Reboot of the Rebooted Top Gear - Season 24

I did not enjoy Season 23, and The Grand Tour resurrected a lot of the magic of the old Top Gear. The reboot of the reboot managed to resurrect some of the old formula to good effect. It got rid of the rally cross, and brought back the old lap; albeit with an "everyday" sports car in the form of the Toyota 86. Matt le Blanc is an excellent anchor - and channels the James May weirdness in bringing heavy machinery for amusement. There are some crazy challenges - not as off beat as Clarkson shows - but still interesting - such as the taxi challenge in Kazakstan and playing Pac Man.  Extra Gear continued and brought a lot more behind the scenes views - which greatly increased my appreciation on what it takes to actually film an episode of Top Gear. 

All in all, Season 24 of Top Gear manages to resurrect the show - and it is more of a driving, car show than 3 blokes having fun. It's more balanced from the absurdities of the Clarkson era; a whole lot better than Season 23 - so there are signs of hope once more.

Amazon Video

It has been just over 3 months since the global launch of Amazon Video; and I have been a subscriber since then - initially to watch The Grand Tour - but there have been other things that have kept me paying. 

I have mostly been watching TV series but have also watched a few movies - even though I find that selection rather meagre. At least in SA. One of the interesting experiences was to see the difference in content between South Africa and Reunion - some content I had downloaded on my phone disappeared, while I had access to other content. 

I also find it strange that some of Amazon's own content is not immediately available - even if it is for an additional cost. Manchester by the Sea is the example that comes to mind, but there are other series that I have heard of but not seen on Amazon. I expect that will change over time - or at least I hope so.

 Technically, I have had few issues with streaming HD content on what is still a fairly slow 4 Mbps ADSL line - and that says a lot for Amazon's streaming codecs. I would prefer if my Nvidia Shield TV cached or otherwise downloaded content that is in my queue - but except for a few occasions, haven't had cause to complain.

The Grand Tour

Take the recipe of Top Gear (before the relaunch in 2016), remove the annoying celebrity interviews, add even better production quality (I didn't think it was possible for a car show), and you have The Grand Tour. 

There is not much new - and in fact, the segments that are frankly not needed. There is no need to have a chat sideline in "The Conversation Street" - the in-between segment banter is sufficient. "Celebrity Brain Crash", which replaced the celebrity interviews and instead manages to kill off interviewees in weird accidents is getting boring and nonsensical. 

The stand out is off course the cars and the fantastic test drive scenarios. Some segments - such as the Jordanian Special Forces in episode 2 or the environment cars in episode 4 have been weak; but overall the spread of cars, and the locations have been great.

Grand Tour can certainly run for the next 3 seasons - but the formula is ageing and I don't know how much longer it will make sense. But Top Gear itself, I think is now dead an buried.

Amazon Prime Video

The Grand Tour is not the most pirated show ever - but it certainly is one of the most pirated shows ever. That is not too surprising - Top Gear in the days of Clarkson was also one of the most pirated shows. Some years back, I wrote a paper on digital piracy (also related to a presentation at Indicare 2005) where I proposed that a key cause of piracy was availability of media and convenient format of media - and while factors such as price matter, digital piracy would remain an issue if availability in the right format is not solved for. The Grand Tour is the perfect example of this proposal - launching a highly popular show (well at least Top Gear was) but constrained to a few locations instead of the global reach.

Amazon's Prime Video service has now taken the leap of bridging the availability conundrum with its global launch. The key attraction - shown prominently on the web page - is off course The Grand Tour; but it does offer more than that. Amazon's own original series - Mozart in the Jungle, Man in the High Castle - are also on offer; and the price is phenomenal at USD 2.99 for the first 6 months followed by the standard price of USD 5.99. Oh, and there is a free trial also for a month.

However, the breadth of content is quite underwhelming. Starting with Amazon's own content - the content available is not all the content produced by Amazon. Furthermore, not all the seasons are there - I have access Mozart in the Jungle's first season, not the second for example (and the same with Transparent). Outside Amazon's own content - there are very few other top TV series, and the catalogue for movies is equally bare. 

Catalogue of content aside, the other big annoyance is the lack of Apple TV support. At this moment, I am downloading content to my phone and then playing via Airplay (and I am very impressed with its power efficiency). But what I would rather prefer is to queue content download on Apple TV, instead of relying on downloading when I am at home.I have tried the streaming - and have been generally quite impressed with the quality and speed. My Internet connection is flaky so prefer the download approach - but generally I have been impressed by the app.

