I think one thing that worked against it was the extremely long and detailed press coverage of the build-up, so you kept going, I've already seen that bit already, and that, and that, in trailers, newspaper site videos etc. Hopefully they managed to keep something back as a surprise for later episodes.
It had a feeling to me like they had reverse engineered the old shows to find out what all the essential TG elements were, made a big list, then tried to shoehorn as many in to the new show segments, thinking that must guarantee success, without stepping back to see if it actually scanned as a decent bit of tv.
As I don't think they will be able to prevent Evans from being his annoying self, I think there is a way round that by allowing Matt to effectively be the viewers' mouthpiece, to roll his eyes and do knowing looks to camera, in acknowledgement of what we are thinking. At least that way, we wouldn't get the feeling that they knew better about what we should be liking.
I noticed in the paper this morning that there was a more positive reaction to the online BBC3 show that followed it, but I didn't see that. It had two of the other presenters on it. If it does well, there is always the possibility of transferring some of that over to the main show instead, in fact they may be using it as a kind of feeder-show for future presenters.
Mirror saying that those ratings were the worst in 10 years
(30-05-2016 15:54 )HannahsPet Wrote: [ -> ]Mirror saying that those ratings were the worst in 10 years
evans saying they was better than last series...be at least one less viewer next week
FACT...u ginger cnut
Evans gave an interview at the weekend & said keeping basically the same format was deliberate because having changed all the presenting team it was felt that they needed to keep with the same format or it would be too much change all at once.
It's such a high profile show that it was inevitable people would leap to instant judgement. Give it chance to settle down would be my advice & resist the temptation to compare it with the previous incarnation.
I think they need to drop the ginger one...fast otherwise it will sink much faster than the Titanic
(30-05-2016 19:30 )babelover48 Wrote: [ -> ]I think they need to drop the ginger one...fast otherwise it will sink much faster than the Titanic
Well given that they've filmed all the action for the series that won't happen!
I didn't intend watching it, partly because Top Gear, for me, is C, H & M, but also because I can't stand Chris Evans, however, curiosity got the better of me.
Evans - OK, I was never going to like him, but, even by his standards, he was awful, which is a bit of a problem when you're the host of the show!
Joey, sorry LeBlanc - best thing on it, by far, and the best part of the show being the Nomad film.
Star in a... rubbish, even worse than normal.
Studio bits - cringeworthy bad!
Biggest problem, however, was the bullshit we got from the 'powers that be' at the BBC, not to mention the PC brigade etc. about the 'sacking' et al being the ideal opportunity to reinvent TG, and bring in a new audience, but they come back with a VERY poor imitation of the 'real thing'!
Unless Evans is sacked (or he stomps off in a huff), and is replaced by LeBlanc, I think my curiosity has been satisfied!
(30-05-2016 19:29 )SecretAgent Wrote: [ -> ][Snip] resist the temptation to compare it with the previous incarnation.
Yes but by sticking closely to the format and stylings aren't they inviting the comparisons to the old show themselves?
Question is does Evans have any new ideas for it? ... Besides making it more like TFI that is.
(30-05-2016 22:44 )Censorship :-( Wrote: [ -> ]Joey, sorry LeBlanc - best thing on it, by far, and the best part of the show being the Nomad film.
Am I missing something here? The bloke was as dull as ditch water, mogadon man incarnate.
(30-05-2016 15:54 )HannahsPet Wrote: [ -> ]Mirror saying that those ratings were the worst in 10 years
Telly audiences have been declining for years - that's why catch-up figures are included later to give a "truer" picture, although without data from every house in Britain, it's never going to be all that accurate.
If I were to make a complaint, it would be with the main film - what was the point?
Circles Wrote:It had a feeling to me like they had reverse engineered the old shows to find out what all the essential TG elements were, made a big list, then tried to shoehorn as many in to the new show segments, thinking that must guarantee success, without stepping back to see if it actually scanned as a decent bit of tv.
This is a very good point, and ties in with the usual critical mis-judgement about the old show - the silly challenges almost always had some good reason for them, such as testing a new car. The Reliant race didn't work because LeBlanc either had no knowledge or inclination to fix the car, and because the Reliants were super-imposed. Maybe this was more honest than "we found these cars ourselves" but it makes the presenter look lazy or stupid.
The Jeep/Land Rover race was also futile - UK v USA, but what for? This really was mucking about in cars, something the CHM days really didn't do.
OK, maybe that's a long complaint. But apart from that...
