Talk:Extreme Makeover: Home Edition

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Television (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborate effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Name & Format[edit]

Who came up with the name and format of the show? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:49, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi my name is jacquelyn taulbee and my fiancé is captain bobby spencer of the clay city ky fire dpet. These men and women give their life for people. They give up their time with their families to volunteer their life and time to help people in car wrecks homes that are burning and they run in burning buildings to save people not even thinking bout their self. They put their own life on the line for other people that dont even think about the dept until they need them.

    They are in need of their dept to be updated and they need proper gear that they can not afford they do not get paid for what they do they are all volunteers and they are incredible in what they do. I never realized how much they do until my fiancé showed me and opened my eyes. I am amazed by their will and the care they show on every call they recive. They all are like family and they love what they do. They are passionate about what they do. They just need alittle help and thats what i am ask you for. If you want to contact me my number is 6064814419  Nikia84 (talk) 19:26, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Cost procedures[edit]

I'm curious if anyone knows how the financial situation works between the network and the family. I would assume that ABC would have to buy the house and land in order to do the renovations to the extent that they do. Futhermore the property tax that the family would be left with could be too much for many of them. Are there contractual agreements for ABC to pay the tax? Is the family required to live there for a specified period of time before they can sell it and move someplace less costly? Anyone know the answers to these questions?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Schalicto (talkcontribs) 12:30, 18 August 2005

Having indirectly worked with the show, and seen two homes here locally get 'made over", it is run kinda like the story of "Stone Soup"... ABC and the producers pick a family, and then go to the businesses and people of that community, and beg for donations of time, labor, materials, and, oh yeah, money. No contracts exist to my knowledge regarding home resale or tax liabilities. ABC sets it all up, has everyone pay for the bulk of it, and takes all the credit. Check-Six 02:02, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

I can't speak for local laws on property taxes, but the federal gift tax is avoided by a loophole that allows for the tax-free "improvement" of rental property. In essence, ABC rents the property from the family for the week. The family is payed in improvements to the property. In this case, the improvement is usually the demolition and construction of a new house. 05:17, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

From what I understand, the "rent" they are given is substantial enough to set up a situation where the interest pays off the difference between the new property tax and what they had before. However, I don't have proof of this anywhere. (talk) 08:46, 11 September 2008 (UTC)


This page is in need of an update -- grammar errors, cast members, etc...

My question is this: Most of these families are having serious financial problems. They're struggling to pay their bills, including the mortgage. Yes, ABC is doing great things to improve their homes and lifestyles...BUT....their financial situations are still the same, right? I've seen several shows where the builder works to pay off the mortgage, but not on every episode.

As to answer this question, the truth of the matter is that the financial problems these families are suffering from are no different from the ones millions of other families have been facing since the recession. Not too long ago there was an article about how Larry and Judy Vardon of Oak Park, MI nearly lost their house built by the show to foreclosure. The root of this problem was not the makeover itself, but the fact that the main source of income for the family was Larry's job in Detroit's auto industry. He was among thousands of workers in that industry laid off during the recession. Another example was the Wafford Family. The family was in hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt and they came close to losing the house over an error in the loan they had taken out. The bank noted that the problem was not because of the makeover, but because of a lack of financial planning, which for a family of nine can quickly get out of control. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:41, 22 May 2011 (UTC)


I am the one who wrote the sections on the criticism because I feel that a lot of people are missing the point of the show. I've been an avid viewer since the show started, have volunteered twice with them, and have had discussions with Ty, some of the designers and crew. The reason I support this show is because they promote values which I believe are going to go extinct if programs like this stop advocating them. I take it seriously to point out the true intentions of the show to people who just don't seem to get the picture.

First, they advocate helping families in need in a smart, productive manner. When I say smart manner of helping people, I mean that they help families who give of themselves towards others in order to promote the common good, such as those who participate in groups and organizations which support others struggling with challenges such as grieving, illnesses, disabilities and other handicaps. Other good reasons these families are chosen are to advocate against criminal activity such as drunk driving and domestic violence, advocate for supporting and honoring veterans, police, firefighters and other law enforcement which keep the public safe. Each episode is written out to have one of these lessons tucked within it.