I expect that the catalogue will grow with time - and there is enough right now to keep me interested and subscribed. I just need the Apple TV app ...

Top Gear

I think I have watched every episode of Top Gear since it was relaunched in 2002 - even the ones that features reviews of second hand cars, or the ineffectual Top Gear Stuntman and the lesser seen Top Gear Dog. I have watched many episodes of Top Gear before the relaunch - during repeats of BBC World in the late 1990s. Needless to say, I am a Top Gear fan. 

And yes, I did watch the most recent Top Gear series - and also agree with most reviews and other commentary on the general weakness of the series in comparison to the previous series. Series 23 retained the amazing production values in terms of cinematography and video production; but almost everything else was below par. 

But to be fair, Season 23 was actually 2 parts - the hour long TV show that tried to be like the previous 22 seasons, and the online Extra Gear. Extra gear was the car nerd special - the one that features car guys talking about cars and motoring - something similar to what the previous 22 seasons of Clarkson, Hammond and May. 

Top Gear's previous 21 seasons (leaving aside the first season of the reboot) was more than just a show about cars - it was really a show about 3 guys doing things with cars that other people may have considered; but didn't have the money, time or just creativity to pull off. Be it building hovercrafts, or racing across countries; or playing large scale games with caravans as pieces; it was entertainment that pushed boundaries of what cars could do.

Season 23 on the TV had plenty of car reviews - and on their own; they were quite good. But put them together as a show it seemed to fall flat. There was a race against a train - and the cars lost. There was a race with SUVs; but it wasn't that memorable. There was a race with reliable robins; that just didn't seem to have a point. 

There was some madness (both featured Matt LeBlanc - the Ariel Nomad and the Tour of London) but it just wasn't the same. Maybe next season will be better; I will wait one more season out. But if it is the same as this season; there are other better things to watch.

Naked and Afraid

Survivor made reality tv big, and Fear Factor exploited the viewer's fears (often of creepy crawlies and other gross things) and others have taken the viewers to exotic locations around the world. And in all examples of reality tv, it is a bunch of people competing for a prize. There are a lot of safety nets (in shows such as Fear Factor), and most reality tv shows are driven by the competition between the participants.

National Geographic's Naked and Afraid series (not sure if it is screening in SA yet) somewhat turns most of this up side down. There is no prize money. There is no competition between participants. For 6 episodes, 1 man and 1 woman, both supposed expert survivalists, are placed naked (as in absolutely no clothes) in some inhospitable location, with 2 survival tools (usually from the group of cutting implement, fire starting implement and pot) and live for 21 days. Yes there is a camera crew - but only during the day. The participants have to do everything for survival - get water, get food, make shelter and survive the local inhabitants, ranging from snakes, to bugs to hyenas. 

What is most interesting, is what it really takes to survive in remote locations with no real help. All participants loose weight - some with drastic weight loss. Many almost give up - and 2 actually do. Making fire, with 2 sticks can take hours. Making fire, even with a lighter, can fail when there is nothing to burn. Despite being experienced hunters, all participants go for days without food. Almost every participant falls sick or gets injured in some manner. And the nudity - you don't see much, this being an American production - makes it difficult when temperature drops, or sun leads to bad sunburn.

 

Should a post-apocalyptic scenario painted by novels or movies ever take place - humanity won't be only wiped out by the event - but by the thirst for water, lack of food, lack of good tools and microbes. It also means that while we were once equipped to survive on primitive conditions, we have also lost those natural defences long ago. Progress has its downsides ...

DSTV Price Increase

I have a DSTV mobile (Drifta) subscription as a standalone, and noticed that it will be going up by 25%. Not sure on the other price increases, but that is excessive when compared to the year-on-year relative stability of the Rand and low inflation rate. I hardly use it, perhaps I should just get rid of it.

Wonderful World

Despite the recent controversy, BBC still has some of the best nature documentaries. Assembled from a cross section of a number of such documentary series, BBC's ad of "Wonderful World" (with David Attenborough narrating Louis Armstrong's classic) captures the sentiment wonderfully.

