The main difference between TGUK and TGA presenters

[mgezz3]

(If someone has already mentioned this, please excuse me for putting up another thread, and just place me in that one...)

I think what is a very valid point in the difference in the presenters of the two Top Gear shows are in the background line of work each person has.

TGUK - Jeremy Clarkson - newspaper journalist(early 1980's). James May - Automotive Journalist(Early 1980's). Richard Hammond - Radio presenter (1990's).

TGA - Charlie Cox - Radio presenter (1960's). Steve Pizzati - Advanced driving instructor. Warren Brown - Editorial cartoonist.

For me what I feel is that the TGA crew aren't experienced enough in motoring journalism and are really just feeling their way into this. I don't doubt their ability at all to make an informed review on a car, it's the lack of experience in front of a camera - it feels like they are catering to their audience rather than making outlandish statements and sticking it in your face whether you like it or not, much like they do on TGUK. I watched ep4 this week and I can't help but notice how the audience look completely and utterly BORED!! They don't do what TGUK do every week, and what they are classically best at doing - ripping the shit out of cars (and sometimes the people that drive them.), instead they do pointless challenges and have not made solid statements about the cars they review - Like they aren't trying to insult anyone or any car manufacturer... meh, I don't know...

It's almost as if they are being watched by the SBS producers, making sure they only say nice things to keep the ratings from drifting off...

Look, I would really LOVE for TGA to work, but something about the boys needs to be overhauled - maybe they need to just RELAX and stop OVER ACTING! Or maybe they need a new lineup of people who can talk the journalistic lingo - or at least who are good with words, I'm am not digging the accents and the "okka-fied" Australian - whether that's SBS's way of trying to communicate to a majority of Australians, it's not really working. I seem to get the impression that every time they pay out a car, they use this okka slang... ie. "ave a bit of a fang!" "it's got a slush-box!" "it's got enough squirt to blow a dog off a chain!" "my favrite, tha booshfia!"
"a pooftienth more economical" "broo-ha-ha" "argy-bargy" "oh crikey!" - and all of this was in the space of 20 minutes in ep.3!!!

Warren seems to be the only well-spoken one, who uses colloquialisms within reason, and not overdone like the other two.

I could nit pick all day...

I hear the TGUK boys are coming down this way soon, maybe they can work on a team building exercise with the TGA boys, lol.

I really hope it does get better. I'm sure it will!!

I know it's not really worth much, but that's my two cents, lol.

[melbournian]

I think I read somewhere that Warren Brown already write a motoring column for a Sydney paper, plus his Peking to Paris doco, so he does have a bit of motoring journalism experience. Charlie also has his experience as a racing driver and motorsport commentator for the BBC.

[evorobin]

Warren has the experience but is annoying and so ugly to look at I've stopped watching the show. Subjective I know but that is a face for radio not TG.

[fbc]

The 'problems' pointed out are in some ways part of the reason the guys were selected. They were chosen because they represented the Top Gear ethos, not because of any particular journalistic / tv background. Sure, they could've gone for people with more experience in TV, but it's highly doubtful they'd have found anyone with that experience who was also capable of fitting the Top Gear mould.

IMHO they got it right - they chose guys who they knew would fit Top Gear, and get along well - thus echoing what Top Gear is really about - three mates enjoying cars, messing about & taking the piss out of each other. The lack of experience will be solved with time - you can already see they're getting more relaxed in front of the camera, delivering their lines, and taking jabs at each other. It's only going to keep getting better.

[chipchipchip]

The UK presenters don't say "Ryto" quite as much Ha I like both the shows but it just feels a bit strange not having Clarkson there..

[il est myron]

Originally Posted by mgezz3

I'm am not digging the accents and the "okka-fied" Australian - whether that's SBS's way of trying to communicate to a majority of Australians, it's not really working. I seem to get the impression that every time they pay out a car, they use this okka slang... ie. "ave a bit of a fang!" "it's got a slush-box!" "it's got enough squirt to blow a dog off a chain!" "my favrite, tha booshfia!"
"a pooftienth more economical" "broo-ha-ha" "argy-bargy" "oh crikey!" - and all of this was in the space of 20 minutes in ep.3!!!

How come I never see people complaining about the British colloquialisms used on TGUK? Sure, people occasionally ask what some sayings mean, but they never seem to complain about them.

Originally Posted by evorobin

Warren has the experience but is annoying and so ugly to look at I've stopped watching the show. Subjective I know but that is a face for radio not TG.

Have you ever seen Clarkson's face?

[kermit-1979]

for goodness sakes, Charlie, stop flapping your arms while you talk... it is so annoying...

and Warren, get rid of that tuff of hair on your chin... leave the moe if you must, but that strip of fluff... "What WERE they thinking???"

[yt_55]

If you are going to watch a bunch of guys drive sand around in a ute for 15min or drive around the bush in a 4WD in some boring staged race they have to be super funny people. TGUK's antics work cos the presenters are really entertaining people, unfortunately TGA people are not.

Also the scale of the challenges in the UK show are much grander.

I think these guys would be more suited to a journalistic type show with a few jokes thrown in (ie Fifth gear) rather than a variety show with a motoring theme.

I find my self cringing at the jokes and the challenges are extremely boring.

