Top Gear America Review – I Watch the First Three Episodes

Top Gear America hosts

Every car buff I know watches Top Gear almost religiously. When rumor of an American version of the show was first brought to light, everybody I talked to assumed that it’s going to be terrible. Phrases such as “poorly-executed ripoff,” “sacrilege,” and “shameless capitalism” were often used to describe what the American version would be. Those are some pretty harsh assumptions, and I can’t say I wasn’t in the same boat. But after months of back-and-forth with details, the American version of Top Gear was official. Hosts Tanner Foust, Adam Ferrara, and Rutledge Wood took on the spotlight roles, and the show will first premiere on the History Channel on November 21, 2010.

Viper Cobra chase Top Gear AmericaHistory Channel was kind enough to send me the rough cuts for the first three episodes of Top Gear America. After watching them with an open mind, I’m happy to say it’s pretty damn good. Initially, I was afraid that the show would attempt to be just like the British Top Gear, copying the host’s styles and mannerisms. That’s what Top Gear Australia did, and it turned out to be awful. Fortunately, Tanner, Adam, and Rutledge have their own personalities and provide a unique atmosphere. They’re a different kind of funny and charming, and a bit more in-your-face, as Americans tend to be.

In fact, the show overall is more aggressive and brash, and I like that. It’s also very proudly American. The first episode features a Dodge Viper, with which Tanner tears up the pavement. Then, in typical Top Gear fassion, the car is chased by a Cobra attack helicopter through a small town in Georgia. I won’t ruin it for you though, be sure to check out the premier on November 21.

The format is nearly identical to the British show, as expected. They have the car reviews, the challenges, our own Stig, a Power Lap board, and even the “Star in a Reasonably Priced Car” segment, but we call it “Big Star, Small Car.” It’s important to keep in mind that the show isn’t copying the other Top Gear…it is Top Gear. It’s just the American version. One reason it’s particularly nice to have a version based here in the States is that the theme will be more relevant to us. Prices are given in dollars instead of pounds, all the cars shown are available here, and all the places they travel will be more recognizable. In fact one of the segments in the third episode was shot about an hour from where I live.

After the first show airs, be sure to come back here and let us know what you thought. And even if you don’t like the first episode, don’t give up. I think it gets better with each episode.

Also make sure to enter the Top Gear Prize Pack Contest we have going on right now.


Categories:: Car NewsCar Opinions


  • Raeed

    looks cool! i guess i would be wrong then…

    • Ryan

      From the unbiased view of a Canadian fan: I think that viewers need to give the show a chance to develop into its own style and flow. Top Gear UK (which I watch religiously as much as the next gearhead), has had years to refine its brilliant style. Jeremy, Richard and James have had many years presenting the show together and have developed a bond that comes across fantastically on camera. I'm sure with time and more experience together, the guys on Top Gear USA will also develop a comfortable, fun bond on camera that will be as appealing (in a different way) as the way the Top Gear UK guys present. Also, if the current producers find that the current writers are not providing them with material that's engaging to the audience, maybe in possible future seasons they'll employ new writers; writers who are wittier and provide better material for the hosts.

      Anyone who is a true fan of Top Gear and adventurous car shows should give this show a chance with an open mind. If you've ever seen really early episodes of Top Gear it honestly wasn't that good. It has grown into a world-class show that holds a special place in all our hearts.

      • Jeff in SF

        Agreed. I've watched the first three, and while these guys just don't have the chemistry and enthusiasm that the Brits do, I have to remember that you have to start somewhere. The subject matter is good, and they've done some fun things on the show. As Mr. Burdick pointed out, it's nice to see prices in USD for cars that are available here as well. I'll give them the first season to smooth out their delivery and grab my interest, but I'm not giving up my weekly dose of the Brit (when it comes back next season, that is!).

  • Chester O'Malle

    I am really NOT looking forward to this version. Give me the original any day, whether the cars are available here or not.

    Where else do you get to watch three British blokes with decent teeth on one screen? So what if it took me 10 minutes to recognize the Mayor of London, Boris Whatever. The segment was over by then, anyhow.

