First show in the can, then back to boot camp.

Now that myself, Peter and the producer have finished shooting the first in the new series, a number of things have struck me.
1) At least we don't seem to be any worse at this gig than in autumn.
2) The Shit Wine review really does require a shit wine, with a capital turd. It's not the Passable Wine review.
3) The new titles look really cool.
4) The way that the raw footage has been filtered makes us both look like 80's dads dressed unsuitably young, but in a good way.

I was certainly pleased with the wines (Tour Leognan 2010 and Les Arums de Lagrange 2009), not only for their quality and enjoyability, but also for the ease with which we were able to review them. I really don't want to be banging on for hours using unidentifiable adjectives like a half smashed Jilly Goolden (ahhh, fond memories...) on an episode of Just a Minute. I want to tell you, briefly and comprehensably, if you should buy it.

Buy the Lagrange. White Bordeaux purists may want to turn their nose up at the richness, but there's no denying it's deliciousness. Drinks well. Provide your own adjectives.

Here's a snippet. Full show to be published soon.

While I'm happy with the look of the new video, there are some serious questions I need to ask of myself regarding how I appear on camera. Do I really want to "act" so much? I think it makes it funnier to watch, but is that really desirable in a wine show. Also I think I'll go back to the more heavily prepared, heavily written style of the first few episodes. Bits of paper, staples glue, paperclips children's reward stickers and lots of words were a fun, if solitary, way of preparing for a show. I think I'll go back to that style, only with fewer words.
Enjoy the episode.