they come up with this show, it's so boring. If only I can take back the full hour that I lost for watching the premiere of this show, I would take it.
  • It's a terrible show, why are people watching this?

    Honestly, big names are attached to this bore-fest and it's a stain to their reputation. This lackluster film contest stretches time on the results show, and has NO TIME on the filmmakers and their struggles. Really, it would help a lot if there was any footage of the contestants, but instead they are forgetful and lacking any chance at a connection with the audience. The audience, though, shouldn't bother to stay anymore since this show has no skill at keeping one for the time that they have.
  • I find myself wondering...WHY did I watch this overrated hollywood junk fest?

    I find myself wondering...WHY did I watch this overrated hollywood junk fest? "Exit stage left" This show is all about simply indulging the hollywood "lovefest" with itself! I don't understand why if Steven Spielberg is looking for his next replacement, why then couldn't he just watch this junk and pick for himself. He is a great director, I trust his personal choice for successor. But maybe not his choice to air this waste of time.
  • This is enough to kill my reality show addiction!

    I'm an avid reality show addict. There. But this show, oh my god, it bored me to tears and I was scrambling for the remote faster than I could flick a bug off my toe. The judges comments were painful to hear. The host Costa stammered most of the time and when she introduced Carrie Fisher as Carrie Fishy, it was a huge sign that this show is going downhill fast. Spielberg rarely puts his name on icky shows so I'm waiting for him denounce this one. Oh and the contestants oh my are the most insipid boring individuals I've ever seen! This is like watching The Making of...where we are given info we don't need.
  • Very uninteresting.

    A few years ago, a reality show produced by Ben Affleck and Matt Damon came out called Project Greenlight. It's about a group of filmmakers competing for a chance to get their dream projects produced by a hollywood production company. Sounds like a good idea for a tv show. Now another show using the same formula as Project Greenlight comes into our tv screens, but this time, it's got Mark Burnett and Steven Spielberg attached to it. Sounds great, or does it? It loses it's charm with the very fact that it's just another survivor set in hollywood. I was expecting this show to be a little better than the other realities out there, but I was mistaken, it's just another reality show. It's not worth my time.
  • Global Search for New Original Talent .. Is NEITHER

    Listen, I know this is a long story to take in, but I was a contestant for this show... and I can tell you FOX treated people like crap in their website. People got gagged left and right, accounts deactivated, words filtered -the works... simply for posting opposing views to those sponsored by FOX. A bunch of us filmmakers got tired of the Big Brother censorship, and got together and started our own community, karmacritic.com, where no one can "gag" us. Someone posted about it in Wikipedia's entry for On The Lot. I tracked the IP of FOX's Vice President of Branded Media trying to delete all references to us from there. Even today, if you go to thelot.com and type "karmacritic" the word will turn into "BLEEP", your post will then be deleted and your IP (not just your account, but your whole IP ) will be banned in minutes, try it. Minutes. The whole thing is here, screenshots, links, etc. Screw On The Lot. http://www.karmacritic.com/?q=node/276
  • Read below.

    With the hype around this show I was expecting an AWSOME opener. They get the BEST time slot available on television and put their audience to sleep in less than 20 minutes. Whenever you hear Spielberg is on board you expect nothing but the best. Unfortunately, we went from the most entertaining show in the world (American Idol), to this. It seemed like another Big Brother, which I guess you could expect from Mark Burnett's team, but come on, its time to step it up, we deserve it. The concept for this show it great. The delivery, or edit, or DP style is way off. I really hope, even expect them to get better. Over all, the opener was a downer. Lets hope they understand that the drop-off in ratings they can expect on Thursday night is do to the style in which they are delivering the entertainment and NOT the loss of Idol as an opening support. All they have to do is adjust a few stylistic choices and this show can and should be the next big hit. Otherwise it will be tossed over to CBS and be Big Brothers new filler. Come on Spielberg, make it happen.
  • The show is too long. All I want to see is the movies. I'll meet the contestants later.

