Bottle Shock Movie
Storyline
TAGLINES
Based on a true story of love, victory and fermentation.
The story of the early days of California wine making featuring the now infamous, blind Paris wine tasting of 1976 that has come to be known as "Judgment of Paris".
| Chris Pine | Bo Barrett |
| Alan Rickman | Steven Spurrier |
| Bill Pullman | Jim Barrett |
| Rachael Taylor | Sam |
| Freddy RodrÃguez | Gustavo Brambila |
| Dennis Farina | Maurice |
| Eliza Dushku | Joe |
| Miguel Sandoval | Mr. Garcia |
| Bradley Whitford | Professor Saunders |
| Joe Regalbuto | Bill |
| Hal B. Klein | Shenky |
| Kirk Baily | Loan Officer |
| Philippe Bergeron | Pierre Tari |
| Leslie Goodman | Wine Tasting Spectator |
| Frank Avila | Field Hand |
| Randall Miller |
7.40 out of 10 (835 votes)
Visitor Reviews
A naive domestic movie, not presumptuous enough to amuse.
posted on 10 Aug 2009The real presumption, of course, belongs to the California wine-makers who made France sit up and take notice in 1976. If only Randall Miller had a filmmaker's version of their zeal and skill. It seems more like he's trying to capitalize on "Sideways", with Napa Cab Sav instead of Santa Ynez Pinot Noir, but he fails to create a vintage flick. "Sideways" had passion; "Bottle Shock" --indie or not-- has Hollywood formula.No scene emerges as pure plonk, except perhaps the silly boxing matches between Barrett father and son. Indeed, some scenes are almost sparkling, e.g., every one pairing Alan Rickman and Dennis Farina. But overall, it's the cinematic equivalent of table wine, up to and including "surprise" endings in a movie about actual events. There are other disappointments: The girl (there's always a girl) played by Rachael Taylor is spirited, but she adds body, no flavor. Bill Pullman, who seems to have aged 20 years since "Nobel Son" one(!) year earlier, does his best with the splenetic Jim Barrett, but all his scenes are vinegary. Chris Pine, in the plummy role of Bo Barrett, is both creditable and engaging, in spite of the periwig ("Bottle Shock will be the last wig movie I ever do"); but nothing about Pine's performance here prepares you for his first-rate work-- comic, dramatic, and athletic-- in the burdensome role of young James T. Kirk.Only one thing about "Bottle Shock" left me wanting more: the storyline about immigrant Mexicans as the true masters of both viticulture and wine-making in California. Freddy Rodriguez and the wonderful Miguel Sandoval bring such strength to their characters that I found myself wanting a sequel-- but by Alexander Payne, not Randall Miller.
I loved it.
posted on 08 Aug 2009I have to disagree with the negative comments. Of the six or so films I saw, this one was the best. First off, it was beautifully shot. The scenery that was captured is going to get people to visit Napa on it's own. Alan Rickman was as great as always, and Freddy Rodriguez was amazing. Bill Pullman's character, as the owner of the winery, had a terrific arc. I understand that elements of the story were fictionalized, but I come to expect that with most "based on a true story" films.There were some great, touching scenes between the father (Pullman) and son (Chris Pine) and with Rodriguez as almost a "son he never had" type of character. Oh, and Dennis Farina nearly steals the scenes with Rickman he's so funny - I have to say nearly, because I love Rickman.In all it was thoroughly enjoyable, and I talked it up with several other movie goers on the tram ride afterward, and EVERYONE I spoke to loved it.