Now, a criticism I hear too often is made in regards to giving too much to a single family and talk about giving to charities and homeless families instead. While I am in favor of giving to such causes, the truth of the matter is that giving to these causes must be done in a specific manner. If the show went around giving new houses to every person with a maxed out credit card, then that element of advocacy would be worthless. In addition, giving to others in that manner is risky business because at times it becomes too easy for people to take advantage of, and in turn does not yield much contribution to the common good.

The main reason they focus on one family at a time is so that viewers can get a glimpse at how people deal with certain problems in their lives and how much something like what the show helps to accomplish for the family can make an enormous difference in their lives. For example, the Burns Family was a family they helped out earlier in the show. Their youngest son suffered from brittle bone disease and had broken nearly twenty bones by the time he had reached school age. That family came to the makeover I volunteered with first and what I had heard was in the three years since their makeover, their son had broken only three bones, all of which had happened outside the house.

Does anyone know of any criticism for this pap? I've seen every episode, and I know that it's really an hour-long commercial for sears etc. I can't be the only one who has noticed this, nor can I be the only one who finds trite such formulaic tugging of the heart strings. Turly-burly 12:21, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Noted the criticism in the PopReview article. Wish I could find more. Turly-burly 04:35, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
If every long-form commercial resulted in improving the lives of people who much more often than not were victim to something beyond their control, I'm not sure it would be bad. Of course it's a commercial, of course it's made to be heart-wrenching...but the heart-wrenching leads to viewers, and viewers lead to advertisers, and advertisers lead to money and donations that can be used on the houses. ...just a possible insight into the difficulty in finding criticism. (That, and anyone who criticizes will immediately get attacked as hating people who have little money/are victims of {disaster/disease}, so I imagine most potential criticizers just find something else. ;) ) -- 01:05, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Response to Question Above The reason Sears plays such a large role on the show is because Sears is one of their largest sponsors, and they need a way to pay for all the stuff Sears gives them. It's called capitalism, and its hardly exploitative when the family chooses to participate knowing the presence of Sears in the show.

It seems like we should be able to find some more articles on criticism, though. I mean, a bunch of things jump to mind right off the bat. The idea that they're putting these houses in neighborhoods which are completely inappropriate is the first thing, but is only touched on briefly in the criticism section. Similarly, I often question the practicality of these houses. Will the family have to pay to refurbish Junior's room when a pirate theme is no longer appropriate? And how do you sell a house that has five bedrooms and two bathrooms -- one of which has five sinks and two showers?

Response to Question Above There's hardly anything wrong with people wishing to build houses of unique, modern styles, as it represents a pattern of architecture which has been developing for decades. From what I've seen, the houses are designed to fit the individual needs of the family. In families with lots of kids, one must remember that each of those kids is going to have friends and classmates over to the house, and if the parents are socially active they will have family, friends, church groups, sports teams and other organizations in the house.

The fact is that the issue of refurbishing a house, regardless of its size, is going to happen with every house.

The rooms designed for kids in various themes all have one thing in common, they're easily adaptable for when the kids grow older. I know because I've helped set up many of them.

As for the process of constructing these houses, the process of doing this is as follows. As soon as a family is selected by the executive producers, they use information on the family to draw up the house plans, and then begin seeking out a contractor. Once the contractor is selected, the plans are handed over and a large portion of the house begins to come together in small sections, which makes the process of making sure the houses are built properly much more efficient.

Finally, among the main reasons I take so strongly to addressing these criticisms is because of the fact that some of these problems described in these pessimistic comments have ridiculously simple solutions. If you know someone who is in need of a helping hand, don't sit around and wait for Extreme Makeover: Home Edition to do it. After all, it's only one show and there are so many people out there. Therefore, try getting out of your house and volunteering to make someone else's life better, which the show profusely advocates multiple times in every episode. They aren't the only ones capable of helping others; we all have the capability. The same can be said about those who criticize the manner in which the makeovers are carried out, which to some extent almost sounds like Socialist propaganda at times. There is no law against or harm done in living in a big house.

To be honest, most of what I've seen is basically people venting over their own emotional problems. The best explanation for this would have to be found in Taylor Swift's Mean

P.S. I'm an optimist. Deal with it.

