WS 2010: The Tapestry of Champagne

It’s all in the details for these benchmark sparkling wines

Alison Napjus
Issue: December 31, 2011

A fine Champagne illustrates the art of blending. The chef de cave weaves together a variety of different base wines-hundreds in some cases-to produce the final bottling. Each base wine has its own strength and character, yet the finished product is seamlessly integrated. Champagne's beauty is truly not skin-deep.

In this sense, the wines of Champagne are a metaphor for the region as a whole. Behind the outward face of high-end bottlings, luxury and glamour lies a tightly knit community of farmers, vintners, marketers, businessmen and others, each performing a distinct role in creating the world's preeminent sparkling wine region. This is the tapestry of Champagne: individuals dedicated as a group to preserving the region's traditions and honoring its past, while also ensuring Champagne's success well into the future.

It's a complex balancing act. Small growers work alongside and with the big houses. They tend a mix of Chardonnay, Pinot Noir and Pinot Meunier vines, planted on rolling hills that give way to the dramatic gradients of coveted vineyard sites. And the region's 84,000 acres under vine encompass an extremely diverse mix of soils and microclimates, from those at the northernmost limit of wine production to the more southern area of Aube, which enjoys a warmer continental climate well-suited to ripening the fickle Pinot Noir grape. This diversity is on display in the wines, and exploring the many styles is surely the most approachable and enjoyable path to understanding this unique region.

Since our last report ("Cause for Celebration," Dec. 31, 2010 - Jan. 15, 2011), I have reviewed more than 350 wines in blind tastings in our New York office. Few wine regions can consistently boast the across-the-board quality of Champagne, with this report finding 10 wines earning classic scores (95 to 100 points on Wine Spectator's 100-point scale) and the vast majority of the remainder, 90 percent, receiving scores in the outstanding range of 90 to 94 points. (A free alphabetical list of scores and prices for all wines tasted is available.)

The 10 wines at the pinnacle come from four producers; both vintage and non-vintage, all are currently available. Perennial leader Krug strikes again with this report's highest rating, 98 points, for its 1998 Brut Blanc de Blancs Clos du Mesnil ($849). This wine is beautifully crafted, an exercise in finesse and balance, and has only improved since its initial release in 2009.

Impressively, Krug earned five additional classic ratings this year. Two of the wines are also from the elegant 1998 vintage: the focused Brut (97 points, $279) and the powerful Brut Blanc de Noirs Clos d'Ambonnay (96, $2,549), made entirely from Pinot Noir from Krug's 1.7-acre Clos d'Ambonnay vineyard. The rich and aromatic 2000 Brut Blanc de Blancs Clos du Mesnil joins the Brut at 97 points ($979), while the house's two non-vintage cuvées each earned 95 points. The Brut Rosé NV ($299) is firm and mouthwatering, while the Brut Grande Cuvée NV ($169) partners power and grace. Sharing the spotlight with the Krug bottlings, Henriot offers its beautifully balanced Brut Champagne Cuvée des Enchanteleurs 1998 (95, $199) and Ruinart its Brut Dom Ruinart 2002 (95, $130), the latter harmonious and lacy, made from 100 percent Chardonnay (although not labeled as blanc de blancs).

Not least, one of the region's top grower-estates, Vilmart & Cie, received 95 points for both its 2000 Brut Cuvée Création ($141) and 2002 Coeur de Cuvée ($153). Vilmart's Laurent Champs utilizes 228-liter Burgundy barrels, two to four years old, to ferment and age his base wines for these high-scoring Champagnes. Over the past decade, Champs' vintage Champagnes have almost always been outstanding, but this year's releases show that he has really found the sweet spot in balancing the distinctive richness and exotic spice character that the oak imparts.

The 2002s from Ruinart and Vilmart illustrate the strength of this powerful vintage, whose top wines typically show fine balance and intense acidity partnered with ripe fruit and rich texture. For many producers, the year is the current release in the marketplace.

Other standouts from 2002 include more affordable offerings such as Philippe Prié's well-cut Brut 2002 (93, $59) and the rich Brut Vieilles Vignes from Le Brun Servenay (94, $90). At higher price-points are Bollinger's subtle-textured Brut La Grande Année (94, $125), an oak-fermented and oak-aged blend of the house's best barrels from 2002, and Perrier-Jouët's Brut Blanc de Blancs Fleur de Champagne Cuvée Belle Epoque 2002 (94, $350), a lively and graceful wine. Hervé Deschamps, chef de cave at Perrier-Jouët, attributes its success with the vintage to a windy period prior to harvest that concentrated the grapes' ripeness and acidity.

Along with 2002, the bulk of available vintage Champagne comes from 2004, another excellent year. After a cool, wet August, this vintage was saved by near-ideal weather during harvest. The resulting wines consistently partner ripe fruit with good, balancing acidity, making them approachable from the get-go. As an added bonus, the year produced a banner crop in Champagne, one of the largest in the past couple of decades, so there should be plenty of 2004s to go around.

Among the 2004s currently available, seek out Piper-Heidsieck's rich and toasty Brut (94, $75), the top-scoring '04 in this report. At 93 points, several grower-estates produced distinctive offerings, including L. Aubry Fils' vibrant Brut Le Nombre d'Or Campanae Veteres Vites ($68), made from Champagne's ancient varieties of Pinot Blanc, Pinot Gris, Petit Meslier and others; Pierre Gimonnet & Fils' subtle Brut Paradoxe ($88); and Pierre Moncuit's finely meshed Brut Blanc de Blancs ($60). And three of Champagne's larger houses stood out for their outstanding examples in 2004, also at 93 points: Drappier's Brut Grande Sendrée ($86) is a vibrant, toasty version; Veuve Clicquot's Brut ($75) is refined and graceful; and Taittinger's Brut Rosé Comtes de Champagne ($220) is a rich rosé well-suited to food.

