Top gear America

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: expat
"Jay Leno, who originally turned down offers to host the show, expressed concern over whether or not a show like Top Gear could be successful in America.[14][15] In a column published by The Sunday Times, Leno expresses concern that an American version could lack the critical reviews the British version is known for.[16] The British show is produced for the BBC with public funds while the American show will air on commercial television. Leno believes that the show may have to worry about offending current and potential sponsors by giving their products poor reviews, leading to a compromise in the journalistic integrity and freedom of the original show."



Move it to PBS or C-SPAN solves the commercial problem. It would give me a reason to watch one of them for once. The only time I ever watch C-SPAN is to watch the House of Commons yell at the PM at 2am.
 
"Oh yes, this chrysler hemi is just the bees knees Frank. When you start it up you know you're in for a treat" *footage of some fat bald dude cruising around*
 
The first Oz top gear was pathetic.

The current season is actually quite fun. The main host was ditched, Shane Jacobson (Kenny) was installed, and they do Oz stuff.

The "reasonably priced car" is a Falcon Ute with a bullbar.
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
The first Oz top gear was pathetic.


Dunno,I could only stand the first 5 minutes....and judging by that,I doubt if I could get through the first 30 seconds of the US version.They did a bad boys Kiwi car show a few years ago,and had Aaron Slight doing the fast car and bike track tests,but even that couldn't save it - dead in the water after a couple of episodes.They didn't dare call it Kiwi Top Gear though.
 
The presenters were all a little squeaky voiced. It seemed a little "Boxing Day" with great cars and photography then three "kids" in charge. Am glad they don't have Leno though; his star power would overshadow the other presenters. Similarly if they had click or clack they'd just be chuckling and snorting for 44 minutes, and they can't drive anything faster than a subaru outback.

Is as contrived as the BBC version: When they're "lost" in the Viper they powerslide a 180' off a bridge in front of a stationary camera.
 
Awful presenters. I'm not sure why the US can't make a decent car show. They are either a Mother's wax commercial disguised as a car show or an ad for the car they're testing.
 
The presenters were very scripted and awkward in front of the camera. The camera work was amateurish, shaky at times, and someone needs to tell them that copying the super slow-mo of BBC Top Gear for scenic effect only works if you use a high frame rate...

I think it has "potential". It reminds me of the first season of The Office, another copy of a British show. It took a while for everyone to sort of create their own show identity.

This may be similar.
 
Originally Posted By: expat
"Jay Leno, who originally turned down offers to host the show, expressed concern over whether or not a show like Top Gear could be successful in America.[14][15] In a column published by The Sunday Times, Leno expresses concern that an American version could lack the critical reviews the British version is known for.[16] The British show is produced for the BBC with public funds while the American show will air on commercial television. Leno believes that the show may have to worry about offending current and potential sponsors by giving their products poor reviews, leading to a compromise in the journalistic integrity and freedom of the original show."




There is a lot of truth there!
Imagine if they said the Prius was junk like they did on the BBC or god forbid the Volt and leaf.
All the presenters would all of a sudden be audited by the IRS,labeled environmental terrorist and the shows producers would find themselves in court on some trumped up charges that could range from a morals rap to plotting to assassinate Kennedy.
 
That's why I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt for the remaining 9 episodes. Perhaps they will develop that chemistry.

They may not capture the market of those who watch the BBC Top Gear, but do well with those who don't watch the original. If they get a large enough audiance, it will stay.

I was thinking they need someone like Mike Rowe. Not that he knows that much about cars, but because he does well in front of the camera.

I could see him in a role similar to Jeremy Clarkson.
 
The Mythbusters guys have a similarly good chemistry. Theirs was even okay in the pilot.
 
I watched it yesterday. It was not as bad as it is being portrayed. I got the feeling that the hosts were nervous and did not seem to be genuinely having fun doing the show. I ended up fast-forwarding most of the show but I will watch couple more before giving up on them.

- Vikas
 
Originally Posted By: eljefino
The Mythbusters guys have a similarly good chemistry. Theirs was even okay in the pilot.


You bring to my mind a good point. If you go back and watch the first episode of Mythbusters compared to the show today, it is painful. It took some adjustments to get to the cast they have today.

Adam and Jamie apparently worked together, so they had a certain relationship already. But it didn't translate well to the camera at first. However, I think it would be called a success today.

With that said, there was no "standard" for Mythbusters like there is for Top Gear. Any new iteration has a seriously high bar to meet for the fans of the BBC show.

Also, I've seen all three of the BBC Top Gear presenters in other works solo. None of them have the appeal of Top Gear. They've captured a certain chemistry and I'm not sure one can just choose three people and replicate. Even if you choose carefully.

So I'm on the fence. I'm not sold on it, but I'm not totally turned off either.

Give it more time to see how it shakes out.
 
Perhaps the cast of Seinfeld could do it?
Jerry is a Car Guy at least, and he does Irony well.
 
Originally Posted By: javacontour

I was thinking they need someone like Mike Rowe. Not that he knows that much about cars, but because he does well in front of the camera.

I could see him in a role similar to Jeremy Clarkson.

I saw Mike Rowe in a Ford commercial yesterday. He was actually telling a "Camry Owner" (obvious actor) that the Ford Fusion - made in Mexico - is a smart buy because it has a projected resale value that is higher than that of the camry.

PROJECTED.

PROJECTED!!

On WHAT planet does a Ford vehicle keep its value better than a Toyota?


This shows to me that Mike Rowe has no personal integrity and will only espouse what he's being paid to shill.
 
Mike Rowe would be contracturally obligated to only like Ford products and Joe Rogan would then accuse him of plagarizing other Ford salesmen.
 
Originally Posted By: L_Sludger



I saw Mike Rowe in a Ford commercial yesterday. He was actually telling a "Camry Owner" (obvious actor) that the Ford Fusion - made in Mexico - is a smart buy because it has a projected resale value that is higher than that of the camry.

PROJECTED.

PROJECTED!!

On WHAT planet does a Ford vehicle keep its value better than a Toyota?


This one.

http://www.kbb.com/new-cars/ford/fusion/2011/resale-value
http://www.kbb.com/new-cars/toyota/camry/2011/resale-value

This matters when they try to figure out lease end residuals.
 
Originally Posted By: Ursae_Majoris

I could stomach about 10 minutes of that poor excuse for the show.


I didn't make it 5 minutes. HORRIBLE.
 
I find it funny that people are giving up after only 1 show. Give the guys some time to get comfortable. Most first episodes of something kind of like this (like the mythbusters example above) can take a little time for the presenters to get comfortable and form their own chemistry with each other. These guys in the US version have some major shoes to fit into, I'm sure they know it, and it's in the back of their head causing a little of the akwardness.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top