Rickman is great, and the story manages to be both fun and interesting (despite a few minor missteps; the romantic subplot especially feels a little underdone). Really, there's very little to dislike here, whether you're a teetotaller or a fully-fledged oenologist: as the movie itself implies, it's the people that are interesting, not the wine.

"After Sideways and now Bottle Shock, it's official: I love wine as much as I hate movies about people who love wine." - Ed Gonzalez

The best parts of this film lie in the 2nd act, when Bo goes through his trials and Rickman progresses through his journey through Napa. However, the beginning does a rough job of establishing the story's characters and their intentions and the ending feels far to easy and sentimental. Pullman overacts his way through this entire film, but Rickman is pleasant to watch as always. In fact, until Pine's story really kicks in, I would have been happy with Rickman remaining the central focus.

don't be "shocked" by its nice nose, full body and clean finish.....recommended.

I wanted to see Snape on a comedic drunk rampage to all his friends and loved ones, not this crap

Good film.

This is an entertaining film with a nice ensemble cast. Of course Alan Rickman is good in this movie and so is a Pre-Star Trek Chris Pine. It is weird to see Dennis Farina in a movie without him playing a character that swears all the time.

I couldn't really get myself to care about the romance plot, or really most of the characters' lives. It's good enough to see if you're a huge Alan Rickman fan, but nothing else about the movie makes it stand out.

bad script or something,for rickman drinking wine see the song of lunch

Fairly harmless story. Good enough performances to watch once. I don't feel the need to ever see it again. Love story was not needed. Pullman is a bit over the top, and did anyone else think Chris Pine's wig was a gag they were going to reveal at some point, and just didn't?

They wrote a story into a historic event but left much of the history on the cutting room floor while writing in a small 1970s hippie love affair, ultimately not doing justice to any story and saved only by the acting of Alan Rickman and nostalgia.

I don't understand the low rankings of this film.. The cast is pretty much perfect, the music and swooping images of the wine country are very pleasant and the story is both thrilling and engaging. It's not perfect, but.. I didn't expect much, and I left the showing impressed. As opposed to people who seem to think this made very little of it's source material, I thought it made quite much out of very little. But I'm no wine expert. Also, I must clearly attempt to watch more Pullman films.

Since I know nothing about wine, I found the history mildly interesting. I would think that anyone that knew anything about wine would be bored by this movie. I felt the love story was a complete waste of time. The acting was pretty good overall, but Chris Pine's hair was stealing the show in a bad way. Rickman and Rodriguez were great. [Entry 1 Birthday CD Movie Crawl 02.23.2009]

"More of Rickman's snooty comedic presence - the movie's gold-star highlight - would have enriched the film's palate."

limited appeal to people who are not wine buffs, but it's still a fine example of film making, since i've actually read a book about the judgment of paris to see it interpereted on film was a pleasent surprise.

Alan Rickman plays Steven Spurrier, a British wine snob who goes to California in 1976 to see if he can find wines to rival the French wines for a publicity stunt -a blind taste test in what became known as The Judgement of Paris. It is good if not as earthshattering as its subject matter - Rickman is especially funny and expressive as he tastes Napa Valley wines, guacamole and KFC for the first time.

So I was a little let down but I found it to be an enjoyable film. Grade: B-

So much potential squandered.

This film was decent. Only thing keeping it there for me is Snape.