# R.I.P. Top Gear



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

...as we know it, at least.

Jeremy Clarkson will not have his contract renewed. It expires at the end of the month. 

There is speculation that a replacement will be considered, but as Richard Hammond and James May have said they won't do the show without Jeremy, the whole future is in the balance and personally, I doubt it would succeed without him anyway.

The above link is to a live update feed from The Guardian newspaper in the UK. Other articles are listing names for a successor with Chris Evans emerging as favorite even though he denies being approached.

I have also seen a rumor that Netflix may be interested as well as other UK stations. Time will tell which is true.

I hope they'll make the material from the last three episodes of the show that are in the can available to watch in some form.


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

Come on, Netflix. :up:


----------



## heySkippy (Jul 2, 2001)

It was great while it lasted. I will definitely check out whatever Clarkson decides to do next.


----------



## Sapphire (Sep 10, 2002)

Oh c*ck. Well I guess I'll have to resubscribe to netflix if Clarkson's new venture is any good. 

Make no mistake he IS the show.


----------



## DeDondeEs (Feb 20, 2004)

The cynical side of me was thinking this was a big publicity stunt, akin to the radio DJ locking himself in the station studio and playing whatever he wants for several days. 

But if BBC is really not renewing his contract, then there really must have been serious interpersonal issues between Clarkson and Managment. 

It will be interesting to see what May and Hammond do. May has seemed supportive of Clarkson, but May also has a few other shows on BBC, I wonder how far he is willing to burn bridges with the BBC and put his other show contracts in jeopardy. 

If they do another show on Netflix, I am sure it would have to be pretty different from the current Top Gear format to avoid litigation. But perhaps he/they could mock that by saying it is a "motoring documentary show" 

Well, on that bombshell....


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Clarkson and crew can continue by doing Top Gear with a different name on Independent TV in the UK, and syndication, BUT a major feature of Top Gear is the high quality of the cinematography and editing. Maybe they can also keep the behind the scenes crew.


----------



## JohnB1000 (Dec 6, 2004)

Surely this belongs in the Now Playing forum ?


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

DeDondeEs said:


> It will be interesting to see what May and Hammond do. May has seemed supportive of Clarkson, but May also has a few other shows on BBC, I wonder how far he is willing to burn bridges with the BBC and put his other show contracts in jeopardy.


May made a brief statement at what appears to be his house:





Seems pretty clear that he doesn't seem remotely interested in working with a replacement.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

If a person punches a coworker, that person has to go. Even if he is the show unfortunately. I loved Top Gear and will miss it big time. I hope they come out with something else.


----------



## betamax (Mar 5, 2002)

JohnB1000 said:


> Surely this belongs in the Now Playing forum ?


Actually they would have to create a Not Playing forum.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

Awesome...



Click on the pic to go to the full story. The last two lines are priceless!


----------



## Jstkiddn (Oct 15, 2003)

Hoffer said:


> If a person punches a coworker, that person has to go. Even if he is the show unfortunately. I loved Top Gear and will miss it big time. I hope they come out with something else.


I dunno...sometimes people need punching. Do we know what the row was about?


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Jstkiddn said:


> I dunno...sometimes people need punching. Do we know what the row was about?


From what I understand, after a particularly long day of on-location shooting, the producers failed to have a decent meal available for the talent. Jeremy was very tired and very cranky due to hunger, and he took it out on the producer.

I'm not certain about this, but I think it was because they depended on the hotel kitchen to prepare the food, which had closed by the time filming had completed. From what I can tell, they don't do "craft services" catering like they do over here.


----------



## Jstkiddn (Oct 15, 2003)

The "You're not yourself when you're hungry" Snickers commercials are coming to mind.


----------



## shady (May 31, 2002)

He was hangry


----------



## ewolfr (Feb 12, 2001)

Jstkiddn said:


> Do we know what the row was about?


http://www.thewrap.com/top-gear-host-jeremy-clarkson-fired-by-bbc-for-assaulting-producer/



> The ruling came after the Top Gear host was the subject of an internal investigation following an assault earlier this month when he got into a fracas with one of the shows producers over the lack of hot food after filming.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Jstkiddn said:


> The "You're not yourself when you're hungry" Snickers commercials are coming to mind.


Actually sent to him:


----------



## Jstkiddn (Oct 15, 2003)

LoadStar said:


> Actually sent to him:


Ha ha! Too funny! :up:


----------



## DeDondeEs (Feb 20, 2004)

Yeah I think that Snickers picture was in one of the other two threads about Clarkson. 

I like James May's recent tweet complaining about all of the idling diesel-powered news vans outside of his house.


----------



## DouglasPHill (Feb 10, 2005)

dedondees said:


> the cynical side of me was thinking this was a big publicity stunt......


+1


----------



## purwater (Aug 25, 2005)

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.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

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.


----------



## midas (Jun 1, 2000)

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.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

midas said:


> 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.


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.


----------



## midas (Jun 1, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> 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.


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.


----------



## Jon J (Aug 23, 2000)

DeDondeEs said:


> But if BBC is really not renewing his contract, then there really must have been serious interpersonal issues between Clarkson and Management.


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.


----------



## SWFan (Oct 6, 2002)

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.


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

SWFan said:


> 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.


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.


----------



## Sapphire (Sep 10, 2002)

Hoffer said:


> If a person punches a coworker, that person has to go. Even if he is the show unfortunately. I loved Top Gear and will miss it big time. I hope they come out with something else.


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.


----------



## shady (May 31, 2002)

SWFan said:


> 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.


I don't think anyone is saying otherwise.


----------



## ElJay (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.


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

SWFan said:


> 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.





shady said:


> I don't think anyone is saying otherwise.


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 the heads of the BBC cut off their noses to spite their faces. Maybe 6 months from now they get canned for costing the BBC so much money.


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



> Oisin Tymon, who is the victim in this will probably pay a price career wise. He's now THE guy who killed Top Gear. Maybe he and Yoko can hook up? While he didn't have to, he could have saved things by not going to the hospital for what has been reported as a slight split lip. Once he put things on record, the dye was set.


Sorry, but Jeremy Clarkson's inability to control himself is what ultimately killed Top Gear.


----------



## murgatroyd (Jan 6, 2002)

RonDawg said:


> 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:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


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.


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

murgatroyd said:


> 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.


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.


----------



## tvmaster2 (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....


----------



## Unbeliever (Feb 3, 2001)

--Carlos V.


----------



## murgatroyd (Jan 6, 2002)

RonDawg said:


> 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.


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?


----------



## Worf (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.


----------



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

murgatroyd said:


> ...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?


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


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

murgatroyd said:


> I'm not really interested in what you think my opinion is or what you think my opinion should be.


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.



> 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.


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.



> 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.


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.



> 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.


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.



> 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?


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.


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

BTW for those who think the BBC is being unduly harsh on Clarkson, keep in mind that nearly a year ago a DJ was forced to resign after he played a song which contained the N-word. Except the DJ didn't know in advance that the 82 year old song contained the N-word. This incident occurred after complaints about the Burma episode.

Contrast that with Clarkson, who should have known that "slope" was potentially offensive (since he already knew it was a slang term for East Asians) and yet got put on probation by the BBC even though he supposedly uttered the N-word on camera some years earlier. And AFAIK David Lowe does not have Clarkson's boorish reputation nor did he strike any of his co-workers in frustration.


----------



## DouglasPHill (Feb 10, 2005)

I'm ok with what all have posted here. I wish the BBC had let law enforcement do its thing and also see if Clarkson would enter an anger management program. Maybe put Top Gear on hiatus while it all gets worked out.


----------



## murgatroyd (Jan 6, 2002)

murgatroyd said:


> 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?





RonDawg said:


> 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?


How can you say I *assumed* that catering services are done the same way as they are in the USA, when I said in my post -- in the very part of it that you quoted -- that I knew they DON'T do things the same way in England? 

You missed the entire point of my post, which was that if you ARE at the mercy of the hotel restaurant to feed your cast and crew, then you'd better arrange your shooting schedule so that you don't have to feed everybody on cold cuts at the end of a long day.


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

murgatroyd said:


> How can you say I *assumed* that catering services are done the same way as they are in the USA, when I said in my post -- in the very part of it that you quoted -- that I knew they DON'T do things the same way in England?


You said:



> 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


First of all, what makes you think it's "cheaping out?" How about, "it's done differently?" Or, maybe "such services were not available where they where filming at the time." Why do you think it's always about money?

Again, if a show has the kind of budget to shred a set (or more) of 4 tires at say $400 each per show, and if they have the kind of budget to destroy brand new cars, I highly doubt they were being "cheap." Short-sighted maybe.



> You missed the entire point of my post, which was that if you ARE at the mercy of the hotel restaurant to feed your cast and crew, then you'd better arrange your shooting schedule so that you don't have to feed everybody on cold cuts at the end of a long day.