[trist0608]

I fall of the flipside of this argument, perhaps because I try to view this show as more like a set of stand-ins for our intrepid trio (like Carson used to do on The Late Show). The stunts and tests are not up to the level of TGUK, not likely to ever be that good. No problem! Charlie, Steve and Waz are engaging and perfectly capable of being both irritating and funny at the same time. The episodes that I have seen so far lead me to believe this show can and will get better. Charlie storming up the sand dune in the RAV4 and nearly running over Steve and Warren...TGUK worthy. Warren and Steve in a SmartCar hearse, complete with stupid hats...TGUK worthy.

One thing to keep in mind is that the producers are gearing this show towards a primarily Australian audience and their humor and sensibilities. Just like TGUK does not work for everyone so too will TGA struggle with some audience groups. Then again, TGUK has had a long time to grow on its audience.

[lancem]

Im Australian and TGA doesn't appeal to me. The way that i see it is our presenters just have no idea of what they are doing. Sure 2 of them have a bit of experience but this is no match for the 15 years clarkson had done before he started the new topgear and on top of that being a motoring journalist.
Can you imagine what TGUK would be like without clarkson considering he writes majority of the jokes that hammond and may say. IMHO topgear is topgear becuase of clarkson so we would have quite a hard time trying to come even close to it.
SBS has done an OK job so far with the tiny budget that had incomparison to the BBC topgears budget.
Charlie is nowhere near clarksons ability so he will have to try a different approach on humor. I hate the waving the hands thing he does and the australian humor he comes up with is definitly not australian/oka humor.
Warren is definitly the best but just needs to stop drawing stupid little cartoons, put some expression in his voice and burn the face fungus.
OH and the track is just pathetic. they have coppied everything so why not copy the track. atleast there would have been some comparision between the UK and aus lap times.
The presenters share to much of a similar view towards everything. Yes i get the idea that they are mates but that doesnt mean they all have to agree on everything.

So in my view to fix the show they need to become more childish, use facial expressions and bigger words instead of sounding like a bunch of retards, actually express there views instead of agreeing with charlie, ask the audience some questions, tell us the specs of the car that they are testing like they didnt with the holden w427 and a bit of wit in the jokes would go along way.

[Nuieve]

I find Australian presenters alright. All three of them. Charlie's playboy manners and gesticulating the same "i don't know" over and over and over does get a bit repetative, yet he never really gets annoying, I really like him. I like Warren too. I'm not so sure about the little guy, he seems awkward and I hate his accent, can't make out what's he's saying, but he ain't bad.

I like Clarkson, but I'm tired of him and his forced humor, honestly. He and his vibes got old long ago. I don't care about Hamster, I kind of like May. So it's 2.0 for Australia vs 1.5 for UK for me.

[trist0608]

Originally Posted by lancem

SBS has done an OK job so far with the tiny budget that had incomparison to the BBC topgears budget.

OH and the track is just pathetic. they have coppied everything so why not copy the track. atleast there would have been some comparision between the UK and aus lap times.
The presenters share to much of a similar view towards everything. Yes i get the idea that they are mates but that doesnt mean they all have to agree on everything.

So in my view to fix the show they need to become more childish, use facial expressions and bigger words instead of sounding like a bunch of retards, actually express there views instead of agreeing with charlie, ask the audience some questions, tell us the specs of the car that they are testing like they didnt with the holden w427 and a bit of wit in the jokes would go along way.

I agree with some of your arguments, especially about the track. Even if they can't copy the track, they need to make the AUS track more visually appealing. There just isn't the sense of speed or difficulty watching the timed laps that you get from TGUK.

I hope the second part of your argument is something that will gradually happen over time, just as TGUK has improved since its hit or miss first season. As for Charlie and his comically exaggerated arm movements...well, he reminds of my former French neighbor who couldn't move his lips without moving his hands. After a (long) while I just stopped noticing the flailing about and it stopped bothering me.

[epp_b]

I still say it's the accent

[Smörgåsbord]

Originally Posted by il est myron

How come I never see people complaining about the British colloquialisms used on TGUK? Sure, people occasionally ask what some sayings mean, but they never seem to complain about them.

Because the UK colloquialisms are actually used by British people. I'm not an Aussie, but I get the impression from what people have been saying here that the TGAus hosts are using over the top and out of date Aus slang, is that right?

[mgezz3]

It seems to me SBS have a tight budget, and are making the best they can with what they have.

Paul Mcdermott would make a great host! if you don't know him youtube him, check out good news week.

He would nail it.

[fbc]

Originally Posted by Smörgåsbord

Because the UK colloquialisms are actually used by British people. I'm not an Aussie, but I get the impression from what people have been saying here that the TGAus hosts are using over the top and out of date Aus slang, is that right?

I'd agree with that - most Australians don't use those colloquialisms, or if they do it's very rare. We talk, y'know, normal.

[Lupin_IV]

Originally Posted by fbc

I'd agree with that - most Australians don't use those colloquialisms, or if they do it's very rare. We talk, y'know, normal.

Okay, what's a bogan?

[Gman333-X-ferrari]

Originally Posted by Lupin_IV

Okay, what's a bogan?

This is a bogan and all we know is that we hate 'em.

In fact, he's a popular upbeat 90s video to illustrate the point:

+ "Nobody likes a Bogan" via YouTube

[stiggie]

Originally Posted by Lupin_IV

Okay, what's a bogan?

A bogan is like a redneck, except that they don't have to be from rural areas the way a redneck is.

[tone76]

Originally Posted by stiggie

A bogan is like a redneck, except that they don't have to be from rural areas the way a redneck is.

Or, for our British counterparts, a bogan is basically a chav without the fake bling.