This is my thread
- Thread starter S O F I
- Start date
I'm going to be honest here - I don't watch the show, because for the first part I just don't find cars interesting. And secondly, when I have seen it (my dad watches it), I've always found Clarkson to be a vile, arrogant, annoying individual. Him having made a series of incredibly racist comments never surprised me in the slightest, because every time I have seen the show, he's made a disparaging comment about a celebrity, group of people or a mean-spirited joke about a current news event, etc etc.
His entire understanding of "humour" involves shitting on other people. Whether it's poor people, gay people, disabled people, ethnic minorities, Clarkson and his ass-licking cronies seem to think it's OK to lay into them. How hilarious! The rich white people make fun of everyone else! It sickened me every time I saw it, and Clarkson writing an equally racist column for a right wing newspaper (it was either The Sun or the Daily Mail) was the icing on the privileged establishment cake.
The fact that we have a petition where seemingly hundreds of thousands of people are upset that a vile piece of shit like him got fired for physically attacking another person is the kind of stuff that makes me weep for humanity. It's enabling some of the worst traits of humanity, for what reason? Because he presents a TV show that you enjoy watching? Have none of these cretins stopped for 10 seconds to think about how they might feel if it was their brother, or son, or partner that got slogged in the face and had to go to hospital?
Regardless, the brand and show is bigger than the individual - everybody needs to remember that. If the BBC hire the right person, the show can become even more successful. I hope they do find the right person, and somebody better. They have plenty of experience doing exactly that. The other huge BBC show (and one I actually do watch) that gets syndicated worldwide is Doctor Who. People thought it wouldn't survive in the 80's after Tom Baker (4th Doctor) left, who was arguably the biggest star of any BBC show, ever. And they thought the same when David Tennant (10th Doctor) left. In both instances, the show actually got even bigger with the actors that succeeded them (Peter Davison as the 5th Doctor, Matt Smith as the 11th Doctor). So the BBC knows better than anyone how to replace their stars.
The idea that Clarkson, May and Hammond are the only people that can present a successful motoring show is nonsense. There are people that can do a better job, and I would be willing to bet that the BBC is reviewing it's shortlist right now and there are some incredible presenters on that list who could work wonders with the show.
His entire understanding of "humour" involves shitting on other people. Whether it's poor people, gay people, disabled people, ethnic minorities, Clarkson and his ass-licking cronies seem to think it's OK to lay into them. How hilarious! The rich white people make fun of everyone else! It sickened me every time I saw it, and Clarkson writing an equally racist column for a right wing newspaper (it was either The Sun or the Daily Mail) was the icing on the privileged establishment cake.
The fact that we have a petition where seemingly hundreds of thousands of people are upset that a vile piece of shit like him got fired for physically attacking another person is the kind of stuff that makes me weep for humanity. It's enabling some of the worst traits of humanity, for what reason? Because he presents a TV show that you enjoy watching? Have none of these cretins stopped for 10 seconds to think about how they might feel if it was their brother, or son, or partner that got slogged in the face and had to go to hospital?
Regardless, the brand and show is bigger than the individual - everybody needs to remember that. If the BBC hire the right person, the show can become even more successful. I hope they do find the right person, and somebody better. They have plenty of experience doing exactly that. The other huge BBC show (and one I actually do watch) that gets syndicated worldwide is Doctor Who. People thought it wouldn't survive in the 80's after Tom Baker (4th Doctor) left, who was arguably the biggest star of any BBC show, ever. And they thought the same when David Tennant (10th Doctor) left. In both instances, the show actually got even bigger with the actors that succeeded them (Peter Davison as the 5th Doctor, Matt Smith as the 11th Doctor). So the BBC knows better than anyone how to replace their stars.
The idea that Clarkson, May and Hammond are the only people that can present a successful motoring show is nonsense. There are people that can do a better job, and I would be willing to bet that the BBC is reviewing it's shortlist right now and there are some incredible presenters on that list who could work wonders with the show.
Well, I might be in the minority of TG fans that thinks the Clarkson firing was justified. It's hard to condone violence/assault. I just see it as Clarkson forcing them to do this. TG didn't want to do this. Despite his vulgar demeanor, he was a fan-favorite. Everyone loves the person that says what they can't say, even though they're thinking it. I'm talking about the jokes he makes and not the racist stuff he says.
I'm sure any successful show can hire "better" stars to host or act in it, but it doesn't mean the show will remain successful. I mentioned Chris Harris because he's just as knowledgeable and technical as James May, but doesn't have Hammond or Clarkson's humor. He would be a fine replacement. The thing is, I don't think the other two will stick around. And if you bring in quality like Harris, that's just one host. There are still two other gaping holes to fill and it's tough to find quality replacements for something that isn't actually acting. You wouldn't find the smartest host, necessarily because the show isn't really all about informing as much as it is about entertaining. The three had chemistry that actually made the show entertaining. If you bring three more people, it takes time to reestablish the faith in the viewership, and more importantly, the chemistry between the three hosts. And that's where the problem lies. It's an investment that will take time and if it doesn't pan out, that's a lot of money spent by the BBC and more time for viewers to grow bored and move on.
We'll see what happens. As a viewer, my loyalty isn't to the network or even the TG brand. I liked the content which was created as a result of the three guys that were hosting it. You can ship off any three retards to Burma or Africa to build a bridge. Doesn't mean it'll be entertaining. And if you don't ship people off to other countries for "challenges," then you've kind of changed the format of Top Gear that has been a staple for over a decade.