*I* missed that point? You even quoted it:



> 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?


----------



## BrettStah (Nov 12, 2000)

Raj said:


> staff being abused by talent is actually a quite frequent occurrence.


----------



## Bob Coxner (Dec 1, 2004)

Some of the reports say this went far beyond a temporary tantrum by Clarkson.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/11493270/Jeremy-Clarkson-to-be-sacked-by-the-BBC.html

"It is understood a report into the so-called 'fracas' at a North Yorkshire hotel, concluded that presenter spent 20 minutes verbally abusing producer Oisin Tymon, before launching a 30 second physical assault on him."

If true, I can't imagine the BBC (or any other corporation) had an alternative to firing him.


----------



## jamesl (Jul 12, 2012)

murgatroyd said:


> I'm not really interested in what you think my opinion is ...


then why do you keep posting ?


----------



## Craigbob (Dec 2, 2006)




----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

murgatroyd said:


> 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?


They have it in the U.K. where it is called location catering.

Allegedly:

After the days shooting they were provided with a helicopter to fly them to a not cheap hotel >
http://simonstonehall.com/

They kept the helicopter waiting for several hours while they got drunk in a pub.

When they arrived late at the hotel the chef had gone home but the hotel staff had prepared cold meat and cheese platters. Clarkson told his producer he wanted an 8oz sirloin with fondant potatoes, pan-fried wild mushrooms, grilled cherry tomatoes and peppercorn sauce.

After Clarkson's 30 minute racist rant which ended in a physical assault the hotel manager prepared his steak and chips.

Major U.K. broadcasters ITV, Channel 4 and Sky have said they will not be offering him a contract.


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

It's not a cheap hotel, but it's not outrageously expensive either. For a standard double the rate was £110/night for mid-June. I paid more than that for a shoe-box sized room in NYC that didn't even have its own ensuite bath.


----------



## murgatroyd (Jan 6, 2002)

pgogborn said:


> Allegedly:
> 
> They kept the helicopter waiting for several hours while they got drunk in a pub.


Well (if true) that's different, isn't it?


----------



## Jon J (Aug 23, 2000)

pgogborn said:


> They kept the helicopter waiting for several hours while they got drunk in a pub.


Now that I've seen it on the internet I know it must be true.


----------



## verdugan (Sep 9, 2003)

Jon J said:


> Now that I've seen it on the internet I know it must be true.


It's been widely reported in newspapers as well.


----------



## MarkofT (Jul 27, 2001)

Newspapers or tabloids?


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

Now the head of the BBC is getting death threats over Clarkson's firing. Really people?

Per the Daily Mail, Tymon is also getting threats:



> One Twitter user said they hoped Mr Tymon 'visits the morgue very soon' while another wrote: 'Tony Hall BBC director, I wonder if Oisin's and your head can stop a bullet!!! just wondering.'


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

MarkofT said:


> Newspapers or tabloids?






^ Link to video of James May saying he was "blind drunk" during the row. When and where do you think he got drunk?


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

All three heads removed from Top Gear website as of yesterday!


----------



## DouglasPHill (Feb 10, 2005)

I'll leave the season pass until they have shown the last three eps with the 3 amigos or I decide they are not going to show them. Then season pass good by.


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

TonyTheTiger said:


> All three heads removed from Top Gear website as of yesterday!


At least the ones who don't normally do the show with full-faced helmets on the entire time. The Stig is still being featured.


----------



## midas (Jun 1, 2000)

Hasn't The Stig actually changed a few times over the course of the show?


----------



## Big Deficit (Jul 8, 2003)

midas said:


> Hasn't The Stig actually changed a few times over the course of the show?


Yes. There was even an infant Stig as well as many different international Stigs with a variety of style and body shapes. And the helmet on the web site isn't like any the Stig has used previously.

Maybe the Stig will be the new Top Gear presenter? Should cut down on needless banter ~100%. The celebrity interviews should be particularly novel. I always skipped over them in the past, but I would watch at least one.


----------



## midas (Jun 1, 2000)

Big Deficit said:


> Yes. There was even an infant Stig as well as many different international Stigs with a variety of style and body shapes. And the helmet on the web site isn't like any the Stig has used previously.


I meant the actual one. I thought I remembered something about his identity being revealed and then being replaced.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

midas said:


> I meant the actual one. I thought I remembered something about his identity being revealed and then being replaced.


Yes. There have been at least 3 official Stigs since the show relaunched in 2002. The first one, Perry McCarthy, was in a black racing suit and helmet, and was outed by a newspaper. The second one, Ben Collins, outed himself and was sacked. Both Collins and the current Stig wear the same white racing suit and helmet.


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

Reports are that the Top Gear hangar set has been dismantled in the last couple of days.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

ClutchBrake said:


> Reports are that the Top Gear hangar set has been dismantled in the last couple of days.


Not surprising. While there's still a chance the filmed segments might still be broadcast in some form, it's incredibly unlikely that they would do any additional studio segments for them. I don't think the hangar set is a standing set when the show isn't in production, so it's a given that the set would be struck and stored.

I'm pretty sure the contract for all three hosts elapsed at the end of March, and I believe Wilman's contract expired as well. I haven't heard whether any of them re-upped, but I rather doubt they did. There didn't seem to be much interest in doing the show without Jezza, and I'm pretty sure there would be no interest in doing the show without Wilman.

The show may still be back, but it definitely won't be the same, especially if you lose all three hosts *and* Wilman.


----------



## redrouteone (Jun 16, 2001)

The last episode is Clarkson and May reviewing big american pickup trucks, while Hammond was stuck on a mountain in Alberta. 

Now that is a bombshell. 

I'm going to miss the show, but they were on borrowed time anyway. Jeremy has been running his mouth off too much the past few years, if it hadn't been this, he would have done something else just as stupid.


----------



## phox_mulder (Feb 23, 2006)

redrouteone said:


> The last episode is Clarkson and May reviewing big american pickup trucks, while Hammond was stuck on a mountain in Alberta.


That was the 2nd to last aired episode.

Last one that aired was James doing rallycross, Jeremy in the latest Jaguar F-Type, and Hammond in his favorite girly car, the Mazda MX-5 (Miata).
Nicholas Hoult was the Star in a Resonably Priced Car, and IIRC, he was near the top of the fastest list.

phox


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

IIRC the last two first-run episodes that were aired in the US after the scandal broke was a two part-special called "Perfect Road Trip -- Italy." Clarkson and Hammond (no James May present) drive/boat to the island of Capri to drive Ford Capris. I think it was normally one of their DVD-only specials that tends to be released in the UK around Christmas, but BBC (or at least BBC-A) hastily substituted it for the originally intended episodes due to what happened with Clarkson.



LoadStar said:


> While there's still a chance the filmed segments might still be broadcast in some form...


Next Christmas' DVD-only special?


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

RonDawg said:


> ...after the scandal broke...


"Scandal"? What "scandal"?


----------



## thewebgal (Aug 10, 2007)

Bierboy said:


> "Scandal"? What "scandal"?


Clarkson and May got roaring drunk after one of the field events, got back to the hotel and no warm food was available (since they were late). Clarkson went on a rant and after verbal abuse, punched the producer. Clarkson was sacked, then May and Hammond were not renewed (all 3 contracts were due for renewal at the end of march) ...

Thus, R.I.P. Top Gear


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

thewebgal said:


> Clarkson and May got roaring drunk after one of the field events, got back to the hotel and no warm food was available (since they were late). Clarkson went on a rant and after verbal abuse, punched the producer. Clarkson was sacked, then May and Hammond were not renewed (all 3 contracts were due for renewal at the end of march) ...
> 
> Thus, R.I.P. Top Gear


I think Bierboy knows. He's just, in his own way, trying to say that he doesn't consider it a scandal.


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

LoadStar said:


> I think Bierboy knows. He's just, in his own way, trying to say that he doesn't consider it a scandal.


Yeah there's people out there (not pointing to anybody specifically here) who think it's "no big deal" to punch someone after a half-hour-long verbal abuse, and that Tymon shouldn't have gone to the hospital for his injuries, and it's all Tymon's fault that our favorite automotive-themed program is being cancelled and thus deserves the death threats he's getting.


----------



## DouglasPHill (Feb 10, 2005)

I don't think that's it. I just wish he could have been suspended from the program while his arrest works its way thru the courts. After he's been sentenced, maybe jail time, maybe anger management, whatever they do in UK; then he could return to Top Gear.

Regardless, when this is all over I anticipate the three Amigos being back on a show somewhere and the BBC losing boatloads of money.


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

DouglasPHill said:


> I don't think that's it. I just wish he could have been suspended from the program while his arrest works its way thru the courts. After he's been sentenced, maybe jail time, maybe anger management, whatever they do in UK; then he could return to Top Gear.