Fun Little Flick
posted on 02 Aug 2009Bottle Shock was a fun little ride. Certainly not without faults, but the predictable payoff was fun and the film wrapped up in a nice way. It's not quite the laugh-out-loud comedy the previews have tried to build it up to be, but this little film has heart, and though alone that can't carry it to greatness, it does make for an enjoyable evening at the movies.The performances are mostly quite good. Chris Pine as Bo Barrett does a wonderful job as our unambitious young hero. The part has been written stereotypically for a NorCal 70's stoner, but Pine manages to find the subtle and human aspects within that stereotype. He's exciting to watch throughout. As impressive as Pine is, Freddy Rodriguez as his quietly more ambitious buddy, Gustavo Brambila, overshadows him a bit. Rodriguez's passion, his quick changes of pace and tone, and his unexpected energy make Brambila the best part of the film. He plays beautifully, moment-to-moment, and though you're never sure where he'll take you, you're always ready to go. Rachael Taylor as Sam rounds out our three young leads. Taylor does a very nice job. She's sexy and fun, not overly impressive, but she keeps up with the boys and seems to have a good time doing it. Jim Pullman as Jim Barrett is a bit disappointing. He doesn't do a poor job, per say, but he doesn't do anymore than is required of him. Jim Barrett is a pigheaded and tight-wound man, with a passion for growing wine. Pullman's performance gives us this, but nothing else. You don't see any other aspects of the man. It was very two-dimensional and left me wanting. Alan Rickman does a wonderful job as Steven Spurrier, an arrogant and uptight wine snob. All the little quirks of Spurrier come out in Rickman's performance. He's a poser, a bit of a loser, and has a sadness beneath the surface that makes him very human, and engaging to watch. Also worth noting is the fabulous performance of Bradley Whitford as Professor Saunders. It's a small supporting role, one scene, but a key scene in the script, and Whitford plays it off beautifully. Possibly the best scene in the film, and he strolls on and steals it. Disappointing supporting performances come from both Denise Farina as Maurice and Eliza Dushku as Joe. Both actors play the same thing they always seem to play, and in neither case does it entirely seem to fit the role. He's abrasive, she's a tough girl, and they're both repeating performances we've seen them give before.This film's main faults lie in the structuring of it's second act. The most blame for this lies in the Film Editing by Randall Miller and Dan O'Brien which is erratic and jerky, the Original Music by Mark Adler which opens the film beautifully but begins leading the action in strange ways later on (popping in at awkward and noticeable moments, straining drama into melodrama), and the Writing by Jody Savin, Randall Miller and Ross Schwartz (story by all three plus Lannette Pabon) which seems to lose track of whose story to follow and how to follow it.In the end, as always, most of the blame and praise falls on the Director, and though Randall Miller's work here is certainly uneven, the performances he manages to illicit bring a joy to the screen that is hard not to feel. I left the theatre pleased, musing at the films problems rather than berating them. As I have said, it's a film full of heart, and that makes up for a lot.
After a shake up, things sometimes settle beautifully
posted on 23 Jul 2009Admittedly I saw >Bottleshock< at 11:30 p.m., after a long week of trudging through the snow & cold of Sundance. I usually don't go to movies after 7 p.m., because the whole thing quickly devolves into a $10 nap. (Picture sleep-deprived me in a soft velvet chair in a darkened room…) But I was out of time at ye olde film festival, and really wanted to catch this one.>Bottleshock< scored its first cool points with me for something a (sucky) screen writing school I once attended calls "arena." This means that the setting of the film was a spot that I really enjoyed hanging out in for a couple of hours.That spot—actually two of them—was Napa and Paris. Though I've spent more time in the latter than the former, I've drunk more of the affordable fruits of Napa, never realizing that it's a relatively recent invention. In fact, the film is based on a true story about how Napa was nada before one day in 1976, when it proved its wines could be as oh-la-la as those of the French.Charming and sweet, the story is roughly the tale of two oenophiles, who really just wanna matter. One is a California man (Bill Pullman, who quit his gig as a law-firm partner to see if he could cork a decent second career. The other is a fussy, small-time wine shop owner (Alan Rickman) in Paris, dying for un peu respect. And then it's about all these other things too: Slacker kids who turn out okay (Chris Pine); freeloaders who offer priceless advice (Dennis Farina); the groovy granola 70s (starring as themselves); being a Mexican immigrant promoted up the grape chain (Freddy Rodriguez); good love (Rachael Taylor), and bad hair weaves (that would be Pine again).The adventure lifts us leisurely over the fruited hills of Napa, or sends us rushing vite-vite through the streets of Paris. Ultimately it's Rickman who tries to put himself on the map by getting out of his dusty shop and staging an international taste-off. Everyone assumes the multi-culti French, who gave us brie and fois gras and topless bathing, will take the grand prize. But it turns out to be the hang-loose-dude Californians, who gave us the salad bar, white after Labor Day and the power lunch.>Bottleshock< is a fun film. I hope it comes to a theater near you. Or that you can queue it up in your Netflix, score some California wine and some runny French cheese, and enjoy it in the comforts of your casa. Pamela K. Johnson
That glass is more than half empty...
