aarone2884

The show starts off on the proposition of showing the history of oil including the geological and scientific history behind it too.

And with the host Professor Iain Stewart, being a geologist i expected this.

Unfortunately it felt like a children's education programme.

There was not much in this show that i did not already know from children's encyclopaedias, or expect most people who have some basic history and science knowledge.

First he shows us Shale, which is a rock that is an indicator of oil as it is a precursor to the product, so where you find shale, oil ought be close by.

Unfortunately that was about it, no explanation of where all the living matter came from, and how it came to be concentrated, or how long it takes to form and the theory's.

Then he discussed oil, broke it down to Oil, and Skunk oil. That was it, no explanation of Light crude and heavy crude.

Just pointed to how things are from oil, like Nylon, polyesters, etc.. but not real explanation about them, for me this

Then shows an Oil, well, shows how they stopped it from collapsing in the early days, yet.. no explanation on how it works and some of geological underpinnings of it, not even a graphic.

The political side was a bit ho-hum really. Look at major events, but that was it, did not look at Venezuela, Brazil or Russia who is now the biggest producer of Oil.

Also the conclusion that high oil prices made the UK have a smog alert in 1952 is not true. Coal is for electricity production , hence the smog. UK later changed to Nuclear electricity which would have have a much greater effect than oil, oil does not stop Smog, Catalytic converters do.

The ending was weak, left us hanging with a talk on Global warming. Oil has had probably less impact on global warming than Brown Coal, OK it is still a Fossil fuel, but the show was about OIL.

And finally, no future speculation. No question was put about "and as for the future of Oil?" Electric cars, Solar panels. Hydrogen fuel cells... all these possibly could impact on it.

I can only make one suggestion, skip this doco, unless you know absolutely nothing about oil.

I am always wary of TV show Franchise's, Just look at Top gear UK turned into Top Gear Down under, or Kath and Kim Turned in to Kath and Kim USA.

When they decided on a Grand Designs Australia i was a bit worried... Do we build enough interesting homes to fill enough episodes? Who should host?

Essentially these are the only 2 questions one needs to ask.

The first question is fairly easy. Yes. Building seems like a national past time here, New house's, improving and renovating is a cornerstone of our culture i believe, We love our homes, and Surprising there has not been a similar show sooner. So finding the right homes for the show has not been a problem.

Secondly, The Host was chosen Wisely, Peter Maddison lets the pictures and owners tell the story with little interference only guiding it along and putting in his 2 cents only when it matters.

Overall a great show which i think Kevin Mc'cloud would be happy to have his Grand designs UK show associated with it. 10/10

I like this show. I am a landscaper firstly, i have only watched the first 2 episodes and they are quite good with both very different landscapes.

The couples of both these episodes seem to know what they want to achieve, and appear competent enough to do it, maybe not to a fixed timeline or budget you will get from a professional, but they do quite well, and probably for a lot less.

The Host use's a Kevine McLeod of grand designs impersonation to handle the show. Probably the the best way to handle a show like this, as they are very similar, except one is exterior construction/landscaping.

Unfortunately it is what he adds on top of that impersonation.

Attempts to look as though he is part of the project, he constantly is stating The winter mud may.. "Make or Break this landscape" just add the reason to the start of make or break..... this is OK if it is true and you can show on film how it is making or breaking the landscape....otherwise Shut up.

Or when he gets involved is cringe worthy, the plants on the embankment made me laugh....the ground is hard....then he looks over he is then sayin..hrrmm...they seem to be doing OK.....that was not hard ground.

Please just stand back Mathew and let the people handle there own landscape!

And then there's the Convenient "Wow someones donated $10,000 of materials for your job....or here is a $50,000 excavator you can use for 5 months for free!

As much as this might be true....i doubt it.

With the exception of the hosts interferences and nonsensical concerns from the shrubs with the camera in his face like something out of blair witch.....this show is really good.

A show like this though will really deserve and benefit from a Revisited series, A lot more than Grand designs revisited has, as these gardens are going to take a few year to really come together and evaluate properly due to the nature of plants taking time to grow.

And you can see this in a lot of the finished landscapes, Hard surface work is completed and the plants practically still the same they where when they where planted.

I have given it 8 out of 10.

1 off for the host and 1 off for having the episodes drag on so long when they could have been shorter, there is a lot of unnecessary film.