• Top Gear producer Andy Wilman quits
    49 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Streecer;47589686] I have absolutely no idea what point you're trying to argue from. Beyond that if we ignore everything he did wrong, he wouldn't have been fired.[/QUOTE] The point being made is that he probably wouldn't have been suspended for a verbal rant alone and we probably wouldn't have even heard of it beyond some hotel guest accounts of Clarkson being noisy in the bar. It's not being argued that he should be allowed to punch somebody and get away with it.
[QUOTE=Snowmew;47589585]That's not the point: This isn't a bank or a law firm where this wouldn't be acceptable, it's an absolutely enormous television production based largely around getting the presenters riled up and having them argue with each other. If he ranted for 40 minutes alone, that shouldn't be a reason to put him on a leave of absence. Such a statement signals to me that they clearly have never watched the show because if they had, it would be obvious that such activity is commonplace. I'm saying nothing about the assault.[/QUOTE] I've watched a lot of the show actually (and a forty minute tirade of verbal abuse isn't commonplace). He should have been put on leave for that because anyone capable of a solid [I]forty minutes[/I] of ranting directed at one person who did so little clearly needs time away from work. For his co-workers sake as much as his own. And obviously the assault changes everything.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/3qHb17q.png[/img] [url]https://twitter.com/RichardHammond/status/591573451397328896[/url] Just in case there was any dispute.
[QUOTE=shozamar;47583746]Of course I know what happened. It had more than enough coverage. It died because Jeremy was a key part of it and he was justly sacked. There was no way the producers could've not sacked him and maintained any credibility or sense of fairness. The fact that his life was really shitty at the time explains his actions but doesn't really justify them.[/QUOTE] Disregard the fact that BBC did it despite Jeremy and the producer made peace with each other and both wanted to work together again... BBC shot itself on the foot.
[QUOTE=Snowmew;47586927]Clearly you have never watched Top Gear. A 40-minute rant is nowhere near a reason to suspend him...[/QUOTE] His rants are hilarious.
Wilman in Top Gear Magazine [QUOTE]"The BBC hasn't just lost a man who can hold viewers’ attention in front of a camera, it’s lost a journalist who could use the discipline of print training to focus on what mattered and what didn't, it’s lost an editorial genius who could look at an existing structure and then smash it up and reshape it in a blaze of light bulb moments. The BBC grown-ups were adamant a woman should be in the line-up. Now, I'm a big, big fan of the Beeb, but, my God, do they stretch your patience when they start “applying their marketing logic”, or to use another word, meddling. Their theory behind a female presenter was that if you want women to watch something, you need women presenting it. The problem was that most of the grown-ups in the BBC management didn't care about the car world, and basically there's this weird logic whereby the less their interest is in the subject, the greater their compulsion becomes to meddle."[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]He said chiefs at the corporation also originally vetoed hiring James May, claiming the three were all ‘middle-class public-schoolish blokes of a similar age’.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=BANNED USER;47583341]Top Gear was like a thoroughbred horse in it's prime, and then all of the sudden the Stable decided it deserved to be glue than win the triple crown because it bit another horses ear. This is also one of the smallest articles I've ever read, it's literally 4 sentences.[/QUOTE] It's also like Patton being pulled from command for slapping a soldier.
[QUOTE=SgtWoodsy;47589805][img]http://i.imgur.com/3qHb17q.png[/img] [url]https://twitter.com/RichardHammond/status/591573451397328896[/url] Just in case there was any dispute.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE][img]http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/04/24/09/27E99F2D00000578-3052014-image-a-3_1429864834616.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Grizz;47590387]Wilman in Top Gear Magazine[/QUOTE] I really don't understand the BBC's fixation with inserting women where they're not needed or wanted. But still, Top Gear will rise again like a phoenix from the ashes, you mark my words.
[QUOTE=Lium;47590577]I really don't understand the BBC's fixation with inserting women where they're not needed or wanted. But still, Top Gear will rise again like a phoenix from the ashes, you mark my words.[/QUOTE] What's wrong with hot women?
