Is it me, or does it seem we might be enjoying it more than them?
At least C/H/M seemed like they were enjoying it and having a laugh too. The current presenters only seemed to lighten up a bit as they were saying goodnight to end the show. Relieved it was over I expect.
I watched it and thought it was just ok I don't rate any of the presenters and there is far too much forced comedy in it and it just comes across as strained, I think the celebrity section should be dumped as that was also a bit cringey and for me it has had its day.
I agree with he 'strained' comment, I was going to use 'awkward'.
That Alfa looked brilliant fun though, I couldn't see properly but do you think he damaged the A post / roof when he did the windscreen ? If not it was close.
At the time, it certainly looked like the top of the A pillar and the area around where it meets the roof, was damaged.Originally Posted by JasonM
Yes, damage was shown more clearly in the "Extra" show.
It's Sunday night fodder, it's fine if you don't over analyse, ignoring the "race" element I thought the 911 v Curryinacan feature was fun this week.
imho it benefits from the lack of Chris Evans and think they'll get better-maybe Rory might even get to drive something worth more than a leggy taxi with the other two in the future.
Indeed, he has been promised a drive in the new Twingo
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Thought it was very good last night. Interesting cars and entertaining features. Thought the presenters were fine - even Rory Reid (perhaps because he wasn't in it much.
Can't see how MLB could have been 43 seconds faster on that downhill though?
The only explanation is that CH being a racer could not stop himself from braking just before entering the corner, as a reflex before accelerating throughout... except he couldn't and therefore was hit by a massive time penalty every time.
Shaping up quite nicely I think and the reviews, road trips etc are on a par with some the "old" Top Gear. The cinematography has been superb, just as we've come to expect from the Beeb. The celebrity bits, and to a lesser extent the other studio segments, of any Top Gear (inc TGT) have always been the weakest part and invariably I skip them or pick up the iPad for 5 minutes. No change there. Still not sure about Rory, can't we have Jenson in lieu?
I'm not convinced it's all a bit contrived to be like old top gear...However i like the hosts better than the last series, I'll carry on watching and see how i feel , still a bit sat on the fence tbh
Sent from my Lenovo YT3-X50F using Tapatalk
Tbh, I think it worked quite well with having as much of MLB and CH in the episode as it did. I feel like Rory is already 'the one we give everyday cars to review to make it feel like Top Gear of old' and the literal third wheel of challenges.
Despite the fact his taxi won which was quite amusing
Sent from my Lenovo YT3-X50F using Tapatalk
Frankly, Episode 2 was a lot better than any of the episodes in The Grand Tour.
First off, TG is still about cars, not the presenters egos (I'm excluding May in that as I think he is the least egotistical of the three).
The Alfa review was superb, the supercar challenge was great, I like Chris Harris a lot, and I think MLB and RR do a solid and improving job.
My wife (who had given up on TG under CMH) and my nine year old son thoroughly enjoyed it too - which is as it should be.
So clever my foot fell off.
and Chris Evans era TG
Andy
Wanted - Damasko DC57
Really enjoyed last nights episode and I cannot say that for ANY of the latter TG stuff or Grand Tour. Seemed more natural and the presenters jelled much better. Also thought all the segments were well done and fun/interesting. Thought The first episode was really poor so am hoping it carries on like this!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Nope. Note to Rory, don't clap yourself. And the Chris bloke, very fast etc etc but has an irritating manner, plus whenever I see him I can't get the image of Mr Bean in the mini out of my head
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Thought Chris Harris trying to slide the Alfa through the cutout was ridiculous. The fact that he kept trying damaging the car in the process was cringeworthy.
Would not be impressed were I the manufacturer, especially given the damage.
The rest of the programme was ok though I still preferred CMH as presenters.
I thought episode 2 was much better than the first.
I'm hoping it's going to get better and they'll become a bit more comfortable in each other's company, unlike McLaren and Honda haha
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I think the fact that he presented them with a 10 minute advertisement and glowing endorsement on a show that will be seen by tens of millions around the world, will help soften the blow.