    If I want to watch three slouchbums drift corners, I can go to the mall and spit on 20 of them. Assuming I have my wheelchair fully charged and ready to go.

  • http://www.uselessfacts.8k.com Gyro231995

    I just watched it, and I am impressed. A few issues, though. It was poorly scripted, the interview was short and awkward, and stage looks like the Brit version only smaller and much worse. But, above all, the biggest fault was that it ended. I loved it. If you hate it, watch the 2002 Top Gear UK first episode and compare them.

    One major issue, though; Mercedes Benz is rolling ads on it and even sponsoring it, which means that if the gang reviews an M-B, even the ML 350, it is automatically PERFECT.

    • http://www.automoblog.net/ Chris Burdick

      Yup, not sure about them being sponsored by MB, that's got to be a conflict of interest. I guess we'll see.

  • cam

    I just watched episode 1. It was horrible. It was shameful to the original. It was so scripted, so diluted, and oozed of true American capitalism. It was just one big, poorly executed advertisement. I'll never lay eyes on it again. Oh, and Tanner can surely drive, but he's a HORRIBLE presenter. They should make him be the stig and keep his mouth shut.

    • http://www.automoblog.net/ Chris Burdick

      How do you mean it's an advertisement? It's no different in that sense than Top Gear UK.

      • Jeff in SF

        I agree, but the irreverence that seems to be part of the British crew's personae masks that really well. They'll bash anything (well, I can't imagine Jeremy ever completely panning an Astin), whether or not they're a sponsor, or such is the conclusion that our suspension of disbelief will lead us to. I'm still giving these guys a newbie break, but they don't quite have that reputation for independence…not yet, anyway.

        • Don Quigley

          The difference between the UK Top Gear and the American Top Gear is that the BBC is a government funded channel. The original plays with no advertisements. The presenters can be as unbiased as they would like. I have read things that say the presenters on American Top Gear will be unbiased as well, but there has to be a slight motivation not to completely bash a car. I do think the show is good at the core and like the previous guys said, the original UK Top Gears were a little akward at first too.

  • ryan

    Just saw the first episode as well. And for the most part I agree that it wasn't the best. I will watch it again and again but I most defiantly prefer the english one. The cars were cool. The driving was cool. I like that the prices are in dollars and all the cars are available here. BUT, I feel like the presenters are terribly uncomfortable in front of the camera. I feel like they're still trying too hard to be there english counter parts. If you have never seen top gear before and you like cars. Then you will prolly love this show. But as an avid fan of top gear on BBC I just won't be able to get fully behind this series. But I will still watch it lol.

  • thomrud

    Just watched the first episode and it sucked! The great dynamic between the hosts in the U.K. version just isn't there in the American counterpart. The insights into how the cars performed were lame and totally scripted by bland writers. I remember Adam Corolla and/or Leno were originally going to be a part of this project–I only wish they were, then it might be entertaining to watch. Instead, it's just a giant disappointment. Give me the U.K. version any day, can't wait for the next one on BBC America!

  • http://www.automoblog.net/ Chris Burdick

    Ouch, tough crowd.

    Give it a chance – I think the third episode is the best of the three. Keep watching and come back here to let us know what you think.

  • David Schulz

    I think the main thing that the show is lacking is personality. You need someone like Clarkson who has a larger than life personality and a true knowledge of the history of cars. Leno would have been great, but I doubt he would stoop down to the level of a car show on the History Channel. Rutledge Wood had the most personality, but I see him as the goof guy like James May. I just have my doubts whether Tanner Foust and Adam Ferrara have the personality to carry this show. It's a tough slot to fill, but you need a big personalities to make this work, Bam Margera, Rob Dyrdek & Travis Pastrana are all types of guys that come to mind. Maybe even throw a Nascar driver in there just to make it interesting.

