The Ever Controversial John Gilman

[s*d*r]

As many of you know, John Gilman is the author of The View From the Cellar. He publishes his voluminous monthly opinions of wines from all over the world. He has a "classical:" palate and likes 'em old. This is a small fraction from his annual Bordeaux report he released yesterday.

He is a big fan of traditional estates such as Domaine de Chevalier, Canon and Magdelaine and praises them over many vintages, young and old.

“When tasting through the wines of the last fifteen vintages in Bordeaux, it is readily
apparent that the wines produced here today are simply made in a very different style than the
wines that were made here in the decades of the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s and 1990s. So many of the
wines now are big, ripe, thick and often hot with uncovered alcohol on the finish. . . I am still thoroughly convinced that the last truly great vintage produced in Bordeaux was the 2008 vintage.”


2022 Château Montrose
I really do not like the balance of this wine, which seems to indicate that it will dry out without ever softening up its tannins and will always have to sidestep around excessive alcohol. It is respectably fresh and vibrant for its alcohol level, but that is not to be confused with a serious wine. Given the paucity of complexity the wine exhibits today, my score may actually end up being overly generous. 2040-2100. 82.


2018 Château Montrose
The 2018 vintage at Château Montrose is another ripe and lusty wine, coming in listed at a
heady 14.5 percent alcohol in this drought vintage (though no doubt the actual alcohol level is
really just a whisper under fifteen percent). . .On the palate the wine is deep, fully-bodied, jammy and overtly hot, with plenty of stuffing at the core, some soil tones, astringent, uncovered and dry tannins and a soupy, bitter and alcoholic finish that is unfortunately, really quite long and prolongs the suffering. . . This is a train wreck of epic proportions. I have to laugh that some journalist gave this disaster a hundred points. I would not even cook with it! I cannot imagine a time when it will provide even a modicum of pleasure. . . I would not pay even fifty cents for a bottle, as it is really completely undrinkable. The 2018 Château Montrose is clearly one of the worst wines I have tasted from this truly pitiful vintage. 63.

1990 Château Margaux (Margaux)
I have been less than wholehearted in my enthusiasm for how the wines from Château Margaux have evolved in bottle from the Paul Pontellier era at the estate. . . But, for more than a decade now, I have had my fair share of moderately disappointing wines from Château Margaux from the Pontallier era and no longer feel this was a “golden era” for this First Growth. Despite that, this recent bottle of the 1990 left me a bit more perplexed than usual about Château Margaux, as the wine was still certainly, deep, long and showed excellent backend lift on the finish. But, it somehow seemed that the whole here is decidedly less than the sum of its parts. The bouquet initially is somewhat four-square and notably lacks complexity . . . So, the wine has some very good attributes, but at the same time, somehow managing to continually emphasize that it is not really a great wine. . . it has the feel of a wine that was constructed . . . the wine is ultimately on the road to nowhere special. 2025-2075. 89.


1928 Château Poujeaux (Moulis)
. . . the 1928 Château Poujeaux is still at the peak of its powers and is drinking brilliantly well today, at nearly one hundred years of age! The bouquet is deep, pure and vibrant, wafting from the glass in a blend of sweet cassis, dark berries, pipe tobacco, black truffles, a fine base of dark soil tones and plenty of upper register smokiness. On the palate the wine is deep, full-bodied and still plush with sweet black fruit at the core, with excellent soil signature and grip, still some tannin, great balance and a very long, focused and beautifully complex finish. . . the 1928 Poujeaux, which remains at its apogee of peak drinkability and has decades of life still ahead of it! It is by far the greatest vintage of Poujeaux that I have ever drunk. 2025-2050+. 95.

[stefan]

Is it true that when Gilman visited Montrose and left his trunk open, he found it empty when he returned to his car?

[NoahR]

Maybe there’s this unwritten rule that every 5 years, as interest and clout wane, a critic has to go out on a limb and trash a famous wine in a supposed Emperor-Wears-No-Clothes moment. Establishes independence and reasserts a need for tough criticism…

Galloni on 2008 Giacosa and then 2020 Monte Bello comes to mind.

[greatbxfreak]

John Gilman is a true provocateur.

I have never trusted his descriptions and ratings of wines.

He gives Montrose 2022 82 points with wicked complaints and, at the same time, states that this wine can keep until the year 2100, which means 78 years.

Ridiculous!

[JimHow]

Yeah, I haven't had the 2022 Montrose but I've had the 2019 and other recent vintages, I'm pretty hard pressed to take this seriously. To me Montrose is at about the top of my list of Bordeaux estates since 2000, consistently great year after year.

[Claudius2]

Guys
Well I have a full case of the 2018 Montrose.
I did not buy many wines from that vintage as i have found some to be a bit too alcoholic and heavy, but they are not terms I've ever associated with Montrose.
I have once tried the 18 Montrose at a tasting in Singapore a few years ago, and it was very good (otherwise I'd never have bought it).
I have also bought a case of a sister Chateau - Tronquoy - which is really good at its price point.

I also bought a few each of 2019 and 2020 and am quite shocked by Gilman's notes.

I wonder what he would make of some Parkerised South Australian labels?

[AlexR]

On the other hand... you have to hand it to critics who think outside the box, aren't willing to always kiss the behinds of château owners, and say what they think.

I find Gilman's comments and score ridiculous but also refreshing.

He gets away from the script and, as far off the mark as he is - in my opinion - you still have to respect him for that.

Bordeaux is a place of hierarchies and sometimes setting the cat amongst the pigeons is a very healthy thing to do.

However, it would be poetic justice if Gilman were to be served (blind of cours) the wine he has so decried down the line and find it much different...

Alex R.

[greatbxfreak]

Alex, you are such a funny lad.

Thinking outside the box, hierarchy (?), it's bulls.... I recall Neal Martin showing disrespect to fellow wine critics by saying that they should taste wines blind because they made mistakes. Afterward, he stepped back, saying he's not a saint in this matter.

I find him bullying, provocative, and disrespectful. Funny thing is that he never is bullshitting Burgundy and Beaujolais wines.

I find it strange that you have some respect for him.

Any comments on our Bordeaux tour last month, perhaps?

[DavidG]

I find Gilman's comments and score ridiculous but also refreshing.

I would add amusing and entertaining.

He gets away from the script and, as far off the mark as he is - in my opinion - you still have to respect him for that.

Bordeaux is a place of hierarchies and sometimes setting the cat amongst the pigeons is a very healthy thing to do.

Alex R.

I could respect Gilman for calling out an emperor with no clothes, but I don’t think this is that. He is purposely using inflammatory language to draw attention to himself and his personal preferences. Not to expose some obvious problem that the larger populace has been fooled or bullied into ignoring. It’s fine if he wants to do that, but it’s showmanship, not a public service.

[greatbxfreak]

I came to this outburst because, in my opinion, glorifying the work of John Gilman, and particularly his vendetta against Bordeaux wines, is affecting my work. I would say it makes it less important and weaker.

I am not hiding my writing behind a paywall; I cover all my expenses, and I am occasionally invited to dinners at the chateaux. My recent trip to Bordeaux costed me 3500+ euros.