Clarkson

the playing mantis

eh up vtech how do, u daft old bugger.

debeli

Manc33 wrote:

Christopher Hitchens... never impressed me, he is an antagonist from what I can tell. That debate he had about religion with Anne Widdecombe, I think he lost out there, while assuming he won. The religious people pointed out to him that he is fixating only on all the bad stuff religion has done and he is ignoring any of the good stuff, like the priests in WW2 that provided food and shelter for people and so on. The guy seems like an ass, a sort of "extremist" atheist (I'm not even religious myself and can see that).

Was, rather than is. Seemed rather than seems. I believe he may have gone to meet his... well, not maker exactly, but the bloke who pretends to be that. Or doesn't.

That your view of him is based (in part at least) on a televised debate rather than on decades of written work on subjects from Vietnam to Clinton is in itself telling. He wrote a lot of books and an extraordinary number of articles on many topics. But this is now a screen world - so he is that bloke who debated against Anne Widdecombe. And Clarkson is the hero of the Saxo-driving, Impreza-aspiring intellectual tumbleweed of our sacred isle. Which is also telling. Had the petition required a real signature and a real piece of paper, it would have fewer 'signatories'.

I did see that debate (which was slightly too 'celebrity fluff' to be the real thing) and by any understanding of what a debate is, his house won it. Convincingly. But that isn't the point.

pinno

If you no longer wish to watch this topic you can either click the
"Unsubscribe topic" link found at the bottom of the topic above, or by
clicking the following link:

viewtopic.php?uid=477045&f=40088&t=13019850&unwatch=topic

VTech

Manc33 wrote:

b]He probably fakes most of the show, but I am only bothered about the fact that an outspoken guy is being taken off the TV and will probably be replaced with some drone with no opinions of his own. Its not like the next presenter won't be faking just as much of the show as Clarkson did.

People used to know about cars on the show, but the show changed so much that it became that you wouldn't need to know about cars to present on the show anyway. All the proper presenters like Tiff Needell (a racing driver in real life) left and went off doing other shows. What credentials does James May and Richard Hammond have? Aren't they just as inept as Clarkson when it comes to cars?

I know Hammond has got more balls than May and Clarkson put together. [/b]

Christopher Hitchens... never impressed me, he is an antagonist from what I can tell. That debate he had about religion with Anne Widdecombe, I think he lost out there, while assuming he won. The religious people pointed out to him that he is fixating only on all the bad stuff religion has done and he is ignoring any of the good stuff, like the priests in WW2 that provided food and shelter for people and so on. The guy seems like an ass, a sort of "extremist" atheist (I'm not even religious myself and can see that).

I agree, I have said before that Top Gear is scripted, not a lot is left to chance.
I honestly think that without Top Gear there is a real opportunity for a true car show. One that shows which cars are better than others, both for road and race applications.
For that you do need someone like Tiff who is a great driver and is a good presenter but the reality is that people like "daftness" more than serious and honest information.

I can't stand the show smashing decent cars for so called fun when I know people who really could do with a car.

the playing mantis

VTech wrote:

Manc33 wrote:

b]He probably fakes most of the show, but I am only bothered about the fact that an outspoken guy is being taken off the TV and will probably be replaced with some drone with no opinions of his own. Its not like the next presenter won't be faking just as much of the show as Clarkson did.

People used to know about cars on the show, but the show changed so much that it became that you wouldn't need to know about cars to present on the show anyway. All the proper presenters like Tiff Needell (a racing driver in real life) left and went off doing other shows. What credentials does James May and Richard Hammond have? Aren't they just as inept as Clarkson when it comes to cars?

I know Hammond has got more balls than May and Clarkson put together. [/b]

Christopher Hitchens... never impressed me, he is an antagonist from what I can tell. That debate he had about religion with Anne Widdecombe, I think he lost out there, while assuming he won. The religious people pointed out to him that he is fixating only on all the bad stuff religion has done and he is ignoring any of the good stuff, like the priests in WW2 that provided food and shelter for people and so on. The guy seems like an ass, a sort of "extremist" atheist (I'm not even religious myself and can see that).

I agree, I have said before that Top Gear is scripted, not a lot is left to chance.
I honestly think that without Top Gear there is a real opportunity for a true car show. One that shows which cars are better than others, both for road and race applications.
For that you do need someone like Tiff who is a great driver and is a good presenter but the reality is that people like "daftness" more than serious and honest information.

