Bottle Shock

As someone who isn't fancy and doesn't drink wine all that much, I wasn't sure I'd be all in with this movie. Friends and experts and lushes insist that Sideways is a better gateway into the cinematic world of oenology. But I liked Bottle Shock just fine, thanks. I'm a big fan of Chris Pine and I'm half-way in love with Rachael Taylor. And Alan Rickman is straight-up legend.Just in case you don't know from having read the hundreds of other reviews, Bottle Shock recounts the early days of California wine making and re-enacts the notorious blind Paris wine tasting of 1976, now known as the "Judgment of Paris." Set in a period in time when bongs and bell bottoms were the rage, it's about a bunch of disparate characters whose paths end up crossing. The Napa Valley vintner (Bill Pullman) who is on his third loan from the bank, and his hippie son (Pine). A Mexican-American (Freddy Rodriguez) with an exquisite palate for wine. The British expatriate and failing wine shop owner (Rickman) who dwells in Paris and who hatches a plan to expose Parisians to wines from elsewhere around the globe.It's a good movie made exceedingly watchable by Alan Rickman doing Alan Rickman things. He plays the pompous wine snob to perfection, even makes you like him. Not his character's fault that, as much as he ends up savoring California vintage, he doesn't think it'll hold up when compared to French wine. The scene that recreates the game-changing blind wine tasting in Paris is my favorite scene, mostly because of Rickman's marvelous reaction when the underdog Montelena took the Chardonnay competition. And to support Mark Twain's assertion that "Truth is stranger than fiction," Steven Spurrier, the British snoot that Rickman plays, hosted another blind wine tasting thirty years later, in 2006, fully convinced French wine would prevail this time out. Except California kicked ass again. Amazing.For what it's worth, the technical bits support the performances of this stellar cast. The cinematography deserves mention; it captures the lush splendor of the Napa Valley landscape. And, then, there's the score that knows when to stay in the background and when to step up to a sweeping crescendo. And I dig the '70s soundtrack.If there's a nitpick - and I had to think hard to come up with this one- it's that the love story, what there is of it, is unnecessary. But a movie requires eye candy, and I guess Chris Pine wasn't enough. So we get Rachael Taylor as the gorgeous, free-spirited Sam the intern who funs around with Freddy Rodriguez and Pine. See? That is reaching, fellas.Even an unsophisticated non-connoisseur like me can wallow in the romance of making wine. Is it catching, the passion the characters feel for the art of oenology? Maybe. In a few minutes, I'm off to 7-11 for a bottle of Barefoot Red Moscato which, by the way, has absolutely no shot of winning any sort of blind wine tasting. A bottle of Barefoot Red Moscato may actually make its drinker blind.

This story of a little California winery in the 1970s that competed with the French wineries in a contest is enjoyable to watch and especially elevated by the performance of the late Alan Rickman. As a little wine shop owner, Rickman had impeccable comedic timing and a droll way of portraying British snobbery. His character's friendship with Dennis Farina's character was engaging and led to a turning point in the plot. Rickman was a joy to watch all the way through the film. The father-son conflict between Bill Pullman's and Chris Pine's characters typified the conflict of hippie sons and daughters in the 1970s with their establishment parents, and the struggles of the little winery to compete with the French wineries in an era before California wine was recognized as fine wine introduced the problems the story needed to be meaningful. I had seen this movie several years ago, but it is worth another view, especially for Rickman's performance.

Barely watchable, predictable beige version of what SHOULD have been a fabulous film. Rachael Taylor and Chris Pine were awful. Poor writing and direction gave the amazing Alan Rickman (RIP) nothing to work with. Ditto Bill Pullman and Dennis Farina. These guys know what they're doing, but this film didn't. It managed to make a wonderful story with spectacular scenery, into a dull, slow, boring movie. Such a waste.

