R.I.P. Top Gear

Discussion in 'Now Playing - TV Show Talk' started by TonyTheTiger, Mar 25, 2015.

  1. DevdogAZ

    DevdogAZ Give 'em Hell, Devils

    59,055
    4,495
    Apr 16, 2003
    Arizona

    Advertisements

    I think the "unpopular" version that was being talked about was the version of TG that ran from 1978-2002 before Clarkson rebooted it.
     
  2. HerronScott

    HerronScott Well-Known Member

    7,615
    1,131
    Jan 1, 2002
    Staunton, VA
    Wait I thought he was referring to Fifth Gear?

    Scott
     
  3. DevdogAZ

    DevdogAZ Give 'em Hell, Devils

    59,055
    4,495
    Apr 16, 2003
    Arizona
    Here's how I interpreted the conversation. The reference to Fifth Gear was simply to point out that it has a similar format to the original Top Gear.

     
  4. LoadStar

    LoadStar LOAD"*",8,1

    40,564
    3,235
    Jul 24, 2001
    Milwaukee, WI
    Fifth Gear, for all intents and purposes, is the original Top Gear. It was conceived by Channel 5 as a continuation of Top Gear after it was canceled by the BBC. It has a similar format, and many of the presenters from the original Top Gear moved over to Fifth Gear when it launched. Channel 5 even wanted to keep the Top Gear name, but the BBC denied the request.
     
  5. RonDawg

    RonDawg Well-Known Member

    27,261
    2,919
    Jan 12, 2006
    Neither...

    Advertisements

    The "eventually unpopular" version I'm referring to is v. 1.0 that eventually became Fifth Gear.

    And I thought the early version of Fifth Gear (that aired for a short while here on Speed Channel) was kinda meh compared to the Discovery UK version, which we get/got on Velocity.
     
  6. DUDE_NJX

    DUDE_NJX Well-Known Member

    12,838
    390
    Feb 12, 2003
    I'm surprised so many people are enamored with the "chemistry" between the old hosts. I've never thought it's anything special. The "jokes" are often really shallow and the interactions seemed forced and/or scripted. Seemed amateurish like a group of teenagers trying too hard to be funny for their youtube channel.
    I much more enjoyed it when each guy was presenting a segment by himself. Mainly, though, I watched the show for the fantastic camera work and, obviously, the cars and some interesting locales.
     
  7. Dan203

    Dan203 Super Moderator Staff Member TCF Club

    54,596
    7,558
    Apr 17, 2000
    Nevada
    I loved the road trip and race segments. (especially the ones with the beater cars) They were always a ton of fun. The actual reviews were OK, but I only have so much interest in watching reviews for cars I will never be able to afford. (or that aren't even available in the US)
     
  8. Jon J

    Jon J Curmudgeon TCF Club

    7,977
    166
    Aug 23, 2000
    Music City USA
    Though they fired Clarkson the BBC are not shy in using his stuff in the runup programs to the new Top Gear.
     
  9. DevdogAZ

    DevdogAZ Give 'em Hell, Devils

    59,055
    4,495
    Apr 16, 2003
    Arizona
    Why should they be? They own the footage and they didn't have any issues with the way Clarkson performed his duties in front of the camera/microphone. Their only complaint was for incidents that happened "behind the scenes."
     
  10. RonDawg

    RonDawg Well-Known Member

    27,261
    2,919
    Jan 12, 2006
    Neither...
    There's LOTS of things that Jeremy Clarkson has done on-camera, aired and unaired, that brought negative attention to the show and the BBC, including:

    1. The time he vandalized much of Bristol to prove the robustness of a Toyota Hilux pickup, including crashing it into a church-owned tree which later died.
    2. The "slope" on the bridge comment on the "Bridge Over the River Kwai" recreation that produced complaints about him being a racist.

    Wikipedia even has a page dedicated to Top Gear controversies much of which Clarkson alone was responsible.
     