Indeed. TG has always had a soft spot for Alfas but concluding that it was better than the new M3 is worth a lot more than a few cars.
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
I was thinking the same.
How much does a 30s car advert cost to make these days?
Even if they'd totalled a £50k car (and that's retail!), it sounds like a bargain for a positive 10 minute piece on a car show that will be seen by millions of petrolheads.
Agreed i think it's great coverage for the brand
Sent from my Lenovo YT3-X50F using Tapatalk
In Richard Porter's book he says that TG would usually be given pre-production or test mule cars for the stunts. They can't be sold anyway and are usually scrapped so the manufacturers pretty much let them do what they want with it. The Renault Twingo, which hit just about everything at Belfast port before ending in the sea, comes to mind.
In your opinion. Which is just as valid as those that think it's still like a painful sixth form project.
To be fair, this episode was okay *because* I skipped the studio sections. Some aspects of the Lamborghini / 911 piece went on a bit too long but not bad. The Alfa bit wasn't bad, not quite up to old TG standards but okay.
I think they just need to do away with the studio aspect full stop. It's horrible.
Of course it's my opinion. Not sure what point you are making?
It's an interesting idea to do away with the studio section - you might be right. It is difficult to see what it is adding, other than somewhere to have a celeb chat and house an audience.
So clever my foot fell off.
The interviews are cringe worthy so getting shot of the studio may well improve things
Sent from my Lenovo YT3-X50F using Tapatalk
It was referencing the fact that you continually present your viewpoint *on this topic* as though it is inarguable and the Single Version Of Truth. It seems at odds to your generally balanced demeanour that you have such a negative hard-on for Grand Tour and a positive chubby for all things Beeb.
No offence intended, just an observation :)
I watched it last night & thought it was ok...far better without Evans.
It's not doing anything for me. I think it might be getting worse!
I enjoyed the second episode. Harris and Le Blanc are both good. Rory would be more suited to fifth gear. I like the idea of replacing him with Jenson and then I think we would have a strong trio that would start to gel more naturally.
It does sometimes feel like an American show with (obviously the American presenting) the transitions which doesn't feel particularly natural. They need to improve this.
I rather like that suggestion, I do quite like Chris and Matt correcting each other's English
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by Saint-Just; 14th March 2017 at 15:59.
Definitely only my views. I do have a bit of an idea about television and film production having spent my first career working at the major studios - Elstree, Pinewood, Shepperton etc, as well as ITV Network and other media companies in production and management.
I wanted to like The Grand Tour, and I consider TG in it's heyday (North Pole Challenge, Toyboata etc) as some of the best TV ever produced. I even bought Amazon Prime specifically to watch TGT (although to be fair The Man in the High Castle fully justifies the whole cost on its own).
I also definitely don't have a chubby for all things Beeb - worked for them a few times, wasn't anxious to repeat the experience (although I do respect their news and current affairs, along with the Natural History Unit at Bristol).
My main problem with TGT is that it brings nothing new, no inventiveness to a formula that had already got very tired by the time it was finally killed off following a row over steak. It might cost many times more, but that money simply isn't there on the screen. The idea of a tent moving around the world has been utterly squandered - I was expecting to their segments to really reflect the country they were in on that week, but they don't. "The American" is terrible, and Dead Celebrity gag quickly became moronic. TGT is a vehicle for presenters, whereas TG is more a vehicle for, well, cars, as well as daft entertainment. I can barely remember any car review from TGT (seems only interested in hypercars these days), whereas I greatly enjoyed the Alfa Guilia segment.
And I'm quite happy to do without the casual racism and juvenile attempts to be controversial that seemed to become another TG trademark in the latter years.
All just my opinion, and I hope that CMH - who I do think can be a great presenting team - learn from Season One and make improvements for Season Two - as TG appear to have done.
So clever my foot fell off.
Fair enough - I may well have misrepresented you in which case I apologise. I suspect we largely agree on what it *should* be like but as neither have delivered to their potential yet, we need to get through the growing pains first.