posted on 21 Jul 2009Unless you are an unconditional fan of Alan Rickman--whose contemptuous curling of lips is always delicious to see, and who does indeed steal the show whenever he is on screen--don't bother with this movie. I do not say this just because, to paraphrase Rickman, I'm French and you're not, or because I resent the fact that California wines won over French ones. I really thought that it was a terrible waste of beautiful scenery and sometimes decent acting. Movie? More like an ad from the Napa Valley tourism board or the local wine makers' association. I didn't think that "Sideways," the success of which may have helped secure financing for this project, was that good of a movie, but this is much worse. Bill Pullman overacts more than William Shatner, the Dennis Farina character is seemingly there only so that Alan Rickman doesn't speak to himself, the clichés are piling up so high you can't see the picture anymore... Actually, come to think of it, some of my impatience with the film does come from the fact that I am French and have lived in France as well as the US. Most of what is shown as being French is either a cliché or a misrepresentation. Sorry, but Sonoma CA doesn't look anything like Paris or its region--for the scene of the wine tasting, I might have bought Provence, but outside Paris? Please. And in 1976 French people drove cars others than Citroen 2CVs. As for learning something about wine, it's all well and good that the efforts of California wine makers were deservedly recognized, but the film doesn't get anywhere near conveying the complexity of factors and decisions involved in wine-making and especially wine-selling. If you really want to learn about that, watch the excellent 2004 documentary "Mondovino" instead.
The whine about wine
posted on 21 Jul 2009The Judgment of Paris preceded "Rocky" by four months in 1976, an uncanny coincidence had both events taken place in such a short period of time, since the bi-country wine competition between France and the United States, and the Sylvester Stallone vehicle that catapulted him to fame, each owned a distinct underdog component to its story. Were the time-line reversed, however, and the film was available for exhibition sooner rather than later, maybe the British wine merchant's idea to stage a chardonnay challenge(really, a no-win situation for the French wine industry), might've withered at the vine, once he saw the climactic fight scene in "Rocky" where Apollo Creed's trainer warns his fighter, "He doesn't know it's just an exhibition." Steven Spurrier(Alan Rickman) is Apollo Creed. He gave the Napa Valley wines its title shot, so to speak. At the same time, he's also Rocky, in the sense that the Judgment of Paris was supposed to be a platform for the outsider to ingratiate himself with the French wine establishment. The only problem was: the California wines were better. While "Bottle Shock" celebrates the moment that France's dominion over the science of oenology ended, this entertaining, but unfocused film unintentionally makes the case for French movies over American ones as being part of the superior cinema tradition.For commercial purposes, "Bottle Shock" spends an inordinate amount of time on the love triangle that transpires after a comely intern arrives at Château Montelna and strains the friendship between Bo Barrett(Chris Pine), the boss' loser son, and Gustavo Brambila(Freddy Rodriguez), a Montelena field-hand who can identify the brand and vintage of any wine. Bo is a hippie, a burn-out at twenty-five. He hangs out with the other burn-outs down by the meadows to the chagrin of his father Jim(Bill Pullman), who tells his son, "Woodstock was seven years ago." It's time to stop being groovy, and start being a man, is the gist of Jim's message, as Bo gets his bell rung up by dad in a boxing ring set-up within the vineyard. Gustavo, on the other hand, impresses Sam(Rachael Taylor) first, when she samples the wine from his little distillery he operates on the side. This is where "Bottle Shock" runs into problems.At the airport, Steven stands in line with twenty bottles of wine he needs to bring back to France, including Château Montelena, for the Tasting of 1976. But since this California chardonnay seems less like a small distillery and more like a large-scale operation such as Gallo or Paul Masson after Jim fires Gustavo, our excitement about Montelena's chances is somewhat tempered for having such a corporate mandate against having dreams. Then Gustavo loses the girl. In a sort of "Judgment of the Blonde", Sam ultimately chooses Bo, once he gets his s*** together, which has metaphorical value later on in "Bottle Shock", when an alchemical change in the wine restores the chardonnay back to its natural white coloring after being brown, and being mistaken for a bad vintage. "Bottle Shock" unwisely undercuts Château Montelena's underdog status with a bigger underdog. The rivalry between Bo and Gustavo threatens, and undermines the rivalry between the California Chardonnays and France's Burgundy Chardonnays. Unlike Bo, Gustavo gives the audience a reason to root for him. Some moviegoers may wish that it was Gustavo's chardonnay going up against the French.If "Bottle Shock" stuck with Steven as the main protagonist, he could've visited more vineyards and wineries, and met more interesting people than Bo. "Bottle Shock" only tells half the story; it forgets about the red wines, the California Cabernet Sauvignons that outperformed the Bordeauxs. The French still have Jean Luc-Goddard.
