Top Gear...Anyone?!?!

[polak]

Oh yeah. I forgot about that.

[PIMking]

Top Gear wouldn't be the same without Clarkson and the viewership would drop by a ton if he isn't a host.

[M*A*S*H 4077]

Originally Posted by polak

Apparently he punched a producer... LOL

I'm sure if BBC punts Top Gear someone would pick it up in a second. Plus Jeremy owns a large part of the show. If he goes, it goes.

The producer probably asked him to do manual labour

[chid]

Anyone see the Canada episode? I was pretty disappointed. The show does a typically amazing job with the cinematography and the landscape of their usual locations. They seemed to have treated the Canada episode a bit differently, and not in a good way.

[Barnes]

It was filmed at Retallack. I was cat skiing there about a month later. Can't believe no one at the lodge mentioned it.

[Thor]

I loved the Canada episode!

[FlameOn]

Sky has been trying to poach the Top Gear team for years. If BBC kills their golden egg, it'll get picked up in no time likely with almost all of the same people jumping ship.
Top Gear's the only BBC show sold in 214 territories with over 360+ million consistent viewers and is their highest revenue show (over £155 million in revenue). If they killed it completely or if revenue dropped in half by removing Clarkson, well... I don't think their CEO would last long.

Over 200000 people have signed a petition already to have him reinstated and to restart the show... I think the suspension is just a slap on the wrist. If not the CEO is just committing career suicide.

[Jimmy Stang]

Originally Posted by chid

Anyone see the Canada episode? I was pretty disappointed. The show does a typically amazing job with the cinematography and the landscape of their usual locations. They seemed to have treated the Canada episode a bit differently, and not in a good way.

I just saw it last night. I didn't mind it, to be honest. Seemed like the usual sort of segment. It seemed that the weather was quite dim and cloudy as well, which probably limited some of the visuals somewhat.

[Jimmy Stang]

James' short response (short video in link):

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-31834058

"Was it over dinner?" "Ah.... yes."

I love James May's dryness. If anyone hasn't seen "James May's Man Lab" yet, I'd highly recommend it. Full episodes are readily available on YouTube.

[fundamentals]

So apparently they've cancelled the rest of the series now?

http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-31828184

This might actually be the end of Top Gear... on BBC anyway

[polak]

BBC can huff and puff all they want.

It's Top Gear. It pays pretty much all of their bills.

Hell, let them walk. I guarantee whoever picks them up will demand more than 5 episodes a series.

[fundamentals]

Oh, I completely agree. I might almost like it better if they were to leave BBC.

Could you imagine the budget they would probably get (at least for the first season) if they were to jump to a new network? I know the budget of the show is obviously not small but they are always joking about "How the BBC is funded" and stuff like that.

And I can't believe the BBC payed Clarkson so much for the rights to Top Gear. He is their entire show. I'm sure if they booted him the other guys would likely follow suit. BBC's version of Top Gear would be a joke compared to whatever Clarkson, Hammond & May did next. The name is worthless without the guys. IMO anyway

[Locke]

Could you imagine if Top Gear was picked up by HBO and had no censorship and a 'Game of Thrones' level budget....

[Burninator]

I read a couple of opinion pieces on The Guardian calling for Jeremy to retire. Guuuhhh. Why would you even write an article telling readers which direction the show (one of the most popular shows in the world) should be going in? Especially, when it's clear you don't even watch the show!

Top Gear, being so far behind the curve, would only be able to catch up if it undertook a radical rethink of its value system. I suggest an eco-feminist approach.In the first place, they need to incorporate the obvious concerns of the entire industry, to produce cars that get you places without needless waste. It’s not wholemeal and boring.

http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-ra...inist-top-gear
That actually sounds really boring. The Guardian clearly laments that the show is silly and not a rigid boring car show. Like one of the car shows that every country has but no one cares about because they are truly boring and pander to the car industry.

It’s long been clear that Clarkson is either unwilling or unable to accept the limitations placed upon him by mainstream professional broadcasting. He is a popular figure but he is also a liability.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...ing-and-resign
Probably because I am not living in Britain, but I don't get how he is a liability? Liable for bad PR I suppose. I don't see how it is hurting the BBC (apart from Guardian headlines) because they are getting massive ratings and money from him and the show. I bet Clarksons acting out is directly proportional to the bashing he takes in the media.

They better not scuttle those episodes and the show. Unless, like Locke said, HBO picks it up. That would be amazing.

[polak]

Haha someone should show the writer of that article Motortrend on TSN. They'd love it.

What Top Gear has going for is exactly the fact that they're anything but a normal car show. People don't want to see real reviews. They want outlandish characters doing outrageous things in outrageous place with outrageous cars.

[Hack&Lube]

How much did the BBC pay Clarkson for the Top Gear concept?

[fundamentals]

A ton apparently. (£14m)

[Locke]

Originally Posted by fundamentals

A ton apparently. (£14m)

That actually doesnt seem like all that much considering the ridiculous popularity of the show.

[fundamentals]

Originally Posted by Locke

That actually doesnt seem like all that much considering the ridiculous popularity of the show.

I dunno... seems like a huge overpayment to me. Like I said above, I think Clarkson knows that he is the real draw, not the name Top Gear. He has been putting out DVD's for years that are just called "Clarkson: (subtitle)" which are not affiliated with Top Gear at all (I'm fairly certain anyway). And most likely nobody is going to watch BBC's Top Gear without the current crew. When I look at it like that, it looks like Clarkson made out like a bandit in that deal.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by fundamentals

I dunno... seems like a huge overpayment to me. Like I said above, I think Clarkson knows that he is the real draw, not the name Top Gear. He has been putting out DVD's for years that are just called "Clarkson: (subtitle)" which are not affiliated with Top Gear at all (I'm fairly certain anyway). And most likely nobody is going to watch BBC's Top Gear without the current crew. When I look at it like that, it looks like Clarkson made out like a bandit in that deal.

Maybe, but I look at it from a residuals perspective, moving on hes only getting his presenter's fee.

Look at Seinfeld. He is one of the top paid actors in the world per annum and he doesnt do jack because he lives off residuals and royalties whereas Clarkson sold all of that to the BBC especially when you consider the value of the franchise.