He hasn't been arrested, the person he allegedly assaulted does not want to bring charges.


----------



## Bob Coxner (Dec 1, 2004)

The police announced this morning that they've completed their investigation and no charges will be made.

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/apr/07/jeremy-clarkson-police-top-gear-bbc


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

Good News! My wife explained today in the gentlest of words that I'm a hypocrite.


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

Stormspace said:


> Good News! My wife explained today in the gentlest of words that I'm a hypocrite.


And I thought you were going to talk about a redesigned Dacia Sandero


----------



## Big Deficit (Jul 8, 2003)

And on that bombshell? Good night!


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

Looks like there's a good chance we'll get to see the footage from the last three shows in the series...

https://www.yahoo.com/tv/s/jeremy-clarkson-appear-top-gear-again-141923148.html


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

TonyTheTiger said:


> Looks like there's a good chance we'll get to see the footage from the last three shows in the series...
> 
> https://www.yahoo.com/tv/s/jeremy-clarkson-appear-top-gear-again-141923148.html


Noticed Netflix had season 21 up. I'm looking forward to the review of the BMW i series hybrid.


----------



## murgatroyd (Jan 6, 2002)

TonyTheTiger said:


> Looks like there's a good chance we'll get to see the footage from the last three shows in the series...
> 
> https://www.yahoo.com/tv/s/jeremy-clarkson-appear-top-gear-again-141923148.html





> Moving forward, Shillinglaw is tasked with finding Clarkson's replacement, who many - including bookmakers - believe will be a woman. The current odds-on favorite is apparently Sue Perkins, host of BBC One's "The Great British Bake Off."


Sue Perkins? Seriously?


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

I doubt it. It's all unfounded speculation at this point, so the more controversial the better!


----------



## DouglasPHill (Feb 10, 2005)

In the latest press it sounds like the BBC is doing a little backtracking. My prediction is this will eventually be just a hiatus and all three amigos will be back within a year.


----------



## midas (Jun 1, 2000)

murgatroyd said:


> Sue Perkins? Seriously?


I just Googled her. She kind of looks like Clarkson in drag.


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

DouglasPHill said:


> In the latest press it sounds like the BBC is doing a little backtracking. My prediction is this will eventually be just a hiatus and all three amigos will be back within a year.


It goes like this.

Stuffed Shirt #1: What do you mean revenue will be down 250 million pounds next year?

Stuffed Shirt #2: Well. Top Gear was the number one watched show in the world. Many of those markets don't want to pay full price for BBC content without it, not to mention the areas that only bought Top Gear.

#1: Call Clarkson. Tell him to lay low for a while. We'll let this quiet down and put him back on the air in a year with some sort of apology.


----------



## Big Deficit (Jul 8, 2003)

Stuffed shirt #2: Clarkson told me to get stuffed and that his new shows premiers in 3 months.

BBC Chairman of the board: You are all sacked.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

I think the fact that Andy Wilman has quit is a factor in all this, too!


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

TonyTheTiger said:


> I think the fact that Andy Wilman has quit is a factor in all this, too!


If Clarkson has decided on doing his own show, he might just want that fella along with him.


----------



## pteronaut (Dec 26, 2009)

James May has also confirmed that he is not continuing with the show also. (Although his agent differs.)

http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-32437814


----------



## Jesda (Feb 12, 2005)

I'm always amused when people compare it to a punch being thrown in their office.

"Well, I know *I* would get fired on the spot."

Yeah, but you're a replaceable 'nothing' who hardly affects the bottom line. You don't have a global following of fans. You don't have hundreds of people whose livelihoods depend exclusively on your ongoing success.

So I'm sorry, Mr IT Guy, if the only people who would notice your absence are a couple accountants, your boss, and maybe the receptionist you flirt with at a local firm.


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

Stormspace said:


> If Clarkson has decided on doing his own show, he might just want that fella along with him.


I didn't think of this before, but James May told the _Guardian_ that there may be the issue of non-competing clauses, according to this Jalopnik article:



> May said that one or more of the presenters may have non-compete clauses in their existing contracts with the BBC, and may have to wait for those to expire before they take their ideas elsewhere.


May does seem to strongly hint that the three of them could be back hosting some sort of car show for the BBC.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

New presenters?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ie-Kidd-Life-Mars-actor-Philip-Glenister.html

I suspect it would struggle to get out of FIRST gear, let alone Top!!


----------



## JMikeD (Jun 10, 2002)

TonyTheTiger said:


> New presenters?
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ie-Kidd-Life-Mars-actor-Philip-Glenister.html


I don't know about the others, but Philip Glenister might be a pretty good choice. I'm moderately familiar with his work.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

JMikeD said:


> I don't know about the others, but Philip Glenister might be a pretty good choice. I'm moderately familiar with his work.


He was Ash 'Three Socks' Morgan on Hustle as well as being in Life On Mars.

Like I said in the title...

R.I.P. Top Gear.


----------



## thewebgal (Aug 10, 2007)

TonyTheTiger said:


> New presenters?
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ie-Kidd-Life-Mars-actor-Philip-Glenister.html
> 
> I suspect it would struggle to get out of FIRST gear, let alone Top!!


oh dear god - ... to the Quatro!!



TonyTheTiger said:


> He was Ash 'Three Socks' Morgan on Hustle as well as being in Life On Mars.


[PHILIP Glenister was the one on Life on Mars and Ashes to Ashes -both cool shows ...
ROBERT Glenister was the one on Hustle - not quite the same guy ...]

He is the son of director John Glenister and the brother of actor Philip Glenister, who plays "DCI Gene Hunt" in Life on Mars (2006).


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

It won't be Top Gear with Clarkson, May, and Hammond, but I'll certainly give it a watch. Could still be a decent car show.


----------



## SR7D1 (Feb 3, 2004)

Similar to the above post, but updated.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/cel...ar-presenters-to-replace-Jeremy-Clarkson.html


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

thewebgal said:


> oh dear god - ... to the Quatro!!


More like "Let's fire up the Quattro!"


----------



## heySkippy (Jul 2, 2001)

This has fail written all over it.


----------



## Jon J (Aug 23, 2000)

heySkippy said:


> This has fail written all over it.


I think you are right, mate.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

More speculation?

Could it be that TG WILL return?

http://www.theguardian.com/media/20...may-richard-hammond-jeremy-clarkson?CMP=fb_gu


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

I think a US company should scoop up all 3 and just continue the show here. It was a world wide success, it could be made anywhere and still work. As long as they didn't mess with the formula.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> I think a US company should scoop up all 3 and just continue the show here. It was a world wide success, it could be made anywhere and still work. As long as they didn't mess with the formula.


That article posted by TtT speculates that Clarkson may have a non-compete clause in his contract, so that might not be possible at this time. If Clarkson has non-compete language in his deal, I would expect Hammond and May would have similar language.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Do those sorts of things hold up if you get fired?


----------



## heySkippy (Jul 2, 2001)

I don't think Clarkson was fired, his contract was not renewed.


----------



## BrettStah (Nov 12, 2000)

Can a clause from a contract that expired be enforced?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

BrettStah said:


> Can a clause from a contract that expired be enforced?


Yes. In fact, that's exactly how a non-compete clause is intended to work. It prevents the employee from working for a competitor AFTER the contract ends and the employee is no longer working for the employer.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

This doesn't tell us much, but here's a teaser for the "Top Gear Special" - or the BBC's way for using up the leftover footage from what was supposed to be three more episodes from the 'final' season.

http://jalopnik.com/the-new-teaser-for-top-gears-lost-episode-is-here-1709883248


----------



## heySkippy (Jul 2, 2001)

There was a fresh round of rumors o FB recently about Hammond and May turning down BBC2 and pursuing a Netflix deal with Clarkson.

Please let this come true.

Please.


----------



## osu1991 (Mar 6, 2015)

The three of them are up to something this week, from their twitter posts


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

We'll see how it goes.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

osu1991 said:


> The three of them are up to something this week, from their twitter posts


...or the other two are having some fun trolling Clarkson.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

All three tweets made within less than a minute of each other. Seems unlikely Jezza made a serious tweet and both Hammond and May came up with such a similar troll response within a few seconds. More likely they were all together and decided to send the tweets.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

If you had seen the relevant item that prompted the tweets, it would make sense...

Chris Evans, a BBC Radio 2 DJ and well-known petrol head, was on TV and let slip that he was filming a car-related sequence "sometime next week".

He has vehemently denied any chance of him hosting a new, revised Top Gear and ended the interview with "we'll see how it goes".

The lads were having a jab at him and nothing more.

ETA: Here's the details...

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...-top-gear-film-as-only-they-can-10303530.html


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

Seems there's no smoke without fire...

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-33158464


----------



## DouglasPHill (Feb 10, 2005)

I'll be deleting the season pass after the 28-June show.