I can't stand the show smashing decent cars for so called fun when I know people who really could do with a car.

which no one will watch...see 5th gear

pinno

VTech wrote:

Manc33 wrote:

b]Some stuff

I honestly think that without Top Gear there is a real opportunity for a true car show. One that shows which cars are better than others, both for road and race applications.

I agree wit that!

the playing mantis

what with tiff needel,some ugly posh munter, some wannabee hamster and jason 'about as interesting as a dry slab' dawe presenting.

andrew english, jay leno, david coulthard and steve soper would be watchable

VTech

Sadly, the playing mantis is right, people wouldn't watch the likes of Tiff or in fact Jay Leno, DC etc due to the fact that they are not stupid.
People love idiocy, they love the stupidity of top gear, the fact that behind it all, they know that its scripted and doesn't give real info. If top gear told you not to buy a renault, the truth is you would look only for renault knowing it must be the best thing to buy.

I find it funny when I read things online where people write about how good this is, and how bad that is because they have viewed it on top gear but the info is wrong.
The i8 revue they did was so wrong, no data was used from the actual driver and jeremy clarckson made his views up for viewer pleasure. The same can be said about the Porsche 918 vs McLaren P1 vs Ferrari LaFerrari debate.

The problem is, the viewer doesn't get the truth so bases his/her judgement on the wrong facts whereas the people who understand these cars are left with nothing from the show other than frustration.
Its a shame but thats life I guess.

the playing mantis

no im saying they would watch jay leno and DC. leno is pretty funny, he turned down american TG...DC is entertaining too...5th gear is woeful.

you need silly and serious as otherwise its too niche

pblakeney

Debeli wrote:

And Clarkson is the hero of the Saxo-driving, Impreza-aspiring intellectual tumbleweed of our sacred isle.

You have lost touch with the "yoof" of today.
They neither watch Top Gear, nor care about that dinosaur Clarkson.
Nor do they drive Saxos or Imprezas. That was 20 years ago.

VTech

PBlakeney wrote:

Debeli wrote:

And Clarkson is the hero of the Saxo-driving, Impreza-aspiring intellectual tumbleweed of our sacred isle.

You have lost touch with the "yoof" of today.
They neither watch Top Gear, nor care about that dinosaur Clarkson.
Nor do they drive Saxos or Imprezas. That was 20 years ago.

Judging by the online petitions and the people I have seen posting for the return of JC on Instagram I would say the "you" are exactly the people who love Clarkson.
I don't know why, maybe misinformation or downright lunacy but he is worshipped, I can't think of a more appropriate word for it.

graham.

All I can say (and bear in mind that I have been drinking) is that there is only so many times that you can see a car that you will never be able to afford going around a track sideways entertaining, informative or educational.



PS Please feel free to add in the rest of the punctuation as you see fit.

MisterMuncher

There's plenty of outspoken people at the beeb currently or in the past. That they do not adhere to Clarkson's incredibly orthodox form of being unorthodox doesn't make them less so.

Wheelspinner

Not sure what the case was elsewhere in the world, but I'd like to point out that the local franchise production of Top Gear here was barely successful in its first season, and went downhill from there faster than a Koenigseggeggeggeggeggeggegg into the scenery driven by Stig.

It doesn't exist at all any longer, not for a few years now at least. The public broadcaster SBS here started it for a couple of series, then it got sold to a commercial channel (Nine network) who binned it fairly quickly because it was a dud.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Gear_Australia

The UK version still rates quite well with Clarkson and Co though. Not watched it much in years.

Stevo_666

Wheelspinner wrote:

Not sure what the case was elsewhere in the world, but I'd like to point out that the local franchise production of Top Gear here was barely successful in its first season, and went downhill from there faster than a Koenigseggeggeggeggeggeggegg into the scenery driven by Stig.

It doesn't exist at all any longer, not for a few years now at least. The public broadcaster SBS here started it for a couple of series, then it got sold to a commercial channel (Nine network) who binned it fairly quickly because it was a dud.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Gear_Australia

The UK version still rates quite well with Clarkson and Co though. Not watched it much in years.

