• The Forums are now open to new registrations, adverts are also being de-tuned.

Patagonia Special TONITE!

You have to be licensed to fly those, so unless they had a team with them it would be cheaper to book local a helo to do filming.

They sub-contract to a specialist company for the aerial shots. The pilots would certainly be CAA-certificated (not that this would mean anything outside the UK though).

They used this lot in Africa and Burma so I suspect it was them again this time:

Extreme Facilities
 
Knowing full well it is contrived / staged and pre-planned out - I don't really care.

I take it in the spirit which it was intentioned - 3 blokes messing around in inappropriate cars doing stupid things and causing some trouble to up the ratings.

I would not be surprised at all to learn their major trouble at the end of episode two was all setup for ratings.

Very entertaining and I also get to see parts of the world I have no interest in visiting.

Just wish I could get paid that amount of money to do what they do - hardly working for a living is it...
 
What I am struggling to understand is- why are they taking forever and a day to replace JC? I thought he'd sold the rights of his TG programme to the BBC to allow them to host it. So why don't they recruit fresh meat? Instead of old ripe Argentinian Spam???
[Spam...spammety spam sspam...spammettyy spa...]
 
What I am struggling to understand is- why are they taking forever and a day to replace JC? I thought he'd sold the rights of his TG programme to the BBC to allow them to host it. So why don't they recruit fresh meat? Instead of old ripe Argentinian Spam???
[Spam...spammety spam sspam...spammettyy spa...]

Because the BBC can't decide between Harry Hill and Russell Brand as JC's replacement.
 
I doubt they will change the formula - sells too well as it is.

They'll keep milking that cash cow.
 
Anyone watching the Patagonia special would have heard JC explain how he got the TG gig all those years ago. Being controversial is the job.

Back to the 'protest'. What we saw looked pretty violent. Had TG staged that, wouldn't Argentina have by now disputed the alleged barbarity they are accused of?
 
Anyone watching the Patagonia special would have heard JC explain how he got the TG gig all those years ago. Being controversial is the job.

Back to the 'protest'. What we saw looked pretty violent. Had TG staged that, wouldn't Argentina have by now disputed the alleged barbarity they are accused of?

Maybe they are happy to let that ride given we did far worse defending the Falklands.
 
Maybe they are happy to let that ride given we did far worse defending the Falklands.

I'm trying get my aging bewildered neurons to figure how to assess this particular response - either it is illogical or it is pathetic.
 
I doubt they will change the formula - sells too well as it is.

They'll keep milking that cash cow.
And JC and his business partner own the rights to the show, and it now sells very well on a global basis.
 
It's all become a bit self indulgent for me (although if offered the job I wouldn't say no).

Change of format required methinks or pension it off....
 
I watched both shows on iPlayer and quite enjoyed. Sceneries were fantastic, 928 and Lotus looked great and JCs 928 story seemed genuine and honest.
The end was definitely very traumatic and someone could get really hurt or killed. I just don't understand how could Beebs allow this filming to take place in Argentina at first place. There was a definite breach of crews Health Safety and Security regulations
 
^ you, as others, are assuming the protests were real. I personally doubt it. As for JC's 928 anecdote, don't shed too many tears for him, I doubt that story was without embellishment too.
 
^ you, as others, are assuming the protests were real. I personally doubt it.
I am honestly puzzled by this assertion. Can you expand your argument a little further as to why you think the incidents depicted at the end of the programme didn't actually occur? Or do you mean they weren't justified or had no rational behind them as opposed whether they actually took place? Or was it all scripted/ made up for the programme? I'm not sure exactly what you are trying to say?:confused:
 
I meant to say that the protesters were actors, the thrown stones, damaged vehicles, personal peril, abandoned cars etc were all scripted.
 
I'm trying get my aging bewildered neurons to figure how to assess this particular response - either it is illogical or it is pathetic.

Perhaps not worded the best - my point was we whooped their asses and rightly so. I doubt we are going to worry about them throwing some rocks at a few cars as a nation... if indeed it wasn't staged.
 
I meant to say that the protesters were actors, the thrown stones, damaged vehicles, personal peril, abandoned cars etc were all scripted.
Fair enough. I am more inclined to the monumental ****-up theory myself where some TV types got out of their depth on foreign soil.:doh:
 
^ you, as others, are assuming the protests were real. I personally doubt it. As for JC's 928 anecdote, don't shed too many tears for him, I doubt that story was without embellishment too.

I just said that his story seemed truthful and honest whether it is or not we'll never know. If it's fake than JC deserves at least nomination for next BAFTA

I meant to say that the protesters were actors, the thrown stones, damaged vehicles, personal peril, abandoned cars etc were all scripted.

I doubt that this part was scripted anyhow. As I already noted beebs is to be blamed for serious breach of safety standards.
 
wemorgan said:
^ you, as others, are assuming the protests were real. I personally doubt it. As for JC's 928 anecdote, don't shed too many tears for him, I doubt that story was without embellishment too.

That anecdote has been mentioned before in at least one of his books so I don't doubt it's authenticity, I'm sure I've heard it mentioned in a piece about the 928 as well.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom