The main difference between TGUK and TGA presenters

stiggie

pop
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
11,293
Location
Wollongong, Australia
Car(s)
Golf GTI
Yes, except that I think "Chav" is generally used for young people, where-as bogans can be of any age.
 

mgezz3

New Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2008
Messages
8
Location
Australia
hahaha, loved the you tube clip - here's another one, this was Eric Bana before he became hollywood actor!

I know it's off topic, but it's well funny, POIDA!!!

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-W-vzELBt8&feature=related[/YOUTUBE]
 

STIG_mata

Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2008
Messages
77
Location
Western Beaches.
Car(s)
B200 and the Honda.
I think the main diff between UK and AU presenters is that the UK ones are charming in their own way and yet quirky, esp Clarkson and May. There not of the classic American suck-up style of presenters with all perfect smiles and self depreciating humour but thats what makes them a real person, because they come with faults like Jezzas grumpy old man ego.
The 3 UK guys also have that elusive quality of AN ENGAGING PERSONALITY that appears to be a part of them and not something that gets turned on with the cameras.

The Au guys are missing that outgoing engaging personality.
Cox seems to be making a restrained attempt at rounding out his media portfolio whilst ever aware that his mates are watching, instead of bringing excitement to the screen.
And the other two are low voltage wet sacks that shouldnt have been chosen either.
IMHO,Warren has emerged as the best, but the standards pretty low. And Steve has a slightly creepy conspiritorial delivery that closes the screen down.
Youre all meant to be charismatic guys able to turn your hand to anything and make it riveting television.

For TGAU to pull out of this nosedive it will need life,
it will need people ready to laugh at themselves outside of groan-worthy staged stunts and smart snappy presenters ready to put much more of themselves into the show. (as though it was their own money being spent). Presenters ready to dive in and build the show.

The current AU guys dont make me believe they want to be there or do the reviews, the jokes or the stunts.
The UK guys are believeably enjoying the trip. They all have personality, charisma and commitment to the show and that is the success of the show that the AU show cant find.
 

rx7_ted

Active Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2008
Messages
185
Location
GTA, Ontario, Canada
Car(s)
93' RX-7
I think the main diff between UK and AU presenters is that the UK ones are charming in their own way and yet quirky, esp Clarkson and May. There not of the classic American suck-up style of presenters with all perfect smiles and self depreciating humour but thats what makes them a real person, because they come with faults like Jezzas grumpy old man ego.
The 3 UK guys also have that elusive quality of AN ENGAGING PERSONALITY that appears to be a part of them and not something that gets turned on with the cameras.

The Au guys are missing that outgoing engaging personality.
Cox seems to be making a restrained attempt at rounding out his media portfolio whilst ever aware that his mates are watching, instead of bringing excitement to the screen.
And the other two are low voltage wet sacks that shouldnt have been chosen either.
IMHO,Warren has emerged as the best, but the standards pretty low. And Steve has a slightly creepy conspiritorial delivery that closes the screen down.
Youre all meant to be charismatic guys able to turn your hand to anything and make it riveting television.

For TGAU to pull out of this nosedive it will need life,
it will need people ready to laugh at themselves outside of groan-worthy staged stunts and smart snappy presenters ready to put much more of themselves into the show. (as though it was their own money being spent). Presenters ready to dive in and build the show.

The current AU guys dont make me believe they want to be there or do the reviews, the jokes or the stunts.
The UK guys are believeably enjoying the trip. They all have personality, charisma and commitment to the show and that is the success of the show that the AU show cant find.

very true, i just finished watching episode 5 and honestly... i dont think i want to watch any more of this. the presenters are just way too boring. it feels like they're doing what someone is telling them to do vs. doing something they want to do.

on the up side TGUK is back this weekend and i can't fucking wait.
 