If you like Cute you'll love this movie.
posted on 17 Jul 2009I stuck with this movie because (1) I hoped to learn more about wine making (2) the photography was A+ and as a travelogue it was was enlightening.But almost every scene in California seemed to have been written by a teen-ager who knew only cute. Or perhaps someone wearing pink lensed glasses. Sweet is the word for this movie. Overly sweet. Saccharine. Ramshackle cars and trucks on their last legs trucks predominate, showing us that everyone is on their last nickle. A young girl-intern lives in a cabin right out of Hans Christian Anderson. The art director and whoever built the cabin must have been living out a childhood fairy tale. It was a perfect cabin, perched on a little hill-top, in the midst of miles of grape vines, under the heavenly blue sky usually seen on Hallmark greeting cards. Only Toto was missing.On the other hand the moment that Alan Rickman and Denis Farina get to work, I felt like they brought their own writer. Funny, intelligent, and engaging, most of their scenes were fine. Although someone thought that Farina wasn't quite enough of a character so he was constantly dressed in very noisy sport jackets, ones that may have been cut from some surplus horse blankets. -- More cuteness, I guess. Also, he's given an Elvis pompadour to wear -- Farina is a strong enough character on his own, he doesn't need any props to make him more than he is on his own. maybe the director is insecure or never learned that less is more. Everything in this movie is too cute and over sugared. There is the usual father-son conflict. There is actually a boxing ring set up on the verge of the vineyard so that Dad and son can go to it in the ring.I know you don't believe me--but you'll see it when you get to this film. The writers and directors must have been classmates at the California College of Cliché.
A Wine Film for the Holidays
posted on 29 Jun 2009I have been waiting to see this film ever since seeing a trailer for it many months ago and seeing the great Alan Rickman doing his version of the English wine snob.I know some wine snobs. My brother is one, and proud of it. A dear friend from Santa Fe, coincidentally also named Barry, is another. Between the two of them, and the sommeliers of some of the best restaurants of Europe and America, they have contrived to introduce my low-rent and uncultured palate to the joys of wine as it appears when practiced as an artform. I am indebted to all of them, and offer my review of this fun film as my humble attempt at a thank-you.As Galileo said, "Wine is sunlight, held together by water."A good film is light, period, projected through frames of celluloid, held together by a good story.The story of "Bottle Shock" is a good one, and a true one. In 1976, to rescue a failing business as a wineseller in Paris, a British wine snob named Steven Spurrier conceived of going to Napa County in California and gathering the best wines he could find, and bringing them back to France for a "blind tasting," conducted by the most cultured and educated palates in the world. In a blind tasting, for those who have never done one, you don't know which wines you are tasting, or where they came from. You are innocence itself, open to the experience of sunlight in a glass, open only to whether it speaks to you or whether it doesn't. You don't care about what country or what winery the glass in front of you comes from, only how good it is.The results of the 1976 Wine Tasting Of Paris rocked the oenophile world and ended forever the reign of French wines as the undisputed "best." "Bottle Shock" puts faces to that story, and well.It's the "feel good" movie of the season, even though the "season" may be only on DVD, since this film seems to have failed to find an audience in the theaters. A pity, because "Sideways," which was another film about wine, did. A pity squared, because "Bottle Shock" may be a better film.The film is worth seeing for Alan Rickman's performance alone. No one can do "snob" the way that Rickman can, and allow you to even love the snob along the way. Bill Pullman has never been better, and Freddy Rodriguez, Dennis Farina, Chris Pine, and Rachael Taylor aren't far behind.It's a delightful little tale about an artform that is not as universally appreciated as some of the others, and about the artists who work with the medium of soil and water and grapes and sweat to produce that artform. If you are looking for a film that the whole family can enjoy this holiday season, this one may be it. Take the whole family to see it, or rent it, and afterwards go out to dinner and order a bottle of a fine Napa Valley wine and sip it together and smile. This movie is about how what you are drinking came to be considered in 1976 not only drinkable by the snobbiest people on earth, the French, but respectable. I think the last time that the French found an upstart respectable was 200 years before that, in 1776, when America told the British to buzz off.