    • Jeff in SF

      Ferrara I actually liked. He's got a bit of gritty New Yorker that comes through and gives him some personality. Foust is flat as a Veyron in a corner, and so far my jury is still out on Wood. He seems a bit forced in his delivery, like he's trying to be the class clown but just can't quite get the timing right. That may come with experience though. If they can replace Foust with someone who has a personality that isn't made of wood, I think the show would take a giant step in the right direction.

  • yazied

    well,

    what made top gear in the firset case is the hosts,,

    clarkson is amazing with giving reviews .. also May and Hammond,,,

    top gear UK does have a huge budget,,

    last night's eposide of top gear usa showed some slacking,, i.e the cameras crazy shaking in the lambo race,, top gear uk drove a bugatti and the cameras inside it were so stable even wit 267 mph !!

    it could be worse for top gear usa,, but i would go with top gear uk though.

  • Chester O'Malle

    Well, I watched this episode, or rather in parts as I drifted thru channels and as surmised it didn't capture me. Maybe it has a chance but some aspects it needs are 1) better video editing (hats off to the UK version which is as glossy as high art) 2) chemistry between the 3 faces but perhaps its because they all look like babies (give me some more maturity) 3) less obvious canned audience reactions and 4) Stig don't need his own screen in the background; it's annoying. Unless Stig really IS Michael Schumacher under the helmet, then he could do ANYthing.

  • Jim

    What a piece of crap. It was as boring as watching milk curdle. Three completely boring guys, like college geeks with no sense of humor or wit between the three of them. Prediction: Dead show walking.

  • john bevill

    it was ok. i'm looking foward to seeing if they make any changes to improve it. my first thoughts of the show while watching were the hosts just don't cut it. i feel like they tried to be their british counter parts rather then just be themselves. no one is going to be able to pull it off like hammond,clarkson,and may. the new hosts alos seem very alkward in front of camera and have very little personality.

  • http://www.automoblog.net/ Chris Burdick

    Again, I really thought the third episode was the best of the three, which will also (hopefully) take care of some of the gripes I'm reading here. I'm interested to hear what you all think after watching a few more episodes.

    Also be sure to enter the Top Gear Prize Pack contest: http://www.automoblog.net/2010/11/12/contest-win-

  • ryan

    Ya I can't wait for the next couple episodes. I will def give this show a chance. But I think were all expecting too much from top gear america. We turn to it on the tv and are expecting.. Top gear UK.. But its not. So naturally we are instantly disappointed. But look at the bright side. No more stupid alfa romeo's and dumb "england only" cars that we will never see or have a chance to buy in the episodes. And no more british slang that we don't understand. "Bonnet, boot, anorax, quid" lol

  • originaltopgearfan

    I'm sure it will get better with age but it's not wine man. It is a fast paced car show for guys or at least it was supposed to be. I mean really they compared three Lamborghinis against each other. Heaven forbid they compare cars from different manufacturers. Don't wana piss off Lambo they might never lend us their car again…. I really hope that it gets better by the 3rd episode as you said Chris. And to Gyro231995 I did see the first 2002 Top Gear UK and it was a lot better than The US 1st episode. At least the hosts had chemistry or was it better writers I'm not sure. Even the fat guy who talked about used cars was better than any of the three US Hosts. Even the hosts of the Australian one has chemistry. They complemented each other they had specific roles and they kept up with it. On screen chemistry between the hosts and good writing can forgive a lot of the short comings of a tv show. I really hope that the shows producers wake up and get better writers and maybe change a couple of the hosts. I would keep Tanner because he is a decent driver. I would like to see Adam come back from the NBC Top Gear Pilot. At least he has some interview skills. Maybe its a dumb idea but Top Gear + Man Show. What do you think guys?

    • http://www.automoblog.net/ Chris Burdick

      It does, I assure you. Especially by the third, you'll see them start to interact with each other more and I think it works out.

      I like Tanner and I like Rutledge, but we haven't really had much time with Adam yet. I don't like Adam Corolla, so I wouldn't be a fan of him on the show.

