Top Gear USA

[david.valeri]

My vote is: meh

Cinematography: Shaky video from camera vehicle, shaky video from in-car cameras. Very sub-par for Top Gear in some places but mostly of good quality.

Presenters: Where was the banter? There were a couple zingers here and there, but for the most part it ran like an episode of Fifth Gear with less polish. Only slightly less annoying than Viky's giggling and that bearded buffoon's worthless segments. I expected less fact and more humor.

The interview: You had Buzz Aldrin, I am sure that man has stories out the wazoo. I would have liked to have seen at least one interview question rather than a weak review of the list of his cars.

Commercial breaks: We run a 3 minute piece where the presenters tell you what they think while driving the cars. Then we go to commercial. Then we come back and the voice over recap replays 45 seconds of what they just did before the commercial. Then the presenters stand around in the studio and say the same thing again. I think this crap made Mythbusters unwatchable so I hope it doesn't do the same to Top Gear.


I'm sure they will get better as time goes on. I hope they survive long enough to get comfortable with each other and work out the issues. It probably doesn't help my perception any that I watched the Top Gear episode with Diaz / Cruise and the Senna tribute right before watching the US show.

[Dan133]

The chemistry is missing between the hosts--Tanner Foust is a great driver but is a bit short on personality. The interactions of the hosts seem forced. Hopefully it will get better with time.

[eage8]

yeah... it was actually quite boring.

I don't understand how you can make a segment with a viper and a cobra attack helicopter so boring...

Tanner really doesn't have a stage presence at all.

They also need to spend less time spouting out 0-60 times (ie fifth gear) and more time reviewing the car... or beach invading.

I'd actually rather watch fifth gear.

hopefully they'll rotate some better cast in (UK version wasn't perfect the first season either) and get some chemistry.

[hepcatz]

It certainly has a long way to go to be entertaining. Not a fan of Tanner at all. The original TG wasn't nearly as fun so although possible over time it could get better, my vote is it won't make it. Just like most Brit. shows converted over & redone in the US. A unique car show would have been much better then a rehash.

[earl998]

Man, you guys are harsh. Give it some time. At least it's a show about cars and not another rehab/ half-assed celebrity/ reality show piece of crap. I hope it makes it because we need more car shows not less. JMO. Thanks, Earl

[david.valeri]

The second episode was better. I think it had something to do with Tanner not presenting.

[earl998]

I liked the second episode more also. The ending was classic.

[flohtingPoint]

The show is horrible. The thing that makes Top Gear good is the challenges (did communism make a good car, make a car-boat, build the car rocket, go to the north pole on cars, etc) and this show lacks those.

[defylogik]

Not impressed so far, but getting better. In-car cameras are way too shaky. They need to talk to franklin and get some camera mounts that arent garbage Or at least hang some weights from them to stabilize them.

Overall, it is one of the few car shows on cable, so how can we really complain. It will get better, but it should have been "epic" from the get-go. Literally even if they spend a year perfecting every aspect of it, people would still give it crap.

I'll continue to watch, even though it needs work. What else do we have? Chasing classic cars? Advertiser ridden saturday morning how-to shows?