    It is episode two (or maybe episode 1 and 1/2) and this show is really beginning to get on my nerves. It is too long. The thing that attracted me to the show is the chance to see new movies. I'd be happy if they just showed the movies. Save getting to know the contestants until later. I will not be able to take another two hour episode of this show. Also, episode 1 and 1/2 seems unnecessary. It should have been at most a half hour show. The person I really want to vote off the show is that frightening hostess. I know I'm not alone. In the first episode, most of the contestants shied away from her. They don't want her touching them. She makes me feel both annoyed and uncomfortable.
  • Cross American Idol with Survivor and what do you get? A load of crap.

    Its a good sign that most of these unscripted so called reality shows are getting bad ratings - Pirate Master on CBS is another notable example.

    Networks keep pumping out low budget crud by the bucket full and tossing it onto the audience to see what sticks. What can you do to make this show watchable? Burn it.

    Even watching 10 seconds of this show is a painful experience. If they showed it to inmates at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba or a Super Max prison, it would be called cruel and unusual punishment. Only good thing about shows like this is that I watch far less TV than I used to.

    Maybe Stephen King could show up and turn this into Salems Lot?
  • How can FOX screw up their own "American Idol" formula? By getting a useless hostess, pathetic and lame judges, and basically trying to suck.

    I honestly was so excited for this show. I counted down days even. It was advertised everywhere, and I knew it would be big. But then, it aired. First episode, liked the host actually. It wasnt too great at developing characters, or anything really, but they had 50-some contestants, so i couldnt blame them. Of course. They just had to ditch one judge, leaving the useless-no-real-comment-stars-wars-ex judge, then the old witty guy who gets all the "jokes". Then, they ditch the hostess. And then give us "Costa", who can only host a show by reading off the prompter. She even said in an episode "If i can just read the prompter..." or something very close to that nature. Ok, so we have bad judging, bad hosting... can we get worse? How about confusing interface. They start off with 50, go down to 30-ish. Then get rid of half of them and leave us with 18. Then the week they still had 2 episodes per week, they got rid of 3, leaving 15. I didnt understand why the first week they had to make movies, they made comdey oriented shorts.... but now its a free for all? and everyweek they show 5 movies and eliminate one person from LAST week? and the keep going? how are they going to continue this?

    Thats not the only question i asked myself. "When the hell is it on?" was another one. It's still on tuesdays right?
    Also, if its supposed to be a "world wide competition", why the heck is there ONE candian, someone from europe (i think) and then the rest are americans. Most of the movies suck. And don't really show off any direction skills. You don't get to get inside the lives of the directors really... it's pretty much a giant advertisement for Ford and Verizon. Maybe when they narrow it down to top ten, we can see how the directors live together... if they even do. I'm still confused by this show... and frankly, I don't really care anymore.
  • On The Lot was supposed to be a new kind of reality show. No cheesy Survivor-style eliminations or over-hyped performances like American Idol, but it totally missed what it was aiming for.

    The first thing you'll notice about this show is how ironic it is. The show is partially about editing movies, but the show itself looks like it was edited by a 4 year old with a walnut stuck in his brain. The camera movements are choppy and you can get seasick watching it. Not an entertaining experience. Anyhoo, OTL is supposed to be a reality competition in which people compete against each other to become a Hollywood director. They do so by making movies (duh). That's what it was SUPPOSED to be, mind you. What OTL really is is a bore-fest. Usually the big grip on reality shows is being a fan of somebody, having somebody to root for and/or having somebody to root against. That's impossible with this show. I don't know one person's name or really care about any of them. You can see the eliminations from a mile away and the judges look like they'd rather be a their own funeral than judging this competition. OTL attempts to create "drama" by showing the disputes between the directors, but all that does is take away it's potential as a family show. No family wants to sit down and watch two overweight losers scream at each other. That's what Dr. Phil is for. I'm not saying that OTL is a horrible show, but it's not worth your time or mine. Please watch something that has more class, like competitive eating or midget wrestling.
  • On the Lot - so what?

    This doesn't stack up to its predecessor "Project Greenlight", which was a better idea, a better competition and a better "show" Too many people, too little exposure to how a film gets made and just not enough personality or "narration" - none of the lively cast of "Project Runway" for example. And the prize - a million dollar deal? That's what was offered in the first two seasons of "Project Greenlight" and look what a dismal product the result was - even when it was upped to 3 mil, it was a rough go - and the audition films - what we see of them - are not much above good home movies. I don't see a Season 2 here.
  • Had potential... fail at execution!