I want to see what happens with the Stars in the Reasonably Priced Cars thing. If all three are gone and replaced with new hosts, I doubt they reel in talent like Will Smith or Matt Leblanc. I doubt they bring in big name British talent either, like that ginger that played Ron in Harry Potter or members of ACDC. They'll bring in irrelevant shit like Eddie? Sheeran. Or people that are actually involved in motorsports like Lewis Hamilton or Ricciardo. If the big names show up, it'll be out of pity.
I'm sure any successful show can hire "better" stars to host or act in it, but it doesn't mean the show will remain successful. I mentioned Chris Harris because he's just as knowledgeable and technical as James May, but doesn't have Hammond or Clarkson's humor. He would be a fine replacement. The thing is, I don't think the other two will stick around. And if you bring in quality like Harris, that's just one host. There are still two other gaping holes to fill and it's tough to find quality replacements for something that isn't actually acting. You wouldn't find the smartest host, necessarily because the show isn't really all about informing as much as it is about entertaining. The three had chemistry that actually made the show entertaining. If you bring three more people, it takes time to reestablish the faith in the viewership, and more importantly, the chemistry between the three hosts. And that's where the problem lies. It's an investment that will take time and if it doesn't pan out, that's a lot of money spent by the BBC and more time for viewers to grow bored and move on.
We'll see what happens. As a viewer, my loyalty isn't to the network or even the TG brand. I liked the content which was created as a result of the three guys that were hosting it. You can ship off any three retards to Burma or Africa to build a bridge. Doesn't mean it'll be entertaining. And if you don't ship people off to other countries for "challenges," then you've kind of changed the format of Top Gear that has been a staple for over a decade.
I want to see what happens with the Stars in the Reasonably Priced Cars thing. If all three are gone and replaced with new hosts, I doubt they reel in talent like Will Smith or Matt Leblanc. I doubt they bring in big name British talent either, like that ginger that played Ron in Harry Potter or members of ACDC. They'll bring in irrelevant shit like Eddie? Sheeran. Or people that are actually involved in motorsports like Lewis Hamilton or Ricciardo. If the big names show up, it'll be out of pity.
So, I said, it would be romantic if all of us could sit with our loved ones and gaze at the night sky full of trillion points of light. To come up with stories of horror and wonder based on the lights. It would improve our imagination as well.
That's when my father blocked me on Line app. It's my fault, for insisting on disturbing his status quo. An ailing man with decades of neoliberal indoctrination can only take so much of denial of his existence.
The ball is in his court, as they say.
That's when my father blocked me on Line app. It's my fault, for insisting on disturbing his status quo. An ailing man with decades of neoliberal indoctrination can only take so much of denial of his existence.
The ball is in his court, as they say.
I get that, and I'm not after a review show. But it was too staged for my liking. I try to ignore it and enjoy the entertainment, but I can't. It's the same thing that makes me hate action films. The lack of realism.
As for the other comments above - I don't care to type too much... but...
I don't believe Clarkson is racist or a homophobe or a hater of the planet. He is frustrated by modern society, which I am sure we would all agree is too politically correct. He isn't shitting on people. He is addressing the balance and pushing the boundaries as far as he possibly can. Again, I'm sure we'd agree that he oversteps the mark looking for cheap humour.
He actually does a lot for the environment and is a big fan of wildlife... but that is kept quiet as it doesn't fit with his image.
As James May said, Clarkson, Hammond and May come as a package. That is their selling point. They will find plenty more work and will get a very lucrative contract elsewhere. It won't be Top Gear though, as the BBC bought the rights back from Clarkson.
As for Top Gear. I agree with Coonie. It will die.
Yeah, I think the labels are painted with broad strokes. He says some not-politically-correct stuff, but I can appreciate and respect that. From anyone, not just a host I like on a TV show I like. It's one thing to crack a joke about a Mercedes (or Audi?) GPS having coordinates set for Poland when you buy the car, or whatever his joke was. And it's another thing to just straight up targeting people with bigoted remarks. To me, that's just a loud mouth vs a bigot. And both types of remarks could get his ass kicked if said to the wrong person, but I wouldn't call him an anti-Semite or anything for his remarks on the Burma incident.
You mentioned the "staged" aspect of the show. I think I'm too big of a fan boy so I overlook it. I know it's definitely there, but I can live with it. I do notice it from time to time, but I'm OK with it. When the whole license plate issue was going on in Argentina, I gave him the benefit of the doubt. If he hinted at it, he did a good job of being subtle for those who weren't familiar with the Falkland issue. But after this whole thing and his laundry list of inappropriate remarks, I would say it was 50/50 Clarkson stuck that license plate on purpose. Or I should say 40/40 he did or did not intentionally do it. Maybe 20% a producer or someone on the crew or something thought up of it subtly.
You mentioned the "staged" aspect of the show. I think I'm too big of a fan boy so I overlook it. I know it's definitely there, but I can live with it. I do notice it from time to time, but I'm OK with it. When the whole license plate issue was going on in Argentina, I gave him the benefit of the doubt. If he hinted at it, he did a good job of being subtle for those who weren't familiar with the Falkland issue. But after this whole thing and his laundry list of inappropriate remarks, I would say it was 50/50 Clarkson stuck that license plate on purpose. Or I should say 40/40 he did or did not intentionally do it. Maybe 20% a producer or someone on the crew or something thought up of it subtly.
Yeah. I was unsure about that too.
Regarding the Falklands or whatever Argentina call it. It's almost uninhabitable. As far as I am concerned it's not worth fighting over. If it has oil, again.... That is a commercial issue. It's not like the money from it will ever reach the people. BP will gain most from it.
Donate
Any donations will be used to help pay for the site costs, and anything donated above will be donated to C-Dub's son on behalf of this community.
Members online
No members online now.