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

Did the planned speed challenge between the LaFerrari, the 918 Spyder, and the P1 ever get filmed? Last I remember the manufacturers had all agreed on terms and the only thing holding it up was Porsche providing a car.


----------



## shady (May 31, 2002)

TonyTheTiger said:


> Seems there's no smoke without fire...
> 
> http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-33158464


That's about the best outcome I can think of.

It's funny that they chose someone who also has a controversial past with the BBC


----------



## heySkippy (Jul 2, 2001)

Chris who?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

ClutchBrake said:


> Did the planned speed challenge between the LaFerrari, the 918 Spyder, and the P1 ever get filmed? Last I remember the manufacturers had all agreed on terms and the only thing holding it up was Porsche providing a car.


That's the one thing I was most looking forward to for Series 22. Bummed that it never happened.



heySkippy said:


> Chris who?


IIRC, there was an episode a few years back where May went to Chris Evans' house and borrowed Evans' vintage 60s Ferarri convertible for the day.


----------



## pteronaut (Dec 26, 2009)

heySkippy said:


> Chris who?


The former husband of Billy Piper. and star in a reasonably priced car.

http://www.topgear.com/uk/videos/52997007001


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

DouglasPHill said:


> I'll be deleting the season pass after the 28-June show.


Same here. I've tried the other variants of the show (the Australian one and the US one) and didn't enjoy either one. It was really the specific hosts, and not the format of the show, that made it fun for me to watch.


----------



## Big Deficit (Jul 8, 2003)

TonyTheTiger said:


> Seems there's no smoke without fire...
> 
> http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-33158464


Adam Savage changed his name and is hosting Top Gear? 

Hmm, actually, the guys from Mythbusters would probably make decent hosts, certainly way better than the current US hosts.


----------



## JMikeD (Jun 10, 2002)

I wouldn't mind if some network started airing episodes of _Fifth Gear_ again here in the USA. I like those presenters, and the show reviews a lot of cars I might actually be able to buy.


----------



## osu1991 (Mar 6, 2015)

JMikeD said:


> I wouldn't mind if some network started airing episodes of _Fifth Gear_ again here in the USA. I like those presenters, and the show reviews a lot of cars I might actually be able to buy.


Velocity was showing Fifth Gear in the US, however that may have ended when Discovery stopped showing Fifth Gear in the UK last year and it moved to History UK for 2015.

You can watch some past seasons on Hulu.

http://www.hulu.com/watch/328682#i0,p8,s20,d0


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

Heads up!

The FINAL Top Gear with the trio is airing in the UK tonight.

That means it'll be available through 'magic means' fairly soon after, or on BBCA some time in the near future.


----------



## HerronScott (Jan 1, 2002)

Hopefully they will air it here soon so I don't have to go searching for it. I've been putting off watching the last episode that aired as I'm in denial that it's over... 

Scott


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

I dropped my SP for both the UK and US Top Gear.


----------



## osu1991 (Mar 6, 2015)

Sad to see it end. Have to say the final segment today was some of the funniest they've done.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

Bittersweet.

"I hate working on Top Gear"!!!!!


----------



## Todd (Oct 7, 1999)

I'm starting to watch it now. Will have to finish it tomorrow though. It starts out with the trio buying 3 classic cars and living with them.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

I'm just starting the final episode. The elephant is the perfect TG touch.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

osu1991 said:


> Sad to see it end. Have to say the final segment today was some of the funniest they've done.


Agreed. There were a couple of lines in that second film that may be the funniest I've ever heard on the show.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Just watched the final episode. So sad to see the show go. Even though I'm not really a car guy it was still one of my favorites because thise three guys made it so much fun to watch. I hope the three of them get together and do someing else.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

I watched it last night. It is always great when they drive old, cheap cars. It is even better when they get caravans involved. 

I too hope the 3 fellows get another show going. I heard a Netflix rumor. Is that true or are there any new rumors?


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

Hoffer said:


> I watched it last night. It is always great when they drive old, cheap cars. It is even better when they get caravans involved.
> 
> I too hope the 3 fellows get another show going. I heard a Netflix rumor. Is that true or are there any new rumors?


Was it on BBCA? I'd like to see it and think I cancelled my OnePass. Would like to try to catch it.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

ClutchBrake said:


> Was it on BBCA? I'd like to see it and think I cancelled my OnePass. Would like to try to catch it.


It's definitely worth it. Some very funny stuff in the second segment.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

I watched it off BBCA.


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

Turns out I recorded it last night. Sad when they said good bye at the end.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Has there been anything even remotely concrete about what they're planning next? I mean, I know the rumor was a Netflix show, but I haven't heard anything about negotiations or anything.


----------



## osu1991 (Mar 6, 2015)

Most of the news now is that they have a no compete clause in the UK that runs through 2017, so they are trying to get around that by signing a deal with a US company (Netflix) that can then turn around and license it back to ITV or another UK broadcaster.


----------



## DouglasPHill (Feb 10, 2005)

It was great, I was chuckling numerous times. For some reason I did not get the last half hour. Can't wait for the new show on Netflix with the gang.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

I got some sort of Best Of recording last night. Haven't watched it yet.


----------



## midas (Jun 1, 2000)

I really don't understand. BBC claims what Clarkson did was so bad that they have no choice but to sever ties. Yet they don't seem so embarrassed by his behavior that they don't show reruns constantly. I guess what he did was bad enough to not pay him anymore, but not bad to stop making money off of him.


----------



## osu1991 (Mar 6, 2015)

Dan203 said:


> I got some sort of Best Of recording last night. Haven't watched it yet.


BBC started showing best of episodes from the final 2 series last week. BBC America is following suit. Should be for the next 3 weeks, as they have 4 scheduled.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk


----------



## wedgecon (Dec 28, 2002)

midas said:


> I really don't understand. BBC claims what Clarkson did was so bad that they have no choice but to sever ties. Yet they don't seem so embarrassed by his behavior that they don't show reruns constantly. I guess what he did was bad enough to not pay him anymore, but not bad to stop making money off of him.


They are not embarrassed, they severed ties because Clarkson assaulted a fellow employee. Like most employers they can not keep an employee who assaults another employee. That does not mean you can not profit off their previous work for which they own the rights too.


----------



## BrettStah (Nov 12, 2000)

Do the hosts get residuals from the reruns, I wonder?


----------



## DouglasPHill (Feb 10, 2005)

wedgecon said:


> Like most employers they can not keep an employee who assaults another employee.


The PC police did their job. I had suggested a suspension with anger training classes but they chose a very unprofitable route. They, the BBC PC police, made their decision now they can live with the monetary consequences.


----------



## GoPackGo (Dec 29, 2012)

BBC had no choice but to let Clarkson go. Keeping him would have opened them up to a lawsuit from the assaulted employee.


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

GoPackGo said:


> BBC had no choice but to let Clarkson go. Keeping him would have opened them up to a lawsuit from the assaulted employee.


I would have been surprised by that, given that he didn't report Clarkson. Clarkson reported himself.

That being said, with the other scandal(s) going on with the BBC their hands were tied. They did what they had to do.


----------



## midas (Jun 1, 2000)

GoPackGo said:


> BBC had no choice but to let Clarkson go. Keeping him would have opened them up to a lawsuit from the assaulted employee.


So what? Paying the guy to settle the case would have cost them less than they are going to lose by trying to have Top Gear without Clarkson. Don't you think a low level producer would have jumped at a million bucks? How many multi-millions is the BBC going to lose in just the first year?

And I don't know how it is in the U.K., but here in the U.S., firing Clarkson would not preclude the guy from suing the company. And in fact they didn't actually fire him, they just failed to renew his contract.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

midas said:


> So what? Paying the guy to settle the case would have cost them less than they are going to lose by trying to have Top Gear without Clarkson. Don't you think a low level producer would have jumped at a million bucks? How many multi-millions is the BBC going to lose in just the first year?
> 
> And I don't know how it is in the U.K., but here in the U.S., firing Clarkson would not preclude the guy from suing the company. And in fact they didn't actually fire him, they just failed to renew his contract.


It wasn't about the liability for this incident. That already existed. Firing Clarkson was about limiting the BBC's exposure for any future incidents. If they knew of this incident and allowed him to keep working and something similar happened in the future, then that could be used against the BBC to make them liable since they knew of a dangerous situation and did nothing to correct it.


----------



## pteronaut (Dec 26, 2009)

Clarkson was already on his final warning after the 'slope' incident.

Even if his victim hadn't reported the assault, an onlooker could have easily made a complaint based on a public order offense, including racism. The BBC is already under the microscope for all of the alleged sex crimes by public figures in their employ that either went unreported or were swept under the rug in the 1970's. Clarkson is the sacrificial lamb following Operation Yewtree. Top Gear can be a drop in the BBC's ocean, or a Millstone around it's neck where current UK public scrutiny is concerned.


