Streaming Spotlight: Bottle Shock - Movie Review

The lesser known of the two movies made about wine from the 2000’s.

Bottle Shock starring Chris Pine, Alan Rickman, Bill Pullman, Rachael Taylor, Freddy Rodriquez, and directed by Randall Miller. The film is based on the true story of a 1976 blind tasting competition between French and California wines. Bottle Shock focuses its story on one California vineyard in particular owned by Bill Pullman’s character Jim Barrett who is helped by his son Bo played by Chris Pine. They are a struggling financially and without producing a successful wine for the season Jim will have to sell the vineyard. Enter the British wine enthusiast played by the late great Alan Rickman who offers to put California wines up against the vaunted French. Rickman’s character, Steven Spurrier doesn’t really think the California wines have a chance, but he’s surprised by how good the wine is in California.

Bottle Shock is a simple light fun movie. There isn’t much depth to its story, but the film does try and add more to its characters. It’s about the romance of making wine along with the desire to do something with your life. Jim Barrett left a law firm to buy a winery and make wine. He knows what he is doing, but there is always a hint of him being lost in the process. Bo is a hippy who is still lost in the sixties, and doesn’t want to grow up. Rachael Taylor plays the girl interest for Pine and Freddy Rodriquez, and adds love triangle element to the story. She is probably the least developed character, but still plays the role well. I could have probably done without this story element, but it doesn’t hurt the movie either.  Rickman’s character Spurrier wants to prove he belongs in the wine circles in France and sees the competition as a way to become established. Most of the characters have something to prove to either themselves or the outside world, and while it might be a tad cliché, I found the story and characters engaging.

All of the actors in the roles do a fantastic job. Pine might seem out of place playing the hippy, but he does it well. There is a great scene with him going to a country club to ask for money from his mother and is beautifully awkward. Alan Rickman stands out above everyone, because of who he is. He plays the pompous British wine snob to perfection. There is a hint of his inner goodness throughout the film though. He has the façade of being a snob, but in the end you can’t help but like his character. I can watch this movie over and over simply because Rickman is in it and how well he acts in the role. The film is worth a watch at least once just to see him perform. Don’t get me wrong he’s not playing Macbeth, but he just does a great job. Pine and Rickman are the two standouts in the film for me, but Rodriquez does a good job with his part and adds an interesting Mexican-American element to the story. It might be a little heavy handed at times, but I still enjoyed it. The entire story might be a little on the nose overall, but with its light fun tone, it doesn’t worry about making big statements with its characters.

The backdrop and setting of the film is another reason why I enjoyed it so much. Setting the film in Napa Valley is fantastic. The characters travel around the valley quite a bit and why wouldn’t you use this as an excuse to shoot the fantastic scenery. Along with the scenery I found the musical score in the movie added to the tone of the film. I liked that Spurrier had a nice little French theme to go along with him, and Bo a rock. Then with the sweeping shots of the valley you get an appropriate musical score to accompany them. The score just added a bit more enjoyment to the light hearted good natured movie.

The only issue I have with the movie is that the pacing is a little off. It probably is about ten to fifteen minutes too long, and some scenes could have been cut to speed up time. They could have cut out the love triangle aspect and it would have sped up the pacing. The ending has one too many scenarios, and while parts of each story are probably true, the film could have cut back on one and it would have streamlined the ending of the film. Even with these problems I have watched Bottle Shock numerous times. I’ll stop and watch if I catch it on television at any point and watch until the conclusion.

For me Bottle Shock is an enjoyable fun film based on true life events. I think it is worth watching, and if you have Amazon Prime you can stream it as part of their video service at the moment. If you have seen it before let me know what you think. If not does it sound interesting? Comment and let me know. 

Streaming Spotlight: Defending Your Life - Movie Review

So I’m convinced the founder of Chipotle came back from Judgment City with the idea for his restaurant.

Defending Your Life starring Meryl Streep, Rip Torn, and Albert Brooks who also wrote and directed the film. The 1991 movie tells the story of Daniel Miller who dies in a car crash and wakes up in Judgment City. Judgment City is a stopping point where lives are put on a pseudo trial. If the person has lived a life facing fear and conquering it they can advance to another plane of existence. If they failed this test then they get to go back to Earth and try again.

Honestly I’m not sure how Albert Brooks got this film green lit. It has a completely unique look at life after death, merging some Eastern ideals with Western ones. Brook’s character, Daniel, lead a fairly normal North American white male life. He had a job, but wanted more money from it. He had a wife and had been divorced. He was also a bit of a klutz, which might be part of the reason why I loved this movie so much when I was younger, because I’m a huge klutz as well. It’s a little weird that I found myself watching this film every single time it came on HBO when I was a kid. I would have been eleven when it made it to the paid channel, and I can’t imagine my eleven year old liking this film. Maybe it was the love story and the chemistry Meryl Streep and Brooks have that always kept me engaged.

At the core of the film and its strange setting is its love story. Streep plays Julia, who unlike Daniel has lead a life unquestioningly facing her fears. There is never really a doubt about her moving on or going back to Earth. She is going to go forward. She had a great life and is ready for the next test. She seems to have everything together, but is instantly drawn to Daniel. Watching it again I still bought into their love story, but the two characters are opposites. It goes to just how strong the acting, writing, and directing is for the film that we never really question how these two very different people can fall so quickly in love.

The setting might have also helped with the believability of the love story. Judgment City feels like a convention town. The people with their life on trial can go anywhere in the city and get amazing food quickly. They just ask and it is immediately available and is prepared perfectly. There are no repercussions on what you can eat. You will never gain any weight, because well you’re dead. There are touristy things to do around the city, like the past live pavilion. The individuals who are defending their life can view the people they have been in previous lives. It is one of the best scenes in the film, and has always stuck out to me when remembering watching it. It still holds up and I chuckled through the scene again while watching it.

Everything is so seamless in the film, and you buy into the world Brooks creates without much question. This is helped along with the actual full time residents of Judgment City. The defenders and prosecutors who try each life also serve as a de facto guide for the people who have died. They explain what they will be doing and why the process is the way it is. It is a great way for the film to give the audience and the character an exposition dump and clear up some sticky points about certain issues with the process. Where are the kids Daniel asks? Which his defender, played by the great Rip Torn, responds when a child dies they just move on. How many chances do you get to go back? No clear answer is given, but there is a limit, and then a soul is just retired. There is no hell in this afterlife scenario and the only segment of people not mentioned are violent criminals. Watching it when I was younger I didn’t notice this, and now it is easy to assume those souls just get retired and don’t get to exist anymore. 

I have a soft spot in my heart for this film. It is one that has stuck with me because of the great concept and love story in movie. If you haven’t seen it you can watch it on Netflix right now. I think any generation can enjoy the film even if the décor is very late 80’s early 90’s.  It even has a mini-mall joke which is dated, but still funny. I would say this film is well Worth Seeing simply for its unique take on life after death. Give it a watch if you have never seen it.

If you have seen Defending Your Life did you like it? When was the last time you watched it, and does it still stick out in your mind? Does it sound interesting if you have never heard of the film before? Comment and let me know.