    The only reason I began watching this show was because I was ill and couldn't find the remote. Either I was to wound up from the cold medicine or my fever made me delerious but at the time I thought it really had potential to be good but it would need to find the right audience. With the decline in movie industry I think this show really came out at the wrong time. Maybe if this had come out a few years ago or even a few years in the future it would have had a chance but it has failed to catch my attention for anything more then a fleeting look as a pass by in my endless channel surfing ... and I really am a huge movie fan so I had such great hopes.
  • A group of wannabe directors are given the chance to direct a Dreamworks picture worth $1,000,000 through a series of directing, writing, and editing competitions.

    This show was great! The show went promptly along going forward at breakneck speed and then stopped dead in it's tracks after FOX introduced a format change in episode 3.

    At this juncture the shows slow speed may ruin it, if it hasn't already. The current idea of eliminating one person each week is boring, this could have been done in an entire episode thus allowing more time to see the creativity of the contestants.

    Unfortunately I am hooked on it and will be forced to endure this latest elimination phase. Hopefully their's a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.
  • Give it time to find its legs...

    I feel that this show has huge potential and will turn into a rather entertaining show, but not yet. As the directors get eliminated the skill levels will improve and I think then we will really see a great show. I hope that the show is able to spend more time with each director and see each of there individual process. I know there are so many different ways to tie a note and I'm very interested in seeing how they each do it. I think the host needs some help. In a show like this everyone is going to compare and contrast to Ryan Seacrest from Idol, and she doesn't compare. I have hope.
  • 'On the Lot' had potential. I still enjoy watching the films. Everything else, however, seems... pointless.

    I'm 16 years old, and I've been making films for about 4 years now. So when I heard about "On the Lot", I was very excited to check out the series. It was created by Steven Spielberg! It had to be good.

    The first episode was enjoyable. Chelsea Handler as host was excellent, and everything flowed very well. The next few weeks were still good. I enjoyed watching how the films came together, and I picked my favorites.

    Eventually, the live shows came. That's when the show began falling apart. It was too much like American Idol. I hate to say this, but the new host was extremely annoying, and I just lost attention after a few weeks.

    It also struck me as odd that the show was not in HD. You'd think it would be, considering the purpose of the show. So it seems to me that Fox didn't give it too much help in the beginning. In my opinion, the only reason the show is still on the air is because Steven Spielberg was partly behind it.

    Basically, I just lost interest. It wasn't fun anymore. I didn't have time for the show, and it just kind of died on me.

    I'm pretty sure this will be the final season for "On the Lot", unless they pull some pretty awesome ratings these last few episodes.
  • To make this show worth watching we need more originally created material and less talking heads.

    my review

    the films created by the contestant director wannabees were fantastic, but the rest of the show is talking heads, in the last three episodes there were no new films, they just aired previously shown material. To make this show worth watching we need more originally created material and less talking heads. below is just filler to meet my 100 word minium review.

    this is a reality show that will give the winning director a job at dreamworks. The wannabe directors must compete in contests that focus on the skill's needed to be a good director. They then make short films and witch are reviewed by three directors. then the viewers are encouraged to call in and vote on the best film. the one with the lowest votes is eliminated fron the show ever episode until there is only one.
  • I love the idea, but this one is cheaply orchestrated. Great competition. Fun challenges. Useless unwanted judges; don't follow nothing, too stuck-up ! Unfair, so not true comments Horrible Hostess.

    Film directing ! What an interesting subject for a ridiculous reality show !!! It's awesome of having all these talented artists gathered. They offer us such a great show...that unfortunately, the three stooges can't follow. It's very sad.

    The contenders present us beautiful piece of arts, amazing sense of humor and a so refreshing modern thinking ! In return, those "ineloquent" lousy judges comes in adding bias in this 100% unfair contest.