Fry's Planet Word

In an earlier post, I mentioned the series on languages by the BBC, Fry's Planet Word, presented by author, comedian and actor Stephen Fry. For a number of reasons, I only got round to finishing the series today - watching the last 3 (of 5) in one go.

It is an absolutely stunning series; with each episode giving something to think about. Starting with the very essence of language, and exploring the concept that language is what sets homo sapiens apart from other animals (in episode 1), to the cultural and societal differences that have an impact on language and expression (in episode 2).

Episode 3 focused on "bad language", with gems such as why swearing is actually a primal reaction, and off course a liberal sprinkling of "fuck" (especially considering that it is a BBC documentary). Bad language is not only about swearing, but also about innuendos, propaganda, slang and derogatory words. The discussion on propaganda, not only on the traditional Nazi propaganda topics; but also the more recent "collateral damage" was particularly illuminating.

Episode 4 was on writing - exploring the history of writing, and how writing has fundamentally changed humnan society. Writing off course leads to books, and my argument on digital vs physical books was expressed and debated so much more elequently! Episode 5 rounded up on a more personal view on literature, from Joyce to Tolkien to Shakespeare to Orwel and Woodhouse.

The series is an exploration of language; on its universality and its regional nuances. It is thought provoking and manages to have interviews with a wide variety of very interesting people. It is certainly a gem in the long line of great BBC documentaries.

Languages

Foreigners are often astounded by the fact that South Africa has 11 official languages. What is more interesting is asking different people, what they believe is the "average" number that are spoken by South Africans - and inevitably it breaks down racial lines. I have asked this question to a number of people I know - some like me speak only English fluently and understand the basics of another (most likely to be Afrikaans); others are fluent in two languages (usually English and Afrikaans) - while many more are fluent in a lot more, 4, 5 or even more. So the polyglot I once met in a Cape Town station is not that rare; though his language skills were far more diverse.

Stephen Fry has a very interesting series on BBC (no mention on where one can easily acquire it without watching BBC) called Fry's Planet Word, which explores the development of language - historically, culturally, physiologically etc. I have only watched one episode, but I think it is yet another BBC gem that is really worth watching.

Edit
Updated, full review can be found here.

Al Jazeera (English)

Al Jazeera, is most famous for the Al Qaeda tapes from Osama bin Laden. Originally, it was broadcast only in Arabic, but more recently (I think for the past 2 or 3 years) there has been an English 24 hour news channel also. I have been watching the English broadcast on DSTV for a few hours, and I must say I have been really impressed.

Firstly, being based in Qatar, it is no wonder that there does seem to be an emphasis on news from the Arabic peninsula. That said, the Arabian peninsula is one of the news hotspots of the world, so it is not such a bad thing. In fact, what is really impressive about Al Jazeera is its balance in reporting. For almost every major controversial topic, there are reports that examine the contrasting views. A report on Gaza features a report from Israel and a report from Gaza. A report on the climate change conference in Bali features reports from the developing country representatives, the US representatives, the pro-lobby groups and even environmentalists who think the Bali process is pointless.

Sometimes, I think that they seem to be trying too hard to be balanced! But their approach is refreshing, and I particularly liked some of their special segments, featuring topics that seem to be almost completely against the Arabian prejudicial views: shows focusing on women's movement, the high price of oil, human rights and Islamic extremism. The English channel is full of veterans from CNN and BBC, and it almost seems that they have a lot more freedom in their craft.

TV Blues

Somehow, TVs and I have not got on well this past year. There was the story of my TV card at the beginning of the year. And two more incidences from the last week to add to the list.

Firstly, I bought a really old TV from a student for €15. It worked for a while, but doesn't any more. It is to be expected really ... don't think I was intentionally sold a bad TV ... it is old, and to be expected.

Then, acting on Hans' recommendation (and doing what I should have done initially), I got myself a DVB-T stick. It is actually a very cool device: very small and compact, and works quite well. Except for two things:

1. Erlangen does not seem to have any digital TV coverage of the two channels with mostly English content (CNN and MTV).
2. The reception in my apartment for Eurosport (for the Rugby WC) and RTL (for Formula 1), the two German channels I want most, is almost non existent. It does work elsewhere ... I have tried it in a park for example, and was watching F1 on Sunday while surfing the net at a Cafe!

And to mess it all up, the TV cable in my room seems to be analogue only (probably a Cable TV source). The channel that works best however carries football, some Bundesliga matches and some Euro qualifiers. So it is not all that bad I suppose ...

