The ensemble dramedy is always a potentially great film, and what it ultimately comes down to is the writing, and whether or not the film is heartfelt enough for its audience to be moved. While Bottle Shock won't be winning any Oscars, it certainly accomplishes the aforementioned goals. In short, the film is very honest, heartfelt, informative, and enjoyable. It will draw its comparisons to 'Sideways' because of the subject matter and some of the characters (Bill Pullman in BS and Paul Giamatti in SW have similar characters),but what sets Bottle Shock apart is that it looks at the wine itself as a character. You care just as much about the wine as you do about the characters.

Bottle Shock may be categorized as a comedy in some listings, but I felt that this isn't right. It's more of a drama than comedy, but it does have its light hearted and funny moments, most of which center around Rickman's British man getting involved in 1970's California culture. The film does a great job of setting up an atmosphere in which we can get lost in, not to mention shows a part of the USA rarely seen. The cinematography and physical landscape of the film is beautiful. It also is smoothly edited.

The acting is always a topic of conversation in this kind of movie, and I found the film to have a lot of subtle and powerful performances, especially from Bill Pullman and Alan Rickman. Pullman's character is quite the specimen. A man who's quit his job as a lawyer (and partner of a firm) to grow grapes, essentially, and is having a hard time watching it fail. I felt that Pullman nailed the nuances and little emotions he needed to. He also had a good dynamic with Chris Pine. The restrained anger was especially well done by the veteran. Alan Rickman gives yet another interesting and intriguing performance in a part that was probably written for him. In the hands of any other actor, the character is bland at best, but Rickman gives Steven Spurrier a certain depth that makes him likable despite his snobbish attitude.

Surprising me with yet another great show after his wonderful performance in 'Bobby', Freddy Rodriguez gets a lot to chew on here. This guy has got to be one of the most underrated and rare talents in the business. I appreciated his Oscar worthy turn in 'Bobby', and he probably gives the most difficult and well done performance after Pullman. Chris Pine is acceptable, but is nothing special. Rachael Taylor has a certain likable charm about her (she has gorgeous hair and eyes),though the fact that her strong British accent slipped into her obviously fake American one a few times bothered me. Dennis Farina and Eliza Dushku are nice additions in smaller parts.

Bottle Shock certainly isn't for everyone. You won't find super huge action sequences or psychotic bad guys here, but you'll find a remarkable character study with a compelling enough story to keep a viewer interested. It is a movie that doesn't require a ton of thought, but some attention is needed. I will give our director and writer some props for keeping the movie going smoothly. It never dragged or was boring. If this one is playing at your local cinema, I advise you to give it a chance.

"There is hardly a word that is true in the script and many, many pure inventions as far as I am concerned"....Steven Spurrier

Steven Spurrier (Alan Rickman) is one of the main characters in this film and the real life Spurrier thought the film was almost complete fiction. Likewise, the character Gustavo Brambila did not even work in Napa until AFTER the famed tasting in France. I also am pretty sure the one-bottle FAA limit scene never could have happened, as I carried LOTS of wine/beer in carry-ons before the recent changes due to worries about terrorism. And then there was the law office that just happened to have a spare sword lying about...so, at least from a historical standpoint, "Bottle Shock" is not a good film. And, as a retired history teacher, I was dismayed that so many instances of artistic license occurred with the movie.

"Bottle Shock" was adored by many when it came out and I got around to watching it today. I was NOT as enamored with it and apart from the historical inaccuracies, I thought the characters were pretty much ALL annoying and poorly written (especially Pullman's). I can only assume that many of the folks who adored the film did so out of a sense of nostalgia for the time period and the wines. As for me, I've been on wine tours in many regions in the world (including Napa and Sonoma) but that just wasn't enough to make the film work for me. The only things that really worked were the music and cinematography. Otherwise, I just wasn't enthralled.

It's 1976 Calistoga, California. Jim Barrett (Bill Pullman) is desperate to scrap up the money to perfect his chardonnay. His son Bo (Chris Pine) is a lot less patient. Sam Fulton (Rachael Taylor) surprises everybody as the new intern. Gustavo Brambila (Freddy Rodríguez) is the foreman trying to make his own wine, and Bo's best friend. In Paris, sommelier Steven Spurrier (Alan Rickman) has a failing wine shop. He is challenged by his next door neighbor American Maurice Cantavale (Dennis Farina) to go taste some Californian wine. He goes to find some Californian wines to challenge the french ones in a blind taste test. He has a roadside breakdown and Jim Barrett coincidentally rescues him. He is amazed at Jim's wine and the rest of the area wines.

This is a nice charming true story. Alan Rickman has a friendly snotty attitude. He's snobby without being arrogant. I think that's the key. He's actually likable. As for the romantic triangle, I like the hot girl not picking the handsome leading man but then she changes her mind. It's balanced out by an angry Bill Pullman. He provides the little bit of drama in the movie.