(Taken from http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/)
I enjoyed this movie much more than I did the last one I
watched (Uncorked). It focuses more on the wine. It has a dry humor about it
that keeps you alert. I liked the way they broke stereotypes about New World
wines. It’s taking on slightly fictional angle at telling a true story—that of
a wine tasting contest in Paris in 1976. Alan Rickman plays British wine snob/store
owner, Steven Spurrier who lives in France. Oh, very good… Yes, it is easy to
see that months of wine education in preparation for this movie have not been
wasted on you, Rickman. He shows that he is very knowledgeable about wine; he
is laboring under the delusion that the entire wine world is impressed with
him. His friend, Maurice (an American) however, criticizes him for not
having enough diversity in his inventory. In a plan to save his business,
Spurrier/Rickman travels to Napa Valley to collect wines to compete in a blind
taste test to be held in Paris (known as the “Judgment of Paris”—get it?!).
(The Judgment of Paris,
Peter Paul Rubens. Taken from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgement_of_Paris)
In Napa (an up-and-coming wine region at this time),
Spurrier/Rickman meets Jim Barrett who is played by Bill Pullman (see creeped
photo of Pullman below sitting next to me in Next Door Bake Shop in BLACKSBURG,
VA). Jim Barrett (along with his son, Bo) is a local winemaker who quit his job
as a lawyer to make wine. His vineyard, Chateau Montelena is suffering
financially. He is suspicious of Spurrier/Rickman, believing him to be making fun
of New World winemaking. These feelings aren’t completely without reason as
Spurrier/Rickman’s arrogance gives the impression that he thinks New World
winemakers to be a bunch of dunderheads.
(Bill Pullman eating lunch at our very own Next Door Bake Shop this week in Blacksburg, Va.)
Confused when they produce brown chardonnay, Jim Barrett refuses
to send his wine back to France with Spurrier/Rickman. Barrett believes there
is a subtle science and exact art of winemaking. Because his wine is brown, he
thinks he failed in the wine business and seeks to get his old job back. His son
sneaks a couple bottles to Spurrier/Rickman at the airport. The brown
chardonnay is caused by a condition called bottle-shock, which apparently turns
the wine brown for a few weeks. I thought maybe this was fabricated to enhance
the story, so I found my way to a great article called Bottle Shock Movie: Fiction vs. Fact on http://discover.winecountry.com/wine/2009/09/bottle-shock-movie-fiction-vs.html.
As it turns out, Chateau Montelena’s wine did start out brown and then changed
color before the competition. It happens because additional sulfur gets into
the wine after bottling.
The movie effectively shows how close-minded France used to
be towards New World wines. It really supports what we’ve been talking about in
class. What makes a great wine is individual preference. Region, although
helpful in growing specific kinds of grapes, does not mean all wine from that
area is all good or all bad. You can make crappy wine in Champagne. Clearly,
fame isn’t everything. Price doesn’t mean anything either. Since Napa Valley
wasn’t famous at the time, their wines weren’t sold as widely as they are now
and thus they were sold at much cheaper prices. The movie draws attention to
this during a montage in which people who have read the article in Time Magazine covering the wine-tasting
event suddenly want to try Montelena’s wine, but it’s not in stock. In Champagne: How the World's Most Glamorous
Wine Triumphed Over War and Hard Times, the authors explain how the prices
of champagne rise and drop due to the market, changing preferences, local
preferences (Russians prefer sweeter tastes for example), etc. The product can
be praised one year and looked down upon the next. I think the same is true for
all wines; people go through fads. This movie really says something about the
wonders of experimentation and how success can re-invent pre-existing ideals
about wine.
I really enjoyed learning about a real event. I didn’t know
about this version of the “Judgment of Paris” until this movie. I like
Spurrier/Rickman’s last lines: “We have shattered the myth of the invincible
French vine. I'm a pariah among the cavistes and persona non grata to the
vintners.” It perfectly and concisely sums up what this movie is about.
Spurrier/Rickman and Barrett are shown to be experts in the wine world. They can teach you how to bewitch the mind and ensnare the senses with wine. They can tell you how to bottle fame, brew glory, and even put a stopper
in death. Spurrier/Rickman opened the world to a new perspective on winemaking. Because
of him, people are going to experiment and try more wines than they used to.
Always.
(Taken from https://pinterest.com/ashleybacon4/snape-and-lily/)
No comments:
Post a Comment