Delightful Tale of Wine
posted on 17 Jun 2009I am probably way behind watching this film, but DARN I enjoyed it. Sure there were a few tiny holes here and there, but so what. The only thing I would have to say I did not like, was the short, unneeded Sam/Gustavo hookup. It didn't advance story, plot, or any sort of entertainment value. I looked back at the film and thought, "Would the outcome of the film change had that scene be left out?" NO.Worth the price of the rental was the chance to see a TRUE actor show off his craft. Rickman's facial subtleties and body language demonstrated his over-time acceptance of this "interesting" wine country. A performance NOT to miss!!!
Is it worth your time - short review
posted on 24 May 2009Its not bad.. But its not great either.. Scenically beautiful but that's about it.. Even Alan Rickman and Dennis Farina humorous characters' still didn't let me forgive the films emptiness. Shame really.. I really wanted to like it.I saw a review on here from nippy woo on IMDb which mentioned the Bad Wig - I now know what he meant.. Just trust me and avoid.. You'll be saving yourself from the question you'll ask yourself afterwards 'Why was that movie very good? I mean it should have interested me, but it didn't... hhmmmmmmmm?' - then you'll post a similar comment as I have even after you've been warned its.. well.. its.. a nothing film really... Watch 'Sideways (2004)' instead - it is far the superior film.
The Bottle was Empty
posted on 24 May 2009This is not a good movie…for many reasons: poor script, bad conception, spotty acting, incompetent technical delivery, etc. etc. We only saw this turkey because there was a mix-up (oops! on IMDb) in the theatre schedule which meant we would have to wait an additional half hour for our desired film (to remain nameless). We should have waited. There is so much wrong with this film, it is hard to know where to start. Let me turn this around then and begin with what I liked: Alan Rickman's performance, especially in his strange little talks with Dennis Farina in the former's wine shop. That's all.A few specifics in the bad film department: Most of the other acting was ho-hum or worse, including Chris Pine (too much time on screen) and his so-called romantic interest played by Rachael Taylor. To be fair to the latter, her character was a walking cliché who, instead of developing a relationship with the Freddie Rodriguez role, which might have been interesting, falls inevitably into the arms of Mr. Pine. Did I mention racism as another problem? So Rodriguez is wasted, as well as Ms. Dushku, who seems to exist primarily as an obvious and lame plot mechanism.Writing this is making me angry all over again, so for our collective health, I will end this by lighting into the cinematography, which was lazy and badly staged (my viewing mate spent the film counting technical mistakes because it was so poorly made), giving us little sense of the actual locations where the main action was taking place. The characters could have been anywhere – and wound up nowhere, just like the viewing audience who hated it as much as I did.
Wonderful Film . . .
posted on 16 May 2009While some people might immediately try to compare this film to Sideways, that would be a big mistake. Both films might share wine as their subject matter but diverge dramatically from there.Bottle Shock tells an unknown story of Californian wine beating French wine in a surprise blind taste test (no one was more surprised than the French).Having the US as the Underdog, seeing the passion of the wine makers and seeing the French being served makes this an absolutely wonderful 2 hours.Bill Pullman was superb, Alan Rickman portrayed the quintessential snobbish Britt, Rachael Taylor was stunning and Dennis Farina was "Bacon Fat with a hint of Ripe Mellon!"