[QUOTE=Grizz;47590387]Wilman in Top Gear Magazine[/QUOTE] So basically, bbc went with the "we need more women on it because YES!" Disregard the women that watch it already, like a friend of mine who was extremely sad when she heard that Clarkson got sacked... Then again, Sabine Schmitz could have been fun to have in the show for example. From what I remember, she was pretty fun during the Nurburgring diesel jaguar and ford transit challenge.
[QUOTE=Lium;47590577] But still, Top Gear will rise again like a phoenix from the ashes, you mark my words.[/QUOTE] I think Top Gear is going to come back as a serious consumer motoring show like it used to be again tbh. The director of BBC2/4 has been talking about how she is looking forward to basically reinventing it.
[QUOTE=agentfazexx;47590580]What's wrong with hot women?[/QUOTE] I don't see what relevance that has to this discussion. [QUOTE=Jsm;47590828]I think Top Gear is going to come back as a serious consumer motoring show like it used to be again tbh. The director of BBC2/4 has been talking about how she is looking forward to basically reinventing it.[/QUOTE] By Top Gear I mean new Top Gear, not the Top Gear that the BBC will try and fail to make without the gang. Pretty much no one is interested in a show purely about cars. They're just metal boxes you move around in on.
Wait, is Wilman implying the BBC fired Clarkson to try to work a woman in as a presenter? Like I'd have to see the interview itself, but something is really fucked.
Jeremy, meanwhile, has finally fulfilled his destiny to become [I]'THE MAN WITH THE RUINED FACE'[/I] [img]http://i.imgur.com/3rq7KRU.png[/img] [QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;47590939]Wait, is Wilman implying the BBC fired Clarkson to try to work a woman in as a presenter? Like I'd have to see the interview itself, but something is really fucked.[/QUOTE] I think he was going back to the original line-up.
[QUOTE=Lium;47590888] By Top Gear I mean new Top Gear, not the Top Gear that the BBC will try and fail to make without the gang. Pretty much no one is interested in a show purely about cars. They're just metal boxes you move around in on.[/QUOTE] You should look at fifth gear...
[QUOTE=Jsm;47592129]You should look at fifth gear...[/QUOTE] For what purpose?
[QUOTE=Occlusion;47583297]Clarkson would've snapped eventually. His mum died, he got divorced and then had a cancer scare. If it hadn't been a bad day's filming that pushed him over something else probably would have.[/QUOTE] whoa holy fuck I had no idea about any of this, I thought it was just classic "privileged actor is famous and irreplaceable so they think the get permission to be a dick" but apparently not
[QUOTE=Lium;47592351]For what purpose?[/QUOTE] At how popular it is and how many awards it wins. There is a demand for that sort of program and I really can see the BBC trying to get (back) into it.
Instead of a 100th Top Gear Fracas thread, I'll just post James May's latest (from The Sunday Times) here :v: [QUOTE]There we were, all three of us, on the brink of a new three-year contract to make Top Gear, after which we would definitely chuck it in with dignity and hand the reins to a new generation, assuming we were still alive. There were a few details to resolve about time frames and other mundane stuff, but the groaning draft version of this document was actually sitting on my desk. Nobody yet knows what is going to happen in the future of Top Gear or its three former presenters. That is the honest truth, despite what you may have read elsewhere. No-one has even arrived at a definitive pronunciation of 'fracas' yet, so what chance is there that we'd have rescued our careers? Whatever we do, it will be scrutinised ruthlessly. Our fans feel betrayed and believe a spell has been broken. Our foes are rejoicing at the banality of our demise. If there's a hint of mediocrity in any future endeavour, both parties will feel vindicated. Even if Top Gear is revived in a new format with new hosts and isn't as successful as it once was, that'll be our fault. And if it's better, then we were overdue for retirement anyway. I accept that this is a bit of a hashtag firstworldproblem, but I'm finding it quite difficult to handle. Humility is the key, I think, to coming out of this well.[/QUOTE]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.