While vintage bottlings are often the pride of a house and a highlight for any Champagne lover, it is the non-vintage bottlings, which are more widely produced, that some argue are the better judge of a house's or a grower's overall character.

The majority of the blend for most non-vintage Champagnes is based on two to three recent vintages, mixed with some percentage of "réserve" wines from older-sometimes much older-vintages. The goal of the chef de cave is to produce a consistent style for his non-vintage Champagne from year to year, despite the variety in the characters of the vintages going into the blend. Although the base years may differ depending on the resources of a grower or house, many non-vintage Champagnes currently available at retail and in restaurants are based primarily on the 2008, 2007 and 2006 vintages, in varying percentages. This is promising, because while 2007 is a somewhat variable vintage, both 2006 and 2008 are excellent years.

This promise has been realized in the results, with 87 percent of the more than 230 non-vintage wines I reviewed receiving scores of 90 points or higher. Of those wines, several were notable for their balance and refined textures, often offering good value for such high quality.

On the heels of Krug's 95-point non-vintage wines, Gosset stands out for its Extra Brut Blanc de Blancs Celebris NV (94, $208), a beautiful Champagne with fine definition and detail. At just a notch below, 10 wines in the non-vintage category received scores of 93 points, representing a mix of different styles-brut, brut blanc de blancs and brut rosé-and a variety of houses: Henri Billiot & Fils, Bollinger, Diebolt-Vallois, Alfred Gratien, Charles Heidsieck, Henriot, Jean Laurent and Piper-Heidsieck. Among these estates, Henriot made a particularly well-priced bubbly, the fresh and juicy Brut Souverain NV ($50), while sister-houses Piper-Heidsieck and Charles Heidsieck delivered a one-two punch with the former's vinous Brut Rosé Sauvage NV and the latter's finely woven Brut Réserve NV, both at $55.

Other terrific values include two bottlings available for less than $40, the focused Brut Blanc de Blancs Réserve NV from Guy Charlemagne (92, $39) and the creamy Brut NV from Nicolas Feuillatte (92, $36). Also worth searching for are Ayala's Brut Majeur NV (92, $40), firm and minerally, and G.H. Mumm's rich, flavorful Brut Cordon Rouge NV (92, $40).

Like many Old World wine regions, Champagne walks the fine line of preserving a storied past while maintaining relevance and position in the modern marketplace. Two success stories stood out to me during a visit to Champagne earlier this year as illustrative of this balance.

Veuve Clicquot showed its market savvy and foresight when it recognized, in the late '90s, the growing interest in rosé Champagne on the part of various demographic groups and in the Asian market. After several years of development, the house's response was to reintroduce to their lineup, in 2005, a non-vintage rosé Champagne.

"Veuve Clicquot almost invented the category, in 1775," explains Cyril Brun, a member of Veuve's winemaking team, but the house's focus for many years and even into the 1990s was on the vintage rosé. At that time, he says, "It was hard to make a consistent style of non-vintage rosé-we needed less swings in nature, and [the ability] to keep reserves of red wine in order to apply the same philosophy of winemaking to the rosé non-vintage as to the regular non-vintage."

To answer these needs, in 2006 Veuve Clicquot renovated and expanded a red-wine production facility located in Bouzy, where the company owns almost 70 acres of prime Pinot Noir vines. Dedicated to the production of still red wine, made from only the best red grapes, to be used in rosés, the facility represents a considerable yet highly worthwhile investment for the company. Today, Veuve Clicquot's Brut Rosé NV (91, $64) is second only to its ubiquitous yellow-label Brut NV (91, $51) in terms of availability, and is well-placed in the still-growing, trendy rosé market.

While these results are already measurable, those of another recent investment by Veuve Clicquot-the purchase of 30 large oak foudres in 2007 and 2008-have yet to be seen. The 7,500-liter and 5,100-liter new oak barrels are intended primarily to ferment and age the wines for Veuve Clicquot's vintage Champagnes, but will be used for its non-vintage wines in years that the house does not declare a vintage.

Like two kids in a candy store, Brun and chef de cave Dominique Demarville get excited when they walk among and talk about their barrels. The 2008 harvest was the first to go into the barrels, which Demarville says add further complexity to their blends: "More diversity in the wines, more choices-and two sizes to allow us to diversify even more."

Compounding that diversity is the uniqueness of each barrel. "Each foudre is a personality and has its own character. This is a Chard guy, this one likes his Pinot," Demarville jokes. He adds that they're also now able to extend the aging of the reserve wines with these barrels, which "automatically raises the complexity of the blend."

While the changes at Veuve Clicquot relate to its infrastructure, the second success story I encountered this past year involved a change in corporate structure, one that will shape the future for sister houses Charles Heidsieck and Piper-Heidsieck.

In late 2010, then-owner Rémy Cointreau put the houses up for sale, and a deal was struck in June of this year with Société Européenne de Participations Industrielles, a French luxury goods firm. EPI quickly appointed Cécille Bonnefond, former CEO at Veuve Clicquot, to head up its new Champagne division.

During the interim period, Régis Camus, chef de cave for both houses, kept doing what he does best: maintaining high quality while producing a distinctive style for the wines of each house. At times in the past, the Charles Heidsieck line of Champagnes may have offered a more consistent quality level than the more abundant Piper-Heidsieck line. But that was certainly not the case this year, and wines from both houses showed equally well. In my tastings, scores ranged from 92 points for Piper-Heidsieck's Brut NV ($45) to 93 points for its Brut Rosé Sauvage NV ($55) and Charles Heidsieck's Brut Réserve NV ($55) and Brut Rosé Réserve ($75) to a high score of 94 points for Piper's elegant 2004 Brut.