So:
- Aussie version of Top Gear with no Clarkson = flop
- UK version of Top Gear with Clarkson = hit

Wonder if there's a connection?

slowmart

And you'd have thought the aussies being aussies they would have lapped up the formula but maybe it's still too evolved for em?

ddraver

Graham. wrote:

All I can say (and bear in mind that I have been drinking) is that there is only so many times that you can see a car that you will never be able to afford going around a track sideways entertaining, informative or educational.



PS Please feel free to add in the rest of the punctuation as you see fit.

I kind of agree with your drunken rant...

I like watching it with after my Sunday Tea having had a good club run the day before, then snoozed in front of whatever stage is on the telly that afternoon

However, I also agree that it is holding my attention less and less these days

VTech

Written yesterday in the daily mail:

The remarks may add to his woes, as the BBC investigates the now infamous 'fracas' between Clarkson and show producer Oisin Tymon, with whom it's claimed he had a fight in a Yorkshire hotel over the lack of hot food at the end of a day's filming.

Of the comments in the magazine, MP Helen Goodman said: “These are not the reactions of someone on a peace mission. He’s trying to maximise the conflict.

“As an MP for a northern constituency, I can tell you he’s talking complete nonsense.”

It's far from the first time that Clarkson has been accused of making racist comments.

Last year, Ofcom upheld complaints that he purposely used a derogatory term about a Asian man while filming a segment in Burma for the motoring show.

He was also forced to make a grovelling apology to fans after using the n-word in an outtake from the show which was later made public.

Clarkson is currently suspended from 'Top Gear' pending an investigation by the BBC over the alleged fight. [Daily Mail]

Seems I'm not on my own in the thoughts that he is purposefully making maters worse.
I won't use the word daft in relation to anything as that doesn't go down well on this forum but can I use the word "silly man"

Actually thats wrong, he isn't silly, some might say he is clever but that depends on wether you feel it right to screw over as many people as you can in order to get exactly what you want even if that means screwing over the people who gave you millions for a company/product which you now seem to want to own again without paying for it.

ugo.santalucia

VTech wrote:

I don't know why, maybe misinformation or downright lunacy but he is worshipped, I can't think of a more appropriate word for it.

I don't think it's Clarkson... it's the program and the format. There isn't much on TV that one wants to watch... they are down to doing reality shows about sewing, gardening and now even drawing and painting.
There is even a rather entertaining reality show about people watching the above crap.

Top Gear stands out as one of the few programs in the weekly schedule that one actually wants to watch. Clarkson and Top Gear are the same thing, the program cannot go ahead without him... so people are not adoring him, but the show.

Other shows he did were not so popular

MisterMuncher

I don't know if it is on purpose per se. His behaviour hasn't altered so much as the perception of it. Perhaps he's just went beyond the tipping point after all these years, and burned too many bridges?

VTech

ugo.santalucia wrote:

VTech wrote:

I don't know why, maybe misinformation or downright lunacy but he is worshipped, I can't think of a more appropriate word for it.

I don't think it's Clarkson... it's the program and the format. There isn't much on TV that one wants to watch... they are down to doing reality shows about sewing, gardening and now even drawing and painting.
There is even a rather entertaining reality show about people watching the above crap.

Top Gear stands out as one of the few programs in the weekly schedule that one actually wants to watch. Clarkson and Top Gear are the same thing, the program cannot go ahead without him... so people are not adoring him, but the show.

Other shows he did were not so popular

OK< I can accept that.
I think the format would work for me (because everyone has their own opinion) if it were more truthful and factual. The scripting and fakeness is something I dislike, maybe the fact that I know people who work on the show causes that and if I didn't know them maybe my thoughts would be different?
I dislike wrecking perfectly good cars on daft ideas, its not even as if anything is achieved. A crash test would be far better imo than smashing cars on purpose pretending it to be an accident.
I went on a business trip with one of the stages 2 weeks ago to miami and we talked quite a lot about the show and I found out that on almost all of the tests this year, JC had not completed the driving on the tests and in fact only did the start and end and the review was NOT based on the actual findings.
This isn't right, it is misleading and something the viewers could/would change ideals on future purchases which in effect has the negative of causing companies to potentially lose revenues.
If you don't like a particular car thats fine, but making things up for the point of dragging out a review isn't broadcasting to me.

ugo.santalucia

VTech wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

VTech wrote:

I don't know why, maybe misinformation or downright lunacy but he is worshipped, I can't think of a more appropriate word for it.

