I'm still baffled...

theiceisalie

Active Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2011
Messages
189
And that is exactly why we compare it.
It's trying to compare between a Mac and a PC. Both have their faults, and both have their benefits. But in the end, it's two different systems.

This whole thread is full of bashing and rants and I've yet to see one suggestion on how would you people improve the show, if you hate it so much. Saying something is "utter garbage" and yet saying nothing specific about what makes it "garbage" is really easy and makes you sound like a troll.
From what i've seen, any "constructive criticism" is instantly labeled as heresy. Why even bother suggesting ways to improve the show when it's gonna be bashed as "Oh, your just a TGUK fanboi, go back to watching those wankers!"
 

jasonof2000

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 6, 2008
Messages
1,940
Location
Delmarva Peninsula
Car(s)
2013 Lincoln MKT, 2002 Miata SE, 2012 Honda NC700
Except all the "constuctive critism" is really just whining about how much the show sucks or idiotic ideas about replacing BSSC with a V-6 Mustang and drag racing.
 

theiceisalie

Active Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2011
Messages
189
Except all the "constuctive critism" is really just whining about how much the show sucks or idiotic ideas about replacing BSSC with a V-6 Mustang and drag racing.
Okay, lemme throw out a few ideas:

1. The Hosts. Tanner stays. His background supports his stay. Maybe work on his presenting. Rutledge goes. His interviewing skills are atrocious. His dialogue is forced and too canned. His personality is a mixed bag of being too hyper at the wrong times to being too frat boyish for the task at hand. Adam goes. All I get from him is a creepy Guido vibe. I don't feel like he knows about cars and was just a last minute addition because the producers couldn't find the right third guy in time.

2. The Format. The new season pretty much is a step backwards. The intro needs to be the iconic intro from the UK version (the whole black background motif, not the aerial shot one), only given a distinct American flair. Silhouettes of the guys on top of cars hooning in the background. A Corvette doing burnouts. A Pony Car track battle. Some stupid shots of Dodge Neons being blown up. Get people back into the studio, not outside. Rename "Big Star, Small Car" back to "SIARPC" because the list of "stars" they've had so far aren't big. Big is getting someone that makes $20mil a film. Big is someone that has been acting for years and years and has a whole wing of their house dedicated to the awards they've won. Big isn't getting two of the main faces of one of your sister shows on the same network into the car.

3. The Challenges. I know it's hard not to overlap the UK version, but if you have to, keep to the spirit of the original. You can change the cars if you have to, but I don't wanna see some idiot yelling like a girl while being chased by an attack helicopter in a Viper. As for being original, make them interesting, but not too corny to the point where even I have to wonder who's the asshole that thought that idea was a good one.

4. The Reviews. As far as i've seen, it's a mixed bag. The reviews need to convince me to BUY THE CAR, not make me wonder why "what the hell is that asshole saying?"
 

bryanbeachboy1970

Active Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2011
Messages
307
Location
Kansas, United States
Car(s)
Dodge Dakota, Chrysler Lebaron convertible
idiotic ideas about replacing BSSC with a V-6 Mustang and drag racing.
Dude, at least its a constructive remark. For the record, Justice put forth the idea of drag racing as something distinctly American (odd, being a Dutchman and all) in addition to the generic track run. I thought (and still think) the idea had some merit (SIARPC is dull, dull, dull IMHO; at least a drag race would be over quick). But bad or good, he had a decent suggestion (more than one actually), appropriate to our nation. What's yours, apart from trashing someone who actually made a constructive suggestion r/t whining?
 
Last edited:

shellygrrl

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2008
Messages
3,676
Location
Maine
The intro needs to be the iconic intro from the UK version (the whole black background motif, not the aerial shot one), only given a distinct American flair.
There is nothing wrong with the show's current intro. It doesn't need to be the same as its parent, IMO.

Silhouettes of the guys on top of cars hooning in the background. A Corvette doing burnouts. A Pony Car track battle. Some stupid shots of Dodge Neons being blown up. Get people back into the studio, not outside. Rename "Big Star, Small Car" back to "SIARPC" because the list of "stars" they've had so far aren't big.
Tim Allen = Probably the biggest guest they've had so far.

Kid Rock = Also pretty big.

Buzz Aldrin = Even though he's not an actor, and even though he gave a lousy interview (at least IMO), still fairly big.

Big isn't getting two of the main faces of one of your sister shows on the same network into the car.
In its defense, Pawn Stars gets around 7 million viewers, which is pretty damn good for a cable channel (also: what's wrong with a network cross-promoting its shows?).
 