  • http://www.uselessfacts.8k.com Gyro231995

    You've got to be glad to see them try. Unlike the BBC, the History channel has limited funds because it is private. They're taking a HUGE leap of faith especally because the trailers earlier in the deckade sparked little interest. And did anyone see that cheesy moving Stig in the background?

    • originaltopgearfan

      I totally give them an A for effort but I think a show like Top Gear is a great match to the BBC since they are a state run company and does not have to answer to advertisers like the History Channel.

      What if Top Gear US have to give a very bad review of the new E class or something and that show was sponsored by lets say BMW. Is that fare? Can we really trust Top Gear US to give us a honest non bias opinion on anything since they have advertisers to satisfy.

      And yes History channel has very limited resources but their other shows have better camera work especially in car camera footage. Look at the in cab footage on Ice Road Truckers and compare to the in car footage on the Lambos in Top Gear. The truckers are drivng on "ICE" and they shake less than the in car footage in a Lambo. I just feel they should have done more pre and post production work on the show before they aired it.

  • Eric

    It is true that TG American version will never compare to the UK one. The UK one almost immediately developed into something truly special, mostly due do the presenters chemistry, which never can be mirrored. So, I tried not to compare the US version to the UK version to judge it on its own merits as best I could. I was very skeptical but pleasantly surprised, there were some weak glimmers of chemistry and wit hiding in the poor scripting. So I'm going to give it a chance through season one and see if it evolves a little bit. I just don't think it's fair to compare it to the UK version because through blind luck, careful planning or both they have achieved perfection. I think public funding has helped Uk version a lot. I think the US version is going to suffer greatly from bias and special interests/sponsors. I don't think you guys should be so quick to dismiss it though, it was only the first episode and even though Tanner may not have facial expressions he can drive like a beast.

  • Matt Barney

    I had very low expectations going into the first episode and it pretty much played out how I thought. The hosts will have a hard time living up to the chemistry and comedy that Clarkson, May, and Hammond continue to give us. The segment with the viper felt outdated to me. The lambo segment was a bit better but i thought they could have done a more exciting race than a standing one mile sprint. With the set design, lap time leader boards, and format basically the same it felt a little bit like a cheap knock off you would buy on canal street. I may just be spoiled by the brilliance which is Britain's top Gear but we have a long way to go to fill there shoes.

  • http://www.topgear.com Franklin

    Wow, amazingly bad. It was hard to watch, mainly the really poor choice of presenters. Three young goofs, talking heads really, do they have any credentials at all? Surely selected out of a casting call in L.A. We turned it off half way through. Will not watch again…

  • Matt Barney

    @Franklin. Wood is a racing analyst with speed channel, ferrara is just a comedian/actor with no real automotive background from what I know. Now tanner foust has the best qualifications of the three to be hosting top gear. He has hosted several shows on the SPEED network and has competed in Tons of rally and drift races with a good degree of success as well as been in many movies as a stunt driver. Foust brings the trio from bad to mediocre but like I previously stated, they have a long way to go. Wish them luck as they will need it if they want to get picked up for a second season

  • John

    I'm giving it a chance, but the first episode was BLAND! I agree, the scripting was pretty poor, and I'm sure Dodge just loved it every time Foust said hte Viper was "Dangerous". Tanner foust just doesn't have much of a personality, nor does his dossier impress me even though he is clearly impressed with himself. He just doesn't seem like he's the joking around type. Tanner, Lighten up!!! I guess a drift background IS good for the standard Top Gear smoking tires bit. Rutledge Wood is generally a goofball on Speed. He can be funny once he loosens up, which I'm sure he will. I just really really really hope they avoid totally Rednecking it up. I'm not sure about Ferrara. They just clearly look like three guys thrown together that don't know each other very well. The banter looked forced, however I'm sure that will come. I remind myself that the three Brits are journalists and well established broadcast personalities. Our crew, well Experienced, but I wouldn't call them "established" just yet.