"It's a privilege to make both-because they must stay separate in style, but both come from the same source materials," Camus says. One system of vinification is used to produce the base wines that are ultimately blended into the individual bottlings from each house.

The poet in Camus comes out as he describes the difference in style between the two houses. "Piper is springtime, all floral, citrus and white fruit; Charles is fall-golden-with Mediterranean dates and stone fruits." He explains that the style for each is maintained in part through the proper selection of reserve wines to add when blending the non-vintage cuvées, using younger reserve wines for Piper-Heidsieck, and older reserves-usually eight to 10 years old-for Charles.

With Bonnefond at the helm, both houses will surely see changes, but Camus' position will stay the same. Bonnefond affirms, "Régis Camus is and will remain the lead man behind the two lines of wines, ensuring their elegance in their own ways. We have projects for each house. But one clear focus will be to put the wines at the core of our plans."

The leaders at both Veuve Clicquot and Charles and Piper-Heidsieck make it clear that despite the changing times and new opportunities, the heart of the matter is always the wines.

For Demarville at Veuve Clicquot, that focus is on the yellow-labeled NV Brut and the overall Veuve Clicquot style. "[We have] to continue what was done by our predecessors. It's easy to be good for Grand Dame when you use only the best wines," he says, referring to their tête de cuvée vintage Champagne, but adds, "Yellow Label drives our decision-making process."

At Charles and Piper-Heidsieck, Camus's goal is stability. "A Champagne house is judged for the quality of the style," he says, "but most importantly, the consistency."

Each are sentiments echoed by their peers in the region, and reminders that though continually looking ahead, the Champenois know their primary goals and can stay well-tuned to the here and now. It is this ability-to blend all of the little pieces together to create the whole-that keeps Champagne dynamic and fresh, and earns it its place as the world's benchmark for sparkling wine.

Senior tasting coordinator Alison Napjus is Wine Spectator's lead taster on the wines of Champagne.

 

WS 2012: Beyond the Bubbles

‎Upgrading Vintage 2004 to 92 vs 90.

A closer look at the wealth of offerings from Champagne

Alison Napjus
Issue: December 31, 2012

France's Champagne region has worked hard to establish itself as a symbol of luxury and celebration. But there's solid achievement behind that frothy image. Champagne is the world's premier region for sparkling wine, producing an impressive range of styles and doing so with consistently high quality.

Since our last report ("The Tapestry of Champagne," Dec. 31, 2011 - Jan. 15, 2012), I've reviewed nearly 425 Champagnes from more than 120 different producers. A large majority of them received outstanding scores of 90 points or higher on the Wine Spectator 100-point scale, with more than a dozen rating classic. (A free alphabetical list of scores and prices for all wines tasted is available.)

Of the classic-rated wines in this report, there are a number of bottlings from Krug Champagne, including the two high-scorers, which top the charts at 98 points. Krug's 2000 Brut Blanc de Blancs Clos du Mesnil ($859) is a study on the interplay between finesse and power, while its 1998 Brut ($269) offers lovely harmony and luxurious texture.

Both of these are vintage wines, produced from grapes harvested during a single year and meant to capture the unique character of that growing season and harvest. Our tastings, reflecting the current offerings in the marketplace, are dominated by the 2004 vintage, a year that produced a bumper crop but paired quantity with quality. The resulting wines are vibrant, with good structure and elegance, and based on the strength of the 2004s in this year's tastings, I have upgraded the vintage's overall rating to 92 points.

The two top-scoring 2004s are like stylistic bookends for the vintage, with the delicacy of Veuve Clicquot's Brut La Grande Dame 2004 (94 points, $165) acting as a foil to the richness of Vilmart's Coeur de Cuvée 2004 (94, $148). I also recommend the well-priced 2004 Brut Grand from Baron-Fuenté (92, $40) and the Roland Champion Brut Blanc de Blancs 2004 (92, $66), a wine made from 100 percent Chardonnay, a variety that excelled in 2004.

In addition, vintage bottlings from 2005 and 2006 are beginning to have a presence on retail shelves and wine lists. 2005 was a variable vintage in terms of weather during the growing season and harvest, and as a result it's best to choose carefully and stick to top producers. A fine example is Louis Roederer's Brut Cristal 2005 (94, $249), a mouthwatering wine that shows a layered flavor range wrapped around smoky minerality.

Cristal's success in 2005 may be attributed, in part, to the biodynamically grown vines from which the grapes are sourced. Roederer technical director Jean-Baptiste Lécaillon believes that organic vineyards often fare better in difficult years. Referring to Roederer's biodynamic practices as "haute couture viticulture," he says, "It's about pushing boundaries while revisiting the traditional experience."

It will be easier to assess the overall quality of 2006 as more wines are released, yet the vintage shows more promise than 2005, largely thanks to excellent weather at harvest that year. But there are a number of quality offerings already available. The Vilmart Brut Grand Cellier Rubis 2006 (95, $151) is a delicate rosé for its aromatics and finesse, but also shows a lot of power in an elegant package. And two blanc de blancs offer good value: Jacquart's refined Brut Blanc de Blancs 2006 (92, $55) and J.L. Vergnon's firm and fresh Brut Blanc de Blancs Resonance 2006 (92, $52).

Like all fine wine, the best bottles of Champagne can have a long life, and many houses put aside part of their vintage production to release at a later date—sometimes very much later. Krug's current release of this sort is its Brut Collection 1989 (97, $549), a racy, tightly knit wine that is just beginning to show hints of age with accents of ground coffee, oyster shell and dried fruit.