Like Thunderbird . . .
posted on 10 May 2009"Good wine is a good familiar creature, if it be well used." Shakespeare's Othello.Like an expensive bottle of Burgundy that doesn't taste half as good as a $10 bottle of Riesling, Bottle Shock has much promise but loses much in the execution. Where Sideways did an above average job weaving wine tasting among the moods of its interesting travelers, Bottle Shock couldn't shock anyone with its clichéd romantic triangle, injected in the plot to spice up an inherently interesting story about the victory of California wine in a 1976 blind tasting contest in France. "Based on a true story" fulfills the worries of those who still like the real deal.Bo Barrett (Chris Pine) is a naughty, long-haired slacker son of vineyard owner Jim Barrett (an overwrought Bill Pullman) but just kind-hearted enough to catch the eye of vineyard intern Sam (Rachael Taylor). Gustavo Brambila (Freddy Rodriquez), a Mexican worker who has known the land and the business for his whole life, is also in the mix. But the real romance, so much more than this trite triangle, is the emergence of California wines as a world force to be reckoned with.In that spirit, British Steve Spurrier (an appropriately snooty Alan Rickman) provides context and clash among the local vintners as he gathers up their samples for a first-time challenge to the French. Rickman lends just the right bite in this exchange: Jim Barrett: Why don't I like you? Steven Spurrier: Because you think I'm an ass. And I'm not really. It's just that I'm British and you're not. If it were not for Rickman's droll presence, this film would have soured from the first frame except for the eye-popping NAPA cinematography of Mike Ozier.When the film arrives with Bo in France, a bit of the old French farce magic seems to have come with him but not long enough to keep the film from sinking into mediocrity like Thunderbird at a wedding.
Jet Lag for Wine
posted on 06 May 2009Bottle Shock, we learn early on, is or resembles the equivalent of jet lag for wine, but lasts longer than for humans. It is what can happen when wine is transported as cargo rather than as carry-on.The movie is set in the bicentennial year, 1976, in California and France. Bill Pullman (Sleepless in Seattle and While You Were Sleeping) plays Jim Barrett, a former lawyer turned proprietor of a Napa Valley winery in shaky financial condition. He is assisted by son Bo, played by Chris Pine, who is something of a hybrid surfer-hippie without college ambitions. Father-son arguments are taken to an outdoor boxing ring. Gustavo, played by Freddy Rodriguez (the bus boy in Bobby), is a hired hand who has grown up locally and has dirt and grapes in his blood. Rachael Taylor has the role of Sam, who signs on as an intern. Eliza Dushku's character, Joe, owns a bar in the nearby community of Calistoga. Miguel Sandoval (Blow) plays a small-time Hispanic grape grower who favors Maria Callas records. Bradley Whitford (Josh in West Wing) has a bit part as a straw-hatted university agriculture professor.Meanwhile, in France, Alan Rickman (Sense and Sensibility, the Harry Potter series) plays Steven Spurrier, the British proprietor of L'Academie du Vin, which has as its goals (1) selling wine to customers and/or (2) educating them in fine wine appreciation and palate cultivation. If there were any clients, that is. Owner of the next-door Paris limousine tour service is Maurice from Milwaukee, played by Dennis Farina (Law & Order). He enjoys camaraderie with the Englishman, and the wine that goes with the camaraderie, but chides him for shortcomings of business promotion and an inventory that's too French and absent a "global context." An idea hatches to address both such problems, and Mr. Spurrier travels to California.This is my favorite American movie of 2008, hands down, and reportedly was a big hit at the Sundance festival. As directed by Randall Miller, it has a rural flavor reminiscent of films by Robert Redford (A River Runs Through It and The Horse Whisperer) and Victor Nunez (Ruby in Paradise and Ulee's Gold). Pullman is truly outstanding, and Rickman likewise achieves a career best. Rodriguez is good, and undoubtedly we will welcome seeing more of Pine and Taylor in the future. The musical score is appealing. Farina's character, and his wardrobe, are a riot. (Or was it a scream? I can't remember my seventies lingo.)
