I was sitting on my living room couch. It was November 1999, and I couldn't believe my eyes. The son of a bitch did it. John Carpenter took down all 15 questions to become the first person to win $1 million on the American version of "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire." Not only that, but he went out in style, too, using an extra lifeline to call his dad to tell him he was about to win. Fucking baller.

While normal people probably have vivid memories of what they were doing on the morning of Sept. 11 or when they got their acceptance letter to the University, I specifically remember when some dude took $1 million dollars from ABC and Regis's tie budget (the same ties I made my mom buy me for the upcoming bar mitzvah season). I'm also the guy who was a one-time member of a Ken Jennings' Facebook group - I've since moved on. So, as you can probably tell, I take this game show stuff seriously. This is also why I'm more than a little concerned about the current state of the American game show.

These days the game-show formula network TV gravitates to is as follows: Find one out-of-work TV personality from the past, who may or may not have an odd cult following; "develop" an international game show for an American audience, TV speak for "steal an old idea"; and choose contestants based on how entertaining they may be, and not based on how qualified they are to answer trivia questions. If done correctly, the end product should fill in nicely for whatever half-baked sitcom that never should have been green lit in the first place. But that doesn't mean it's going to be any good.

In fact, outside of "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire," none of them have been any good.

If you'll allow me to play the role of game -how xenophobe for a moment, I'll tell you what I mean. The simple fact that at least half of all "new" game shows are simply adaptations of ideas that worked in Europe is both lazy and pathetic. Not only that, but it makes no sense. Am I supposed to be excited because "1 vs. 100," sorry, "Een tegen 100," went over well in Holland? I guess I didn't realize the Dutch were creative game show geniuses.

Don't get me wrong: I'm not proposing a game show fence across the border and I'm not concerned that imported game shows are taking away the livelihoods of honest hardworking American game show creators. It's just that there doesn't even seem to be an effort by American networks to create innovate programming. This is the country that made the wheel synonymous with fortune. I expect more.

One of the few exceptions to this apparent stagnancy of U.S. network creativity is ABC's new William Shatner-hosted game show, "Show Me the Money," which the network claims is "Shat-Tastic." Ugh. "Show Me the Money" is an original idea, but only because the Dutch aren't asinine enough to run something like it. Basically it works like a standard trivia-based game show, but there's a hook . William Shatner randomly dances with beautiful women! I can't wait.

The best daytime game shows like "The Price is Right," and pre-primetime ones like "Jeopardy" work because they engage their viewers, and do so in a way that requires something from them. I don't know shit about the price of four snowmobiles, a grandfather clock and a weeklong Austrian getaway, but God knows I'm yelling out numbers when it's Showcase Showdown time. I just can't picture a dancing Shatner affecting me the same way.

The other issue with these new game shows is that unlike "Jeopardy" and "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire," they use casting calls to find entertaining contestants instead of people with actual knowledge or common sense. This won't be a surprise to anyone who's ever seen "Deal or No Deal," as the contestants consistently make mind-boggling decisions. Really, the only appeal to the show is watching the contestants blow their easy money. Well, that and seeing if someone will successfully shake Howie Mandel's hand (random trivia: that bald head of his? It's because he's mysophobic).

Maybe I'm expecting too much from network TV, but it's only because I know the cultural impact that a "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire"-type of show can have. So if you regularly watch "Deal or No Deal" because the contestants are stupid and it makes you feel good to mock them, then do us all a favor and stop. As long as people keep watching this crap they'll keep pumping out more. It's simple TV economics.

Across the pond

Some of America's favorite game shows actually have a proper pedigree from other nations. Best of the worst:

The Weakest Link (2001) - A puckery British host wearing a Neo-esque trench and acting like a bitch? Fabulous light designs combined with people too stupid to stammer out the word "bank" before they get owned by the trivia writers? A real-life Walk of Shame and the occasional celebrity round? Fantastic!