Top Gear US is currently rockin' a 4.1 on the IMDb. While it is a shallow echo of the original and brilliant UK series, it is by no means deserving of such disrespect.
The first season of the show aired Nov. 2010-Jan. 2011. I did not watch nor hear of it until May of 2011; I do live in America, but I'm just not a big watcher of the History Channel. I'd heard there was going to be a US remake, but it took so long and internet news kept changing and contradicting itself, I just forgot about it and assumed it would never happen, and if it did, it certainly wouldn't be good (especially if it was on NBC).
So I sought out that first season a few months later, just to see how it went. The results? Not terrible. But there is room for improvement. And the show obviously knows it.
The pilot is terrible. There is no chemistry between the hosts, the scripted, heavily-edited patter is insulting, and nobody seems to know anything about cars. But, what the hell, the season was 10 episodes, so I stuck with it. That first show featured a field piece that was kind of fun, so maybe there'd be more of those? As the season went on, the field pieces got better, and the chemistry of the hosts improved. The show stopped insulting my intelligence, and I was genuinely entertained watching the guys hang out, and wished the show would rely more on that, instead of the still-obviously-scripted (but by now less frequent) studio throwbacks. Clearly the producers adapted as the show went on, and I've heard it said on these boards that the first UK series wasn't very good, either.
The hosts have their own issues: Adam Ferrara seems to know nothing about cars, frequently picking New York City staples for off-road tests, when any moron with a junior high school degree would know you don't drive a Coup de Ville through the woods. He's a New York boy and made no effort to educate himself. On the flip side, Rutledge Wood actually did work with cars prior, on the Speed Channel, and while he knows his techs and specs, he's still a good ole boy from the country at heart, and as such, made the exact same "homer" mistakes as Ferrara. Wood and Ferrara's ignorance wasn't endearing, as on the UK show when James May or Jeremy Clarkson screw something up... it's frustrating, because this is a car show, and I should not know more than the hosts.
Tanner Foust is obviously a car guy, he's worked on movies, he's a professional drift racer. He makes for a charismatic host, but he needs somebody to play off of, and the show doesn't offer that. On the UK series, there's a clear leader... Clarkson runs things and May and Richard Hammond are allowed to chime in. Here we have three really polite personable guys who have no strong opinions or, if they do, are not allowed to express them.
Episode 9 features an Alaskan Adventure, showcasing "the great American pick-up trucks." And while I respect that's the theme, a 4th truck-- a Toyota-- was brought as a back-up in case one of the American cars broke down. There was no effort made to talk about the Toyota, to discuss its pros and cons, to compare it to domestic trucks. I felt like I was watching a propaganda film for the US auto industry, and that made me want to rate the show a lot lower than I did. The entire point is to talk about ALL cars, not just what's convenient. And to be honest and objective, and not suck up to companies who might be advertisers.
If you're interested in the concept, or just a fan of cars, or Top Gear, stick with the UK show. But the first season of the US version was an experiment, an audition, a first attempt. It's enough to make me want to watch a season 2, and hope they replace either Ferrara or Wood, preferably with someone who can teach me something about cars. How about a female? Would that be so bad? 60% is passing and I give it a 6/10. But that's still a D. Stop giving them copy and let them talk about cars, and if they can't do that, they don't need to be on this show.
The first season of the show aired Nov. 2010-Jan. 2011. I did not watch nor hear of it until May of 2011; I do live in America, but I'm just not a big watcher of the History Channel. I'd heard there was going to be a US remake, but it took so long and internet news kept changing and contradicting itself, I just forgot about it and assumed it would never happen, and if it did, it certainly wouldn't be good (especially if it was on NBC).
So I sought out that first season a few months later, just to see how it went. The results? Not terrible. But there is room for improvement. And the show obviously knows it.
The pilot is terrible. There is no chemistry between the hosts, the scripted, heavily-edited patter is insulting, and nobody seems to know anything about cars. But, what the hell, the season was 10 episodes, so I stuck with it. That first show featured a field piece that was kind of fun, so maybe there'd be more of those? As the season went on, the field pieces got better, and the chemistry of the hosts improved. The show stopped insulting my intelligence, and I was genuinely entertained watching the guys hang out, and wished the show would rely more on that, instead of the still-obviously-scripted (but by now less frequent) studio throwbacks. Clearly the producers adapted as the show went on, and I've heard it said on these boards that the first UK series wasn't very good, either.
The hosts have their own issues: Adam Ferrara seems to know nothing about cars, frequently picking New York City staples for off-road tests, when any moron with a junior high school degree would know you don't drive a Coup de Ville through the woods. He's a New York boy and made no effort to educate himself. On the flip side, Rutledge Wood actually did work with cars prior, on the Speed Channel, and while he knows his techs and specs, he's still a good ole boy from the country at heart, and as such, made the exact same "homer" mistakes as Ferrara. Wood and Ferrara's ignorance wasn't endearing, as on the UK show when James May or Jeremy Clarkson screw something up... it's frustrating, because this is a car show, and I should not know more than the hosts.
Tanner Foust is obviously a car guy, he's worked on movies, he's a professional drift racer. He makes for a charismatic host, but he needs somebody to play off of, and the show doesn't offer that. On the UK series, there's a clear leader... Clarkson runs things and May and Richard Hammond are allowed to chime in. Here we have three really polite personable guys who have no strong opinions or, if they do, are not allowed to express them.
Episode 9 features an Alaskan Adventure, showcasing "the great American pick-up trucks." And while I respect that's the theme, a 4th truck-- a Toyota-- was brought as a back-up in case one of the American cars broke down. There was no effort made to talk about the Toyota, to discuss its pros and cons, to compare it to domestic trucks. I felt like I was watching a propaganda film for the US auto industry, and that made me want to rate the show a lot lower than I did. The entire point is to talk about ALL cars, not just what's convenient. And to be honest and objective, and not suck up to companies who might be advertisers.
If you're interested in the concept, or just a fan of cars, or Top Gear, stick with the UK show. But the first season of the US version was an experiment, an audition, a first attempt. It's enough to make me want to watch a season 2, and hope they replace either Ferrara or Wood, preferably with someone who can teach me something about cars. How about a female? Would that be so bad? 60% is passing and I give it a 6/10. But that's still a D. Stop giving them copy and let them talk about cars, and if they can't do that, they don't need to be on this show.