STIG_mata

Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2008
Messages
77
Location
Western Beaches.
Car(s)
B200 and the Honda.
very true, i just finished watching episode 5 and honestly... i dont think i want to watch any more of this. the presenters are just way too boring. it feels like they're doing what someone is telling them to do vs. doing something they want to do.

on the up side TGUK is back this weekend and i can't fucking wait.

The vitally important thing is that you quoted my whole post.:D
The life-giving function of your post is that you say the UK version is back soon.:lol::lol:
The saddest part of your post is that the AU version is likely doomed to the crapper.:cry::blink::?:mad::cool::(

But hey.. we gave them enough Feedback , didnt we ??
 

bartboy9891

I'm not Moe
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
9,123
I think the main difference between the two sets of presenters is that the UK set had little to live up to while the Australian set have lots to live up to.

When the new format of TG started, all Clarkson, Hammond and Jason Dawe had to do is review cars. The old TG was more or less the same, except the new format had fewer hosts and more interaction between them. Then Dawe left and May joined the show, and with May being such an odd guy likes lots of the same cars that I do, the show was greatly improved. I did like it better when it was about cars rather than being an entertainment show. There are fewer in depth reviews than there used to be, and too much time is spent trying to appeal to people who couldn't care less about cars. But the show is still great.

The problem with the Australian TG is that it started when TG is hugely popular. They've got to live up to a great show that's been around for a helluva long time and has a dedicated fanbase.
 

STIG_mata

Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2008
Messages
77
Location
Western Beaches.
Car(s)
B200 and the Honda.
I think the main difference between the two sets of presenters is that the UK set had little to live up to while the Australian set have lots to live up to.

The problem with the Australian TG is that it started when TG is hugely popular. They've got to live up to a great show that's been around for a helluva long time and has a dedicated fanbase.

But all of that should work in TGAU's favour.

the AU show already has a clearly defined set of successful parameters to follow in order to succeed....

the AU show already knows NOT to focus on the cars and their dims, facts,stats,ho-bloody-hum,

The AU show already knows that the mix of personalities is the most heralded aspect of the UK show, so why pick 3 numb heads that dont gel at all. ????

the Au show show knows that no matter what crap they say, its actually likely to bring them more attention as the UK show is based on crap, yet amusing opinions,
( Ambitious , yet hopeless ?)

So in reality there are many positive indicators as to exactly what to do in order to make a successful AU show,
yet they managed to avoid all the signposts .. WTF ???

As they say..... Defeat snatched from the jaws of Victory...


the Au show made serious mistakes by choosing 'soft' presenters rather than guys who'd speak their minds. Nice guys, but the AU guys are hopeless personalities when it comes to having a perspective.

They all have a non- offensive, generallly accepted, middle of the road opinion , and very little else to offer.

And if they start trying to talk tough , it'll look like a hissy fit in the schoolyard.

Given the long clear direction of the UK show, its actually amazing that the AU show is crap.

Yes, its got a lot to live up to but the way has been clearly paved to follow.... not in choosing 3 stooges to copy JC,Stumpy and May,
... but in essence.

I dont quesion the 'talent' , I question the alleged 'professionals' who've chosen to go down this route by picking these 3 particular guys. Charlie, Warren and Steve are likely to be doing their best but if its obvious that they cant 'cut it' from day one,

who the hell chose them ???

Thats where we should be looking to blame the crippling of the AU show.
 

stuvik

Active Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2007
Messages
151
Location
Newcastle/NSW/Australia
Car(s)
'12 Toyota RAV4 Cruiser AWD
Why are people still under the impression that the presenters can ad-lib when in the studio?! Speaking your mind is a bit impossible when reciting a script enforced by the Top Gear franchise. I saw this first hand at the filming.

From day one it's felt like the scriptwriter used to write for TGUK and never gave that up when writing for TGA. Even the [apparent] idle conversations in the news is rehearsed!

People need to stop looking for Jeremy, James, and Richard in the TGA, otherwise they'll be disappointed by the show every time. TGA will never have the creative freedoms TGUK has [when in the studio] and until this changes will always be at a disadvantage. The challenges TGA have done have been the best part of the show to date. Warren on a horse beating Cox and "Pizza-boy" using GPS in the NT was pure gold.