The Power of Nightmares

I finally finished watching "The Power of Nightmares" (also see here), a 3 part documentary made by the BBC in 2004. Basically, the documentary, in a style very similar to Michael Moore documentaries (except not funny), explores the relationships between modern politics and terrorism. In particular, it alleges that in the West at least, politicians are now seen only as managers of public life, not grand visionaries who will usher in a new fantastical future. Terrorism has become so hyped up nowadays, not because it is a new phenomenon, but because politicians have realised that they can use it as a new tool to promote themselves - as the people that will protect the public from terror and fear.

It is a very interesting documentary, because it manages to chronicle two of the most influential groups in modern politics - the American neo-conservatives and the Islamists, over the period of the last 30 years or so. But possibly one of the boldest claims in the documentary, is that Al Qaeda as we know it is largely fictional, and its power largely overhyped. The documentary alleges that Al Qaeda, as a term, was invented by the FBI in a trial in early 2001, largely to enable the FBI to try Osama bin Laden in absentia, because that is the only way they could make the charges stick. After 11/09/2001, Osama bin Laden used the term, only after it was used in news reports. Furthermore, the attacks might have been financed by Osama bin Laden, but he was not actually responsible for planning and co-ordinating the attacks.

The documentary also alleges that Al Qaeda is not really a terror network, and is actually a small group of Islamists. Yes, Osama bin Laden is largely responsible for financing many terror operations, but a large network of terror cells planning attacks in largely fictional. The documentary cites the Taliban recruiting and training militias (largely foreign) to fight in the Afghanistan civil war - not Al Qaeda. Also, bombing Tora Bora mountains and subsequent ground searches have yet to reveal a single Al Qaeda operative. With regards to the huge number of terror cells allegedly uncovered in the US; the documentary alleges that not a single one of them has been actually convicted of being a terror cell; and the accused have walked largely free, although some were convicted of some minor crimes.

The documentary aired before the 7 July London bombings; but the question remains. Are these bombers really part of a large terror network, or are they just a bunch of people who have their own grievances and have found this their best way of expression. This is a particularly interesting with regards to the recent airline hijack terror alert, because if the documentary is correct, then the people arrested yesterday are going to go free; because they were actually doing something less sinister.

Terrorism, whatever the definition is not new. As the archbishop of Jerusalem commented on BBC Hardtalk in this past week, one man's heroic action is another man's terrorism action. It is quite amazing how many plots seem to resemble Hollywood movie plots; leading to the question on whether these plots are actually anywhere near the truth. Prevention is better than cure; but the idea of catching people, because they might do something in the future is rather frightening. As in Minority Report - how do you know the soothsayers are correct?

Sport on TV

As a concept, sport is pretty simple: a competition to determine who (or which group of people) are best at a certain task, usually associated with keeping fit (well my definition anyway). When it becomes complicated, is when people are willing to pay to watch other play sport, because then sport is no longer just a competition, but it is also entertainment. Big name sports draw money to the game, because there are a lot of people who want to watch those games, because the games are a social event, entertainment event etc.

In the past few months, there has been a quite storm developing in Cricket - players are starting to complain that they are playing too much - that they will not be able to perform on their best of their abilities all the time, because it will be mentally and physically challenging. Off course administrators see it differently, as they see whinging millionaires who want to work less for more and them missing out on the goldmine that is presented by the cricket watching billion plus viewers.

What neither side is looking at however is the spectators themselves - the very people that pay to watch the game. Right now there are two international series - West Indies vs India and England vs Sri Lanka, and because of the time differences, it is possible to watch televised cricket for about 18 hours a day! During the official cricket season, it is possible to watch televised cricket for the full 24 hours. The question becomes - who is watching?

It's not cricket only after all. There is football from the World Cup, there is motor racing, there is rugby, and a few other major televised sports. But people have to work, go to school, go socialise outside watching sports. Viewer number will drop, not because people are not interested, but because there is too much for too little time. Very soon, it will be the highlights shows that will draw the crowds and not the events themselves.

So, is there too much cricket right now? Personally yes - because it is coming to the point that, at most times, I don't bother other than just looking at the overall results and reading the match (or day) reports. I do not need to be entertained for 24 hours a day, 365 days a year ... then it will no longer be entertainment.