I liked it. It wasn't the Top Gear I know and love but I didn't expect it to be. It will give me another car show to watch where they actually drive em like they stole em. I am not to hard to please and am definetely not comparing it to the "real top gear".... Larry
is that a triple negative? LOL I didn't get why they kept changing the angles of the shots of the track every time they showed it. Kind of difficult to compare when there's no two identical shots of the same corner. Hope they work out the weird camera and production issues.
Is this posted online anywhere :rolleyes5: Never mind, I found it at History.com. I was just surprised it wasnt blocked for us Canajuns I thought when they were interviewing Buzz it was rather lame that they the interviewer had to refer to cheat sheets. Come-on, he's got to do his home work and be better prepared.
I just watched the first episode and thought it was entertaining, which is all I was hoping for. I think Rutledge and Tanner have good chemistry, but Adam seems like a third wheel. Hopefully this will change as the season goes on. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Brian you hit the nail on the head. Adam did not work well with the other two, maybe it was just opening night jitters. If I was Buzz I would have smacked him for his dreadful interview skills. Big stars in small cars would have been perfect for a Mini. In the UK they went with inexpensive, I am sure no manufacturer would accept that in the US, so why not go with something serviceable. +1 on the split screen post production thing once was more than enough and if you are going to use that effect use it to have 3 different things on the screen not one shot chopped up by think black lines.
I was very disappointed. Sure, the overall production is essentially a clone of the original show and formula. However there is complete lack of wit, humor, and un-PC banter, which is what makes Top Gear (UK) so entertaining to watch.
I think it's as good as some of the other shows on Speed. That's actually a backhanded compliment but I'm trying to be kind and it's the best I can come up with. I'll try again. The show has plenty of room to improve and therefore it can improve....right? (is that better? probably not) I figure the technical stuff, camera work, etc, they can and probably will work out over time. The most important part to me is natural flow among the hosts. Yes, the team needs time to gel, but I think the potential is rather hampered by the presence of Tanner Foust. The other Top Gear proved none of the hosts needs to be a professional driver. What I've seen of other pro-drivers (and ex-pros) hosting shows makes me think amateurs that are enthusiastic about cars are a much better way to go. They need smart, clever guys who have good on-screen / TV personality and presence. I've only seen Foust before on Battle of the Supercars where I've not noticed any sort of an interesting personality -- always seems (to me) forced and horribly scripted. Does he just try too hard to "act" (badly) and rely too heavily on scripts or is that his real personality? Nope, I'm not a fan yet, but I'm still planning to watch a few more episodes because I'm hopeful....fingers crossed!
Steve I would go the other way. Tanner seemed to me to be the only one who knows how to drive a car. The other two need to prove to me that they can actually drive (and I do not mean going straight in a supercar on a landing strip) Corrola looked like he had never driven a fast car before when they showed him in the Lambo, if I got that job I would definitly go out beforehand and drive a few fast cars. The hill billy at least looked like he had driven over 100 mph before in his life. All three Top Gear hosts are comfortable behind the wheel which allows them to then screw around with eachother. I can see Tanner being afraid of killing the other two if he starts pushing the limits.
You're right, I spent too many words there on Foust, and I certainly don't have anything negative to say about his ability to drive. I just find it hard to believe, given his lackluster out-of-the-car performance on Supercars, that they'd give him a central, speaking role on another show. I feel like he would have been better cast as the Stig...that is, if they could get him to drive without trying to drift everything. You're right about the other guys needing to prove themselves as good amateur drivers too. Seems like that should have been part of the selection/casting process, eh? Though I suppose it might be possible the producers thought having some "regular guys" on the show might attract more audience? Who knows? It's easy to be critical on the sidelines. I haven't seen any of the original Top Gear episodes. Maybe those guys had some room to improve from the first episode as well. Like I said, I'm still hopeful so I'll keep watching.
I wasn't expecting much and even then, I was disappointed. Really, they had to start strong, and this is what we get? For the TV money whores, I don't know why they just don't pay the BBC for the episodes when they are new, instead of a year old. Should be cheaper that creating a whole new show and the show will be better. Instead of copying the Brits poorly, they should do some US stuff better, or just shelve the whole effort. Cobra vs Cobra was HORRIBLE! Poorly conceived, even worse execution. At least there is lots of room for improvement, let's hope they get better fast otherwise this will be destined for an early end. Matt
OK, the formula works, Proof: Top Gear UK. It's the host. Let me submit the following requirements: #1 Must like cars. Not love, just like. #2 Know how to make a car go fast but not necessarily how to race. #3 Must have a personality. #4 Come from some other entrainment spectrum. IE: Radio , Game Show, News Media, Music industry, Politics/Government. IMO IMO.
Episode #2 was a good bit better. The banter between the hosts was still a little stiff but nowhere near as stiff as the 1st episode. The shaky in car shots are gone in Episode #2. They jury is still out as a whole but dare I say this really does have some potential. If these guys can keep doing a little better each week I think we can get something out of this.
Boo for Tanner, yes he is the only one who can "drive" but he's going to wine everytime he looses. "My tires if only I wasn't drifting all day" boo hoo.
Maybe they will find their legs but just seems like a parody of the real thing..... On a scale of 0-10 I give it a: 3.5
It was better than the first episode IMO. The bit with the blind driver was pretty good and the three of them interacted a little more naturally. The jury is still out but at least it's something to watch on Sunday night.
I watched some but not all... Just didn't hold my attention. The Evo vs skier race had potential... But being behind a truck for a minute and still getting shots of the skiers jumping over the car on the slopes? Can we say staged? At least it was cool to see the car hitting the snow on the slopes. Then gushing all over the V12 Vanquish, but not having the balls to say "You can get as good or better performance for much, much less. So it's a GT Cruiser for those that want to be seen instead of those who want to drive. If you've got more money than God, then this car is for you. For every one else, it's too much money for too little substance." One thing I really like about the british show is that they have the balls to call a car a waste, or to point out that if you want one of many of the cars they drive, it's not because of the value proposition. but it's because it hits an emotional spot. They way the fat man waxed about the Vanquish made you think it was the best car ever... And it's only a second faster around the track than the evo. Since it's cable, I'm sure that the show will be on a zillion times more before the next one airs. Maybe I'll watch it, but I doubt that I'll go out of my way.... Matt
I'm looking at the US version differently than the Brit original. The REAL Top Gear I watch for entertainment and knowledge, the US version for entertainment only.