Well said Steve Coogan

[Biff]

http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2011/feb/05/top-gear-offensive-steve-coogan

Although I doubt they care, so far up their own arses are they.

[Gattopardo]

Or is there another bandwagon I can jump on, that is a bit late.

[Jaded]

They probably didn't care about it when it was published too.

[Exit Stage Left]

I wonder if his view of Top Gear has been modified by his experiences with his road trip series with Rob Brydon? It had lots of elements in common, a contrived format and a reliance on a two dimensional presentation of the principal's characters. I didn't expect either to be entirely rooted in real life, but I much preferred the Road Trip series.
Steve is also not going to be well disposed to Clarkson, a writer for two Murdoch papers.

[LEE]

I think he summed Top Gear up perfectly.

Time for the BBC to start feeling a bit of shame and responsibility (but of course it makes far too much money for shame and responsibility to get in the way).

What a pity that public-funded TV channels are driven by the same motives as Channel 5 (where I predict Top Gear will end up in 10 years, in the slot preceding "Big Brother" and "My horrible infected Knob" (and hopefully, "Monkey Tennis")).

[TimC]

http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2011/feb/05/top-gear-offensive-steve-coogan

Although I doubt they care, so far up their own arses are they.

They've had three and a half years to digest this, so I expect you can Google up a reaction from them somewhere!

[Exit Stage Left]

Since Coogan wrote that he's got into the business of driving around scenic areas, eating expense account meals and bantering with a middle-aged mate. It's much the same as Top Gear, but with Michael Caine, Roger Moore and Sean Connery imitations.

They may be in Italy but they spend half their time talking about British miscellany. Brydon's adverts for Crunchy Nut Cornflakes and B&Q and wondering if they'd eat Mo Farah's legs if they crashed while they were on their way “to Argentina for a Celebrity Krypton Factor”. Brits abroad then, but Brits abroad have seldom been this funny - or charming.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/europe/italy/10744960/The-Trip-To-Italy-preview-Steve-Coogan-and-Rob-Brydon-eat-their-way-around-Italy.html

[clarion]

And less racism, misogyny and homophobia.

[Andrew]

... but aside from that....

I enjoyed the article. Of course it's easy to point the finger and be critical, accuse of hypocrisy or whatever,  but that doesn't detract from what he actually says. Top Gear IS me pogo-ing at my niece's birthday party. Remember how we cringe at those 60s 'Men Only' programs (and their MG ads - for birds, for fun!), well that's Top Gear that is.   

[LEE]

Since Coogan wrote that he's got into the business of driving around scenic areas, eating expense account meals and bantering with a middle-aged mate. It's much the same as Top Gear.

It's much the same as Top Gear in that it's a TV program, they drive a car, and they talk.  Other than that I can't see any similarities.

The humour isn't at anyone's expense (in fact it's generally self-deprecating) whereas Top Gear is always laughing at someone else, be it cyclists, Mexicans, anyone who thinks speed-limits are valid..etc,

Watching "The Trip" doesn't make me want to bludgeon Richard Hammond to death with Jeremy Clarkson's skull, whereas watching "Top Gear" generally does.

Does eating expense account meals make you a bad person?  Bantering with middle-aged mates?  Driving in Scenic areas?

I've led a shameful life if so.

I think the key point isn't that, it's the casual racism/sexism that's tolerated by the BBC.  Casual racism that wouldn't be accepted if, as Coogan points out, it were targeted at certain other ethnic groups.

[mattc]

eSL is just trolling. But  as Lee points out:
TG = unfunny idiots
Brydon/Coogan = bloody funny

[Exit Stage Left]

When you make anything you become more aware of how it's constructed, so Coogan's view of Top Gear will have evolved with the experience of The Trip in Italy. The matey banter in the studio is an annoying part of the show, which I rarely watch for that reason. None of it is live, so there's no sense in which it's not pre-censored.

The amount of controversy they broadcast is the amount they want in order to keep it on the boil, and I don't feel to the need to feed that controversy. The filmed and edited sequences are at the forefront of that type of presentation, so are interesting to de-construct. But no more interesting than Portillo's Railway Journeys in that sense.

What I really dislike about Top Gear is the three presenter set-up, which has become near universal, infecting Countryfile and Springwatch, although I suppose it stretches back to Blue Peter. It would be nice if someone did 'The Day Today' on that format, although Chris Morris is a lot more controversial than Jezza ever could be, no-one will let him near a studio.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vWHNwmzf1o

[Euan Uzami]

Shame, cos he's a lot better as well

[Asterix, the former Gaul.]

Top gear is a grown up version of watching kids who are a bit up themselves in a playground.  Entertaining in a visceral way relying on the viewer not to engage their brain very often.

[LEE]

When you make anything you become more aware of how it's constructed, so Coogan's view of Top Gear will have evolved with the experience of The Trip in Italy. The matey banter in the studio is an annoying part of the show, which I rarely watch for that reason. None of it is live, so there's no sense in which it's not pre-censored.

The amount of controversy they broadcast is the amount they want in order to keep it on the boil, and I don't feel to the need to feed that controversy. The filmed and edited sequences are at the forefront of that type of presentation, so are interesting to de-construct. But no more interesting than Portillo's Railway Journeys in that sense.