----------



## midas (Jun 1, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> It wasn't about the liability for this incident. That already existed. Firing Clarkson was about limiting the BBC's exposure for any future incidents. If they knew of this incident and allowed him to keep working and something similar happened in the future, then that could be used against the BBC to make them liable since they knew of a dangerous situation and did nothing to correct it.


That's a different issue than the one I responded to.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

midas said:


> That's a different issue than the one I responded to.


How so? You were arguing that they shouldn't have fired him (or should have renewed his contract) because the cost of settling with the "victim" would be less than the amount lost if Top Gear goes away. I'm saying that the potential costs of keeping Clarkson around after this incident is simply too great, regardless of how much they're going to lose.


----------



## midas (Jun 1, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> How so? You were arguing that they shouldn't have fired him (or should have renewed his contract) because the cost of settling with the "victim" would be less than the amount lost if Top Gear goes away. I'm saying that the potential costs of keeping Clarkson around after this incident is simply too great, regardless of how much they're going to lose.


Nope. I simply addressed the idea that they had to fire him simply because the guy he beat up would sue.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

I would hope in a normal workplace that if a person punches someone that there would be similar repercussions. There is no excuse for it. None. And certainly the supposed reason for it here is just absurd.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

The trio - and Andy Wilman - have signed with Amazon to create a new motoring show.

http://www.engadget.com/2015/07/30/amazon-top-gear/
http://jalopnik.com/clarkson-hammond-and-may-signed-a-deal-with-amazon-vid-1721030309


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Excellent news. I was afraid the rumors of a non-compete clause might keep them sidelined for awhile. I wonder how soon they'll go into production and have episodes available.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> Excellent news. I was afraid the rumors of a non-compete clause might keep them sidelined for awhile. I wonder how soon they'll go into production and have episodes available.


Production this fall, "air" date sometime in 2016.


----------



## heySkippy (Jul 2, 2001)

Sucks that they went with Amazon.


----------



## Jon J (Aug 23, 2000)

heySkippy said:


> Sucks that they went with Amazon.


Do you think with Amazon they will be able to sell each show?


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

Jon J said:


> Do you think with Amazon they will be able to sell each show?


The article I read said the show will air on Amazon Prime. I'm guessing if you don't have Amazon Prime you'd be able to purchase them individually. This is how it seems to work with their other original shows.


----------



## shady (May 31, 2002)

Jon J said:


> Do you think with Amazon they will be able to sell each show?


No, I imagine it will be available on Amazon Prime. Mind you, they could sell the cars that they review on Amazon


----------



## Craigbob (Dec 2, 2006)

I have to say while I'm happy and excited to see the boys back on the screen, I'm somewhat gobsmacked that Amazon beat out Netflix for the show. They have no where near the market penetration/audience for this. 

Now I wonder about the form of the show. Will they have a tame racing driver? What will they name him if they do?


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

Craigbob said:


> What will they name him if they do?


The Stag?


----------



## Craigbob (Dec 2, 2006)

ClutchBrake said:


> The Stag?


The Gits? Makes me wonder if the Stig is gits backwards to begin with.

Nope... There is a punk band named the "The Gits".


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

Craigbob said:


> Will they have a tame racing driver?


Since Clarkson/Wilman had sold the show (and thus the rights to the unique aspects of it) back to the BBC, I doubt it. Had they retained ownership, they could have offered it to anybody else once the BBC dropped them, including other UK networks like ITV or Channel Four.


----------



## DUDE_NJX (Feb 12, 2003)

Maybe it's time to reinvent the format a bit anyway.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Yay! Can't wait to see what they do. I hope they don't Americanize it too much. Part of it's charm was how British it was. Although I wouldn't mind hearing the prices in dollars instead of pounds.


----------



## DUDE_NJX (Feb 12, 2003)

You realize they don't need to do it in the U.S. just because Amazon is an American company?


----------



## verdugan (Sep 9, 2003)

Craigbob said:


> I have to say while I'm happy and excited to see the boys back on the screen, I'm somewhat gobsmacked that Amazon beat out Netflix for the show. *They have no where near the market penetration/audience for this.
> *


Which is an excellent reason to get this show. You need exclusive content to attract people to your platform/website.

I'm sure Amazon doesn't see this as a money maker. It'll probably be a loss leader to get people to shop at Amazon.


----------



## shady (May 31, 2002)

verdugan said:


> Which is an excellent reason to get this show. You need exclusive content to attract people to your platform/website.
> 
> I'm sure Amazon doesn't see this as a money maker. It'll probably be a loss leader to get people to shop at Amazon.


Exactly


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

Dan203 said:


> Yay! Can't wait to see what they do. I hope they don't Americanize it too much. Part of it's charm was how British it was. Although I wouldn't mind hearing the prices in dollars instead of pounds.


A lot of the cars they featured are not available in the US anyway, so no point in displaying the price in dollars. It's also not that hard to use a currency converter 

Even when the same car is available here and there, you cannot compare pricing. The MSRP on my eGolf was $36,300. Per VW.co.uk it's £31,325 to start, and to make it feature-equivalent to my US-market eGolf SEL it's £34,565. At current exchange rates that's just shy of $54k 

The UK price is "out the door" and includes VAT. But even if you take into account their most expensive VAT rate of 20%, it's still several thousand pounds more than what American buyers pay. I estimated the non-taxed price in the UK for the same car to be about £28,600, or over $44k.

You especially cannot compare pricing on used cars. On various challenges they picked up several used luxury cars for prices that are absolutely unheard of in the US. For the final episode, Richard Hammond supposedly got a later model Jeep Cherokee XJ for under £500; you'd be hard-pressed to find ANY Cherokee XJ for the equivalent of $780 here, much less one that looked like in as "good nick" as the one he had.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Yeah the used car prices they get there seem absurd. I wonder why? Do people over there just put less value on used cars?


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Dan203 said:


> Yeah the used car prices they get there seem absurd. I wonder why? Do people over there just put less value on used cars?


It might have to do with the mandatory MOT testing, which is expensive enough that they advertise "Recent MOT." See Wheeler Dealers on Velocity.

We can guess that at some point people don't want to pay say, $500 annually to keep a $1000 car on the road.

I get to that point with my old cars, where just the (very cheap) insurance and (not so cheap in IL) plates are a pain.


----------



## ewolfr (Feb 12, 2001)

Amazon isn't messing around with the budget for the show

http://www.businessinsider.com/jere...ve-signed-a-deal-with-amazon-2015-7?r=UK&IR=T



> According to the FT, sources say the former "Top Gear" hosts' deal with Amazon is worth a reported $250 million for three years and 36 episodes.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

I wonder if that's the entire production budget for the show, or if that's the compensation for the hosts? I'd have to think it's the former. 

I wonder what the production budget for the BBC version of the show was. I always assumed that they got most of their new test cars for free as journalists doing legitimate reviews of the cars. And in the segments when they'd actually own the cars they were driving (like buy a 1980s Hot Hatch for 1,000 quid), the amount they typically spent was relatively low (although the customizations they then did to the cars were often much more expensive than the cars themselves).


----------



## DouglasPHill (Feb 10, 2005)

My bet is thats number is for everything.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

News out tonight is that the new show won't appear (can't really say "broadcast") until Fall 2016.


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

MikeAndrews said:


> Dan203 said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah the used car prices they get there seem absurd. I wonder why? Do people over there just put less value on used cars?
> ...


That's part of it, but I think the cost of "petrol" has a lot to do with it.

Ignoring the ones that are MoT failures (like that Isuzu Rodeo Clarkson was driving), many of the cars they are getting for absurdly cheap prices (as compared to the US) are gas-guzzlers like luxury vehicles and SUV's. When I was last in the UK (technically, Northern Ireland) in 2012, petrol was $8.something per US gallon. So the only people who can regularly afford to drive these vehicles are people with money.

However, unless the car is some rare example or otherwise highly desirable, the folks who own such cars tend to not keep them long and move on to the next new thing. But because of the high fuel consumption, they don't tend to attract the typical used car buyer, so the price has to keep falling before it gets a buyer.

Here in the US, a used luxury car doesn't have to fall as far in price since our fuel is more affordable for the average person. If you ignore maintenance costs, it's not hard for the average working American to afford to drive a older Lexus or V-8 Mercedes or even a Rolls; not so for the average European.

Used cars do have a market in the UK; it's not like Japan where relatively recent cars are being sent to the scrapheap because their value has fallen very far in relation to the costs of keeping it on the road.