Youre definitely right about the 'lost budget' for GT - I mean, the production values are obviously higher as everything looks so much better, but the amount of waste annoys me. I'm sure it's the same for most TV but having seen first hand the GT filming and what was involved for 5 seconds of screen time, it beggars belief. The opening sequence to the GT episodes where the three of them would drive the cars to set is pointless and a completely missed opportunity.
Mind you TG is no different - the Vegas hotel room start to the challenge added nothing and would no doubt have cost a fair chunk of time and money to set up. Why!
There's room for a pared down version of both. I share your view that the final iteration needs to be better, but for me the GT lot are still way more enjoyable to just be on screen. When they're not driving the TG lot are genuinely cringeworthy to watch.
You know what you're doing - can't you edit an episode of GT and TG together to form one good car show, removing the poor links and peurile features? :)
I think the problem is that there has always been a paired down more car focussed TV show called Fifth Gear. Been around in various formats and on various channels for years but has never really worked. They have most recently tried to start copying TG with their shenanigans but with no budget and presenters with no personality or real chemistry. Shame as I have always sort of liked it, just never quite delivered.
Thank you for your interesting response.
It's interesting that you think TGT looks better - I have been genuinely surprised that the production values of TGT aren't much, much higher than they are, given the budget. Most of the filming and editing techniques are simply a port over from those developed over the past decade on TG, and to me, the show "feels" smaller scale than TG was. Remember the Reliant Shuttle, the American Road Trip, and many of the earlier road trips, the simply superb Arctic Expedition? - all far more ambitious and technically demanding than anything I have yet seen on TGT.
What have you seen first hand? I'm genuinely interested.
TG had a budget of around 650k per episode, TGT is apparently £4mill. I cannot conceive of how they are spending that on what they are producing - even given the global tent and the logistics behind that. The CMH Wilman pay packets must huge.
I agree, "The Hangover" start in Vegas was pretty lame and ill-judged.
The Grand Tour presenting team are much more experienced and have worked together for fifteen years. It took them at least three seasons to properly gel though. Initially they weren't great, and I knew one of the show's producers quite well at that time and they had concerns on many levels. The TG team are novices and new. It will take some time, if it happens.
Editing both together is an interesting (!) idea - I am sure someone with plenty of time on their hands will come up with something on Youtube soon...
So clever my foot fell off.
I must admit I was really referring to the basics of how the shots are put together, the post processing and the outright 'style for styles sake' bits (like a slo mo wheel in the rain or a neon light-painted car in a dark room etc). It might just be because it's 4K and they throw in more shots that take advantage of that fact. The opening sequence to the first show was lovely (if wallet-achingly expensive).
Those type of shots, while present in the last Clarkson era TG, seem to have been dropped for Neue TG. I don't know whether GT took the After Effects licence key with them :) It's a small detail and unnecessary of course, but they co tribute to a 'polished' feel that is currently lacking on TG.
Just while they were filming a couple of episodes here. It's a small town so you can't help but be involved. For the opening shot (title sequence) they went past my house - the logistics involved in setting up, filming, directing traffic, doing a number of takes, support crews, motor homes... all for something that you knew was going to be on screen for milliseconds if at all. Repeat over and over for the rest of the locally filmed content and it's staggering. Like the amount they paid local boats to be part of the stunts or the money they chucked into the lifeboat coffers or at the borough council.What have you seen first hand? I'm genuinely interested.
I think TV production is wasteful, it just seems conspicuously so here :)
TFB, a lot of the production cost goes into filming in in 4K, which was an Amazon requirement. Or so I am told.
Hmmm... it probably is an Amazon requirement, but again it's difficult to see just how much impact this would have on cost.
Granted my knowledge is somewhat out of date now.
Camera technology costs have fallen dramatically in real terms over the past decade or so - at the point I was leaving the industry about twelve years ago they were already going off a cliff as the move away from tape (BetaSP and DigiBeta for broadcast) was changing to HD and SSD tech. I was also at the tail end of film - mostly Super16mm for TV and 35mm for film - and that has almost entirely been replaced now with digital.