    Such a cool show concept sinked by stupidity, stuck-upism, and big F-A-K-E representatives. These participants are not just directors. They also have a lot of acting going. They have to confront the insipid cheap comments of the 3-corrupted-like-sitiing-there-judges,
    without laughing ! I say it again so cool concept but Cheap Cheap Cheap and so is that hostess but anoying in extra.
    It's too bad for the contenders because they kick ass !
  • Love it all but the host. Has she ever even hosted before. She acts as if she is always reading cards. She has a hard time even going to a commercial. I have never written to any show but this had to be said.

    Love the show, the concept and the judges but the host must go. All I can say about her is she is nice to look at. Has she ever hosted before? Who is she and why her. Surely there are better spokeswomen for the job. This is a nice concept and I think the show is good, needs a little fine tuning but that is to be excepted. I just cant seem to get over her. She even has a hard time going to commerical. I am not in film and no little about but I do watch ALOT of TV and Howdy Mandel goes the best with going to commericals, I think. You want to come back...not with her though. Thanks, sorry I couldnt say nicer things for the host, I sure she is a nice person. Thanks ..Kesha
  • Something new to watch on tuesdays cause nothing else is on.

    Tuesday night has nothing on besides House but that wasn't on this week so this new show "On The Lot" was on and i think it will be a good show to look forward to on tuesday nights. It was a good show for most parts but its hard to watcvh because you wish you were there makign the movie because you will think you have a great idea. Thi will be fun to see who wins and since tehre is a guy from vancouver i will be going for him to win. I will see how this is next week.
  • great show: long review

    you're Steven Spielberg and Mark Burnett, I'm pretty sure you don't even need to pitch a network your idea for a reality show. The executive on the other end of the phone simply tells your agent, "Whatever it is, it's 'Yes!' " But were they to pitch "On the Lot" to Fox, it would no doubt have sounded close to this: "OK, babe, here's the deal: 'Project Greenlight,' right? Been done. I know. 'American Idol,' huge huge smash hit. Already on Fox. Big. Big. Major. But 'Greenlight' and 'Idol' ... nobody's ever tried to merge 'em. No one. Ever. Except instead of singing really badly, the people we get do horrible project pitches that we cringe over, that whole Simon Cowell thing. Then when we come to the finalists, rather than doing songs, we have them directing scenes. Omigod, baby -- perfection! We've got art. We've got commercial. We've got the whole shebang."


    Again, Spielberg and Burnett are such superstar names that they could have proposed a show about homely women who get plastic surgery and then compete in a beauty contest and Fox would have ordered it. (Oh wait, Fox has already done that one. Never mind.) As it stands, the premiere of the new summerlong, twice-weekly "On the Lot" on Tuesday night was predictably, sometimes distressingly derivative in spite of its creator/executive producer pedigree of Spielberg-Burnett. It was akin to, "I'll take one of those and one of those and a little bit of that, too -- with extra urgency, please. And toss 'em for me, will ya?" The opener played like a highly caffeinated "Survivor," if that iconic Burnett series were transferred from the exotic jungle of Malaysia to the concrete equivalent of Universal Studios. The music in the opener was driving and constant, the situations and interaction contrived, the payoff altogether questionable. But it also is just getting started, so it still could turn into something more intriguing and original. Not that this is terribly likely. The familiar gambit on "Lot" is to uncover an artistic diamond in the rough, a great amateur filmmaker lurking in the shadows upon whom to bestow a $1 million DreamWorks development deal and ultimately the chance to direct a feature. You might recall that a similar strategy from Miramax didn't work out so well on "Greenlight," its winning writers and directors crafting low-budget, low-return theatricals that quickly disappeared (assuming they appeared at all).

    Things get started with 50 hopefuls (out of a claimed 12,000 submissions from 33 countries) gathered at the Biltmore Hotel -- because it's where they held the first Oscar ceremony -- and then to Universal to learn log lines that will form the crux of their first story pitch. The logs include stuff like, "A mouse is abducted by a pharmaceutical company as a lab rat and must plan his escape" and "A slacker applies to the CIA as a joke and gets accepted." The resulting pitches in front of incredulous judges Garry Marshall, Carrie Fisher and Brett Ratner are mostly lame, of course, making it easy to weed out the first dozen or so would-be Spielbergs. One guy freezes up completely. Another screws up and is reduced to tears. Welcome to Dweebs on Parade.