    Personally my choice for host would have been Tommy Kendall instead of Ferrara. He'd be perfect for Top Gear IMHO. Hilariously funny, knowledgeable and a far more accomplished both as a driver and car show host than Foust, but Tommy doesn't work cheap and he still does a good bit of race commentary. What will take some getting used to is the Sunshine! It's ALWAYS gloomy on the original unless they are out of Britain. I just can't see thee three replicating episodes like The Vietnam or Trans Africa episodes. Oh, and the shaky camera footage in the lambo was from the wasted tires on Tanner's car. He was complaining about the vibration.

  • Ben

    The problem that I see is that everyone is judging TG-American as if it's in direct competition with its European father. It's ludicrous to expect it to be that good in it's first episode–or even its first season.

    It takes time for these things to mature. And if it continues past this season, there will probably be host changes, and it will get better. It won't be what the British version is, and aside from the set and some of the camera work, I don't know that they should want to be.

  • Matt Barney

    I would say it is impossible not to compare the two. The america version forces you to right off the bat with the opening theme song taken from its british counterpart and like everybody mentioned above, set design, segments, and the overall presentation. Thats where I believe the biggest mistake has come. They need to do somthing different to break the mold otherwise they will continue to get theese negative comparisons.

  • Tom

    I'm still out on this version.. The helicopter idea was boring and they had to go the speed limit in town.. of course the chopper will win. The Lambo part was more interesting, but Tanner is just not entertaining.

  • Anthony (London, UK)

    I saw the first episode of the US version and sadly felt the same disappointment as many have commented on already. The script was more than a little wooden, the hosts were bland and seemed to try too hard. And the things they did were second rate attempts to recreate the UK version with American attitude. It really shouldn't be compared to the UK version but when the show starts with the same sound track, has the same set and a similar format, it is hard not to. I grew up with Top Gear and remember the days when the show was not particularly entertaining and definitely not as popular. The UK version now has the stigma of a pure entertainment show that just so happens to include cars. And it took a very long time to get there. The 3 hosts do compliment each other now though it wasn't always like that. Starting life as a car consumer show, it is nothing like that today.

    When the Australians attempted to recreate Top Gear down-under, it's blandness might have had other channels rethinking any attempt to produce their own contextualised Top Gear. So when I saw that the US had made one, I was intreged as to why. But the thing that really baffles me is how the american tv channels feel they need to buy into franchises rather than do some creative thought and make it original. It is a testament to how good british tv production is when you think that Pop Idol, The Office and now Top Gear are all original british shows that travelled across the pond. What I don't understand is how a country that boasts hollywood and every tv channel creating every kind of show possible does not have a set of producers and writers who can create something original to compete with the UK's version or not. It doesn't have to be a contest. It might not work, but at least it could never be accused of not being original. I guess that takes time and effort and does not realise the quick buck which I assume is the intention of all franchised tv shows.

  • John W.

    I just watched the first episode.

    The new American Top Gear SUCK!!!!

    They need a Host for Christs sake, someone who knows cars, can drive AND interview a guest.

    THIS CAST SUCKS !!!

    Tanner Foust can drive, but THIS CAST SUCKS !!!

    I dont care how much they had to pay him Jay Leno should have been hired.

    But I read that He turned them down because he was afraid they wouldnt let him give honest reviews of the cars tested, because they wouldnt want him to offend possible American car companies which would hurt advertising.

    Maybe they could put a clause in his contract, GUARANTYING that he can give ANY review he wants to ANY car ???

  • Steve B

    Wow there's some harsh comments here. I'm quite suprised given that this was the first episode. As some others have said, I think if you watch this expecting it to be like the current UK version you are guaranteed to be disapointed. I'll admit I didn't really enjoy the first episode but given time it could become good.

    If you really want to draw a comparison between the UK and US shows try watching the first episode of the revived Top Gear from 2002. Or if you really want to see the first ever episode you could try and find the original which dates back to the 1970's!!

  • http://Www.mikeskaggs.com Michael Skaggs

    It was TERRIBLE! Tanner is a douchebag and all three hosts are hopelessly mis- cast. Why do we need an American version of top gear anyway? The BBC version is perfection and I get BBC USA.