We were mostly editing on Avid - which was expensive (and a Macbook can now do most of that), and/or early Final Cut Pro. SFX stuff was done on a range of specialist software in the early part of my career - from Flame through to Inferno, then on to Lightworks, Studio 4D, Maya, AfterEffects and others. (Right back in the early days I have fond memories of Video Toaster and Silicon Graphics and Amiga workstations... as used on Babylon 5 and others :-) )
Most of the 4k and movie stuff is now done on these kinds of cameras - http://eu.red.com/ which although they appear expensive, and you need to double the price when you add a lens, are still much cheaper comparatively than Arriflex or Panaflex cameras were, and a full DigiBeta location kit.
Still, they must be spending the money somehow. Clarkson's Rose wine budget perhaps?
So clever my foot fell off.
The cost of 4K isn't that big a deal these days, unless they're being shafted by their post houses (entirely possible). In the real world though render times aren't the issue they used to be and a lot of cameras shoot at least 4K out of the box. A single 2013 Mac Pro will happily edit, grade and render effects for a show like GT / TG in 4K without breaking a sweat or adding any real time to the schedule. I often make films in 4K for HD delivery just to keep some flexibility to re-frame shots, and bump them down to HD late in the process, since it makes no real difference to the editing. You need a bit more storage of course but the cost of this has fallen as the resolution has increased. They may of course be being charged a premium for doing post in 4K, and not using old outmoded equipment, but these days it's basically just flicking a switch, and it's a drop in the ocean compared to their other costs.
The one exception would be CGI sequences, where render times are still significant, and you would have to consider how long things will take and cost in 4K. But for this you'll be dealing with a giant render farm, and these programmes don't use CGI in any case.
Last edited by Itsguy; 14th March 2017 at 17:22.
I think TG needs to tone down on the music and constantly changing camera angles; to the point where you don't actually see anything.
Sometimes a bit of raw footage can make more of an impact, especially when you want to actually hear the car. I very much enjoyed this, for eg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-8uAM4LWX0
I like it, shame the old one went but nothing that will change that and the interim only went to prove its not a simple solution to replicate. Happy with all so far and Ill be watching weekly albeit on catch up on the train from here on in
RIAC
I'm still not sure what Rory's role is?
Clearly CH and MLB can drive and all Rory did was sit on a high chair.
Maybe that's why they gave Rory a slow taxi in episode 1, so he didn't injure himself??
I think JB would be a much better replacement??
I don't mind that Rory might not be a great driver, but it's that accent that kills me. What the hell is it?
Definitely Landan, I forgot he was on gadget geeks, that was a great program (Emma Barnett was one of the presenters and a real babe!)
JB is an undoubted great driver, why wouldn't he be, but a good presenter? I'm not so sure.
I warmed to Rory a bit more this latest episode, he's kind of a grower.
I think there is a lot of over analysing going on here TBH.
TG has set off on it's journey on the back of what has gone before - it's better than it was but it is still a bit of a bad tribute band in my eyes.
GT set off on it's journey on the back of an abrupt end of the then 3 presenters BBC series of long standing. I had a bigger budget than the previous life and it was produced for the wider global media platform from the off. Not perfect - Series 2 will build on what has gone before I am sure.
Stuff should be 4k these days, budget rumours will remain so - what is clear is the Amazon one is larger and less restrictive than TG.
Roll on round 2.
When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........
I think he would be great. He's very natural and relaxed in front of the camera. Nothing seems forced in his delivery.
You might be right, maybe my thinking has been influenced by those tragic Santander adverts he's appeared in!
Just watched episode 2 this morning and thought it was great. I wasn't convinced by episode 1, but the humour between the presenters seemed better this time round and the road trip was entertaining.
I even enjoyed the studio guest bit, but only because I found David Tennant funny and engaging, whereas it felt cringy with James McEvoy. That section is always going to be hit and miss dependant on the guest who's in, but that's no different from back in the days of Clarkson and might be why it got canned in The Grand Tour.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
