kickall A terroir consists of - Climate, Soil type, Topography, and Other plants growing in and around the vine plots Now seeing this film, we are convinced the human factors will play an even critical role than most of the above. Wine reviews guide you to read (not physically touch) the terroir of the wine you are tasting, while the production, distribution, advertising and the pre-determined taste buds determined by a few individuals, during the course, shaped what you think you are having.This is a film for wine lovers to re-think why you fall in love with wine. You can be not so subjective to reviews, just like not seeing a review before going to a theater, or like being open-minded to know someone, without first checking his or her resume.Like all the characters in the film, though more towards those who are pressed by the more financially dominant side.

Simon Peters eddy_mercury in his comments misses the point. The film maker is regretting the standardisation of taste that has occurred because of the way in which the value of the American market in wine has led to a steady and stealthy narrowing of choice when it comes to the style of wine. Nobody would deny that the standard of wine has improved. Nobody would deny the French have been too arrogant for too long. However it is to be regretted that the American public as a whole is so sheep like in following the taste of Robert Parker. He know what he likes and the great American public, which doesn't, is happy to say "Yeah and I like it too". Unfortunately what you will end up with is less choice. Look at what passes for cheese in America, and compare it with the wealth of choice that is available still in the Old World. Do you really want wines that will be like Kraft slices compared with Brie? Trust me, not all wines have to be big tasting reds barrelled in new oak, and giving endless, unchallenging, "easy-drinking". What next - Château Yquem Lite?

P C Business vs. personal conviction. Profit vs. art.As with any documentary that pits the capitalist large corporations against the small producer, the viewer will invariably have to take the side of one or the other based on their own believes. This is as much a documentary of the new standardized way of doing things that globalization is bringing us, against the old traditional ways where character and the art of making things matters almost more than getting the product sold.If you have to remember one thing from this movie, it is that the masses can no longer decide by themselves, they just follow the taste of one or a couple of critics that tend to equalize and standardize taste in the same way as MacDonalds used to do for the fast bite (something Parker himself admits to in the film against a backdrop of a Burger King sign). "It is all about image" against content as another interviewee says. That is the easy way, the standardized way. Easier than taking the time for a nice wine to mature, easier than to forge your own taste by trying and trying yet over again. Controlled branded taste is easier.There is a glitter of hope when even some of our cousins across the ocean agree that a few people are "levelling" the taste of wines to maximize the profits and ensure a maximum of it gets sold to the "grey masses". Individuality and difference is sacrificed for the extra buck. It is nice to see that not everything or everyone is giving in to standardization, even across the ocean.As in many other areas of today's world, dominance of a few and reduced freedom of choice impacts us all... let everyone make up their mind and decide what to go for. Too much standardization kills the mind and taste; difference brings innovation and healthy competition and will allow for choice - and not just vacuum-packed "more of the same". Standardization sells easily and a lot, and brings everyone to the same level - the lower one.On this, I am going to open up a nice bottle and wish you a hearthy "sante".

mark watson The filmmakers try to paint the influence of the Mondovis and Robert Parker as a travesty on par with the German occupation of France and the reign of Fascism. But they never find a victim in this film. We hear wine makers, critics and distributors bemoan that while the wine industry grows it becomes increasingly homogeneous. But the film never makes a case that this has resulted in the loss of any good wine or exploitation of any person or culture other than naive Wine Spectator readers with lots of cash. If they want to pay hundreds of dollars for a dull wine, so be it.If this were a film about the diamond trade, where the DeBeers corporation's market domination results in human suffering, the muckraking style might have been appropriate. But as it is it just comes off as anti-American, anti-modernization and anti-capitalist. Had the filmmakers been around in the 1870s they most likely would have protested the grafting of American vines in the effort to save French wine.