  • yazied

    I wish they used an american car rather than the suzuki,,

    they could use a ford focus or somethin

  • Srt4

    Lame not worth the time just another bs car show give me the bbc version anyday

  • Patrick

    I just finished watching the second episode and other than great cars I'm unmoved. If a twelve year old had NEVER seen the BBC version he might like this one.

    My biggest issues:

    1) Tanner…ugh! I tried to watch other shows featuring Tanner and he just can't host. He's dry, and not in that funny British way, and comedic timing is far beyond his reach. The only show in which he comes across as a human, and not an automaton, is Battle of the Supercars and even there he has occasional moments of complete disconnection. He can drift, he can drive, but he can't host and Supercars Exposed should have been a warning sign to Top Gear producers as should his 'joke' in this episode about Mitsubishi, a great plane they built and method of war (kamikaze) that Mitsubishi had nothing to do with but cost many soldiers very dear lives. That he even said it shows a lack of historical literacy and a disconnected understanding of what he was inferring about the men who died and Mitsubishi as a whole.

    2) Adam Ferrara, while having a colorful accent, fails to produce that regional dialectical affectation typical of New Yorkers and Jerseyboys. Put him in a NYC taxi and let him scream at other drivers and maybe he'll remember what it means to emote.

    3) Rutledge Rutledge Rutledge…seems to have a grasp of the fact that the audience wants to be entertained but, again, delivery is canned and flat with no feeling. He was doing 160 on loose dirt in a 180k Aston and his excitement absolutely failed to come across in any palatable way.

    Sadly for these three hosts and the writer/producers of TG USA the presenters on TG UK can impart more meaning in one sentence and import more inflection in one word than these three can convey in an entire show.

    I have one suggestion besides History Channel running BBC TG instead: Since TG UK loved smashing caravans I think TG USA should smash a Prius every time a guest driver (Dominic Monahan) says they own one. This is a car show for car guys/girls not the Greenie channel.

    Luckily I have a DVR and a volume knob and I can skip them and just watch…the cars.

    • Patrick

      Watched the third episode last night. Better, not much better, but seeing improvement with some truly funny moments.

      I really do want this show and the BBC version to continue succeeding! Ferrara was funny except during the interview. Maybe they should get Mike Rowe to just do the interviews…or the Stig.

      Tanner came out of his shell a bit…or allowed himself some opinion despite his racing sponsors from his other job. God forbid he piss them off to show he's having fun doing something else.

      All in all…enjoyable and a small glimmer of hope.

    • balto

      Hey buddy… first off, don't try to use vocabulary that you can neither handle nor employ properly. You just come across as nothing more than an idiot with a thesaurus. And give 'em a break eh? It's embarrassing. Secondly, these things take time. Wait out the entire season before you dismiss it completely. Yes our friends across the pond made a masterpiece, but they have had ample time to hone their craft and develop the chemistry that makes the UK version what it is today. Of course it isn't perfect after the two episodes you've seen. Lighten up.

      • Patrick

        A personal attack was necessary balto? I am terribly sorry you found my post difficult to comprehend. I mentioned nothing about chemistry so you must not have read it and dismissed it at the first Palinite 'big fancy word' problem.

        I, instead, spoke to items that can't easily be rectified by a full season. Having just finished the most recent episode I will say (in simple words for some): Tanner did make me laugh during the Raptor drive and the video really made me want one but the Automobile magazine article (on the Raptor) had more life. The other segments were better but felt cut short/edited of full potential. Rutledge looked scared to death during the interview but at least they had a car guy driving this week.

  • Underhill

    I too loved the original but I have to say, you guys are off the rails.

    I've watched every Top Gear episode since 2002 and I have to say, this is no worse than the earlier years and in some ways better. It took years for Top Gear UK to find the right mix of talent too. Anyone remember the chubby guy from first season of "The New Top Gear". James May was brought in because he was terrible.