BBC UK, loosen the reins on the our version so we can see what TGA can really evolve into! Having such tight control over content just shows how much you DON'T trust with the brand.
 

stiggie

pop
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
11,293
Location
Wollongong, Australia
Car(s)
Golf GTI
TGA will never have the creative freedoms TGUK has [when in the studio] and until this changes will always be at a disadvantage.

Jeremy once said that while the challenges are real, the in-studio stuff on TopGear is "pretty tightly scripted".
 

idk

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2007
Messages
1,836
Location
SW Germany
Car(s)
Hyundai i30N Performance
I watched all the episode of TGA now. I don't know why but i can not watch it with the same amusement i'm used from the British version.

First i find them a bit hard to understand. I'm not used to that dialect. It confuses me some times. But well... thats my fault.

But yesterday i also came to the conclusion that i don't like especially Charly's voice. I don't know. He sounds so Cowboy-Macho like somehow. A bit aggressive... sorry can't help. And the whole show comes off much more "scripted" to me. TG UK clearly is. But it's not that obvious somehow. Or it's extremely obvious in the UK Version, but that fact makes it even more funny in the specific situation.
 

Lim-Dul

New Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
1
OK, my take on TGA and the hosts.

I also watched all episodes and will watch them anyway since it's better than nothing BUT it's clearly worse than TGUK and not because I'm such a fan of the original and can't stand any changes to the show.

The problem with TGA is that they tried SO HARD to emulate TGUK. They chose presenters with similar silhouettes, similar attitudes etc. but you can clearly feel that they don't have their hearts in it - it's not their show, not their style.

The current format of TGUK evolved slowly over the years (e.g. more humor, less motoring =) and is a result of the specific chemistry between all the hosts - it just comes naturally. TGA is just fake, a replication/copy of the original and, no matter how perfect, can never reach the quality of TGUK.

I have to say that I would have been much happier if they didn't stick so close to the formula of TGUK and tried doing something original - same premise, same general framework but differences in all the details. As it is it looks as if Warren, Charlie and Steve only "played" their parts as TG presenters with Warren being James, Charlie being Jeremy and Steve being Richard... That's not the way to go...
 

idk

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2007
Messages
1,836
Location
SW Germany
Car(s)
Hyundai i30N Performance
It's a bit like these <countrys's> Idol/Talent Show. They have the same Route but still it doesn't seem like they are trying to copy another one.

(Although the German version of Simon Cowell is a even bigger bastard then Simon himself... lol... but thats a long known fact. Long long before the show)
 

STIG_mata

Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2008
Messages
77
Location
Western Beaches.
Car(s)
B200 and the Honda.
Why are people still under the impression that the presenters can ad-lib when in the studio?! Speaking your mind is a bit impossible when reciting a script enforced by the Top Gear franchise. I saw this first hand at the filming.... TGA will never have the creative freedoms TGUK has...Having such tight control over content just shows how much you DON'T trust with the brand.

Stuvik, I wonder why they did choose these 3 guys if they were just going to make them read scripts all day long,
why didnt they just choose 'pretty boys' like on Home and Away. ?


Lim-Dul, I agree that TG is all about the chemistry of the 3 guys...makes me wonder why they didnt select 3 chatty mates from a motor show or pub...


Of course the best place to find a replacement for any number of the current guys would be from the TGAU studio audience..! !
 

stuvik

Active Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2007
Messages
151
Location
Newcastle/NSW/Australia
Car(s)
'12 Toyota RAV4 Cruiser AWD
Stuvik, I wonder why they did choose these 3 guys if they were just going to make them read scripts all day long,
why didnt they just choose 'pretty boys' like on Home and Away. ?