I don't really even think the Sears aspect is as troubling as what I mentioned above. Product placement is a simple fact of life in modern day TV. --Wolf530 04:57, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
My question would be, why are you so determined to find criticism? The criticism that exists already can hardly be called NPOV. Sounds more like pseudo-Communist ramblings. JettaMann 22:33, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
The only criticism I have is rather weak and adds to the criticism brought up above. The rooms they build and decorate for, say, a kid who is ten, is very ten-year-oldish. What happens 18 months from now when they grow out of it? I think they could... tone down the way they design the children's rooms instead of just covering the room in whatever the flavor of the week is. BrainRotMenacer 21:06, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
I have enjoyed the show over the year, a real tear jerker sometimes. However the show about the family in Lincoln, NE was weak. I sure wish the show was on when I first got divorced so they could have built me a house.
The property tax issue is a major one. See this webpage about a family that can't pay the property taxes after EMHE redid their house. And there's also a potential income tax issue: if the improvements to the home get classified as gameshow or lottery winnings, then they are taxable income. Jaysbro 01:50, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
The second link can't be used directly because it is a blog, but if you could find the Newsweek article it mentions, that would be perfect. The first one I'd be very careful how you worded the information though. It would be very easy to twist what the article is saying and introduce ideas that are anti-subject... I would word it something like "After the makeover is complete, assessment values often rise and homeowners have difficulty meeting their new tax level. Congressmen in some states are working towards resolving tax laws to avoid such issues." Something like that, closer to what the article is saying, rather than the usual "Extreme Home Makeover gives no thought to the rising land values after the so-called makover, leaving the disabled homeowner in worse shape than they were before" that I would expect from the usual critics.--Arkcana 02:40, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
The question that bugs me the most about the show is the quality of the construction. While I'm sure that all of the people who build the houses are experts, the idea of crafting a house in seven days, especially some of the massive houses I've seen built on the show, seems too haphazard to be true. Has there been any documented case of any of the houses built on the show suffering damage or extensive need for post-construction repairs or touch-ups? Willbyr (talk | contribs) 20:09, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Can't access google at the moment but was there not an episode where later it was revealed that the person they built the house for was an ex-con? Also the Lincoln NE episode locally was spoke out against from people who knew them and didn't see the need of the family. I should check local paper back issues for it, unless someone can cite first. --Xiahou 02:14, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I found it. It was actually in my hometown and I knew the family. The girl in particular was recently in a drunk driving incident herself actually.

Seems the post above was posted by someone who did not signed. Anyway, my post is below. Extreme Makeover does not appear to be about providing for needy people. It's all about RATINGS. I've seen homes (which many people would love to have) destroyed without regard for their potential to house a different needy family with different needs. An example would be a nice brick home they destroyed, because the current family needed a wheelchair friendly home, but that same home would have made a different family very happy! Waste is not entertaining. In some episodes multiple TVs are placed in the bedroom of one child. Why so many? Another episode gave multiple guitars to a small child who likes guitars. Everyone knows the people doing this show are collecting big bucks, so why focus on tears, hugs, and some disgusting loud-mouth who takes center stage? Why not provide enough help to make a family comfortable and secure, and then move on to another family with needs. I wonder how many views feel that this show wastes far too much time and resources, and would watch more often if it was not as extreme. If people start turning the channel, maybe the sponsors will do an extreme makeover of their own. CynTalk (talk) 01:46, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

I wonder about the legitivity of the "leaked email" mentioned in the "Critisism" section. The website it is sourced from seems like a typical "Conspiracy Theory" site. Is it a good reference? KatCassidy (talk) 11:31, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

A side note: While I am not sure of the validity of this something you might want to look into is that The show refuses to work in at least one state (vermont) due to it not having its sponsers with in the state. It apparently did one home in the state and will no longer do it again. I know this to be partly true because I have been trying to wrangle a house for a very needy family but they have sent me refusals due to "inadaquate support." —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:46, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

50 more episodes coming?[edit]

Commercials being aired around Summer 2006 seem to show Ty P. saying that the show is going to do a tour of the U.S. and visit every state. If that's to be believed, ABC may be planning to air another 50~ episodes. -- 01:07, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

keishajacquet32@yahoo. Company keishajacquet homeless hurricanes Katrina 2005 KeishaJacquet (talk) 21:42, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Marlee Matlin[edit]

This page lists Marlee Matlin as a new cast member, but I believe she's a one-episode celebrity guest host. Am I wrong? - 01:42, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Judgement against five orphaned siblings[edit]

I added updated news on the lawsuit against Extreme Makeover by the siblings...

