R.I.P. Top Gear

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

  1. Mar 25, 2015 #21 of 241
    purwater

    purwater I make tasty water

    622
    25
    Aug 25, 2005
    SW Virginia

    Advertisements

    I felt like he needed to be punished for what happened. I figured maybe a fine and anger management. A public apology to the producer and his crew. From what a lot of people have said it's a lot like a sports situation where people work long hours together and some sometimes things get heated after a long day. Usually things work out and they go on. The producer even said he would work with Jeremy. It's sad and I hope another network or Netflix will entice the three of them to do a show. It might even be a fresh take on the original format. I'll have to watch my collection of the 21 series I already have until the new show possibly happens. I think the bad blood with BBC execs and Jeremy's lack of PC is what ultimately led to the dismissal. I think otherwise he would've been punished, but kept on.
     
  2. Mar 25, 2015 #22 of 241
    DevdogAZ

    DevdogAZ Give 'em Hell, Devils

    58,881
    4,437
    Apr 16, 2003
    Arizona
    It would be very interesting to see what a Netflix version of that show would look like. So much of the humor is so specifically British, and I wonder if Netflix (or any other network) execs would want them to make the show more "accessible" by removing a lot of that stuff. Obviously, I think that would be a big mistake. But I definitely will watch whatever car show Jezza lands at, and would be thrilled if it also included Hammond.
     
  3. Mar 25, 2015 #23 of 241
    midas

    midas I heard that

    14,611
    839
    Jun 1, 2000
    Montgomery,...
    One of the things I really love about the show is seeing the exotic cars. Cars I know I'll never be able to own or ever get a chance to drive. And then seeing them trash those cars as if they total clunkers.

    The problem is, I'm not sure a Netflix or similar version of the show would ever get those type of cars. Would the manufacturers be so willing to offer them the use? You know that the BBC isn't buying those cars.
     
  4. Mar 25, 2015 #24 of 241
    DevdogAZ

    DevdogAZ Give 'em Hell, Devils

    58,881
    4,437
    Apr 16, 2003
    Arizona
    The manufacturers (or private owners, in many cases) would not provide those cars for just any old startup car show. But I think if it included Clarkson and Hammond, that would guarantee the show a reasonable amount of success and notoriety right off the bat, and would therefore be enough to allow them to get access to the types of cars they got on Top Gear.

    And make no mistake, Top Gear has (and any new show would also have) a very robust insurance policy that helps to comfort the owners of the cars.
     
  5. Mar 25, 2015 #25 of 241
    midas

    midas I heard that

    14,611
    839
    Jun 1, 2000
    Montgomery,...

    Advertisements

    We all know that a great cast, even if they are involved in the writing, is a guarantee of success. This hypothetical show could very well bomb. Of course I don't really know what the motivation for the car makers is to provide those cars.
     
  6. Mar 26, 2015 #26 of 241
    Jon J

    Jon J Curmudgeon TCF Club

    7,974
    166
    Aug 23, 2000
    Music City USA
    I think I read that the head of the Beeb (Lord HawHaw or something) had been looking for a failsafe way to axe Clarkson for some time. This was it.
     
  7. Mar 26, 2015 #27 of 241
    SWFan

    SWFan Well-Known Member

    2,194
    42
    Oct 6, 2002
    Kansas...
    If Clarkson actually hit a coworker, then this is what the consequence should have been. I know if I hit a coworker I would expect nothing less than being fired, and probably have criminal charges filed against me. Why someone who is a celebrity is expected to get away with such things is really beyond me. There is just no excuse for taking a swing at someone unless it is in self-defense.
     
  8. Mar 26, 2015 #28 of 241
    NorthAlabama

    NorthAlabama tabasco rules

    11,949
    3,344
    Apr 19, 2012
    sweet home, al
    this was my reaction when i read the story and of his history while working with the network - it's not the first incident of physical violence or inappropriate language while working for bbc, i don't see how they had much choice at this point - anything less could have been seen as endorsing the behavior.
     
  9. Mar 26, 2015 #29 of 241
    Sapphire

    Sapphire Xtal substance

    44,114
    812
    Sep 9, 2002
    USA


    staff being abused by talent is actually a quite frequent occurrence. A popular commentator on a fairly liberal news network for example used to get in a horrific rage when they ordered car service for him and they didn't send a Prius.
     
