My wife and I have decided to do a survey of wine movies, and so I pulled this one out of the dark reaches of forgotten, critically-damned films from the last decade. I’ve never been a Ridley Scott fan, and although I do like Russell Crowe quite a bit, I’ve never liked him when he pairs with Ridley Scott. Obviously, A Good Year was something of a leap of faith, but what was I going to do? How many “wine movies” are there to choose from, after all?

My general reaction was that this was basically a pretty sweet, inoffensive film. Ridley Scott’s comedy is a little bumpy, although the actors definitely give it their all. It’s somewhat stilted and a bit forced – it would have worked better if Scott had let the comedy come to the film more naturally, instead of being so overt about it. But I didn’t find the humor offensive, unlike so many modern comedies. It’s very earnest in its comedy, a bit old-fashioned, with almost a G-rated, 70’s-Disney feeling to it. Good for a few laughs and many (only slightly self-conscious) smiles.

But the big question is: how does A Good Year acquit itself as a wine movie? It’s a little disapointing, but not a complete failure by any means. The wine talk is pretty minimal (the dialog in general is on the minimal side) and not terribly interesting. True, there is the cool idea of the boutique wine being made in secret, but the solution to the “secret” is obvious for the entire duration of the film, and they certainly don’t develop this idea at all. Abby Cornish’s wine brat character could have livened things up, but they didn’t write much dialog for her, preferring to present her as a mopey, sullen, reticent teenager (how original!) The self-righteous French vineyard keeper wound up being pretty hard to take – he talked a lot, but most of it was either muddled mumbo-jumbo or insufferable whining. And Crowe’s character doesn’t give a shit about wine – he’s just there for the babes, the sun, and (maybe) the money.

Furthermore, the visuals of the Chateaux and the vineyards are not very transporting or inspirational – they are not shot very well, and the script does not make good use of them. And Russell Crowe’s supposed transformation from a complete prick into a loving reborn guy didn’t inspire either – in fact, I found it largely unbelievable. I never even believed that he liked his uncle all that much, or that his time at the Chateaux as a child was all that fantastic, although this is mostly due to the casting of the highly irritating and unsympathetic Freddie Highmore as the young Russell Crowe in the flashback scenes.

Marion Cotillard, on the other hand, is pretty inspirational (to look at, anyway.) But she only goes so far, especially since she’s not in the movie very much. Besides, I feel kind of bad that after winning the Academy Award all she can get are these supporting roles playing various shallow caricatures of the gorgeous-but-fragile French woman who is a pawn in the games of men. I guess all actresses have a version of this same problem now, given that hardly anyone writes decent roles for women anymore. Still, if Rachel Weisz can somehow find interesting and dignified roles to play, why can’t Marion Cotillard?

After this littany of complaints, it may seem odd that I actually liked A Good Year, but I did. It’s hard not to like Russell Crowe, let’s face it, and ditto for the excellent supporting cast (Tom Hollander, Abby Cornish, Cotillard, and Albert Finney are all warm and engaging.) And it’s hard not to enjoy a film as earnest and old-fashioned as this, and that has the guts to deliver a fairly believable happy ending. It is a fun little film that leaves a good taste, despite its many small flaws. If you like Russell Crowe, or if like me you are seized with a desire to watch a film set on a vineyard in the south of France, give it a shot.