Krug has been offering its Collection wines since the 1990s. Veuve Clicquot launched a similar concept this year with the Cave Privée series. The Cave Privée wines are specially selected vintages that have not been offered to the market since their original release many years ago. This year's releases include the 1989 Brut Rosé Cave Privée (95, $295), a creamy wine with finely tuned acidity that is aging beautifully, and the 1990 Brut Cave Privée (94, $175), which is rich, with baked fruit, bread pudding and molasses notes, yet remains elegant and persistently fresh.

Both of these Clicquot bottlings were disgorged in October of 2008, in anticipation of their release this year. Disgorgement is an important part of the Champagne production process, wherein the sediment that accumulates during the secondary fermentation and subsequent aging of the wine is removed, before the final step of adjusting the wine's dosage.

"Champagnes age very well before disgorgement, but they can age very well after disgorgement as well," says Veuve Clicquot chef de cave Dominique Demarville, regarding the value of disgorgement for the Cave Privée wines. "It is very important to have both to put the best wine on the market."

The Cave Privée wines list the wine's disgorgement date on the back label of the bottle, joining other houses and producers such as Bruno Paillard and Philipponnat who have been doing so for many years. (For more on the subject, see "Debating Disgorgement Dates," page 104.)

Vintage Champagnes deliver generally high quality and allow producers to craft distinctive wines that reflect the personality of a particular year. But it is non-vintage wines that dominate the marketplace, making up nearly two-thirds of the Champagnes I reviewed this past year.

Non-vintage wines typically offer a good introduction to Champagne, in part because their price point is usually more approachable, and because their general aim is consistency from year to year. They are produced by blending wine from at least two or three vintages (and sometimes more), a method historically designed to balance the dramatic differences between vintage conditions in a cool-climate wine region such as Champagne.

Krug shows its expertise once again with the two highest-scoring non-vintage wines of this report. The Brut Rosé NV (95, $299) is rich and finely cut, and the Brut Grande Cuvée NV (95, $169) offers lovely texture, with layers of fruit, almond, honey and spice flavors. These wines regularly receive high marks within their categories, largely because Krug's attention to detail during its production goes the extra mile and then some.

Non-vintage Champagne need only be aged for 15 months before being released, but Krug's rosé is aged for five years and its Grande Cuvée for six. And while many non-vintage wines blend two or three vintages, Krug's bottlings get added depth and complexity from five or six vintages for the rosé, and as many as 12 vintages (going back to 15 years of age) for the Grande Cuvée. Olivier Krug, director of the house, explains how the additional vintages add more range to the wines: "The idea about reserve wines is to keep specific ingredients from certain vintages."

Other houses also show the ability to partner quality with consistency among their non-vintage bottlings. Alfred Gratien's spicy Brut Cuvée Paradis NV (94, $145) is just a step ahead of the creamy Brut Rosé Cuvée Paradis NV (93, $165) and minerally Brut NV (93, $70), with the rich, well-knit Brut Rosé NV (92, $80) not much further behind. Bollinger's offerings are also impressive: The Brut Special Cuvée NV (93, $75) is very elegant, with fresh, focused acidity, while the Brut Rosé NV (93, $110) shows a briny hint of minerality underscoring fruit and graphite notes.

About a third of the non-vintage wines reviewed for this report are offered this year at a lower price compared with last year's bottlings. Lee Schlesinger, director of marketing for Winesellers, Ltd., the U.S. importer of Besserat de Bellefon Champagne, explains that this price decrease is simply due to the stronger dollar. "2012 prices are a little lower thanks to an improvement of almost 10 percent in foreign exchange."

This means that for the first time since the recession hit, it's possible to find a number of producers offering non-vintage bottlings in the $30 to $35 range. If you're looking for a delicate, aperitif-style wine with bright acidity, try the Montaudon Brut NV (90, $35), while Baron-Fuenté's well-balanced Brut Grande Réserve NV (91) is an excellent value at $30 a bottle. For something with a little bit more richness, Heidsieck Monopole's Brut Blue Top NV (91, $35) is well-defined and energetic.

For just a few dollars more, the Ayala Brut Majeur NV (91, $39) is dry and creamy, and the Vollereaux Brut NV (92, $40) is rich and refined. Piper-Heidsieck also shows well with its Brut NV (93, $50), offering rich layers of brioche, graphite, fruit and spice.

Still, Champagne remains an expensive wine, even in the non-vintage category. But it's important to remember that you're not simply paying for the designer label. Champagne is one of the most technically difficult and labor-intensive wines to produce, and the region delivers some of the most distinctive and ageworthy sparkling wines in the world. They stand out for their diversity and their character, and deserve a place at the table as much as a starring role in your next celebration.

Senior tasting coordinator Alison Napjus is Wine Spectator's lead taster on the wines of Champagne.

Debating Disgorgement Dates

Disgorgement is a fundamental part of the Champagne method. It refers to the process of removing the sediment that accumulates during secondary fermentation and bottle-aging on the lees. Following disgorgement, a dosage (usually sugar syrup) may be added to the wine, and then the bottle is corked and prepared for release.

French law regulates the amount of time a wine must spend maturing on the lees before disgorgement: at least 12 months for non-vintage Champagnes and three years for vintage bottlings. (Many producers will age their wines even longer, sometimes as much as five years or more for vintage versions.) After disgorgement, producers must keep the finished bottles in their cellars for at least three months for non-vintage Champagne and at least a year—though sometimes more—for vintage cuvées.

Champagnes age differently on the lees, or before disgorgement, than they do on the cork, or after disgorgement.

A Champagne from the 1990 vintage that was disgorged in 1994, for example, then aged on the cork until 2010, may be very different in character from a 1990 Champagne that was not disgorged until 2008 and then opened in 2010. Many experts believe that the lees nourish the wine, adding complexity and preserving youthfulness, but it's a matter of personal preference, and also very much dependent on the character of the wine itself.

