Dave Liquorice wrote:
I wouldn't bother. Production values appear to be on a par with
someones home movie. The only dialogue that is clear is the narrator.
You can barely hear anyone else, not even a radio mic for Dermot or
other primary speaker. No attempt to light interiors so not only can't
you hear what is happening you can hardly see it as well. What shots
are there are all wobbly and from very strange angles at times.

It's got to be 'funky' innit. I mean, weird camera angles should give
you the illusion that you're *there* man, with DG cool guy. No?! Me
neither ... It's frustrating. If they think that's the kinda stuff kids
would be attracted to gardening - they haven't done their research.

I guess it's cheap to make if the producer/director goes out with a
just DV camcorder. There hasn't been much spent in post production to
attempt to rescue things either. 1/10.

For a gardener, DG's hands are suspiciously not very 'earthy'. His
constant 'attacks' to the old gardening school is enough for me to
think he wants to be revolutionary but not sure what to go against. I
however enjoyed his garden at Chelsea and purchased a pot of
astrantia, I still think he wants fame and glory for just being alive.

I will never forget the programme pre-chelsea and the razamataz around
him at the time. He was so so so ambarassingly pleased with himself
when he shared 'his secrets' to the design of his garden, which was a
glass of wine he had inadvertently left on his drawing and that gave
him the 'round' aspect of his shed^^^igloo.