Just look at the obvious bottle blondes in the cast. (Because all Californians are blond-right?) Then the ridiculous French mustache on Alan Rickman and he was cast as a British Frenchman (?) with all the stereo-typical snobbery...which is why he went to California in search of wines...because he was a snob (?). Then there was the compulsory nod to the Mexican wine maker who didn't like being told to help load a truck, yet was later fired from the vineyard, dumped by the girl and forgotten by the cast--so what was the long scene defending his ethnicity about if the film wasn't going to carry it through? Yet the writers didn't mind casting the bottle-blonde female lead in a purely sexual role. Her part of the story was being gazed at lasciviously (by Mexican workers by the way) while working with a hose and she ended up sleeping with the vineyard owner once he won the wine contest. Then there's the obvious propaganda supporting California's wine industry. The director murdered what could have been a great film. He had the cast, but he just made them into laughing-stocks.

Based on actual events which occurred in 1976 this is an entertaining, inspiring and heart-warming, if somewhat corny tale of how a Paris-based English sommelier staged a blind wine tasting outside that city and introduced Californian wine to the then French-dominated global market. Alan Rickman is at his sneery comedic best as the outwardly snobbish but entrepreneurial Steven Spurrier who travels to the Napa Valley vineyards to initially taste and thereafter transport twenty-six American wine bottles to his ‘Judgement of Paris’ taste trial, while Bill Pullman and Chris Pine give solid performances as an idealistic former lawyer pursuing his vinicultural dream and his layabout son who just doesn’t seem to get it. Despite not achieving the quality of Alexander Payne’s hilarious study of mid-life male crisis Sideways, I feel that this movie genuinely manages to bring to the screen a sense of the way of life of the people who work the land. There were times when I was totally transported to the 1970s, not just with the music and costumes and on occasions was reminded of the man from Del Monte as Rickman toured the Californian vineyards sampling the produce while one of his voiceovers was decidedly Keith Floydian in tone and content. The movie is not without its flaws (a little melodramatic at times) but I really liked it, and I would definitely recommend seeking it out (probably through LOVEFILM, as I did) if you appreciate a glass or two and enjoy looking at some gorgeous landscapes and sunsets.

I know the late Alan Rickman was regarded as a great actor and this film was a pet project of his but it somehow fails to hit the mark, partly because of Rickman's underpowered performance. It's a nice story and I'm all for puncturing French arrogance when it comes to their wine but I should have cared more about the people. The most remarkable thing about this film is that it manages to make pretty-boy Chris Pine look unattractive.

This film is less known than it deserves to be. I found out about it after Alan Rickman passed away and finally got it a few days ago. What a treat! The soundtrack reminded me of how good the Doobie Brothers were and it evoked the 1970s. I had heard about American wines doing well in a Paris competition during a cooking programme, so had a reference point for the story. The title is neat - 'bottle shock' being a vintners' term and the effect that New World wine actually being good had on the French experts. Make no mistake, the French make some great wines, but for many years they persisted in denying that anybody else deserved to share the glory - especially wines from the New World. This tale has Rickman delivering dialogue with aplomb (or is it 'a plum'?) and the performances from all the actors are equally convincing.This blue-ray is German, so the subtitles are not available in English. My limited French was just about enough to comprehend those parts.Anyway - Grand Cru entertainment IMO.

While based on a true story, the film takes some liberty at embellishing the facts with romance and family feuds, but this does not detract from it being highly instructive for wine lovers.The 1976 competition itself should have been given more time in the movie in my view, as it was the event that justified making the movie in the first place and changed the world of wine ever since.Also, the movie does not make it clear that the competition was only for Chardonnay and Cabernet Sauvigons/Merlot varieties, and as such can in no way be interpreted to be an overall match between Californian and French wines.Finally, one can not help but notice somewhat of a pro-Californian bias in the movie, but this is perhaps inevitable given the nature of the real historical events. I would like to see a film of the 2006 rematch, which California, again, won hands down, in fact by an ever greater margin.

Good story (based on a true one), central character just on the right side of overplayed (perfect for the tone of the film) by Alan Rickman, the boxing matches between dad and son jarred a bit but I guess were based on truth; great views of California vineyards and a good sense of period. Did the huge success of Napa Valley wine really come down to a mildly eccentric Englishman, a bunch of arrogant Frenchmen, and a dozen or so volunteer couriers at an airport? Great fun.