Until recently, there was no way for a consumer to know how long a bottle of Champagne aged on its lees before disgorgement. But some houses have begun to indicate a disgorgement date on their labels. Unlike a vintage year, the disgorgement date does not give any specific clues as to the potential quality and character of the Champagne in question; but like the vintage date, it may give some idea of how the Champagne is aging.

Many of the region's récoltant-manipulant, or small growers who produce Champagne from vines they own themselves and do not buy any grapes, have always listed a disgorgement date on their wines. Among the larger négociant houses, Bruno Paillard has included a disgorgement date on all of his house's wines since 1985, including both its vintage and non-vintage bottlings. Philipponnat has done so since the late 1990s, while Lanson started in the last decade. Krug began this year to mark several of its wines with an ID that indicates the quarter and year a bottle was disgorged.

Paillard is a strong advocate for disgorgement dates, believing they help to counter the idea that Champagne doesn't age. "The motivation was to try and explain to consumers that Champagne is, or can be, a great wine, and as such it has its life and its specific kind of maturation, including after disgorgement," he says. "[We want] to encourage people to discover the wonderful extra complexity which post-disgorgement maturation can offer, and the first step is to know when the disgorgement actually happened."

Paillard's conviction regarding the importance of disgorgement dates is matched by those who adamantly oppose them, such as Peter Wasserman, a wine broker who works with Le Serbet, which represents many Champagne producers in the U.S. Wasserman agrees that it benefits vintage wines to include the disgorgement date, but thinks it can be misleading on non-vintage wines.

"It does not tell you either how long the wines have been aged on the lees, or what the composition—the base year plus the reserve years—is of the wine," he says. "You need the whole explanation each time you put a disgorgement date. There is no way to extrapolate [more information]."

There's also the possibility that some consumers might mistake the disgorgement date for a vintage date, or assume that they only want the "freshest" disgorgement date, overlooking the fact that bottle age may be a plus for the wine overall. But at the end of the day, it's additional information for the consumer, and as with any fact or figure, in order to get the most from the data you need to understand what it means and how to put it in the proper context.

WS 2014: Champagne Shines On

‎Champagne 2006 Vintage Rated 94, on par with 2002 and two points higher than 2004

New wines add greater diversity to the already high quality from France's preeminent sparkling wine region

Alison Napjus
Issue: December 31, 2014

American wine drinkers have a growing thirst for Champagne, and producers are answering the call.

With 18 million bottles of  Champagne arriving on U.S. shores in 2013, the country is still well behind the world's top markets for Champagne—France and the United Kingdom. But of the three, the U.S. is the only market to show an increase in imports from 2012 to 2013, according to Impact Databank, a sister publication of Wine Spectator. In addition, early data for 2014 points to robust growth; according to French trade figures, imports increased during the first six months of the year nearly 12 percent compared with the same period in 2013.

My blind tastings over the past year reflect this growth. Since my previous report ("Brilliant Bubbles," Dec. 15, 2013), I have reviewed more than 450 Champagnes in our New York office. That figure, the highest ever for Wine Spectator, represents a 10 percent increase over last year. Among the tastings were wines from nearly 150 different producers, including 26 producers reviewed for the first time. (An alphabetical list of scores and prices for all wines tasted begins on page 99 and is available.)

Much of the latter group is composed of wines from the region's récoltant-manipulant, or grower-producers, who have greatly increased their presence in the U.S. over the past decade. Known as "small growers," these producers make Champagne from their own grapes, often highlighting a specific terroir. (The larger Champagne houses, or négociants, produce Champagne from both estate-owned and purchased fruit and typically blend grapes sourced from multiple sites.) This style of winemaking helps make grower Champagne distinctive, generating excitement and keeping the négociants on their toes. In terms of sheer volume, however, the U.S. market continues to be defined by the big houses, which account for nearly 90 percent of all Champagne shipments to the U.S. (versus 5 percent for grower Champagne) and, generally speaking, still set the bar for quality.

A fine example of the benchmark set by Champagne's biggest names are the top-scoring wines of this year's report, three bottlings that each rated 98 points on Wine Spectator's 100-point scale. With its first new release in three years, Salon offers the 2002 Brut Blanc de Blancs Le Mesnil ($480). It's an ethereal wine, defined as much by the chalky minerality of the soils from which the grapes are sourced, in Le Mesnil-sur-Oger, as by the complexity and ripe fruit character of the exceptional 2002 vintage, one of the best thus far of the new century.

Also at 98 points are two bottlings from the 1998 vintage, a less-lauded year that nonetheless shows good intensity and balance and can really shine in the hands of top producers. Krug's rich and exotic Brut Blanc de Noirs Clos d'Ambonnay 1998 ($2,399), first reviewed in 2011 at 96 points, is an excellent example. This is a wine that's only improving with time and benefiting from more recent disgorgements.

The other 1998 is a new expression from Moët & Chandon's Dom Pérignon—the beautifully detailed Brut Plénitude P2 1998 ($399). The P2 replaces the the former Oenothèque label as the house's bottling of a high quality vintage that spends additional time on the lees—in this case another nine years on top of the seven years seen by the release of the original 1998 Dom Pérignon. Expansive and persistent on the palate, the wine is marked by a streak of salinity to complement the fruit, pastry and spice flavors.