    The survivors form teams of three to write, shoot, direct and edit a 2 1/2-minute film in 24 hours. Cue music. Cue conflict. Cue meltdowns. We can see the tension already building as the contestants head out to attempt something almost no one does anymore: shoot a movie in Los Angeles. And there will be lots more minimovie tests, we're assured. "Lot" appears sufficiently different from "Greenlight" to distinguish it as something more than a simple rip-off, focusing at the outset on the clashing personalities rather than the process of filmmaking. Yet we're left wondering why Spielberg in particular would be inspired to toss his hat into the reality TV arena at all. For an Oscar winner with unrivaled industry power and clout, doesn't this qualify as slumming?
  • A good overall show and Mark Burnett is thinking up some good stuff with Steven Spielberg. The first two episodes i really enjoyed.

    On the lot, yes it has just started but by just looking at it, it looks like an American Idol for movies. Mark Burnett (Creator of Survivor and The Amazing Race and The Apprentice) and the amazing director Steven Spielberg, the mind has to work on this one to make it on the lot. There seems like there are many talented people in that group and we enjoy Movies equally to the way we enjoy TV series. But overall I like it and will continue watching it and hope Fox don't slip up and make another stupid mistake by canceling it.
  • Produced by media moguls Steven Spielberg and Mark Burnett, this show gives 50 lucky contestants a chance to achieve their life dream of producing a Hollywood film. When a winner is chosen, they will receive a 1 million dollar contract with Dreamworks.

    Ok, let me start by saying the show itself wasn't great. It had little to no action whatsoever, however, I think the show has huge potential. With judges Brett Ratner, Carrie Fisher, and Garry Marshall, and media moguls Steven Spielberg and Mark Burnett producing the show, It will definitely be a hit. I love the idea of giving people a chance to achieve their dream. Another upside, the format of the show is going to change starting June 4. It will be similar to the format of A.I.(American Idol) with a competition day and then a results show.
  • This is a show that I am excited to see where it goes it could be a great hit or miss.

    So far I have to say that I like the show. The judges seem like a good lot so far my favorite is Gary Marshall but we'll have to wait and see as they interact more through out the show. The only problem is that outside of what the show "shows" you. You would have to go online to see the actual movie clips that t hey made last week. All of them were pretty decent there wasn't one that stood out except for the Out of Time with the still effects which was cool but lacking in story line. We'll see how it goes.
  • Why do people dislike this show? I have no clue, I think it's awesome!

    The first episode was all I needed to get hooked to this show. From around America, people submitted thousands of films. From those, 50 special people, film makers, were chosen. Now only one of them will win the competition and get a million dollar contract with Dreamworks. Over several different tasks, they will be cut down slowly until one remains. Now for my opnion, I love this show. The three judges really are awesome. And I am not a big movie type of person, but this show really draws me in. To see all the people trying so hard to make it and over worry and stress and all of that stuff well it's really make's the show a "I want to watch" so. Well, that's my opnion and I know some people might disagree but oh well. That's my review.
  • Zach rocks, he is going all the way with his humble approach and tenacity. Vancouver is watching and rooting for him all the way.....

    Zach, you rocked the house tonight, kudos to ya. Don't go changing your humble approach and style, clearly you are on the right track and focused on your goal. Some of your competitors are perhaps reacting too quickly to the judges and taking their comments the wrong way but you seem to be above that and willing to learn from those that have 'been there done that', yet another admirable quality about you. Hollywood needs someone like you, you are gonna leave the rest in your dust, let's hope you don't forget the little people, i.e. your Vancouver fans who are cheering you on whole heartedly.......

    Kokopelli, a Vancouver fan : )
  • A great show with a few minor bugs.

    It is my favorite show right now. I love Hollywood and I practically live on movies. If you are a movie gore like me you'll love it. The movies which are shown are pretty decent. You'll have a good time. Trust Me. The Only down point in this show is the Host. She tries too hard to be good but fails at it. I mean she tries too hard to build up suspense and drama. But its clear that she sucks at it. Not to mention all the mistakes she makes on a Live show.

    Maybe for the 2nd season, they can get a better person to host this show. Which will make a lot of difference.
< 1 2