DubyaStep

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2008
Messages
2,944
Location
Tampa, Florida but now in Casselberry for school
Car(s)
Ford Thundercougarfalconbird
Dude, at least its a constructive remark. For the record, Justice put forth the idea of drag racing as something distinctly American (odd, being a Dutchman and all) in addition to the generic track run. I thought (and still think) the idea had some merit (SIARPC is dull, dull, dull IMHO; at least a drag race would be over quick). But bad or good, he had a decent suggestion (more than one actually), appropriate to our nation. What's yours, apart from trashing someone who actually made a constructive suggestion r/t whining?
Great idea actually because (a) its VERY american and (b) it would help fix the time issue even if it does just cut 30 seconds. On a real note, the purpose of the 'track' is to test the cars under all condition ect, but the BSSC could use a drag race say, with the whole audience out there so that it makes it more pressure on them. that would be a hoot.

also: what's wrong with a network cross-promoting its shows?).
Not a damn thing, they can do whatever they want. people that bitch about this are just plain dumb (sorry) because its a smart thing to do!
 

theiceisalie

Active Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2011
Messages
189
There is nothing wrong with the show's current intro. It doesn't need to be the same as its parent, IMO.
Would've been cheaper in the long run, plus built-in advertising right there. Get the fans of the UK show onboard abit. Free advertising right there.

Tim Allen = Probably the biggest guest they've had so far.

Kid Rock = Also pretty big.

Buzz Aldrin = Even though he's not an actor, and even though he gave a lousy interview (at least IMO), still fairly big.
A 90's sitcom star and comedian, a late 90's/early 00's "rock star," and a guy well known for landing on the moon.

1/3 doesn't cut it. And I'm giving Aldrin a long leeway in being a "star." But yeah, Rutledge was absolute crap (and maybe a tad disrespectful) to Aldrin with that interview.

In its defense, Pawn Stars gets around 7 million viewers, which is pretty damn good for a cable channel.
From what i've seen, TGUSA barely has scraped 2 million views. It's hovered around 1.5 - 1.8 million views. I don't think any episode has gone past 2 million. And one of the promos for the show has touted 300 million+ viewers worldwide.

If I were a TV exec at History, i'd be threatening Clarkson and co. to get better numbers, or risk being canceled. Especially if I was given the figure that "hey, that show has 300 million viewers worldwide!!" And the numbers it's brought.....
 
Last edited:

zookiemike

Active Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Messages
373
Location
Grand Ledge MI
Car(s)
83 Ranger,91 STANG,82 ft500,99xrl650
This TGA... kills my brain. Im sorry for the negative remarks but wtf? my Dad, he drives a corolla. He likes Top gear and will agree that this show is horrid.
Why is it so scripted, Why isnt there a dedicated news aspect, Where are the honest car reviews? WTF IS THIS SHOW ABOUT.
It cant be cars? $5k to buy an off roader? Dude... You could buy a tacoma with a locker and go where those dudes went. Hell, a Subaru forester would have done
all that shit. I have yet to see a legitimate episode that doesn't offend me.
My buddy builds diesel trucks. There wasn't a test that had a control in it.

They need to really sit down and figure this shit out quick. It might have potential. Just at the moment, its drowning quick.
 

The Spie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2010
Messages
2,013
Location
Chicagoan In Exile
Car(s)
2008 Honda Fit Sport
Why is it so scripted,
Because it's a television show, perhaps? You do know that TGUK is scripted, right?

Why isnt there a dedicated news aspect,
Because they don't tape on Wednesday for Sunday broadcast like TGUK does. Therefore, any "news" will be old by airtime. Also, they only have less than 45 minutes per episode. If you have the News, you need to drop something else. What do you drop? And before you say SIARPC, that's more of a casual audience draw than the News.

Where are the honest car reviews?
They're there. There's going to be one tomorrow, for instance. But in order to review the cars, they have to get them, and TGUS doesn't have the clout to do so yet. Wait on it. It'll come.

WTF IS THIS SHOW ABOUT.
Three pretty average guys cocking about with cars. That is the essence of Top Gear.

$5k to buy an off roader? Dude... You could buy a tacoma with a locker and go where those dudes went. Hell, a Subaru forester would have done
all that shit.
And you totally missed the point about "America's toughest off-roader" by naming two Japanese vehicles. That, I think, shows how far you've misjudged the show in general.
 

GurraJG

New Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2011
Messages
9
Location
Colchester, Essex
TGUS isn't as good as TGUK. It just isn't. But that doesn't make it a bad show. It's still a good show. I watch every single episode, and I enjoy most of it. Some bits, like SIARPC, could use quite a big revamp, and I'm not entirely sold on the whole studio-audience outside bit, but overall, I'm quite impressed! The show still needs tweaking, but that's only natural. It's unrealistic to expect a show in its second series to live up to the standards of a show that's just finished it's 17th series!
 