Like these three top-rated wines, many of the most expressive Champagnes I reviewed are vintage-dated bottlings (as opposed to the non-vintage versions that are more common in the marketplace). There was a wide range of vintages on offer this year, with my tastings spanning 30 years—from Veuve Clicquot's rich Brut Rosé Cave Privée 1979 (94 points, $530), a new release from its library collection, to Louis Roederer's vibrant Brut Rosé 2009 (94, $80), a wine that's hard to stop sipping. Yet for the most part the vintage-dated bottlings I reviewed are from four recent vintages, 2004 through 2007.

Of these vintages, 2006 is the standout. The vintage offers powerful wines with firm acidic structures, yet the best examples show a grace and integration that makes them enjoyable and accessible now but also recommends them to the cellar. It's like the power of the 1996s with the finesse of the 1995s. Though several notable producers have yet to release bottlings from 2006, I rate the vintage 94 points based on the strength of the more than 80 wines I have already tasted.

Drappier succeeds in the vintage with its tête du cuvées, the Brut Grande Sendrée 2006 (93, $120) and the Brut Rosé Grande Sendrée 2006 (93, $130), both sourced from a 12-acre vineyard located in the Aube, the most southerly area in Champagne. (For more on the region, see "Wine First, Bubbles Second.") The former is a more elegant example from the vintage, with beautiful texture and charming spice and graphite accents. The latter shows steely acidity and the power of the vintage, but it's reined in by the creamy mousse and fine integration.

The 2006 vintage also offers a number of excellent values, several for only $10 or $20 more than a typical bottle of non-vintage Champagne. Moët & Chandon's Brut Grand Vintage 2006 (94, $60) partners rich flavor with racy structure; the 2006 Brut Blanc de Blancs Cuvée Fleuron from Pierre Gimonnet & Fils (93, $72) is a well-cut and graceful example with a floral overtone and a long, chalky finish; and the Montaudon Brut 2006 (91, $43) is a crowd-pleasing sparkler at a wallet-friendly price, offering pretty pear, honey and spice flavors.

Beyond 2006, the 2004 vintage still holds a lot of spots in wineshops and on restaurant wine lists thanks to the year's large crop and high quality. I previously rated the vintage 92 points, and the year's vivacious bottlings are still expressing the vintage's ripe fruit character, with some picking up additional complexity with age.

Fresher examples are available from the 2005 and 2007 vintages. Both years experienced variable to difficult conditions during the growing season and/or during harvest. As a result, quality is not as consistent, and vintage-dated bottlings are less common than from the more successful 2004 and 2006 vintages. I previously rated the 2005 vintage 90 points for its open-knit and approachable bottlings, and based on a limited number of tastings I give 2007 a preliminary rating of 89 to 92 points, with a final rating to be determined next year, pending additional reviews.

Most likely, the 2007 vintage represents a step up from 2005 in terms of overall quality. With slightly higher acidity than is normal for the region, these are fresh, lively wines, enjoyable today and in the short-term, with expressive fruit and flavor profiles. Pierre Péters' Brut Blanc de Blancs Les Chétillons Cuvée Spéciale 2007 (94, $134) is an excellent example from the vintage, offering a lively mousse and real mineral drive, with rich glazed apricot, salted almond and spun honey notes. I also recommend the 2007 Brut from Henri Billiot & Fils (93, $84), for its vivacious character and its appealing mix of blackberry, black cherry, toast and spice flavors.

The other side of the coin in Champagne is non-vintage bubbly, bottlings that blend at least two or three vintages, and sometimes many more. Non-vintage Champagne is the historic result of the region's northerly, cool-climate conditions, which led producers to blend vintages in the attempt to offer wines of consistent quality and style, even in lesser years. Today, vintage conditions are more reliable from year to year, but non-vintage bottlings still make up the majority of the Champagne market, representing about two-thirds of my tastings.

Krug shines again with the two top-scoring non-vintage Champagnes, both at 95 points. The Brut Grande Cuvée NV ($179) is rich and smoky, with a beautiful spiced profile, and the Brut Rosé ($299) is a vivid, mouthwatering version, with a lovely, silky texture. Both versions blend many vintages and see additional aging—several years as opposed to the 18 months required by French wine law—helping them to reach the pinnacle of quality and expression from non-vintage Champagne.

Just a step behind Krug's bottlings are two distinctive Champagnes, each rated 94 points. The Henri Giraud Brut Champagne Fût de Chêne NV ($200) shows the power of the wine's fermentation in oak, with a creamy texture and rich flavors of bread dough, honey, spice and coconut, while the Gosset Extra Brut Blanc de Blancs Celebris NV ($167) is a unique bottling made from a blend of the 1995, 1996, 1997 and 1998 vintages. (Non-vintage Champagnes on the market right now more typically base their blends on 2010.)

These high-scoring cuvées represent the crème de la crème of non-vintage, with price tags to match. But many bottles of non-vintage Champagne are available for much less—$40 to $70 a bottle is more common. Two fine examples are the Ployez-Jacquemart Extra Brut Rosé Champagne NV (93, $55), which offers a pretty palate of ripe raspberry and strawberry fruit and good definition, and the Diebolt-Vallois Brut Rosé NV (93, $52), well-spiced and elegant. Champagne lovers can also look for Piper-Heidsieck's toasty Brut NV (92, $40), J. Lassalle's harmonious Brut Cachet Or NV (91, $39) and Louis de Sacy's aromatic Brut Originel NV (90, $30), among others.

More Champagne is arriving to America each year, with greater diversity among the offerings. Champagne houses and growers alike are exploring different styles and more specific terroirs, yet quality remains high and consistent—a win-win for American wine drinkers.

Senior editor Alison Napjus is Wine Spectator's lead taster on the wines of Champagne.