That's my observation anyway, based on my visits over there. The friend I used to visit over there (before he emigrated to Canada) told me that MoT prices weren't that expensive, definitely not $500. Halfords (the equivalent of Pep Boys over there) says the government only allows MoT Centres to charge a maximum of 54.85 pounds for an MoT


----------



## whoknows55 (Jun 17, 2001)

RonDawg said:


> That's part of it, but I think the cost of "petrol" has a lot to do with it.
> 
> Ignoring the ones that are MoT failures (like that Isuzu Rodeo Clarkson was driving), many of the cars they are getting for absurdly cheap prices (as compared to the US) are gas-guzzlers like luxury vehicles and SUV's. When I was last in the UK (technically, Northern Ireland) in 2012, petrol was $8.something per US gallon. So the only people who can regularly afford to drive these vehicles are people with money.
> 
> ...


The other issue is that road tax in the UK is based on either engine size or CO2 emissions so the older large engine cars are more expensive annually even if you don't drive them much.


----------



## Bob Coxner (Dec 1, 2004)

RonDawg said:


> That's my observation anyway, based on my visits over there. The friend I used to visit over there (before he emigrated to Canada) told me that MoT prices weren't that expensive, definitely not $500. Halfords (the equivalent of Pep Boys over there) says the government only allows MoT Centres to charge a maximum of 54.85 pounds for an MoT


It's not the cost of the MOT itself, it's the repairs needed to pass the MOT. In the US, you typically get emissions tested and maybe a couple of safety items like brake lights and turn signals. In the UK the list of things that have to pass inspection is pretty staggering.

http://www.motester.co.uk/mot-information-for-motorists/mot-test-checks-list (note that there are two pages of items and the second page is the most extensive)


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

Bob Coxner said:


> It's not the cost of the MOT itself, it's the repairs needed to pass the MOT. In the US, you typically get emissions tested and maybe a couple of safety items like brake lights and turn signals. In the UK the list of things that have to pass inspection is pretty staggering.
> 
> http://www.motester.co.uk/mot-information-for-motorists/mot-test-checks-list (note that there are two pages of items and the second page is the most extensive)


I had to look at that URL twice to make sure it wasn't what I originally thought it was 

I was just addressing the part about the MoT itself being expensive, which it's not.

But even here in California where we only have to do smog inspections every two years, it can be a major hassle to get an older car passed. The actual smog test results get forwarded to DMV, and if your car emits way too much pollutants, it gets classified as a "Gross Polluter." That means your car can only be tested at a "Smog Test Only" center.

One thing I've noticed since the advent of the Smog Check II program is that even though we don't have rust problems with our cars except in beach areas, you don't see very many cars older than about 15 years old on the road here anymore. I know someone who (through marriage) had a mint-condition Pontiac Fiero, the highly (maybe only) desirable 1988 model, that he had to sell to an out of state buyer because the car wouldn't pass smog.


----------



## mrizzo80 (Apr 17, 2012)

Variety says Apple made an "unprecedented" bid to land the Top Gear talent. Wonder what their offer involved, considering Amazon gave them a $250,000,000 budget.

http://variety.com/2015/digital/news/apple-eyes-move-into-original-programming-exclusive-1201582020/


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

I didn't see a thread for it so I figured this is as good a place as any to mention it.

Former _Friends_ star Matt LeBlanc to co-host the renewed _Top Gear_

I only know him from his most famous TV character so it will be interesting to see if his talent at humor will translate into the show. Chris Evans, and (if the rumors are true) Sabine Schmidt may be good hosts, but I'm not sure if alone they can recreate the chemistry of Clarkson, May, and Hammond.


----------



## Bob Coxner (Dec 1, 2004)

I think LeBlanc is an inspired choice. Name recognition, is doing great comedy work on Episodes and he has still has the record time for a star in a reasonably priced car.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

I thought he was the new host of the American Top Gear, until I clicked the link to the story. He's hosting *thee* Top Gear.

Before clicking the link, I also thought it was weird that Captain America Chris Evans was going to be on Top Gear.

I will for sure check out the new show.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

I just question the choice of an American host for Top Gear (UK). They seriously couldn't find enough appropriate car people in the UK that they had to select an American?

So far, we know for sure Chris Evans and Matt LeBlanc are hosting. Jalopnik believes the third host could be Chris Harris. Sabine Schmitz has also been rumored to be involved, but I rather think she'll be a guest on the show, rather than a full-time host.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

Hey, too many American shows are being hosted by Brits. It's about time Americans start hosting their shows.


----------



## heySkippy (Jul 2, 2001)

I think LeBlanc is a bad choice. I watched him host one of the "best of" Top Gear specials recently and he's got all the personality of a cardboard cutout.

Of course, I think the reboot of Top Gear is doomed anyway, so it probably doesn't matter.


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

LoadStar said:


> I just question the choice of an American host for Top Gear (UK). They seriously couldn't find enough appropriate car people in the UK that they had to select an American?


It could be to make the show more appealing to Americans, who pretty much don't know who Chris Evans is. Brits are far more familiar with LeBlanc than we are with Evans.


----------



## Big Deficit (Jul 8, 2003)

Matt Leblanc is too close to Adam Ferrara for my liking though I will admit to liking him on Episodes while not being much of a Ferrara fan ever. I also think it's a mistake having non-British hosts for the British series. At the end of the day? This is a buddy show and will only succeed if there's chemistry between the hosts. Reference the US version where there is none.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

I think one of the reasons Top Gear was so successful is because the three hosts each had very distinct opinions and had experience writing and articulating those opinions. When Clarkson said something, you knew that he believed what he was saying. Same with Hammond and May. Thus, the show appeared (and was) largely a conversation between the hosts. Sure, much of it was scripted, but even when it was scripted, you got the feeling that the hosts wrote the script, so even the scripted conversations felt authentic.

With LeBlanc, we've really only ever seen him act with words written by others (Friends, Joey, Episodes). So while I have no doubt that he'll be able to competently act the part of a car show host, I question whether he'll be able to have enough input in the writing to make his portions seem authentic rather than him just playing a character.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Big Deficit said:


> Matt Leblanc is too close to Adam Ferrara for my liking though I will admit to liking him on Episodes while not being much of a Ferrara fan ever. I also think it's a mistake having non-British hosts for the British series. At the end of the day? This is a buddy show and will only succeed if there's chemistry between the hosts. Reference the US version where there is none.


I still lament the fact that Adam Carolla wasn't available for the US version. He shot the original US pilot for NBC with Rutledge and Tanner, but NBC passed. Then, when History decided to revive the project, Carolla was under contract for another show that ultimately didn't get picked up, but that brief window killed his availability for TG (US). It would have been interesting to see how that show was perceived with a true experienced host and bona fide car guy leading the show rather than all three of them feeling like they were looking to someone else to lead the show.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Big Deficit said:


> Matt Leblanc is too close to Adam Ferrara for my liking though I will admit to liking him on Episodes while not being much of a Ferrara fan ever. I also think it's a mistake having non-British hosts for the British series. At the end of the day? *This is a buddy show and will only succeed if there's chemistry between the hosts.* Reference the US version where there is none.


Well, that's what the most recent version of Top Gear was. We don't know what the "new" Top Gear will be like. It could end up being a completely different format.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> I still lament the fact that Adam Carolla wasn't available for the US version. He shot the original US pilot for NBC with Rutledge and Tanner, but NBC passed. Then, when History decided to revive the project, Carolla was under contract for another show that ultimately didn't get picked up, but that brief window killed his availability for TG (US). It would have been interesting to see how that show was perceived with a true experienced host and bona fide car guy leading the show rather than all three of them feeling like they were looking to someone else to lead the show.


I've often said that I'd love to see a US Top Gear with car guys that are charismatic enough to carry a show. My examples were Jay Leno, Chris Titus, Adam Carolla, or Tim Allen. That's really the biggest problem with the US version as it stands - the hosts have no real charisma.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

LoadStar said:


> I've often said that I'd love to see a US Top Gear with car guys that are charismatic enough to carry a show. My examples were Jay Leno, Chris Titus, Adam Carolla, or Tim Allen. That's really the biggest problem with the US version as it stands - the hosts have no real charisma.


I think Rutledge and Tanner are fine as second/third fiddles, but they're not lead hosts. And Rutledge is too likeable to be delivering potentially scathing reviews of cars. And Ferarra isn't a lead host or a car guy. He was a horrible pick all around.


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

LoadStar said:


> I've often said that I'd love to see a US Top Gear with car guys that are charismatic enough to carry a show. My examples were Jay Leno, Chris Titus, Adam Carolla, or Tim Allen. That's really the biggest problem with the US version as it stands - the hosts have no real charisma.


As it stands? Is it still on?

I honestly thought it was cancelled some time ago. I forced myself to watch it but didn't really enjoy it. There were a few decent bits here and there. The writing and chemistry was just awful though. Forget the fact that it was called Top Gear.

If it is still on I'll probably go back and skim what I missed.