Country of origin?[edit]

This wiki article states that the country of origin for this show was the United States. However, I do recall watching a Korean version of the show called "love house", pronounced "rubih how-u-si" in korean. The korean version of the show aired a couple years before the first episode of extreme makeover home edition. The show also could not fund all of the new houses they were building, so the show has not been aired for the past few years. I do not have sources except for my own knowledge. Im not going to change but but I do suggest that a knowledgable wiki user research this a little more and update the article.

Kenmore washers/dryers[edit]

Has anyone noticed that in all episodes, the family doesn't get to choose what type of Kenmore washer and dryer they wanted?'s ALWAYS the front-loading(and "EnergyStar"-approved) types...I have read in some newspapers where some families that were chosen actually changed their washer/dryer combos after the cameras(and Ty and the team) had left...I mean, let's face it, not EVERY family likes those Whirlpool-built Kenmore-tagged front-loader washers and dryers...Michaela92399 17:24, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Why wouldn't they like them? Especially when they're free. Chris M. (talk) 00:57, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Where are they now[edit]

I'd love to see how the houses look and how many were lost because they couldn't afford the new property taxes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by C2s (talkcontribs) 16:35, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

That, and how many houses have been burglarized now that everyone in the community knows exactly where and how many big screen TVs there are in the house.

I've been wondering about that, too. This link indicates the lives of some families are indeed made worse than before: --YellowTapedR 16:35, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Unless California is so drastically different from any other state (which it may very well be) the actual house is only about 10% of the property value. Granted, Prop 13 would likely shield most people in California but take a typical house in San Marino, for example. The median home price is around $2mil (this will get you a 3,000sq ft house) with the actual house only valued at about 120-150k. I think these concerns are hyperbolic.Jgeddis (talk) 09:38, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

I seriously doubt that property taxes on these houses are more then mortgage was for their old houses. It seems like only 3 of the families aren't in their houses now. 2 of them voluntarily sold their houses due to issues unrelated to the show, and another one was forced to sell it when construction buisness venture failed (also unrelated to the show). Chris M. (talk) 00:56, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:ExMakeLogo large.gif[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:ExMakeLogo large.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 22:41, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Does anybody know the 3d-animation software which is used by this tv-show?[edit]

i ask because i could use this for my work, so help would be appreciated —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:21, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Permits, blueprints, clearances[edit]

Does anyone know how they deal with all the blueprinting/schematics for the homes they build? How do they get local building permits and the subsequent approvals? How does all that sketching by the designers get translated into a REAL building plan in such short order? Obviously the families must know in advance that ABC is coming. Producers must go in in advance to get the lay of the land and builders must be engaged in advance to have plans/materials/labor at the ready.

Does anyone know how this REALLY works? Devinbaines (talk) 05:31, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Can someone explain how a house can be built in seven days? For example, how long does usually take to build a concrete foundation (ie building the molds/forms (?), pouring it, allowing it to set). How can they do that so quickly? Can someone give a typical schedule (ie Day 1 demolition, Day 2 ???, ..., Day 7 move in the furniture)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:43, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

In most cases the construction period on EM:HE runs 24/7, so there are always people on-site performing labor. Modern home construction techniques such as pre-manufactured roofs, walls and fixtures dramatically speed up construction, as most of these can be built off-site at any time and transported in when needed. The longest task would be demolition (around one day) and setting of a new foundation if necessary (one to two days, depending on the weather). The building schedule is tightly coordinated so that the most can be done in as little time as possible, the shifts for the volunteers are planned in advanced, and visits by inspectors and other officials already scheduled. Kamnet (talk) 15:06, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

"circular" links[edit]

Can anyone explain why several wiki pages have blue underlined links within the article that circle back to itself? For example, if you click on "Eduardo Xol" within this article it will bring you back to the top of this article rather than a page about Eduardo Xol. (talk) 20:53, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Simpsons lampoon[edit]

Worth mentioning the episode of The Simpsons where whats-his-name's house blew down in the hurricane and the whole of Springfield built him a replacement which fell down around him? Definitely "inspired" by EM:HE. Can't remember the name of the episode (I was only half watching), but it was on one of the UK cable channels last week or so. --Matt Westwood 23:31, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Kermit the Frog and Marlee Matlin[edit]

Is there any reason that Kermit the Frog is listed as part of the cast list but Marlee Matlin isn't? They were each a major part of precisely one double episode. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:47, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Extreme Makeover: Home Edition. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:15, 28 December 2016 (UTC)