RB60

Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2011
Messages
38
Location
PA
Car(s)
2002 Explorer, 2007 Mercury Mariner
Having had a 4:30 Detroit Locker rear in a car, IMO I wouldn't want that differential under the front of a 4WD, unless it was only used for rock crawling.
 

jmurphy

Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2011
Messages
15
Location
Sacramento, CA.
Car(s)
Honda Civic
From what i've seen, TGUSA barely has scraped 2 million views. It's hovered around 1.5 - 1.8 million views. I don't think any episode has gone past 2 million.
They have had 2 episodes cross the 2 million viewer mark, the 2nd of which was Episode 3, Series 2. And this whole season I am fairly certain they have been in the top 10 cable shows watched each week, an improvement over Series 1. Finally, out of the 4 episodes so far (5th tonight), the ratings have been as good as or better than the best episodes in Series 1 (ratings wise), which shows massive improvement.
 

shellygrrl

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2008
Messages
3,676
Location
Maine
And again, this is basic cable, not one of the Big Four. So 1.5 - 2 million views is actually respectable.
 

jsausley

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2010
Messages
1,222
Location
Burlington, NC, United States
Car(s)
'16 Audi S5, '14 CC R-Line, '12 Ariel Atom 3
I must say that tonight's GT2 RS review film was amazing, and better than almost any other Top Gear review film, both American and British.

It was worth putting up with the rest of the show just to see that.
 

TopGearNorthAmerica

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
734
Location
Ottawa, ON, Canada
Car(s)
2007 Honda Civic LX Coupe
Okay, lemme throw out a few ideas:

1. The Hosts. Tanner stays. His background supports his stay. Maybe work on his presenting. Rutledge goes. His interviewing skills are atrocious. His dialogue is forced and too canned. His personality is a mixed bag of being too hyper at the wrong times to being too frat boyish for the task at hand. Adam goes. All I get from him is a creepy Guido vibe. I don't feel like he knows about cars and was just a last minute addition because the producers couldn't find the right third guy in time.
No, keep all three. You are not going to get true analogues to the UK boys, because the talent pool for auto shows like this isn't built that way. Rutledge's onscreen persona hits the mark as a gen-you-wine gearhead enthusiast from the South, and Adam's Guido vibe happens to be "working class East Coast" which happens to be in vogue now (why else would Jersey Shore be a hit?).

2. The Format. The new season pretty much is a step backwards. The intro needs to be the iconic intro from the UK version (the whole black background motif, not the aerial shot one), only given a distinct American flair. Silhouettes of the guys on top of cars hooning in the background. A Corvette doing burnouts. A Pony Car track battle. Some stupid shots of Dodge Neons being blown up. Get people back into the studio, not outside. Rename "Big Star, Small Car" back to "SIARPC" because the list of "stars" they've had so far aren't big. Big is getting someone that makes $20mil a film. Big is someone that has been acting for years and years and has a whole wing of their house dedicated to the awards they've won. Big isn't getting two of the main faces of one of your sister shows on the same network into the car.
A. The new title sequence gives TGUS its own identity, and takes less time than the original, meaning more time for the actual segments. B. You've got great California weather and climate outside, you'd be a bloody idiot not to use that for audience comfort. C. The A-List of qualified Big Stars would be more interested in doing TGUK (free trip to England + bigger established audience exposure), but there's nothing wrong with getting cable network personalities on the segment, it's the same as the Brit comedians like Michael McIntyre on the original SIARPC.

3. The Challenges. I know it's hard not to overlap the UK version, but if you have to, keep to the spirit of the original. You can change the cars if you have to, but I don't wanna see some idiot yelling like a girl while being chased by an attack helicopter in a Viper. As for being original, make them interesting, but not too corny to the point where even I have to wonder who's the asshole that thought that idea was a good one.
The UK boys (Hammond, especially) yell like idiots whenever they're confronted with something dangerous -- or did you not see their Holy Land special? By contrast, the Americans do far less yelling now.

4. The Reviews. As far as i've seen, it's a mixed bag. The reviews need to convince me to BUY THE CAR, not make me wonder why "what the hell is that asshole saying?"
The reviews "need to convince you to buy the car"? I'm sorry, are you trying to tell me the reviewers should be selling a featured car to you? Like an extended informercial of the car?

Oooh, no, neighbor. The point of a Top Gear style car review is to talk about the featured car using terms, and metaphors, that people who aren't gearheads can understand -- and give an honest opinion as to why the reviewer likes or dislikes a car. It's not, and never should be, about convincing people to buy a car.
 

theiceisalie

Active Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2011
Messages
189
No, keep all three. You are not going to get true analogues to the UK boys, because the talent pool for auto shows like this isn't built that way. Rutledge's onscreen persona hits the mark as a gen-you-wine gearhead enthusiast from the South, and Adam's Guido vibe happens to be "working class East Coast" which happens to be in vogue now (why else would Jersey Shore be a hit?).
Who said the hosts have to be true analogues of the UK boys? I didn't. I made some references that the show needs some UK background, but definitely NOT the hosts.

