Grapeshot Flies Over a Wine Film Not to French Taste

The Sunday Times ^ | March 20, 2005 | Matthew Campbell

[quidnunc]

Paris – A documentary made by an American former wine waiter is stirring up passions in the vineyards of Bordeaux of an intensity usually reserved for France-England rugby matches.

Some are likening the ambience to the second world war: on one side are the collabos, or collaborators, and on the other the resistance. The enemy this time is not the Nazi invader, but globalisation and efforts to make French wine more appealing to an international palate.

Mondovino, the film by Jonathan Nossiter, has provoked outrage and delight since opening at the end of last year.

It has also intensified long-simmering resentments between those who believe France must adapt to take advantage of international commercial opportunities and the terroiristes — the word comes from terroir, meaning soil — who argue that French wines must retain identities that are rooted in the soil.

Such is the capacity of the film for sparking heated arguments that Nossiter is being called the wine world’s Michael Moore — a reference to the American polemicist who made Fahrenheit 9/11.

Articles have been dedicated to Mondovino in French magazines and it was even the subject of a front-page story in Le Monde newspaper.

So outraged was Michel Rolland, the wine consultant, about the film’s portrayal of him that he almost walked out of a discussion panel after a Paris screening.

For the terroiristes, one of the chief villains in the drama is Robert Parker, the influential American wine critic whose nose is insured for $1m and whose verdict, delivered as a score out of 100 in his magazine, The Wine Advocate, can make or break any bottle.

-snip-

[Uncle Miltie]

"Robert Parker, the influential American wine critic whose nose is insured for $1m and whose verdict, delivered as a score out of 100 in his magazine, The Wine Advocate, can make or break any bottle."

Parker is extremely consistent, and I agree with his palate. He runs slightly towards fruit bombs compared to the Wine Spectator which prefers complexity and balance.

These are the only two ratings I trust. Everything else is often inflated or plain wrong.

With Parker's Wine Advocate (WA) and the Wine Spectator (WS) scores of 87+, I toss about 1% of the bottles I buy. That's consistency not available by any other method.

Suck eggs, France.

[AnAmericanMother]

FWIW, I have also found Parker and the Wine Spectator extremely helpful. I prefer WS because I like the old-fashioned Bordeaux wines the best.

[neuron2]

Wine snobs. How quaint.

[RebelTex]

"I like the old-fashioned Bordeaux wines the best."

Gee - you mean there are different kinds of wine besides Thunderbird and Muscatel? wow - will wonders never cease.

;^D

[AmericanChef]

Ah, wine! The Fancy People's way of getting drunk and stupid...

[tet68]

Nothing I like better than imbibing a glass of microbial
byproducts. NOT.

[thummy]

And you do not eat bread?

[AnAmericanMother]

Don't laugh.

My father determined that the best way to keep my sister and me from running with the drunken teenager crowd was to teach us about wine. He made his own wine in the basement (he had a friend in California with a vineyard - it was California Cabernet grapes, and actually a very good but powerful red) and taught us all about the winemaking process.

We never got drunk in my high school and college years, because we would not drink anything that teenagers could obtain.

[quantim]

Click to be added!

I started a wine ping list recently.