Going out on a limb here...Perhaps because 'pretty boys' wouldn't appeal to most Top Gear fans? Imagine how much softer it would be with 3 'pretty boys' who couldn't say anything bad about the cars they road test. They just wouldn't be taken seriously. ;)

Lim-Dul, I agree that TG is all about the chemistry of the 3 guys...makes me wonder why they didnt select 3 chatty mates from a motor show or pub...

I'm wondering that too. I'm guessing they chose 3 guys based on the broad spectrum of motoring knowledge they collectively contain. They'll get to know each other better as the series progresses.

Of course the best place to find a replacement for any number of the current guys would be from the TGAU studio audience..! !

Here here! :lol:
 

STIG_mata

Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2008
Messages
77
Location
Western Beaches.
Car(s)
B200 and the Honda.
Going out on a limb here...Perhaps because 'pretty boys' wouldn't appeal to most Top Gear fans? Imagine how much softer it would be with 3 'pretty boys' who couldn't say anything bad about the cars they road test. They just wouldn't be taken seriously. ;)

But at least they'd be easier on the eye for all of us, esp the ladies...:cool:

I'm wondering that too. I'm guessing they chose 3 guys based on the broad spectrum of motoring knowledge they collectively contain....

So how much does a cartoonist know ??

And how much does Hammond, ( more than I ) know..as a previous 'talking head' on radio ?

I dont think their 'spectrum' of 'collective' 'motoring knowledge' makes a gnats dick of diff at all...

The Uk guys have shown many times that they cant
build a car,
they cant drive a car,
they cant park,
service or
3 point-turn a car...

Its clear, pretty much, that theyre kinda crap at all things automotive.

Yet the fantasy ...




continues that the AU show needs presenters who are automotive knowledge kings...

why ..??? DUNNO, because theyre sure as shit NOT entertaining anyone according to the ratings.
Or is this another example where the TV heads know better and the paying customers are the idiots..

Get GOOD presenters FIRST, and learn, leach or beat them up on the finer points of automotive excellence as it goes along.

No-one questions Bert Newton about his TV expertise and he gets to host idiotic diahhorea each week, ad infinitum.

Just get 3 guys who can walk and talk at the same time.


They'll get to know each other better as the series progresses.

They, the producers,
Should-a,
Would-a,
Could-a
thought of that BEFORE they even started filming EP 1.

Geez I hope this next episode goes well, so far its a lesson in how to ignore a successful format and waste money.

Please pick a group of happy guys from the studio audience and let them have a go.
It cant be any worse than the work experiece twats theyve got now...

But Once again...its just another sad example of how Australia runs a second rate business,
Add it to the gutless foreign relations,
dopey social handouts,
bloated government departments,
wasteful expenditure on Potitically Correct losers and
massive taxation on any poor mongrel who chooses to actually work for a living.

thank Christ Australia is geographically isolated from the real world, or we'd have been overrun by 2 Teutonic lesbians armed with a butter knife.




{{No offence meant to those who still own butter knives. I have 3 in case of an invasion.}}
 
Last edited:

ajtaylor73

New Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Messages
3
Location
Rosebud, Victoria, Australia
Car(s)
1968 XT Falcon Staion wagon
Yeah should probably have been bought by SBS a couple of seasons ago, but we need to give the guys time and just like TGUK change the lineup to get the presenters right. But I am enjoying the Australianisms to some extent, especially the $500 restore a reck segment, I or my family has owned everyone of those cars. So I had got a good laugh out of it.
 

stiggie

pop
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
11,293
Location
Wollongong, Australia
Car(s)
Golf GTI
Since stig_MATA seems to be wondering, Charlie (a former British Touring Car driver), Steve (an advanced driving instructor and Porsche racing driver) and Warren (a cartoonist, classic vehicle collector and part-time motoring journalist) all got the call-back because their audition tapes demonstrated that they understood the spirit of TopGear. Charlie's tape showed a clip of him from some other show he had done comparing different cars to different wines, much like Jeremy once did with coffee. Steve's tape showed him on the city-streets trying to race a Lamborghini he had encountered on a unicycle to prove that you can't go fast in the city no matter what you drive. Warren's tape showed him racing one of his old 1920's Dennis fire-engines around a race track against a vintage double-decker bus. He lost.