WS: A Grand Slam for Dom Pérignon in 2010

A preview of four new Dom Pérignon cuvées with chef de cave Richard Geoffroy

Posted: Mar 9, 2010 11:43am ET

1

This year is a big one for Moët & Chandon's Cuvée Dom Pérignon. Richard Geoffroy, D.P.'s erudite chef de cave was in New York recently to unveil two new rosés: the 2000 vintage and, for the first time ever, a rosé from the Oenothèque program, vintage 1990.

Geoffroy also brought a surprise for me, a first look at the Cuvée Dom Pérignon Brut 2002 and the Oenothèque 1996, both of which will be released later this year. If my preview was any indication, it will be a grand slam for Moët & Chandon.

Available now is the Brut Rosé Cuvée Dom Pérignon Oenothèque 1990 ($700). From the first sniff, there's an incredible bouquet of mature Burgundy: fleeting, complex, and featuring ripe apricot, spice, berry and mineral. It was opulent and silky on the palate, very round and complete, with a long, spicy finish (95 points, non-blind).

Coincidentally, Geoffroy joined the D.P. team in 1990. Though it is widely considered a great vintage, he recalled that it was not easy in the vineyards, where there were some issues with oxidation. It has gained depth since its initial release, offering more length and dimension. Though it was disgorged in 2007, Geoffroy feels it needs some additional aging on the cork, due to D.P.'s reductive style.

Scheduled for a May release, the Brut Rosé Cuvée Dom Pérignon 2000 ($350) revealed a lovely nose of soft red fruits, cherry and berry with a hint of clementine. Firmer on the palate than the nose suggests, it displayed good structure and intensity with richness and serenity on the long finish (91, non-blind).

"We're really trying to push the envelope of rosé with the perfect balance of black and white grapes, which in itself is a contradiction," Geoffroy said. "We want it to be full from beginning to end, yet also pure and pristine."

"It's gutsier than you would expect from the vintage," he continued, noting that botrytis at harvest required a strict selection for the best-quality grapes.

Dom Pérignon draws on parcels from Aÿ and Bouzy for its still red wines, two grands crus villages noted for ripe, high-quality Pinot Noir. More Aÿ fruit has been used in recent vintages, due to its fully south-facing slopes that facilitate the ripening of the Pinot Noir.

The Brut Cuvée Dom Pérignon 2002 ($160) was a revelation. Coming from a ripe year, Geoffroy took advantage of the flavor maturity in the grapes and the powerful profile of the vintage. Complex aromas of ripe yellow fruits, citrus and ginger are complemented by mineral and toast. Very rich and creamy, dense even, this is a youngster and still expressing its primary peach flavor and a long hazelnut finish. It is a voluptuous wine with flesh covering its structure now (95, non-blind). It is scheduled for release in September 2010.

"It's structured and very complete from start to finish," Geoffroy said of the wine. "Then there's the classical dimension of toast and smoke and complexity. At first I thought it was like the 1982, but now it reminds me of 1990."

The Brut Cuvée Dom Pérignon Oenothèque 1996 ($350) will debut in July. Its complexity was immediately apparent on the bouquet, offering butterscotch, toast and mineral elements. An extremely well-balanced '96, without the high-acid profile of the vintage, the flavors evoked candied citrus, seashore and smoke, reminding me of a great Corton-Charlemagne (96, non-blind).

"It's not relying on acidity, just the pure reductive flavors that go on and on," Geoffroy explained. "I want the whole thing to be sleek enough to have a seamless, gliding feel."

He admitted the team could have waited longer to pick the grapes in '96, for better phenolic maturity, noting that there would have been a different balance in the wine. The concentration and ripeness occurred through dehydration of the fruit.

Nonetheless, the '96 is terrific and, along with the three other releases, will provide much pleasure for fans of D.P. in years to come.

WS 2007: Bubbly Sales Boom All Year Round

Americans discover that sparkling wine isn't solely for celebrations

Mitch Frank
Issue: December 31, 2007

Americans are reaching for bubblies in increasing numbers. Sparkling wine sales in the United States are outpacing the rest of the industry, seeing their biggest growth since the 1980s. According to projections, by the time corks pop on New Year's Eve, U.S. sparkling wine sales will have grown by 6 percent in 2007, while the rest of the wine industry will have grown by 5 percent.

Sparkling wine has traditionally been viewed in the United States as a beverage for celebratory occasions and holidays, but year-round sales are on the increase. "Sales of true Champagne have steadily risen in the United States as wine consumers become more familiar with Champagne's versatility in pairing with a wide range of foods," said Sharon Castillo, director of the Office of Champagne, USA, part of the Comité Interprofessionnel du Vin de Champagne.

Margie Healy, director of public relations at Korbel, confirmed that the California sparkling wine producer was seeing a similar increase in year-round demand. Domestic sparkling wine sales gained 3 percent in 2006 according to estimates from Impact Databank (owned by M. Shanken Communications, the parent company of Wine Spectator).

But is it just a fad? Sparkling wines have seen good times before—and then gone bust. In the booming economy of the Reagan years, sales of sparklers peaked at nearly 20 million cases a year. Then the recession in the early '90s wiped away more than a third of those numbers. Sales were stagnant until now.

Several factors appear to be behind the recent success. One is the popularity of rosé in the U.S.—especially sparkling rosé. Champagne houses and other sparkling producers have also targeted 20- and 30-somethings with single-serve bottles and other smart packaging. And as U.S. wine consumption as a whole increases, more Americans have learned that sparklers are food-flexible wines.

"People are realizing Champagne is not only for celebrations," said Pascal Boye, sales director in the Americas for Champagne house Nicolas Feuillatte. "We see people buying Champagne just to enjoy at home. In restaurants, more people are buying it with a meal because they are seeing Champagne as a wine."

However, Champagne in particular faces a challenge in keeping sales numbers high. The French region is seeing more demand from America and emerging markets like Japan, but supply has not increased, as there is little to no additional approved land to be planted. There is discussion of expanding the appellation, but that is years from fruition.