  10. Mar 26, 2015 #30 of 241
    shady

    shady Previously European TCF Club

    5,263
    630
    May 31, 2002
    Morgan...
    I don't think anyone is saying otherwise.
     
  11. Mar 26, 2015 #31 of 241
    ElJay

    ElJay Active Member

    2,105
    12
    Apr 6, 2005
    I'm sad because I loved the show like everybody else, but I don't see how else they could've handled it. You can't go around assaulting your coworkers when you get mad about something.

    I thought this season was mostly off anyway, starting out with the terrible Patagonia special and it never really recovered. I also started watching again via BBC America for the first time in years, and I miss the proper music editing so much.
     
  12. Mar 26, 2015 #32 of 241
    RonDawg

    RonDawg Well-Known Member

    27,261
    2,919
    Jan 12, 2006
    Neither...
    On one of the other threads (it's being discussed in 3 or 4) someone said that they felt fining Clarkson and forcing him to publicly apologize to Tymon was more appropriate than termination. EDIT: even before that post, there was this one:

    So yes there are people who felt that Clarkson should not have been fired. There's even some victim-blaming as well:

    Sorry, but Jeremy Clarkson's inability to control himself is what ultimately killed Top Gear.
     
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2015
  13. Mar 27, 2015 #33 of 241
    murgatroyd

    murgatroyd Don't stop believin'

    26,095
    256
    Jan 5, 2002
    Berkeley CA
    Clarkson was an ass, and shouldn't have struck his producer.

    However, it is also true that the BBC has just cost itself a boatload of money by firing him.
     
  14. Mar 27, 2015 #34 of 241
    RonDawg

    RonDawg Well-Known Member

    27,261
    2,919
    Jan 12, 2006
    Neither...
    I'm a bit surprised that you (given your opinions on other similar situations) would even let the possible loss of income be relevant to whether or not Clarkson should be fired. I would have thought you'd applaud the BBC for not letting the bottom line influence their decision.
     
  15. Mar 27, 2015 #35 of 241
    tvmaster2

    tvmaster2 Well-Known Member

    2,637
    111
    Sep 9, 2006
    million-pound talent can't get away with bullying and assaulting $70k- lb talent. May's actually the only one who does interesting stuff on his own. Time for a change....
     
  16. Mar 27, 2015 #36 of 241
    Unbeliever

    Unbeliever Random Nobody

    7,143
    1,406
    Feb 3, 2001
    Nowhere Special
    [​IMG]

    --Carlos V.
     

    Attached Files:

  17. Mar 27, 2015 #37 of 241
    murgatroyd

    murgatroyd Don't stop believin'

    26,095
    256
    Jan 5, 2002
    Berkeley CA
    I'm not really interested in what you think my opinion is or what you think my opinion should be.

    You took the quote from the other thread out of context, and I don't think it's right to pull a statement out of the other thread without linking back to it.

    The facts are what they are. This decision is going to cost the BBC a lot of money, and it may result in the termination of the executives involved. That's the way the business works.

    If things had been better managed, maybe the BBC execs wouldn't have been backed into the corner and forced to fire Clarkson's obnoxious ass.

    But it seems more likely that they were just playing out the rope, waiting for Clarkson to do something else stupid so they could ****-can him.

    Given that the franchise was worth so much money to the BBC, it boggles my mind that the custom over there is to cheap out and not have craft services like we do here in the States. For the want of a steak dinner, the Beeb stands to lose in the millions GBP. Does that make sense to you?
     
  18. Mar 27, 2015 #38 of 241
    Worf

    Worf Well-Known Member

    2,534
    160
    Sep 15, 2000
    I'm surprised the BBC didn't simply spin off the production company and wash their hands of the whole thing - so instead of them working for the BBC, they work for Top Gear Inc., which is funded by the BBC and others purchasing the shows and DVDs and such.

    As for craft services - I believe it wasn't to cheap out, just the restaurant they chose decided to close down for the night. Perhaps it's not custom to have a special caterer just for TV and movies (i.e., craft services companies) but instead to just partake in the local fare that was catered in.

