Jeremy Clarkson suspended

Ishmael wrote: »

Well, I think he has a point because Top Gear was not just three presenters. The original presenters are entertaining in there own way but there was a massive team of people behind them at the BBC who all contributed to the quality of the show. Clarkson etc.. will be starting out with a new team of people and competing with a significantly large proportion of the original people who are very experienced at making Top Gear an entertaining show. The popularity of new Top Gear will rest in the likability of the new presenters and whether they chose to continue the same format or come up with a new one.

The Original presenters obviously will draw a large amount of the original top gear fans to their new show, but it will be short lived if the production quality is poor.

Also, there is nothing to say that both shows will not be good. Both Top Gear with its new presenters and Clarkson's new show could be great.

Indeed, Clarkson acknowledged there were some highly talented people at the BBC in his interview with Chris Evans. However Id make several points to counter
Firstly, given the success of the format at making money, its likely they would have a bigger budget and could well offer those talented people a better deal than the publically funded BBC, including Andy Wilman the producer responsible for the lifting of the shows fortunes over the last 12 years into the global success it is/was.


Secondly, as many of those knocking the show point out, its format is formulaic and easily replicated, its not what anyone would call subtle or sophisticated in its creation. An already successful recipe with most of the main ingredients intact is likely to be a commercial success. Perhaps not as big as it was in its pomp, but even half as successful would be a worthwhile enterprise for all concerned in an increasingly diverse media market place.


Both shows could well be great, absolutely, however the point Im making is that one has the recipe for success and the other HAS to find an alternative format if its going to survive as I cant see them producing it in the current formula without the current incumbents, they have to be demonstrably different to accommodate the changes in society tastes that Brendan mentioned earlier


edit: the word "current" could also be "previous" depending upon your viewpoint I suppose

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Personally I haven't seen Clarkson on anything for yonks, but I take your point that he is appearing somewhere I'm sure.
I still think though that not appearing in the TG format will hasten his demise from prime time TV.
I personally think we have seen the last of him and the other two in any programme of consequence.
However given his popularity amongst a certain type of viewer,I could very well be wrong.

he has been appearing regularly I can assure you, the repeats on TV for one, also the press keep raking this one up, they are loving this story, he is high profile, theres no excuse for his behaviour, the bbc had few options, the only one they could realistically choose was the one that would cost them and how could things ever be the same?, its a story that just keeps on giving from a press point of view, its an easy headline for them.




all celebs on tv have a shelf life, some longer than others, (come in Ant and Dec your time is up)
some get a second bite at the cherry and come back into popularity for a while, that's been happening for years, some of the examples you gave above - Cilla Black and Noel Edmonds are only two of many examples who had their "moment", disappeared and then re-emerged with a new project and its difficult to predict with accuracy who will and who wont do that, fame is an elusive thing.


some disappear and end up doing summer seasons at seaside resorts and pantomime or are reduced to reality tv and guest appearances at local fetes


I get your point of view, but I don't share it regarding the speed of his demise, Clarkson may be many things and may well divide opinions (deliberately and provocatively I reckon) but he attracts viewers and at the moment is a marketable product either as himself, the Grumpy xenophobe/patriot, or as a 'topical journalist/soundbiter on Have I got News for you" or as part of some Top Gear spin off show where the three of them play their characters and create a dysfunctional relationship that viewers seem to like and warm to against a background of flashy cars and slapstick humour. In my view, He's around for a while yet, given its two months on, this thread wont die and he still hasn't committed to a new project yet.

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

I personally think we have seen the last of him and the other two in any programme of consequence.

May has done some pretty interesting niche stuff based around science and engineering for the bbc over the past few years. He's easily the most capable of the three when it comes to fronting a show. It would be a shame if he left the corporation.

Mint Aero wrote: »

Just complied some of Brendans sh*te for the amusement of the hardcore troglodyte clarkson fans

I'll have to congratulate you on your trawling through all posts to get those gems.

Pity you spoiled it by the remark at the end.

Can't you understand that people have different views and that your view whilst perfectly valid,is not the only one out there,as is mine.

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

But you don't deny that you think we are all troglodytes, right? I mean, that's pretty obvious....

Let me google troglodytes Granpa.

Wow....the intellectual arrogance is just outstanding

I'm off to catch the reruns on gold. Then maybe an episode of Men Behaving Badly

londonbus wrote: »

Looks like Clarkson has reflected and manned up:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-32819280

That's a major betrayal of some of those who posted here in his defence, claiming that the fault lay with Oisin Tymon.

jimgoose wrote: »

I will. Diff-lock on, traction-control off. JC is the automotive equivalent of Michael Douglas in "Falling Down", and May is his "Q". Long may they reign. See you on the road.

He heh nice one, raging against the machine, socking it to the man.

Has big appeal to a certain segment of viewers for sure.

Yep, has its followers , in fairness.

Watch your rear view mirror:D

last top gear to air

http://www.rte.ie/ten/news/2015/0610/707083-bbc-unveils-trailer-for-clarksons-last-top-gear/

mad muffin wrote: »

Either the BBC totally screwed the pooch on this one, or. It was Clarkson, May, and Hammond's fiendish plan all along, to get out of doing Top Gear and get an even more lucrative gig with Netflix?

Yesterday's men lads.

Hamster has gotten really old looking.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

What's even more annoying is the smug superior attitude that permeates your posts - that only uncivilised backwards peasants could enjoy such a show! :rolleyes:

Top Gear is a show that appeals to millions of people from all walks of life and backgrounds and one which the BBC still see the value in by their efforts to keep it going in some form.

You don't like the show? That's fair enough.. don't watch it then, but I think you take it far more seriously than most of the viewers you're complaining about TBH - viewers who see it as a bit of car-related entertainment and have the maturity to be able to differentiate between banter and harmless scripted nonsense vs actual offensive commentary.

Sorry K, don't mean to be smug and condescending.

I would be fine with car related 'entertainment' however when it is used as a vehicle(pun unintended) to sound off with offensive actions, comments, contrived situations, then I think most reasonable people would conclude that it crosses a line which in my opinion should not be crossed on a taxpayer subsidised corporation.
Given the tenor of the posts here,I would seriously have doubts about the validity of your last sentence.

I think we have seen the last of Clarkson on any new series on the BBC .