I'm a huge fan of British Top Gear who watched the American version for the first time today. You're probably expecting me to talk about how terrible it was, but what was disconcerting wasn't that it was terrible. It was disconcerting in a way that seemed familiar and I finally placed it. You know how Disney takes one of its stars and has them do a perfectly acceptable but utterly soulless version of a pop song. That's American Top Gear.
To illustrate what I'm talking about let me point you to Kid's Incorporated. They would do kid-friendly versions of popular songs. Hearing little kids singing about "Steady rockin' all night long" seems like a bad idea, but I'm not a Disney executive. As you can see from the video the execution isn't bad per se. These are talented kids giving a reasonable performance, but it's just quite obvious that it's derivative.
I'm absolutely willing to buy into the argument that it took Clarkson and the gang years to develop their chemistry, but that's just the point. Why are we trying to have 3 other guys develop chemistry under the same guidelines. Like many Top Gear fans, I really don't give a crap about cars, I just like watching 3 excellent performers work their magic. I know it's all staged and I don't care, I like watching them work. Given this, why do I need to see 3 guys try to do the exact same act when they're not good at it yet. Go do something original and build your chemistry.
I find it particularly troubling that they steal snatches of the same lingo that Clarkson uses. "No drama through the straightaway," etc. Sure that may be common driving parlance, but I don't care about cars, so I've only ever heard that on Top Gear so it sounds stolen. Meanwhile he clearly intentionally avoids other turns of phrase which may have made perfect sense and that seems forced as well. It's a no-win situation for the poor presenters.
All of this is a long way of saying I don't think the American Top Gear guys are bad at their job or that the show is terrible. I just think it's an obviously terrible idea. Like those talented Disney kids, they're just put into a no-win situation. I feel kind of bad for the guys trying to make it work.
Here is the thing, from my point of view. Look at who presents the two shows and you will see one of the big reasons behind that lack of.. ommph. Clarkson is a motoring journalist. He test drives cars and presents motoring TV Shows (As well as some engineering ones). In every way he is a TV personality. While he is an expert on judging the merits of cars and presenting that opinion, he isn't an expert on cars. That can be seen every time the man picks up a hammer. Hammond, is a former radio personality. He LIKES cars, but his motoring experience before Top Gear was driving to work every day. He had a great personality and got on well with Clarkson. May had slightly more experience presenting motoring related shows, having hosted Driven which was a direct competitor to Top Gear pre Reboot, but again, like Clarkson he was an expert about presenting VIEWS on cars, not cars themselves (this has changed over the years with both May and Hammond becoming competent mechanics in their own rights, Clarkson still prefers a hammer and shouting).
ReplyDeleteNow lets look at the Top Gear USA presenters. We have Adam Ferrara, a comedian taking the place of Hammond I guess in this instance. So far so good, but when we look at the other two.... We have Rutledge Wood who is a Automotive ANALYST and Taner Foust who is a professional race car driver! One of the things about the three UK presenters is.. NONE of them can drive! They are all terrible drivers! May is slows (and probably the best driver of the three) and Hammond and Clarkson's only driving talents are hooning around like a couple of teenagers in Daddy's new M3! Both Rutledge and Tanner are experts in CARS. Not presenting, but in actual cars. They KNOW what they are talking about. If I wanted facts, I would go to wikipedia! I want opinion. I want hyperbole, I want and unvarnished look at how *I*, in all my glorious ignorance, would view these cars. I don't want an expert opinion! After season 8, Clarkson put out a call asking "What should this show be about?" my answer then, as it is now is that, if I owned one of these cars, I would NEVER drive it like they do. But I don't, and I can't but I sure as hell WANT to see someone drive their Zonda sideways! I want to know how COOL the cars are, I want to know how comfortable, nice to drive and how much of a berk driving one makes you look. There are a thousand magazines that give the expert opinion, I don't need to see it televised as well.
There is nothing wrong with the format and the presenters are all talented in their own rights, but they are simply the wrong people for the job. Adam is forced to try and carry the audience alone while Rutledge and Tanner give their expert opinions, which I simply don't care about.
Great comment Matt. I honestly have no problem with the presenters or really anything about the show other than the intrinsic question: Why do we need this? What are they giving me that the British version isn't giving me? I have not watched regularly and the episode I watched may have been an early episode, but I couldn't help feeling like I was watching a cover band.
ReplyDeleteMatt, don't mistake the onscreen characters with the 3 guys behind them. All 3 of them are at least competent drivers, their onscreen personas like 'captain slow' are just to add humor and debate.
ReplyDeleteLets clear this up.
ReplyDeleteUK Top Gear > US Top Gear..
who knows maybe after 14 seasons the presenters on US Top Gear will learn to have the flow and comedic abilities as Clarkson, Hammond and May.
For now though, I only see US Top Gear as a boring alternative while waiting for the season 16 of UK's Top Gear to start again.
:)
Agreed. While both shows have clearly staged antics, the British version of Top Gear is so much more crisp and well done. The humor on the US version feels forced. There's a lot to be said for charisma and wit in a show like this, and the US version of the show doesn't seem to have any.
ReplyDeleteI am a long time fan of UK Top Gear and I've been watching the season of US Top Gear with, possibly, a far too critical eye. I find the UK version far more entertaining, but I really need to be careful as a 1 to 1 comparison really doesn't do the show justice. We must understand that when the BBC does a US version of a show they seem to always assume that the US audience has *never seen the UK version*. If you are an avid follower of the UK version of a show you will most likely be disappointed because it was the inherent "Britishness" that in large part made the show what is was. James Bond can't be American, even though we have plenty of American spy movies. The Doctor can't be American, even though we have tons of successful Amercian Sci-Fi shows.
ReplyDeleteAnd, thusly, Top Gear is hard to swallow as an American show. So, when I see it, I just try to mentally change the name and pretend I've never seen the UK version. I think they've done a pretty good job of keeping the challenges US-oriented and they tend to focus on US auto makers (something they should probably stop doing so much). All I'm saying is that my enjoyability goes up when I just chant "It's an American show for an American audience that has never seen Top Gear before" over and over.
Oh, and BTW, I believe, that the character breakdown is:
ReplyDeleteAdam = May (Always gets the crappiest car in any challenge)
Tanner = Hammond (Pretty boy)
Rutledge = Clarkson (Willing to say/do outlandish things and take the abuse for it)
I think the comparisons are shaky, but this seems to be where the US characters are in terms of formula. Adam seems to take the lead role in the studio (like Clarkson), but is always the backwards one (like May) outside the stuido. I certainly hope that they develop their own distinct characters over time.