Disclaimer: This site does not store any files on its server.

Ver Our Blood Is Wine

Our Blood Is Wine is a movie starring Jeremy Quinn, Ramaz Nikoladze, and Giorgi Natenadze. Filmmaker Emily Railsback and award-winning sommelier Jeremy Quinn provide intimate access to rural family life in the Republic of Georgia as...

Emily Railsback
Ramaz Nikoladze, Mariam Iosebidze, Giorgi Natenadze, Jeremy Quinn

All Systems Operational

Product details

Genres Documentary
Director Emily Railsback
Stars Ramaz Nikoladze, Mariam Iosebidze, Giorgi Natenadze, Jeremy Quinn
Country USA
Also Known As ジョージア、ワインが生まれたところ, Wino we krwi, Our Blood is Wine
Runtime 1 h 18 min
Audio Português  English  Deutsch  Italiano  Español  Français  Gaeilge  Svenska  Nederlands
Subtitles Português  日本語  Čeština  Australia  한국어  Filipino  Tiếng Việt  हिन्दी 
Quality 480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
Description Filmmaker Emily Railsback and award-winning sommelier Jeremy Quinn provide intimate access to rural family life in the Republic of Georgia as they explore the rebirth of 8,000-year-old winemaking traditions almost lost during the period of Soviet rule. By using unobtrusive iPhone technology, Railsback brings the voices and ancestral legacies of modern Georgians directly to the viewer, revealing an intricate and resilient society that has survived regular foreign invasion and repeated attempts to erase Georgian culture. The revival of traditional winemaking is the central force driving this powerful, independent and autonomous nation to find its 21st century identity.

Top reviews

Sunday, 12 Apr 2020 08:39

I thought it was pretty good. I like the idea of giving an idea of the history of this country and what it has been like in the past to a non-American audience. That is, if you can get them to understand the history of the US without sounding like a wacko. I also liked the fact that they showed some of the old history of the USA, including the civil war and the founding of the republic. My problems with the movie are as follows: 1. They used too many clips of music videos to tell the story. I mean, it's not the kind of music video that's going to help the viewer understand the history of the USA. 2. They didn't show enough clips of the country itself. I like the fact that they showed some of the country, but I would like to see a little bit more of it. 3. The actors and actresses in the movie did a good job, but I found the portrayal of the civil war and the fight for the republic to be pretty bland and trite. 4. I think the "history" of the country and the "history" of the republic should have been expanded a bit more. In my opinion, the movie would have been a lot better if they had had more footage of the country itself and more clips of the music videos. 5. A bit more background on the nature of the slavery issue and the war itself, I think. 6. I think the film was too broad and lacked depth and depth. It seemed to be focused on one or two of the major issues and lacked depth in the rest of the film. 7. If you like the idea of giving an overview of the US history, then this movie is for you. If not, then I would recommend that you see the documentary about the civil war instead. That one is much more detailed and, although it's not as entertaining as the movie "Tears of the Sun," it's much more comprehensive.
Friday, 10 Apr 2020 10:00

I'm not a wine expert, so I don't know if this is a perfect film. I do know that it's fascinating to see what happens when a wine maker goes from being a small-time wine producer to a commercial-scale one. The film covers what happens in the years following the initial success of their wine and the in-depth look at what they have done with their money. The filming is well-done and the clips are nice enough to keep you interested. What you do not see in the film is the actual making of the wine, or the painstaking labor and care that goes into it. However, I have to say that the footage in the film that was used was quite good. I saw it on a plane and was amazed at how much money goes into the wine. I don't know how well it is used, but it was good. The characters that were shown in the film were somewhat one-dimensional. It was kind of disappointing since I thought the characters were a little more complex. You could tell that the directors were making a documentary of what they had been through. One thing that I do like about the film is that it was able to show the girls from their early days to their late teens in their childhood, and then their later years. You see them getting married, having kids, growing old, getting married, having kids, and then getting older. In the film, you also see the more experienced people that were on their way to becoming very successful at making wine. You see how they go from a lower-level, small-time producer to a commercial-scale producer and then their ability to get their first wine on shelves. I do think that there were some parts of the film that were a little bit distracting, like the conversations between the producers about what they want to do with their wines and their young wives. I thought that these conversations were a little too much. I also thought that there were some moments where I didn't know what was going on and where they were going. I was also disappointed by some of the small, plot-driven moments in the film. For example, they are talking about the title of the film, but when it gets to the real title, it's the third thing they mention and then it's about how wine-making was bad. I was also disappointed by the fact that the story is told from the perspective of the producers. You are not really getting to know the people that are making the wine. For example, when they are talking about the feeling of the wine, you don't really get a sense of what it's like to be a producer. I'm a bit disappointed because the film did a good job of telling the story from the producers' point of view
Wednesday, 08 Apr 2020 03:50