I don't think it's Clarkson... it's the program and the format. There isn't much on TV that one wants to watch... they are down to doing reality shows about sewing, gardening and now even drawing and painting.
There is even a rather entertaining reality show about people watching the above crap.

Top Gear stands out as one of the few programs in the weekly schedule that one actually wants to watch. Clarkson and Top Gear are the same thing, the program cannot go ahead without him... so people are not adoring him, but the show.

Other shows he did were not so popular

OK< I can accept that.
I think the format would work for me (because everyone has their own opinion) if it were more truthful and factual. The scripting and fakeness is something I dislike, maybe the fact that I know people who work on the show causes that and if I didn't know them maybe my thoughts would be different?
I dislike wrecking perfectly good cars on daft ideas, its not even as if anything is achieved. A crash test would be far better imo than smashing cars on purpose pretending it to be an accident.
I went on a business trip with one of the stages 2 weeks ago to miami and we talked quite a lot about the show and I found out that on almost all of the tests this year, JC had not completed the driving on the tests and in fact only did the start and end and the review was NOT based on the actual findings.
This isn't right, it is misleading and something the viewers could/would change ideals on future purchases which in effect has the negative of causing companies to potentially lose revenues.
If you don't like a particular car thats fine, but making things up for the point of dragging out a review isn't broadcasting to me.

But you are a petrolhead, I think there is a general understanding that TG is for people like you, but it's not, otherwise the audience worldwide would be a lot smaller... it's a program for Joe Bloke, a lot of folks like me drive a Focus and have no other aspiration (other than in an imaginary world where money is not an issue), but find it very entertaining nonetheless.

pinno

Stevo 666 wrote:

Wheelspinner wrote:

Not sure what the case was elsewhere in the world, but I'd like to point out that the local franchise production of Top Gear here was barely successful in its first season, and went downhill from there faster than a Koenigseggeggeggeggeggeggegg into the scenery driven by Stig.

It doesn't exist at all any longer, not for a few years now at least. The public broadcaster SBS here started it for a couple of series, then it got sold to a commercial channel (Nine network) who binned it fairly quickly because it was a dud.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Gear_Australia

The UK version still rates quite well with Clarkson and Co though. Not watched it much in years.

So:
- Aussie version of Top Gear with no Clarkson = flop
- UK version of Top Gear with Clarkson = hit

Wonder if there's a connection?

We've devolved and the convicts have evolved.

ballysmate

It isn't a factual programme nor a piece of journalism, it's entertainment. I posted in another thread that it is Last of the Summer Wine with cars. Of course it is scripted, anyone would be foolish to believe otherwise. As for presenters only actually filming segments of articles, well, blow me down.
Like all entertainment shows, it has a definite shelf life, after which it becomes less interesting. TG is fast approaching that stage and for some, like myself has passed it.

pinno

We all know you're passed it Bally.

ballysmate

pinarello001 wrote:

We all know you're passed it Bally.

Almost, but I've got my eye on a 31 year old cutie whose other half can't keep up with because he's too knackered after spending all day collecting tin cans.

MisterMuncher

It's weird that even big TG fans seem to agree the show has jumped the shark.

ugo.santalucia

It's not just Clarkson... it's the combination of the three... individually none of them is brilliant, but when you put them together the blokiness just works. All the best episodes are those when the three of them are involved in some kind of activity.
The parts where only one or two of them act are often mediocre.

May's programs were passable and Hammond's programs terrible... even Clarkson's programs were just about OK

slowmart

But how many individuals have found a resonance with the public through the BBC only to be lured away for the big contract only to find that the flavour and tone doesn't carry across networks?

You could argue the BBC, Wilman and the three clowns are the recipe for success. Take one away and it weakens the proposition?

Wilman is the organ grinder, just find three entertaining performing monkeys and the jobs a good one....


Personally I'd to see how Jodie Kidd step in as a guest presenter and cycle through presenters. It worked successfully for Have I got News for You and while entertaining the present show has a certain "been there, done that and I've got the t shirt" so maybe and as all good things do, its time to move onto something new.

ugo.santalucia

Slowmart wrote:

Personally I'd to see how Jodie Kidd step in as a guest presenter and cycle through presenters.

It seems to me a role rather tailored for Gordon Ramsey...