Science Fun — Top Gear Or Mythbusters?
11Feb. 09
Okay, what’s your poison? Or more accurately — what’s your preference?
I’ve discovered I’ve become rather more fond of Top Gear. Such as when it test-drove the TARDIS with David Tennant:
Whilst doing some flying myself, from Singapore to UK last year (was in the relatively brand-new A380, much to the sulking of certain members of the Skeptic Zone who like the big metal birds), I was introduced to Top Gear 
for the first time. This fact was made additionally irksome to said co-podcasters, by the fact I got bulkhead seats and could even do some yoga stretching exercises in the space quite comfortably, somewhere over Bratislava.
I have evidence — see photo!
Yet I’m aware that Top Gear has been around for quite some time too. Several seasons already. But I am becoming more entertained by the banter and ridiculousness of the show, in comparison to the perhaps-over familiarity of Mythbusters. Serves me right for getting seasons on DVD, I guess.
So — I’m pondering if Mythbusters have become a little over-exposed, in comparison to the unashamed ‘petrol heads racing Communist cars against a dog’ (the dog won) — and maybe the over-familiarity of MB has led to TG becoming my preferred ‘escape for an hour during the day’? Or am I being distracted by the fact that they’re passionate and loud — but not really about the science? Is ‘being about the science’ that important when you’re an adult… would it still inspire kids to watch such a show to learn about the physics and history behind the cars?
I have noticed that the show is popular enough to launch Top Gear Australia local version– although it’s not a ratings-winner like the UK original: ‘Top Gear revs up for Sydney’ in the SMH:
It was all petrol fumes and testosterone at a media conference heralding the arrival of the stars of British series Top Gear yesterday — with the pair already planning to leave large carbon footprints all over Sydney.
“There are too many ‘green’ people in the world and they’re not buying enough Range Rovers to warm it up,” quipped Jeremy Clarkson when asked about the freeze in Britain.
The duo will be without sidekick James May in the 10 live shows which run at Acer Arena from tonight until Sunday. Filling May’s place is Steve Pizzati, a presenter for Top Gear Australia which has failed to strike the same ratings gold for broadcaster SBS as its parent program.
No, not particularly politically-correct either. Does Top Gear’s content really challenge the San Fran lads and their distinctly child-friendly fare — even if they feature questions about vegetable oil for your volvo diesel or Richard Hammond investigating what happens if you’re struck by lightning while in your car?
As for whether it’s a tending-towards misogynistic show due to its failure to feature female co-stars… I guess they’d just look blankly at you. They’re not really about gender… in fact, they don’t seem to be about anything but fast moving metal.
They’d probably gesture vaguely at their ‘Top Gear Fiesta vs Corvette in a shopping mall’ and say that they might be appealing to female consumers with this segment destroying homewares:
It just isn’t really a show that thinks of that element, I guess, and I wonder if more women would change the show much anyway. I have enjoyed the female guest-stars, who are respectfully treated and do pretty damned well in the ‘Star In A Reasonably Priced Car’ segment (Ellen MacArthur, who remains the top driver; Jodie Kidd, Carol Vorderman and Joanna Lumley).
But I’d be interested in knowing if they are appealing to the younger years as a Mythbusters compliment — or if we should be waiting for the next season of ‘Sleek Geeks’ to appear on ABC. Or are fictional portrayals of scientists like CSI, Lie To Me and House winning out still?
Tags: David Tennant, Education, entertainment, gender, Mythbusters, review, Science, Top Gear, TV shows, women
February 11th, 2009 at 8:24 am
Top Gear all the way! I was also a fan of Mythbusters for a while, however the show now seems very contrived, almost forced at times. This could be due to the fact that the vast majority of the ‘urban myths’ they are now testing are so obscure that I am distracted from the show and it’s (loose) scientific grounding, by the sheer absurdity of them. Top Gear could never claim to be a scientific show, however it is light-hearted, entertaining and does provide information, albeit somewhat abstractly; something which is now rare in the world of TV.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:05 pm
I, too, prefer Top Gear. I used to enjoy Myhtbusters quite a lot, but it the latter series have a different feel to them, almost like MB is trying just a little too hard to maintain it’s pop status. TG has a pop status too, but the presenters are so irreverent, and the segments so ridiculous, that it’s almost as though they are making fun of themselves, and the iconic status TG has.
February 12th, 2009 at 10:46 am
I like them both, it never occured to me to compare them. I suppose I’m more of an Adam Savage fan specifically, as opposed to the show — he’s a great skeptic.
July 30th, 2009 at 10:59 pm
[…] shows which demonstrate how a love of technology is nothing to be ashamed of (such as, oh, “Science Fun – Top Gear Or Mythbusters?”). I could ask more questions – like ‘why can’t we embrace more shows that avoid […]