Many of the reviews here for this film are in the form of a straight-faced and thoughtful presentation of the subject, with a lot of recommendations of the fine and well-filmed documentary that accompanied it. It is a good film, and I'd recommend it to anyone who wants to know more about the history of wine. It does a good job of telling a story about the importance of wine, and how wine is a symbol of one of the defining moments in human history. In particular, the clip of the cooking of grapes on the tassel roof of the convent, in the convent's kitchen, is a powerful moment in the film, as it was in the documentary, and it is captured very well in the film. I also enjoyed the interview with the director and a series of people who worked with and for him on this project, especially Tia Andres, who did all the research on the subject, as well as the producers, the directors, the art historians, the wine critics, and the other key players in the development of this film. It was a pleasure to see so many people from all sorts of different backgrounds and professions, and the relationship of those various types of people and personalities, and their roles in the making of this film, was fascinating. It was interesting to see how different people involved with the production of this film agreed that it was a masterpiece, and how they differed in their opinions of how to best present the story. This is a film for people who are interested in the history of wine, and the art of filmmaking.
Tuesday, 07 Apr 2020 20:17

I am not a big fan of Robert Redford. I think he's too 'glib' and pretentious in his acting. I think he's a great actor, but I think he's just a little too pretentious. He's a little too self-involved and confident. But, the one thing that was great about this documentary is that it clearly showed what all these great wine growers and wineries in the wine-producing regions of North America are all about. It also showed what the wine-producing regions are like. A couple of people even said that the wine regions are not really wine regions at all, but they are just really special regions and are the best regions. The thing that struck me most in this documentary was the political connections between wineries and other wine regions. They all have their own governments and their own tax codes. Some wineries have become more sophisticated in the last 30-40 years and now pay taxes on wine that they did not pay before. If you look at the wine-producing regions of the world, some of them have had a long history of wine production. Others have not had the same history and they are more advanced. In the end, you can see that all the wine regions are connected, they all have something in common. The political connections between wineries and other wine regions are just amazing. There's a lot of wine going on in the wine regions of North America, and I think that's why the people in the film were so interested in it. I think that's why they gave this film such a big deal.
Sunday, 05 Apr 2020 14:08

All I can say is that this documentary is not for everyone. It's not just that it's an HBO doco, it's that it's presented in a decidedly different way to the film it was attempting to cover. I'm glad HBO took the chance on this project, but I'm not sure how I feel about it. You can't ignore the things that the film covered, but it's not clear whether they were handled in a way that worked with the film, or were there just to sell the film. The film's main subject was a dentist who lost his wife, and he wanted to document the way her life was transformed by his, the way her life was transformed by the marriage that he was just trying to put together. He wanted to prove that his wife's death was the result of his own life, not just the loss of his wife. He also wanted to prove that we shouldn't judge people based on the things that happened to them in their life, but instead we should judge people by how they are now, and not how they were then. And that, I believe, is what this film is about. Maybe it was the documentary format, or maybe it was the way that the film was presented, but I feel that HBO handled the doco in a way that it was presented in the movie. As a doco, it was very well done, but as a film, it was handled in a way that it was not in the film. I think that HBO is very capable of handling a documentary like this, but I think they did not make it work in the way that they did in this film. I also feel that HBO's approach to the film seemed more than a little off, and I think that there are some things that you just can't get away from. The film was completely forgettable, but at the same time, I can't help but think that I just didn't care about any of the things that were covered in the film. I can't help but feel that the film was just there to sell the movie, and I feel like HBO took the chance to do this and not think about the documentary in that way. I think that there is something to be said for a documentary being presented in a way that it's being presented, and I'm not sure if HBO did that in this film, or if it was just done in the way that it was presented, and I feel like that's what made this film less than memorable.
Sunday, 05 Apr 2020 00:27