----------



## nirisahn (Nov 19, 2005)

heySkippy said:


> I think LeBlanc is a bad choice. I watched him host one of the "best of" Top Gear specials recently and he's got all the personality of a cardboard cutout.
> 
> Of course, I think the reboot of Top Gear is doomed anyway, so it probably doesn't matter.


Agreed. I've seen him on multiple interview shows. His voice is kind of low and soft. He doesn't think quickly on his feet. He's generally pretty boring when he's not working from a script. Maybe Top Gear will be different because he is a gear head, so instead of having to answer other people's questions he'll be talking about something he loves and has had time to prepare for.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

ClutchBrake said:


> As it stands? Is it still on?
> 
> I honestly thought it was cancelled some time ago. I forced myself to watch it but didn't really enjoy it. There were a few decent bits here and there. The writing and chemistry was just awful though. Forget the fact that it was called Top Gear.
> 
> If it is still on I'll probably go back and skim what I missed.


It hasn't been canceled, but it also hasn't been on for quite some time. According to an interview I heard with Rutledge, in the last episode of season 5, Adam got injured during the shoot and had to be sidelined for several months. By the time he was healthy again, Rutledge and Tanner had other scheduling commitments so season 6 had to be pushed back. I don't think they've announced yet when the next episodes will air.


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> It hasn't been canceled, but it also hasn't been on for quite some time. According to an interview I heard with Rutledge, in the last episode of season 5, Adam got injured during the shoot and had to be sidelined for several months. By the time he was healthy again, Rutledge and Tanner had other scheduling commitments so season 6 had to be pushed back. I don't think they've announced yet when the next episodes will air.


Thanks. I just went back to look at the episodes and I might have quit around episode 3 of season 2. I thought I watched longer than that. Maybe I just don't remember the later episodes.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

ClutchBrake said:


> As it stands? Is it still on?
> 
> I honestly thought it was cancelled some time ago. I forced myself to watch it but didn't really enjoy it. There were a few decent bits here and there. The writing and chemistry was just awful though. Forget the fact that it was called Top Gear.
> 
> If it is still on I'll probably go back and skim what I missed.


I just checked and supposedly, they're in production on new episodes. But yeah, it's been over a year since they've had any new episodes, which makes you wonder.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

ClutchBrake said:


> Thanks. I just went back to look at the episodes and I might have quit around episode 3 of season 2. I thought I watched longer than that. Maybe I just don't remember the later episodes.


You haven't seen the show since S2? S02E03 aired in August 2011. The most recent episode (S05E10) aired in October 2014.


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> You haven't seen the show since S2? S02E03 aired in August 2011. The most recent episode (S05E10) aired in October 2014.


I would have sworn I watched three seasons. But going to the History site and looking at the recaps the latest one I can remember is S02E03. I did recognize a goofy-looking car in the screencap for S04E08, but it is likely I saw the car on another show.

I'm curious now though. Gonna see if I can do a search for the Top Gear USA threads and see when I last commented.

EDIT

OK I just did that search and see that I commented on S04E06. WTF? Is my memory going (gone?) or was the show just so bland I forgot a couple dozen episodes?


----------



## MarkofT (Jul 27, 2001)

TG:USA has wrapped filming for their next season, but both Rutledge and Adam have tweeted that they don't know the airdates yet.


----------



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

DevdogAZ said:


> I think one of the reasons Top Gear was so successful is because the three hosts each had very distinct opinions and had experience writing and articulating those opinions. When Clarkson said something, you knew that he believed what he was saying. Same with Hammond and May. Thus, the show appeared (and was) largely a conversation between the hosts. Sure, much of it was scripted, but even when it was scripted, you got the feeling that the hosts wrote the script, so even the scripted conversations felt authentic.
> 
> With LeBlanc, we've really only ever seen him act with words written by others (Friends, Joey, Episodes). So while I have no doubt that he'll be able to competently act the part of a car show host, I question whether he'll be able to have enough input in the writing to make his portions seem authentic rather than him just playing a character.


Weren't May, Hammond and Clarkson all print journalists before TG tv show? I remember reading articles by May and Clarkson a while ago. And that's why their material always, as you say, seemed to be coming from them I guess.

What bothers me the most about the new U.K. TG hosts are their ages. Couldn't they find some younger hosts with charisma? Billie Piper? J.K.? Jamie Oliver would be a riot on this show, or even Gordon Ramsey for that matter. Laurence Llewyn Bowan? lol


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

Before Clarkson was on the recent incarnation 2002 - 2015 of TG he hosted the previous version of TG 1988 - 2000, before that he wrote car stuff for print.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

zordude said:


> Before Clarkson was on the recent incarnation 2002 - 2015 of TG he hosted the previous version of TG 1988 - 2000, before that he wrote car stuff for print.


Hammond was a radio host for a variety of BBC regional stations before moving to television with _Top Gear_.

James May was a reporter for the print magazine _Autocar_, but also a TV presenter for both Channel 4's Driven and, like Jezza, a host on the original _Top Gear_.


----------



## Bob Coxner (Dec 1, 2004)

LoadStar said:


> I've often said that I'd love to see a US Top Gear with car guys that are charismatic enough to carry a show. My examples were Jay Leno, Chris Titus, Adam Carolla, or Tim Allen. That's really the biggest problem with the US version as it stands - the hosts have no real charisma.


I hated Leno as the host of The Tonight Show but I have to say that Jay Leno's Garage was a really good series and I'm looking forward to season 2. He would definitely be a good host for TG US or UK.


----------



## HerronScott (Jan 1, 2002)

RonDawg said:


> I didn't see a thread for it so I figured this is as good a place as any to mention it.
> 
> Former _Friends_ star Matt LeBlanc to co-host the renewed _Top Gear_
> 
> I only know him from his most famous TV character so it will be interesting to see if his talent at humor will translate into the show. Chris Evans, and (if the rumors are true) Sabine Schmidt may be good hosts, but I'm not sure if alone they can recreate the chemistry of Clarkson, May, and Hammond.


I started to watch the first of the Races episodes and wasn't impressed with his way too serious introduction. I hope he comes across more naturally when the new regular episodes air.

Scott


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

Final List of Top Gear Presenters Announced. All *six* of them (talking ones anyway):

Chris Evans
Matt LeBlanc
Chris Harris
Sabine Schmitz
Rory Reid
Eddie Jordan

It sounds like Top Gear 3.0 will be more like v. 1.0 (which had numerous hosts) than the v. 2.0 which has been so popular.


----------



## IDSmoker (Apr 11, 2004)

Sounds more like "let's throw a bunch of people at the (ratings) wall, and see who sticks" to me.


----------



## DouglasPHill (Feb 10, 2005)

Far for me to be a thread crapper. It will probably(no way) be a good show with all those hosts (losers) :down: :down: :down: :down: 
I of course will set a season pass for it (that will be the day)


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Sounds like Chris Evans will be the true "host" and the others will just be contributors. That way, they can film episodes with as few or as many of the others as they want, but they won't be bound by the other people's schedules (specifically Matt Leblanc, who is under contract for Episodes and also just signed a contract for a new network sitcom).


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

The whole charm of this show was the chemistry between the 3 hosts who seemed to be real friends and actually enjoyed picking on each other like male friends do. If it's just an ensemble of a bunch of guys doing one off bits it wont be as fun to watch. That's why I didn't like the US version. None of them seemed like they really knew each other. Plus none of them really took over the leader position like Jeremy did on the UK version.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Dan203 said:


> The whole charm of this show was the chemistry between the 3 hosts who seemed to be real friends and actually enjoyed picking on each other like male friends do. If it's just an ensemble of a bunch of guys doing one off bits it wont be as fun to watch. That's why I didn't like the US version. None of them seemed like they really knew each other. Plus none of them really took over the leader position like Jeremy did on the UK version.


Well, we don't really know what format this new Top Gear will have. Keep in mind that the format of Top Gear that we're (now) familiar with was almost completely the brainchild of Jeremy Clarkson and Andy Wilman.

It's entirely possible that the show opts to return to something closer to the format of the original run of Top Gear, which (more or less) became Fifth Gear. It was less "three car guys screwing around" and more a straightforward motoring show.

Or, it could be something somewhere between the two - or something entirely new.


----------



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

both Hammond and May have some pretty good shows of their own. They seem to be able to exist nicely outside of Top Gear, as they're both likely good writers.
We'll have to see if Sabine Schmidt and Matt LeBlanc (?) can do the same


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

LoadStar said:


> It's entirely possible that the show opts to return to something closer to the format of the original run of Top Gear, which (more or less) became Fifth Gear. It was less "three car guys screwing around" and more a straightforward motoring show.


Except that was the format that eventually grew to be unpopular (at least in the eyes of the BBC) and was cancelled. So they're going to have to make this one stand apart from _Fifth Gear_ and with more than just The Stig.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

RonDawg said:


> Except that was *the format that eventually grew to be unpopular *(at least in the eyes of the BBC) and was cancelled. So they're going to have to make this one stand apart from _Fifth Gear_ and with more than just The Stig.