Those tapes got them an interview. There demonstrated car knowladge and personalities got them from the interview stage into the final 12. The final 12 were then all put together and sent go-karting to see how they would interact. Charlie, Steve and Warren fell right into place, making fun of each other and getting on like a house on fire. Steve and Charlie both broke the go-kart circuit's lap-record on their first lap. That is why they were given the gig. They got the point of TopGear. It is three blokes cocking about and taking the piss out of each other.

When TopGear executive producer(guru) Andy Wilman came out to check on the progress of the Aussie show, he said they had exactly the right attitude. That they understood what the show was about. Since the show has gone to air, Jeremy Clarkson has given it the thumbs up for the same reason.

Forget whether the segments seem rushed. Forget whether you don't like Charlie's hand-waving or his voice. Forget whether you think the show seems over-scripted and the WWTT board seems silly. They've got the relationship between the hosts right, and that is all that matters. As long as the hosts have caught the spirit of TopGear, everything else will sort itself out in time. ;)
 
Last edited:

bolly

Active Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2008
Messages
132
Forget whether the segments seem rushed. Forget whether you don't like Charlie's hand-waving or his voice. Forget whether you think the show seems over-scripted and the WWTT board seems silly. They've got the relationship between the hosts right, and that is all that matters. As long as the hosts have caught the spirit of TopGear, everything else will sort itself out in time. ;)

Obviously the vast majority of viewers feel the chemistry isn't right, otherwise they wouldn't be turning the show off in droves... and waiting for it to "sort itself out in time" is like watching The Titanic go down.

The current combination just don't have the magic spark that viewers had hoped for. Maybe changing at least one of the hosts before series two will remedy that. We can only wait and see.
 

stiggie

pop
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
11,293
Location
Wollongong, Australia
Car(s)
Golf GTI
Obviously the vast majority of viewers feel the chemistry isn't right, otherwise they wouldn't be turning the show off in droves... and waiting for it to "sort itself out in time" is like watching The Titanic go down.

I think most of the people who have stopped watching simply had the unrealistic expectation that it would be as good as the UK version. There also seems to be a lot of people who think that TGA is replacing TG and that the only way to get the original back on air is if TGA fails. This isn't true, TGA was always planned as a companion show. TG returns to SBS with series 11 on November 12th BTW.

The current combination just don't have the magic spark that viewers had hoped for. Maybe changing at least one of the hosts before series two will remedy that. We can only wait and see.

With pre-production for series 2 already underway, they clearly wont be changing hosts.
 

bolly

Active Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2008
Messages
132
I think most of the people who have stopped watching simply had the unrealistic expectation that it would be as good as the UK version. (SNIP)

With pre-production for series 2 already underway, they clearly wont be changing hosts.

I don't doubt the enormity of the challenge TGA took on. They had a mighty big job trying to live up the expectations of TGUK fans. Nevertheless, viewers DID expect it to be better than it has been. There's no point in making excuses, because excuses won't improve the ratings and that's the ONLY thing that matters to SBS. They are, after all, a commercial entity these days.

Unless some significant changes are made to effectively relaunch TGA with series 2, they might as well pack the cameras away. The viewers have already voted on the show's current direction with their remotes, and the only way to win back the disenfranchised is to make changes!

I'd love to see TGA grow into something really great AND really successful. We need local productions like this to do well (and I want to enjoy watching it a lot more than I am at present!). For that to happen, SBS has no choice but to respond to the show's critics. I also wouldn't think for a second that just because SBS have given the next series the go-ahead that it's too late to make BIG changes. It might already be part of their plan.

Obviously, nobody is going to announce changes to the hosting combination while the first series is still on-air.
 
Last edited:
Top