What I really dislike about Top Gear is the three presenter set-up, which has become near universal, infecting Countryfile and Springwatch, although I suppose it stretches back to Blue Peter. It would be nice if someone did 'The Day Today' on that format, although Chris Morris is a lot more controversial than Jezza ever could be, no-one will let him near a studio.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vWHNwmzf1o

On the subject of deconstruction...

A)

When you make anything you become more aware of how it's constructed, so Coogan's view of Top Gear will have evolved with the experience of The Trip in Italy.

Steve Coogan is, and has been for some years, well aware of how TV programs are constructed.  Much of his career has been spent deconstructing TV and making satirical TV programs.
He did work with Chris Morris on "The Day Today" after all.
"Alan Partridge" is entirely a satirical TV and radio show character.
I'm sure there was nothing about the production of Top Gear that left him baffled.

B)

The matey banter in the studio is an annoying part of the show, which I rarely watch for that reason. None of it is live, so there's no sense in which it's not pre-censored.

Yes, it's almost totally scripted and 100% contrived.  I have a feeling it was less so a decade ago.

C)

The amount of controversy they broadcast is the amount they want in order to keep it on the boil, and I don't feel to the need to feed that controversy. The filmed and edited sequences are at the forefront of that type of presentation, so are interesting to de-construct. But no more interesting than Portillo's Railway Journeys in that sense.

Yes,  it's almost totally scripted and 100% contrived.

D)

What I really dislike about Top Gear is the three presenter set-up, which has become near universal, infecting Countryfile and Springwatch, although I suppose it stretches back to Blue Peter. It would be nice if someone did 'The Day Today' on that format, although Chris Morris is a lot more controversial than Jezza ever could be, no-one will let him near a studio.

I don't think you can blame Top Gear for the three presenter set-up, that's Biddy Baxter's fault and, in my opinion, "three" isn't the problem, it's "those three".

I quite like the dynamic of 3 presenters chatting.

Top Gear would be no better with just Clarkson and Hammond.


The great shame is that Clarkson is a genuinely funny writer and that the really old Top Gear shows were simply dreadful and "beige" without his "script". (Think Chris Goffey, Steve Berry and Quentin "TV Presenter? Really?" Wilson)

Shame that Clarkson couldn't reign it in a bit.

[Exit Stage Left]

The three presenter format tends to mean that there's more interaction between the presenters than with 'real people'. I saw Countryfile at work at a hedgelaying competition on Prince Charles' land, and the format put distance between the subject and the viewer, partly that's because of the size of the team and the equipment , it makes people self-conscious.

I did a bit of filming on the day, but that's for a very specialised audience, the subjects themselves, they like a souvenir, but without the flannel, and it's unlikely to interest a general audience.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FskmdJuJjYA


Top Gear is dinosaur television, it's a continuation of the old ways, mainly because of the big audience and the overseas sales. It's also part of the chat-show circuit, people go on it to promote their own product, as Coogan did with Saxondale.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWvWyCfrvDE

I've been very impressed with Guy Martin's presenting style, he relates directly to people. Michael Portillo used to have a distant style which yielded a stilted response, but he's got better, maybe the cameras have got smaller, and are less intimidating.


Top Gear provides steady jobs in an industry that's increasingly casualised, but I prefer the output of nimbler styles of working. Hammond was on the Chris Evans show with Guy Martin, and asked what Guy most liked doing, the answer was truck-fitting. The silence was like sensing the approach of the meteor that saw for the great lizards.

[RJ]

What I really dislike about Top Gear is the three presenter set-up, which has become near universal, infecting Countryfile and Springwatch, although I suppose it stretches back to Blue Peter.

It goes back much further than that. File under tribunes, tribunal, Macbeth, the Trinity, triumvirate etc etc. 

[Exit Stage Left]

I'd rather see a dialogue than banter.

[RJ]

Hurrah for dialectic!

[Exit Stage Left]

Hurrah for dialectic!

That reminds me of the time I spent chatting to Michael E Rosen, now the Professor of Government at Harvard, while waiting for Mike Whittingham, who's now Performance Director at Sport Scotland, to be helicoptered off the mountain on the Vallee Blanche at Chamonix. I don't think we touched on Hegel.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uiWk6IZqwDk

[LEE]

Oh that Michael E Rosen.

[LEE]

Oh that Mike Whittingham.

[LEE]

Anyhoo....enough of name dropping.

It reminded me of this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMuO-8S_0Wg

When will this ancient sketch cease to be topical?

[Exit Stage Left]

Anyhoo....enough of name dropping.

It reminded me of this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMuO-8S_0Wg

When will this ancient sketch cease to be topical?

Well the original is certainly very topical.

Just look around – there’s an awful amount of crap. These decisions are being taken by people who don’t understand comedy but don’t realise that they don’t understand it.” Gilliam added: “The system is so executive-heavy now: there’s an army of compliance cops. Everything has to be pre-digested for the nation by frightened executives who don’t want to lose their jobs. For creative people it’s very, very destructive.” The Pythons didn't just knock the BBC's current output – they admitted some of their own sketches were "crap". Gilliam said: “We could do crap better than anybody else, and get away with it."

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/jun/18/monty-python-bbc-comedy-john-cleese-terry-gilliam-o2

44 years later.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cn8Pua5rhj4