A documentary about an excellent documentary about the Nazis. The end of the war came and the footage of the camps was burned, and the film-makers were not even allowed to go to the places where the filming was done. This documentary is a combination of interviews, archival footage and video footage from the early days of the camp system and the life in the camps. The Holocaust is a topic that cannot be covered in a conventional film, and one of the problems of the subject matter is that it is never fully understood, especially by those who suffered. However, the German authorities were looking for a film that could be done in an easy-to-follow, not too long and not too graphic way, and they had access to many resources. The DVD is very well made and has a clear presentation, the interviews are excellent and the cinematography is nice. The footage from the camps is exciting and not in the least bit dull, and the way in which it was presented made the film very memorable. Unfortunately, the story of the camp system is very complicated and the film-makers try to do everything in the film in a single shot. Therefore, there is very little in the way of explanation in the film. One of the arguments is that it is impossible to capture the experience of the camp system and the guards in a single shot, but that may be the point. The film-makers are quite successful in showing the involvement of the people in the camps, but we are left with a lot of unanswered questions.
Friday, 03 Apr 2020 07:56

The film itself is well done. As a self-professed film junkie myself, I was pleasantly surprised that the film isn't preachy and doesn't really exploit the subject matter at all. While I agree that this film is very much like a documentary, I didn't think it was preachy. Sure, it was a bit jumbled with too many editing mistakes but I thought the film was well done and done with its purpose. I don't think it was meant to be a movie but an overview of the various points of view on the issues raised in the film. I would've liked to have seen a little more of a wrap-up to the various issues raised but overall it was an interesting way to pass time. The film also doesn't portray the issues that it aims to address very well and that is what I thought bothered me the most. While the film did have some good points, the points that it addresses are too important to be depicted with a large hand-held camera in the middle of a soccer field in a field of humanity. I felt the documentary-like treatment made the film feel overly preachy and was actually a bit distracting. The film also had a number of other issues that really didn't seem to be addressed that well. The film is a decent summary of the issues but the film fails to make it feel like it really gives any good points to it's viewers. Overall, while the film was well done, I just didn't think it was well done enough to stand on its own. If you want to know what the topic of the film was, I'm not sure I can tell you. If you don't want to know, then the film is not for you. If you are a film lover, I would highly recommend this film as it is a good summary of a subject that is important to me and I think it was well done.
Tuesday, 31 Mar 2020 12:06

This is a superb documentary that examines the wine scene of Argentina and the complex relationship between winemakers and the wine industry in general. If you are interested in this area, you should definitely watch this film, but it does so in a way that's very deep and very engaging. It's like going through a time machine into the 1990s and the time before the economic crisis in Argentina and, of course, the wine scene itself. It goes back to the beginning of the 20th century, the victory of the Argentine winemakers over the French winemakers who dominated the industry. There was a great movement of winemakers, many of them women, into the wineries and they felt strongly that they had to do something about it and they knew that they could do it. They wanted to form a network and to help the wineries to compete with their French counterparts. The wineries had to compete against the production of wine for export, which was their main export. In the mid-20th century the wine industry changed and the French winemakers began to dominate the industry, but they were not as successful. They lost the battle of the wine-makers, and the wineries were left with little or no competition and became dependent on wine for their survival. The winemakers felt that the French were ruining their industry and they wanted to make the best wine possible and they wanted to enter the French winemaking competitions and they wanted to bring the best wines to the taste of the public. In that sense, they wanted to make a lasting impact on the wine industry. The documentary explores the history of the Argentine winemakers and their relationship with the wine industry and their cultural background. They also delve into the history of the American winemakers and the cultural influence of the wine industry in the US. The winemakers talk about their belief that winemaking was an art and that they had to have the best and that they needed to share their winemaking secrets with the world. They talk about the problems they had with the French winemakers and about how they felt that they were left out of the history books. They discuss how much they were influenced by the French culture, which they felt was extremely important, and how they felt that their winemaking efforts could not be understood by the majority of the population. The documentary also discusses the American winemakers and their influence on the winemakers of Argentina. They talk about how they felt that they had to try to teach the winemakers how to make better wines and how the American winemakers were doing this without using the same techniques that they were using and how the American winemakers were not using the same tools as the Argentine winemakers. Finally, the

Write a review