    The show needs work but comparing it to other shows on cable, it has to rank near the top. And the chemistry will come as these guys get more comfortable with one another. The only question is weather these 3 can get it together or if one or more need replacing…

  • jim

    i have watched parts of the first 3 episodes and i got to say it is shit. un like the UK TG amazing

    Its just America trying to say they know some thing about cars and want to make money of it, with putting ass little in as posiable greedey americans at there best

    second look were a merica is with there auto industry no were. you have Goverment Moters now. they have done the some with there cars make them as cheep as posiable and sell the for alot

    US cars = shity old design and as much litters with no power and no handeling and all plastic interiors

    its just one giant joke Just like the US and please dont take up hours on History chanel

  • http://www.ijdmtoy.com cAr lEd

    this show is very nice, I have been watching it from the very first episode.

    I am a big fan of History Channel!

  • Phil

    As a long-time expatriate Brit who has only seen TG on BBC America and who loves the show as both entertainment and as a source of nostalgia for the old country, I was excited at the prospect of an american version. I have to say that I am disappointed. I don't come with any pre-judgements about the hosts as I have never heard of any of them. Tanner and Adam seem to have no personality at all although Rutledge seems to at least want to say something unscripted. I don't know if I could ever really enjoy this version but that may be more to do with the idea that I would much rather watch F1 racing that Nascar and that I think it is more exciting to coax HP from a small engine than to just make bigger blocks.

    But I won't give up. I'll keep watching and feeling very European and superior and hope that some chemistry and/or humor develops between these three bland personalities.

  • Thirstybuck

    I’m a Yank.

    Top Gear BBC is my fav car show.

    Top Gear USA is the most insufferable car show ever to be pick up and broadcast. Tanner Foust is barely acceptable and the other two put together appear to have the intellectual capacity of a Buick Roadmaster. “Huhhuhhh. This carr is faaast. A V12 that can peel out in the dirt? No waaaay! And it has got buttons that I can push.”

    I’m embarrassed that my country produces such filth (but not surprised).

    Carry on Top Gear BBC.

  • Aidan UK

    As an Englishman i would just like to point out that our version is popular due to CHEMISTRY between the presenters. Like James May "they bereft of the eight-year inheritance during which we have carefully cultivated our mutual loathing of each other". They all knew each other years before the show.

  • Aidan UK

    As an Englishman i would just like to point out that our version is popular due to CHEMISTRY between the presenters. Like James May “they bereft of the eight-year inheritance during which we have carefully cultivated our mutual loathing of each other”. They all knew each other years before the show.

  • Ryo

    I agree with what most are saying and just give it some time.

    One this is for sure is that the 3 hosts needs acting lessons. Then you need better writers and more comedy.

    Cussing all the time is not the way to be funny. These guys and the writers needs to sit down and watch every episode of the UK version and really work on the acting chemistry between the hosts.

    The UK version is very polished, it is hilariously funny, and the hosts have great, believable acting. And yes, in the UK version, they are acting. If you've see some of the out takes, you immediately know they are 'reading' lines from a script. I suggest spending more on the budget for some good, funny writers.

    Other then that, the technical aspect and look of the show (technically) is nearly identical to the UK one.

  • Dennis

    As much as i wanted to enjoy TG US, I am sad to say, that it was crap. The show lacks any originality and looks like a cheap ripoff the original TG UK. The hosts are not as memorable (not to mention suck at acting), the scripts are lame (the whole show feels scripted). The challange where the hosts tried to outrun a helicopter was just ridiculous. The hosts, acting like total ass-clowns, don’t care of the outcome.

    Have you ever watched YouTube parodies of TopGear (UK)? That’s exactly how TG US feels like. 3 hosts (only worse), same stig (only fatter), same cars (not as nicely shot), same studio (but not as pretty), same challanges (only more biased)… etc.

    Also, the last few episodes were all about trucks (no super cars, no sports cars, no luxury cars). Just trucks. And ofcourse they are: Ford, Chevy, Dodge. Somehow Chevy always wins (even when the challange is obviously unfinished).

    Overall – VERY disapointing. I’d rather watch other people create parodies on YouTube, at least those are funny most of the time.

Share with your friends










Submit