Bottle Shock: The Sideways of 2008
posted on 22 Apr 2009I recently got a chance to see Bottle Shock and I have to say I thought it was great. It's really charming and interesting in a very different way from Sideways, although because of all the beautiful Napa Valley photography, it still reminded me of it. It also has great characters and hilarious moments the way that film does. I highly recommend this film. Based on a true story, it chronicles how California wine makers became serious contenders in the world competition of wine-- an honor previously assumed to be rewarded always to the French. It centers around a town of quirky up and coming wine makers, each with their own challenges to face. It's got a great cast, including Bill Pullman, Chris Pine, Freddie Rodriguez, Rachel Taylor, Eliza Dushku and the hilarious Alan Rickman. Rickman plays an English wine seller in France who's desperate to find the best wines to sell in his store. He travels to California to see if the rumors are true about California's wines. His performance alone is worth seeing this. It's a charming, heartwarming movie that I think will do very well when it opens 8/8. Check it out, you wont be disappointed. 9/10
Bottle SCHLOCK
posted on 16 Apr 2009One of the worse movies we have ever seen. Let's see: Bad "Caveman" hair on the Bo character. PLEASE put up the bucks for better hair, or better yet ask your actors to grow their own hair out. YES, we viewers can tell when you are wearing a wig and it is distracting.Bo...no one said "dude" in the 70's...dude.The blond chick that was supposedly studying wine but seemed to be more interested in drinking it or sleeping around Lame scene with above blond chick hosing some piece of equipment off and WHOOPS got the t-shirt wet...hate it when that happens, ESPECIALLY when lots of workers are watching...Male fantasy bartender chick named "Joe"..this movie HAD to be written by alcoholics for alcoholics.The writing is so bad that it makes me want to start writing scripts. Obviously, anyone can do it.The clichés are too many to mention...well, okay...cars breaking down, girl wearing Daisy Duke shorts with boots, Mexican guy knows more than anyone about growing wine, white guy gets the girl in the end, not sure why, the other guy was way hotter, okay, I'm stopping because now I'm just mad that I wasted my time watching this movie. Although we admit to fast forwarding through a lot of it Sorry, I wanted to like it. I love the British actor and his scenes with his American friend. The American living in Paris had awesome outfits. That's really all I liked about this movie.
Audience please for this little gem
posted on 12 Apr 2009My wife and I have been wanting to see this movie for awhile now. With the kids busy, we got our chance yesterday evening. Our first theater trip was a disappointment in that the movie had "left the building" the day before; our fault for not checking. Manager did mention that the movie was a good one, but nobody came. Looking for another theater we were lucky to find one close. 6:25 here we come.We were both glad we made the second trip and saw this movie. Interesting hidden story while our country was busy with its 200th birthday. Remember the red, white and blue toilet paper? Alan Rickman was wonderful as usual. He, IMO doesn't get enough work or is content with his current lot. Other actors were well cast and the flipping from Napa to France was not at all distracting, although I wish a bit more time was spent in the wine country in France. And where did Dennis Farina get that suit he wore during the tasting contest outside of Paris? To close there were about 6 other people in the theater when there should have been 600. When we exited we were stopped by 2 students that asked how we liked the movie. On their clipboard they entered 2 -4 star votes from us.If you get a chance and this is a hard one to find in theaters, go. Hope you enjoy it as much as we did.
Really quite palatable.
posted on 04 Apr 2009America; home of the free, over-sized fast-food and trash TV—at least, that's what most Europeans like to comfort themselves in thinking about their distant cousins. So who then would think, that in the 1970's, only two hundred years into the countries recent history, that this very same country would be the forefront of a wine movement that would change the industry as it was known at the time? Quite honestly, nobody did, except of course, those few American "hicks" who knew what they were doing regardless of their history and position within the sophisticated-snob wine culture of France. Bottle Shock then, with it's attempt at re-telling that story alongside plenty of character-play and drama, achieves in doing what it sets out to do by crafting an uplifting, re-affirming two hours balancing debatable fact with fiction. It's an unassuming experience for sure; wine tasting and competition isn't exactly the medium's foray when it comes to delivering attention grabbing excitement from your average audience. Yet when it comes to simply offering a modest, albeit compelling and engaging character story fit with tangible emotion and relativity, Bottle Shock isn't bad at all—in fact, it's really quite palatable indeed.For all that the general history behind the true story of Bottle Shock, and all that it does for the movie's plot, there still remains a distinct impression here that such involvements are secondary to the elements that are really on show here. Following five characters as they each seek out their place in life, Randall Miller's feature here sticks to the opinion that story can define characters, but that characters define the audience. Taken on a purely ostensible level, Bottle Shock would be a tired, dry