    But it was also likely that by US standards, it's not a "rich" show - unlike the US which can spend millions on an episode, I'm sure the BBC probably has a fixed budget that's really based on sharing the pot amongst every show so the ones that make a lot subsidize the ones that don't, as long as there's a justifiable purpose. It perhaps is why some people prefer BBC programming over US ones - because US style programming is more a lowest common denominator to get the eyeballs and ad rates to pay for shows, while the BBC model is to produce programming that doesn't have to depend on ads.
     
  19. Mar 27, 2015 #39 of 241
    tvmaster2

    tvmaster2 Well-Known Member

    2,637
    111
    Sep 9, 2006
    it's hard to say what the circumstances were - maybe it was supposed to be a short shoot that went way overtime, which didn't originally have need of a steak dinner.

    And seeing that we don't have anything nearly as intellectual, impressive, worldly, loaded with great programs from a PUBLIC broadcaster as they do over there (let's face it, people here vote to have PBS dismantled brick by brick every year because Big Bird wastes their tax money), I don't think we should pat ourselves on the back because we serve Matt Lauer a hot breakfast.

    Good on the Beeb - change is inevitable (ask Doctor Who), and they'll find another group of numbskulls to show off the talents of the brilliant cinematographers, editors and production talent which makes Top Gear motor.
    Let's face it, the BBC brass knew this day was coming, based on Hammond's and Clarkson's continual, idiotic comments.

    No one thought Jonathan Ross could be replaced...enter Graham Norton.
    Change is a good thing, profits will return, and an overpaid bully will be old news.

    But if they showed up on another channel, I'd watch them once or twice
     
  20. Mar 27, 2015 #40 of 241
    RonDawg

    RonDawg Well-Known Member

    27,261
    2,919
    Jan 12, 2006
    Neither...
    First of all, I don't know why I deserved such an overreaction. As I alluded to in my post, you typically take the side of the "underdog" whether it be along socioeconomic lines, racial lines, gender lines (especially), etc. It wasn't meant as a slam. It just seemed surprising to me that you'd even consider weighing the dismissal of someone who did something so egregious against the potential bottom line of the organization.

    Second, if you still feel that strongly you can always put me in ignore. I stand by my opinion unless someone convinces me I was wrong, and in such a case I will admit to that. I was not looking for your approval.

    My intent was not to call out people specifically, but to address the notion that nobody here is questioning Clarkson's firing, because there are certainly people who are both here and elsewhere.

    I also felt that if someone really wanted to know who said what that they could research that on their own. But since that seems to have offended you, I will provide that link right here.

    And rereading that quote, I don't know how I could have taken it out of context. It does not appear that the person who wrote it is in agreement about Clarkson's firing, but rather feels it is an overreaction. If there's a different meaning to that post I'd like to hear what that is.

    Nobody will dispute you here.

    But it was a brave decision by BBC to not let a business decision override what they feel was the proper ethical decision. As said elsewhere (and you can look it up yourself) if you or I were to have punched a co-worker, we'd get fired.

    I will vehemently disagree with you here. If someone at The Beeb was out to get Clarkson, the Burma episode would have been sufficient, especially since he supposedly uttered the N-word on camera before. It was certainly serious enough to get him put on probation with the warning that another incident could get him sacked. And unlike with the Burma incident, there is no way he can profess ignorance of the seriousness of his actions with this incident.

    You're assuming that (1) catering services are done the same way they are in the US and (2) it was totally not the crew's fault. They weren't being cheap as they arranged for dinner through the hotel they were staying at, but by the time they got back the hotel restaurant was closed. How do we know that the Top Gear production staff weren't the ones who screwed up by wrapping up late and not paying the hotel cook staff to stay later? Perhaps that was supposed to be Tymon's job which he screwed up royally, and that's why he got punched?

    TG has a budget large enough to destroy some brand new cars, and lots and lots and lots of expensive tires. I highly doubt they were too cheap to buy a steak dinner. And keep in mind it's not just Clarkson who had to go hungry because of someone's error...they all did, including the victim.
     
    Last edited: Mar 27, 2015

Share This Page

spam firewall

Advertisements