A. The new title sequence gives TGUS its own identity, and takes less time than the original, meaning more time for the actual segments.
God forbid we waste 15 seconds in the intro for another shot of Adam commiting hit-and-run with a Daewoo into a Crossing Guard.

B. You've got great California weather and climate outside, you'd be a bloody idiot not to use that for audience comfort.
On a former Air Force Base, with acres of concrete and asphalt reflecting the sun's rays?

C. The A-List of qualified Big Stars would be more interested in doing TGUK (free trip to England + bigger established audience exposure), but there's nothing wrong with getting cable network personalities on the segment, it's the same as the Brit comedians like Michael McIntyre on the original SIARPC.
Then fucking rename BSSC into something more truthful. C-list and washed-up actors/singers =/= "Big Star" status.

The UK boys (Hammond, especially) yell like idiots whenever they're confronted with something dangerous -- or did you not see their Holy Land special? By contrast, the Americans do far less yelling now.
Compared to the USA boys, at least the UK boys don't scream like little girls.

The reviews "need to convince you to buy the car"? I'm sorry, are you trying to tell me the reviewers should be selling a featured car to you? Like an extended infomercial of the car?
These guys are reviewing a car. Lemme rephrase that again: THEY ARE REVIEWING A CAR. Give me a REVIEW of the car. Why are you driving the car? What is it's background? What interesting quirks and flaws it has? Who drives it? Do you like it? Do you hate it? Why? In a sense, it's almost trying to get someone to buy a car. Hence the concept.

Oooh, no, neighbor. The point of a Top Gear style car review is to talk about the featured car using terms, and metaphors, that people who aren't gearheads can understand -- and give an honest opinion as to why the reviewer likes or dislikes a car. It's not, and never should be, about convincing people to buy a car.
See above.
 
Last edited:

bryanbeachboy1970

Active Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2011
Messages
307
Location
Kansas, United States
Car(s)
Dodge Dakota, Chrysler Lebaron convertible
On a former Air Force Base, with acres of concrete and asphalt reflecting the sun's rays?
Not to nit pick, but it's actually El Toro, a former Marine Corps base. Remember the name proudly, for it was from here that Marine Corps Captain Will Smith flew from in the days leading up to the alien invasion (detailed in the docu-drama Independence Day).

Then fucking rename BSSC into something more truthful. C-list and washed-up actors/singers =/= "Big Star" status.
So, one three letter adjective is what's bothering you? You remember that this is a country that creates celebrities with the simple act of celebrity, yes? Although, with the Interwebs I'd imagine that the phenomenon is not solely an American thing...

Compared to the USA boys, at least the UK boys don't scream like little girls.
Actually, I have a theory on this: high and low pitches are actually just sonic vibrations (basic stuff here). The deep throaty rumble of the Viper's mighty V-10 causes vibrations, as does Rutledge's voice; our ears take in these vibrations and our brain interprets them as sounds. My theory is that the V-10's deep rumbles, being louder than a pair of human lungs can produce, overwhelmed the equivalent component of Rutledge's voice so that all that our ears heard was the higher pitched parts of his voice, making him sound like a girl. I believe the term for this is phase cancellation. I re-watched Clarkson's review of the Viper and didn't see anything that puts the kibosh on this theory; most of the review is done with voice overs or when the car is sitting still. The few shots that do occur while the car is moving are certainly done at low speed.

I have no training or background in acoustics, but it could explain much. To be sure, Rut has a voice with a high nasal pitch, but his screams from the viper vs cobra episode did stick with me too, so I've given it a bit of thought.

These guys are reviewing a car. In a sense, it's almost trying to get someone to buy a car. Hence the concept.
I don't agree with that. Reviews are simply reviews and (apart from occasionally saying that the presenters would or would not have one) are definitely not there to sell you something. Sometimes the TGUK guys will really hate a car (Porsche Panamera anyone?) so they're definitely not trying to sell that. I think I understand where you're coming from, but you're confusing the issue with the 'get someone to buy a car' idea. Are there reviews which are good or bad? Sure, as you said they're a mixed bag; but arguing the point that the TG presenter is trying to sell a car to the audience just doesn't work as a credible criticism to me. And if you want to compare reviews, they're just as much a mixed bag as reviews from TGUK; I can think of several that were not good (the review of the Pagani Zonda in series 5; I appreciate Richard's enthusiasm for the Zonda, but it prevented him from reviewing it with anything approaching objectivity. Still, early in the show's run eh?).
 

Jakain

Active Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2005
Messages
188
This show has far surpassed my expectations and is becoming a regular favorite. I think its second only to TGUK when it comes to automotive entertainment. Hopefully there are more seasons to come and you can tell its improved significantly from the first.
 
Top