and unwelcoming approach to documenting a piece of history fit only for aficionados of the wine trade. Yet by balancing out the script and action with some wonderful character developments and relationships, Miller and his ensemble of writers manage to craft a story that excites and compels by its final act, but only because the first two invest heavily in making you feel for those involved in such a struggle. The result is a slowly paced, somewhat uneven venture, but one that does eventually pay off through its use of catharsis which utilises that empathy to full effect.Aesthetically speaking, the movie isn't all that bad either, gracing the screen with some wonderfully tranquil photography that constantly evokes wistful, whimsical emotions fit for the existential nature of the screenplay. Alongside the cinematography also lays the somewhat majestic, but grounded score penned by Mark Adler that manages to convey the same feelings provoked by Ozier's photography, creating a formidable, cohesive whole that really brings home the themes of the feature with poignancy.Unfortunately, the same cannot wholly be said for the performances that at times can come off as a little disjointed and lazy. As a whole, the cast do well to keep things interesting, and bring at least a little flavour to their characters, but a common thread of awkward phrasing and timing too often breaks the illusion that Miller attempts to weave. That being said, the feature at least boasts a fine introduction for many to the talent of Chris Pine who shares the lead spot here with a coming-and-going Bill Pullman. Again, it's a timid performance fitting of the feature's rather small-time nature, but it's certainly an inviting and oft compelling portrayal that works on many levels and even helps bring out the better sides of Pullman who plays his father. As a leading man here, and indeed giving the movie its finest performance next to an ever-arresting Alan Rickman, Pine offers plenty of reason to believe the young actor has a bright future ahead of him.Despite all the good that the movie does however, there still remains a certain emptiness that resides within Bottle Shock's makeup. It's a feature that uplifts, and engages while it exists on screen, and yet fails to achieve a lasting connection that stays long after the credits have rolled by. In its place exists a fond memory perhaps, but one that probably won't be, and won't need to be revisited again any time soon. In that respect, Bottle Shock achieves a firm hold on its immediate audiences, but differs from its subject by neglecting holes within narrative that would otherwise have filled in lasting impressions upon those very same viewers. Nevertheless, although lacking in a few important areas of taste and refinement, Bottle Shock still permits an enjoyable and rewarding two hours of fine character drama that uplifts and tugs at heart strings.- A review by Jamie Robert Ward (http://www.invocus.net)
Ambitious Effort, Gone Astray
posted on 29 Mar 2009Too bad, tch tch tch. They had something great to make a film about, but instead they overdid the effort and created a bit of a mess. To wit: individually the performances are good, but the dialogue and direction want for lack of finesse. Take for example the two chicks, Sam and Joe, who together (in character) do not a faux Meg Ryan make, despite all their attempts. This is the director's fault, who should have let Ms. Ryan's type go and tried for something historically correct and original . And the cut is wrong, because there is no tension or build-up along the way, as we are led through irrelevant adolescent-like romances, annoyingly. We want a film about wine, not whine. Plus the film fails to make us believe it's 1976; the dialogue style is much too current, the music too long-forgotten. The little gimmick of run-down cars in Napa is very overdone -- one VW Bug example is enough. Such a disappointment when the fun parts are in the ending credits where they let us in on the actual people's lives. The rest of the film is, well, just a sad little mess, casting a bright light on the author's, director's, and editor's ambitions or pretensions.
Crampacked with gratuitous clichés
posted on 26 Aug 2009This could have been a good story for those who didn't know that two California wines won a prestigious tasting of French and California wines in the '70's. Unfortunately the story was flawed by too many hackneyed clichés which made the entire movie tedious.Some examples: the boxing scenes between the father and son were unnecessary and did little to advance the story. The ludicrous plaid suits worn by one of the characters didn't provide comic relief. They just seemed silly and a distraction to the plot. The silly lopping off of the neck of a bottle with a Japanese sword was also a poor attempt to provide interest or "bottle shock" to any viewer who doesn't care about or drink much wine. The overuse of shots of spitting wine into the spit bucket were boring after the first dozen spits.A movie, such as Mondo Vino, provided much more content and food for thought without the "Hollywood," trite, pandering to the viewer who doesn't yet know or care much about the making of wine. That movie provided a lot of information and left the conclusions up to the viewer on the state of "wine making" opposed to the "wine business" and making money. Movie goers aren't really so dense that they have to be hit on the head with so many trite clichés.All that being said, the photography was beautiful and, though I squirmed in my seat at all the "Hollywoodization" of, what could have been,a great story, I stayed to the end because of this redeeming feature. This story needed to be told but in a more honest way.