I don't think it ever did grow to be unpopular! Sure, there were the detractors, but it was still bringing in something like $150 million a year. Nothing unpopular about that!!

The 'new' Top Gear doesn't stand a chance. It can only become a straight-up motoring show and we know from experience that doesn't pull in the kind of audiences the 'troublesome trio' brought in.

The ginger twat notwithstanding, LeBlanc has the personality of a dead dog without a good supporting cast and an outstanding script. The latest series of TG:The Races proves this completely.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

TonyTheTiger said:


> I don't think it ever did grow to be unpopular! Sure, there were the detractors, but it was still bringing in something like $150 million a year. Nothing unpopular about that!!


I think the "unpopular" version that was being talked about was the version of TG that ran from 1978-2002 before Clarkson rebooted it.


----------



## HerronScott (Jan 1, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> I think the "unpopular" version that was being talked about was the version of TG that ran from 1978-2002 before Clarkson rebooted it.


Wait I thought he was referring to Fifth Gear?

Scott


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

HerronScott said:


> Wait I thought he was referring to Fifth Gear?
> 
> Scott


Here's how I interpreted the conversation. The reference to Fifth Gear was simply to point out that it has a similar format to the original Top Gear.



LoadStar said:


> *It's entirely possible that the show opts to return to something closer to the format of the original run of Top Gear*, which (more or less) became Fifth Gear.





RonDawg said:


> *Except that was the format that eventually grew to be unpopular (at least in the eyes of the BBC) and was cancelled.* So they're going to have to make this one stand apart from Fifth Gear and with more than just The Stig.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

HerronScott said:


> Wait I thought he was referring to Fifth Gear?


Fifth Gear, for all intents and purposes, is the original Top Gear. It was conceived by Channel 5 as a continuation of Top Gear after it was canceled by the BBC. It has a similar format, and many of the presenters from the original Top Gear moved over to Fifth Gear when it launched. Channel 5 even wanted to keep the Top Gear name, but the BBC denied the request.


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

The "eventually unpopular" version I'm referring to is v. 1.0 that eventually became _Fifth Gear._

And I thought the early version of _Fifth Gear_ (that aired for a short while here on Speed Channel) was kinda meh compared to the Discovery UK version, which we get/got on Velocity.


----------



## DUDE_NJX (Feb 12, 2003)

I'm surprised so many people are enamored with the "chemistry" between the old hosts. I've never thought it's anything special. The "jokes" are often really shallow and the interactions seemed forced and/or scripted. Seemed amateurish like a group of teenagers trying too hard to be funny for their youtube channel.
I much more enjoyed it when each guy was presenting a segment by himself. Mainly, though, I watched the show for the fantastic camera work and, obviously, the cars and some interesting locales.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

I loved the road trip and race segments. (especially the ones with the beater cars) They were always a ton of fun. The actual reviews were OK, but I only have so much interest in watching reviews for cars I will never be able to afford. (or that aren't even available in the US)


----------



## Jon J (Aug 23, 2000)

Though they fired Clarkson the BBC are not shy in using his stuff in the runup programs to the new Top Gear.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Jon J said:


> Though they fired Clarkson the BBC are not shy in using his stuff in the runup programs to the new Top Gear.


Why should they be? They own the footage and they didn't have any issues with the way Clarkson performed his duties in front of the camera/microphone. Their only complaint was for incidents that happened "behind the scenes."


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

DevdogAZ said:


> Why should they be? They own the footage and they didn't have any issues with the way Clarkson performed his duties in front of the camera/microphone. *Their only complaint was for incidents that happened "behind the scenes."*


There's LOTS of things that Jeremy Clarkson has done on-camera, aired and unaired, that brought negative attention to the show and the BBC, including:


The time he vandalized much of Bristol to prove the robustness of a Toyota Hilux pickup, including crashing it into a church-owned tree which later died.

The "slope" on the bridge comment on the "Bridge Over the River Kwai" recreation that produced complaints about him being a racist.

Wikipedia even has a page dedicated to _Top Gear_ controversies much of which Clarkson alone was responsible.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

RonDawg said:


> There's LOTS of things that Jeremy Clarkson has done on-camera, aired and unaired, that brought negative attention to the show and the BBC, including:
> 
> 
> The time he vandalized much of Bristol to prove the robustness of a Toyota Hilux pickup, including crashing it into a church-owned tree which later died.
> ...


OK, I should have clarified my point. Jon J said,



> Though they fired Clarkson the BBC are not shy in using his stuff in the runup programs to the new Top Gear.


and my post was meant to reflect that he was fired for a specific incident that happened off-camera, behind the scenes. Therefore, the BBC shouldn't have any problem showing the episodes in which Clarkson appeared since they own them and his firing had nothing to do with on-screen content.

If they want to refrain from showing certain episodes that led to controversy, I'm perfectly OK with that. But it would be ludicrous of them to put the whole TG library on the shelf simply because their parting of ways with Clarkson was on less than stellar terms.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

Just to clarify, Clarkson was NOT fired. The BBC decided not to renew his contract. Big difference.


----------



## heySkippy (Jul 2, 2001)

TonyTheTiger said:


> Just to clarify, Clarkson was NOT fired. The BBC decided not to renew his contract. Big difference.


Yeah, one way means he's out of a job and the other way means ...

Wait a minute, that's not a big difference at all.


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

DevdogAZ said:


> *my post was meant to reflect that he was fired for a specific incident that happened off-camera, behind the scenes.*


I think it's more accurate to say that him assaulting a producer during a temper tantrum back at the hotel was the final straw that broke the camel's back, particularly since he was on probation of sorts with the BBC after the "slope" comment the previous season.

Had he been behaving not-so-badly prior to that, the BBC might have forgiven him.


----------



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

RonDawg said:


> I think it's more accurate to say that him assaulting a producer during a temper tantrum back at the hotel was the final straw that broke the camel's back, particularly since he was on probation of sorts with the BBC after the "slope" comment the previous season.
> 
> Had he been behaving not-so-badly prior to that, the BBC might have forgiven him.


not to mention Hamster's Mexico fiasco....


----------



## Idearat (Nov 26, 2000)

I find it hard to see how BBC could hold Clarkson responsible for on-air comments he made that offended people considering they chose to air them. I'm sure there were lots of things said, like expletives when banging your knuckles with a wrench, that were recorded but didn't air. 
I think the BBC was very happy with all their antics, knowing that controversy increased ratings ( or traffic, or whatever BBC uses to measure success ). They could publicly denounce things that came out on the show while still pocketing the revenue they generated.


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

Idearat said:


> I think the BBC was very happy with all their antics, knowing that controversy increased ratings ( or traffic, or whatever BBC uses to measure success ). They could publicly denounce things that came out on the show while still pocketing the revenue they generated.


I think it's one of those situations where as long as it didn't bring too much negative publicity to the corporation, they were willing to put out the fires as necessary. But they had to put their foot down with the "slope" comment and then when this came not long afterward, they had to choose between their ratings and their reputation.

As North Americans we also forget that if you own a TV in the UK, you must legally have a license/licence for it, which is what funds the BBC, even if you don't watch a single channel of it, or don't watch broadcast TV at all (relying on just DVD's/Blu-rays/streaming video). While _Top Gear_ was a net revenue generator for the corporation, since it is funded primarily by tax dollars, their public holds them to a different standard than non-taxpayer-supported TV like iTV or Channel Four, or anything in North America (including the CBC).


----------



## Idearat (Nov 26, 2000)

RonDawg said:


> But they had to put their foot down with the "slope" comment and then when this came not long afterward, they had to choose between their ratings and their reputation.


The comment that _the BBC chose to air_. The comment was scripted, not spontaneous and they ( the BBC ) knew about it beforehand. I think the BBC's claim that they didn't know it was an offensive comment really was hiding "we thought we could get away with it, but since we didn't, we'll blame Clarkson"

http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-28522450


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

From your link:



> The BBC failed to take the opportunity, either during filming or post-production, to check whether the word had the potential to offend viewers."


The lack of proper oversight and due diligence (which in your article Ofcom is blaming the BBC for) is not necessarily the same as "let's do it until we get called on it."


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

heySkippy said:


> Yeah, one way means he's out of a job and the other way means ...
> 
> Wait a minute, that's not a big difference at all.


Actually, one way means he doesn't work for the BBC any more and the other means he can do future projects. In fact, he was due to host Have I Got News For You a few weeks after it all happened - until HE decided to drop out.


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

Jeremy Clarkson apologizes to Top Gear producer Oisin Tymon and also settles Tymon's lawsuit against him out of court for £100k + :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-35648682


----------

