Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Television Entertainment Science

"MythBusters" Drops Kari Byron, Grant Imahara, Tory Belleci 364

Posted by timothy
from the small-team dept.
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.)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

"MythBusters" Drops Kari Byron, Grant Imahara, Tory Belleci

Comments Filter:
  • by digsbo (1292334) on Friday August 22, 2014 @09:24PM (#47734265)
    I won't mind so much. A shorter, more focused format will get me watching more again.
  • "Fan favorites"? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 22, 2014 @09:32PM (#47734293)

    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.

  • No Kari??? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by PvtVoid (1252388) on Friday August 22, 2014 @09:37PM (#47734319)
    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.
  • by rolfwind (528248) on Friday August 22, 2014 @09:37PM (#47734321)

    I will miss Grant too. He seemed to be the only one close to a scientist of the 3, as an electrical engineer and robot builder.

    Haven't watched the show for a while now. It became too much blow shit up and other dumbed down shit. Every episode. And yet it was still one of Discoveries smarter shows, as sad as that fact is.

    While I can fault their scientific method, they had some ingenius ways to test and bust some myths. I wonder if "returning" to roots means smarter shows though or just trimming the budget?

  • by SternisheFan (2529412) on Friday August 22, 2014 @09:44PM (#47734343)
    Kari was indeed 'eye candy' for the male audience, that's not to be underestimated in the TV ratings game. She also pulled her weight when it came to creating/assembling some of the mythbuster's creations. She is a lovely mix of beauty and intelligence, and that's not a force not to be underestimated. Her loyalty to the show goes a long way, and her life acts seem to show a deeper persona. With TV, you need to have to strike a certain balance twixt the nerdy type and the everyperson. Time and fate will tell where each person goes from this parting of the ways. This trio of castoffs might just end up with their own version of Mythbusters, or singly prove their own mettle. Time will tell the tale.....
  • by Almonday (564768) on Friday August 22, 2014 @09:45PM (#47734351)
    ...and the show "went back to its roots." Nothing to see here, move along.*
  • Not sure if gone (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Deathlizard (115856) on Friday August 22, 2014 @09:47PM (#47734369) Homepage Journal

    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.

  • Re:good (Score:5, Insightful)

    by v1 (525388) on Friday August 22, 2014 @09:57PM (#47734423) Homepage Journal

    lol they must have really screwed up for all three of them to be fired at once

    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.

  • by toygeek (473120) on Friday August 22, 2014 @10:01PM (#47734445) Homepage Journal

    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.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 22, 2014 @10:09PM (#47734473)

    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.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 22, 2014 @10:09PM (#47734475)

    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.

  • by Pro923 (1447307) on Friday August 22, 2014 @10:56PM (#47734711)
    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..
  • Re:good (Score:5, Insightful)

    by whereiswaldo (459052) on Saturday August 23, 2014 @12:22AM (#47734967) Journal

    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.

  • by kamitchell (1090511) on Saturday August 23, 2014 @12:52AM (#47735081)

    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.

  • Re:Ob XKCD... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Baloroth (2370816) on Saturday August 23, 2014 @01:21AM (#47735147)

    I often agree with Randall, but in this case I think he's (mostly) wrong. Yes, ideas are tested by experiment. Properly constructed experiments. That means repetition, controls, statistics, the whole nine yards. If scientists used Mythbusters-style experiments we'd still think light objects inherently fall faster than heavy ones (after all, most lighter objects do fall slower than heavier ones, thanks to air resistance). You don't think people in the "unscientific darkness" didn't actually try out a lot of the things they got wrong? Of course they did. They got it wrong because they ran their experiments improperly. And Mythbuster's often does as well. To be fair, "it didn't work this time, lets try it out 99 more times to make sure" doesn't really make entertaining television, and that's generally all Mythbuster's is: entertainment. They have the seeds of science (experimentation), but science is far more than that alone. The problem is, when people look at what they do as actually being science, they end up thinking you can confirm a scientific theory with a single experiment run with 20 minutes of work. And the conclusion to that thought process is looking at the weather report and dismissing global warming because it's a particularly chilly summer. Or saying "hmm, well [some action] didn't kill me this time, it must be perfectly safe."

    Scientifically educated people don't come to that conclusion, of course, but those people aren't the problem.

  • by taustin (171655) on Saturday August 23, 2014 @01:23AM (#47735153) Homepage Journal

    Grant is an engineer were did you come up with "scientist"? I used to watch the show however it became unbearable when they add the other three.

    That'd be season one (Kari Byron), season two (Tory Belleci) and season three (Grant Imahara). There were maybe two episodes without at least one of the three (and one of the ones you especially dislike) in season one.

    Grant is creative when it came to robotics but so is Jamie. I makes no sense to have 5 hosts for a show when two Kari and Tory are dip shits.

    They wanted an hour long show. The five of them have been spending 48 weeks out of every year filming to get ten episodes per season. With 60% less on-screen talent, it will be a completely different show. Perhaps better, perhaps worse, but not at all the same.

  • long in the tooth (Score:5, Insightful)

    by globaljustin (574257) <justinglobal@[ ]il.com ['gma' in gap]> on Saturday August 23, 2014 @05:14AM (#47735365) Homepage Journal

    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

You will be successful in your work.

Working...