  11. DevdogAZ

    DevdogAZ Give 'em Hell, Devils

    59,055
    4,495
    Apr 16, 2003
    Arizona
    OK, I should have clarified my point. Jon J said,

    and my post was meant to reflect that he was fired for a specific incident that happened off-camera, behind the scenes. Therefore, the BBC shouldn't have any problem showing the episodes in which Clarkson appeared since they own them and his firing had nothing to do with on-screen content.

    If they want to refrain from showing certain episodes that led to controversy, I'm perfectly OK with that. But it would be ludicrous of them to put the whole TG library on the shelf simply because their parting of ways with Clarkson was on less than stellar terms.
     
  12. TonyTheTiger

    TonyTheTiger Pro Troll Magnet

    14,641
    737
    Dec 22, 2006
    Just to clarify, Clarkson was NOT fired. The BBC decided not to renew his contract. Big difference.
     
  13. heySkippy

    heySkippy oldweakandpathetic

    21,204
    1,222
    Jul 2, 2001
    Sarasota, FL
    Yeah, one way means he's out of a job and the other way means ...

    Wait a minute, that's not a big difference at all. :)
     
  14. RonDawg

    RonDawg Well-Known Member

    27,261
    2,919
    Jan 12, 2006
    Neither...
    I think it's more accurate to say that him assaulting a producer during a temper tantrum back at the hotel was the final straw that broke the camel's back, particularly since he was on probation of sorts with the BBC after the "slope" comment the previous season.

    Had he been behaving not-so-badly prior to that, the BBC might have forgiven him.
     
  15. tvmaster2

    tvmaster2 Well-Known Member

    2,642
    111
    Sep 9, 2006
    not to mention Hamster's Mexico fiasco....
     
  16. Idearat

    Idearat Active Member

    3,214
    4
    Nov 26, 2000
    Gilroy
    I find it hard to see how BBC could hold Clarkson responsible for on-air comments he made that offended people considering they chose to air them. I'm sure there were lots of things said, like expletives when banging your knuckles with a wrench, that were recorded but didn't air.
    I think the BBC was very happy with all their antics, knowing that controversy increased ratings ( or traffic, or whatever BBC uses to measure success ). They could publicly denounce things that came out on the show while still pocketing the revenue they generated.
     
  17. RonDawg

    RonDawg Well-Known Member

    27,261
    2,919
    Jan 12, 2006
    Neither...
    I think it's one of those situations where as long as it didn't bring too much negative publicity to the corporation, they were willing to put out the fires as necessary. But they had to put their foot down with the "slope" comment and then when this came not long afterward, they had to choose between their ratings and their reputation.

    As North Americans we also forget that if you own a TV in the UK, you must legally have a license/licence for it, which is what funds the BBC, even if you don't watch a single channel of it, or don't watch broadcast TV at all (relying on just DVD's/Blu-rays/streaming video). While Top Gear was a net revenue generator for the corporation, since it is funded primarily by tax dollars, their public holds them to a different standard than non-taxpayer-supported TV like iTV or Channel Four, or anything in North America (including the CBC).
     
  18. Idearat

    Idearat Active Member

    3,214
    4
    Nov 26, 2000
    Gilroy
    The comment that the BBC chose to air. The comment was scripted, not spontaneous and they ( the BBC ) knew about it beforehand. I think the BBC's claim that they didn't know it was an offensive comment really was hiding "we thought we could get away with it, but since we didn't, we'll blame Clarkson"

    http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-28522450
     
  19. RonDawg

    RonDawg Well-Known Member

    27,261
    2,919
    Jan 12, 2006
    Neither...
    From your link:

    The lack of proper oversight and due diligence (which in your article Ofcom is blaming the BBC for) is not necessarily the same as "let's do it until we get called on it."
     
  20. TonyTheTiger

    TonyTheTiger Pro Troll Magnet

    14,641
    737
    Dec 22, 2006
    Actually, one way means he doesn't work for the BBC any more and the other means he can do future projects. In fact, he was due to host Have I Got News For You a few weeks after it all happened - until HE decided to drop out.
     

Share This Page

spam firewall

Advertisements