Even so, producers are not concerned, some believing that a Champagne shortage is nowhere in sight. "I think this is a faux problem," said Jean-Louis Carbonnier, head of public relations for Salon and Delamotte. "I find the supply concern especially ironic given the fact that a producer has been able to make a deal with Woolworth in the U.K. to offer a 5 [pound sterling] bottle."

The U.S. dollar's decline in value is of greater concern, but Champagne prices have managed, so far, to hold relatively steady. "We all see America as a key market and will do what we have to do, even take a loss on the currency," said Boye.

So, despite such concerns, producers are wasting no time in trying to build on Americans' taste for bubbly. Boye said Feuillatte will launch a major ad campaign next year, while Korbel has promotional ties with NBC Sports.

"Champagne is unique and there is a lot of money in the marketplace," said Carbonnier. "There are more millionaires than ever around the world, and growing middle classes ... who aspire to the good life."

WS: The Tastes of 007

James Bond revels in beautiful women, fast cars and the very best in food and drink

John Mariani
Issue: November 15, 2002

"I take a ridiculous pleasure in what I eat and drink. It comes partly from being a bachelor, but mostly from a habit of taking a lot of trouble over details."

Thus spoke Bond ... James Bond, the suave, sophisticated British secret agent created by Ian Fleming, in Casino Royale. Fleming chronicled Bond's adventures in 12 potboilers, beginning in 1953 with Casino Royale. Agent 007 returns to action this year in the latest—though surely not the last—of 20 films, Die Another Day, starring, in his fourth performance as Bond, Pierce Brosnan.

For most men, Bond's appeal surely owes less to his eating habits than to his way with beautiful women. I suspect more men noticed Ursula Andress (as Honey Ryder), clad only in a wet, white bikini and sheathed knife, rising out of the sea, than noticed Bond's discussion of Dom Pérignon vintages with the title character in the first 007 movie, Dr. No (1962). Yet though Honey and the other "Bond girls"—Pussy Galore, Tiffany Case, Xenia Onatopp, Holly Goodhead and the rest—were drawn largely to his bravery, wit and sheer animal magnetism, Bond was the first male action hero to give connoisseurship a sexual charge.

Indeed, prior to Bond, the merest display of epicureanism in a male character was a sure sign of his untrustworthiness or villainy (e.g., Sidney Greenstreet, Charles Laughton, Walter Slezak, Claude Rains). Being a gourmet was considered effete. Try to imagine Bogart, Gable, Cagney, Cooper or Wayne ordering Taittinger Blanc de Blancs.

Bond changed the rules. He reveled in a love of good food and wine, and his connoisseurship was as much a part of his persona as were his Aston-Martin DB5 and Walther PPK. Indeed, his intimate knowledge of wine and food was crucial to his survival, serving to detect uncouth enemies' intentions and shatter his enemies' maniacal egos.

In the film Diamonds Are Forever (1971), Bond exposes two waiters as assassins when they fail to identify Château Mouton-Rothschild '55 as a claret. In From Russia With Love (1963), 007's suspicions are aroused—alas, too late—when a false British agent orders red wine with fish. In You Only Live Twice (1967), Bond cannot resist strutting his epicureanism, complimenting his Japanese host on his sake, "especially when it's served at exactly 98.4 degrees Fahrenheit."

Bond exercises any opportunity for one-upmanship, even with his superior, M. In Diamonds Are Forever, Bond sips a glass of Sherry and says to M, "Too bad about your liver, sir; this is a very good '51 solera." When M shoots back, "There are no vintages in Sherry, 007," Bond replies, "I was speaking of the original solera on which the Sherry was based—1851." And in Goldfinger (1964), when presented with a "rather disappointing Cognac," Bond sniffs the brandy and slowly observes, "I'd say it was a 30-year-old fine, indifferently blended, sir ... with an overdose of Bon Bois." I once asked a Cognac expert if anyone could possibly identify a Cognac so impeccably. "No," he said, "but whoever wrote the script [it was Paul Dehn and Richard Maibaum] knew exactly what he was writing about."

The hero of Ian Fleming's novels was actually quite different from the cinematic 007s, played variously by Sean Connery, George Lazenby, Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton and Pierce Brosnan. Fleming's Bond was neither noble nor idealistic; he endured terrible hangovers and suffered self-doubt. And he was an outright British snob, a connoisseur of food, wine, clothes, cars and casinos. Fleming took pains to detail Bond's gourmet meals (although Noël Coward pronounced Fleming's own cooking—at Fleming's Jamaican residence, Goldeneye—to be inedible), as well as Bond's likes and dislikes. In the novel Diamonds Are Forever (1956), Bond describes the perfect woman as "somebody who can make sauce béarnaise as well as love." He does not care for sushi, and he despises tea, calling it one of the reasons for the downfall of the British Empire. In the

Fleming books, Bond preferred Champagne—particularly Taittinger Blanc de Blancs '45 ("A fad of mine," 007 calls it in Casino Royale)—to red wine, which M prefers. Of course, Fleming created the fad for vodka martinis, "shaken not stirred," that endures to this day.

In the films made by American producers Albert R. Broccoli and Harry Saltzman, less attention was paid to 007's tastes, except to show what he wore, drove, drank and ate on-screen. But what he did drink on-screen took on astounding importance with men around the world. There seemed a natural fit between the worldly sophistication of 007 and the swinger's attitude of Playboy, which published several of Fleming's Bond stories. American men suddenly began to study and appreciate fine food and wine as both a personal pleasure and the way to a woman's heart.

In Dr. No (1962), arch-villain Dr. No proudly serves Bond a Dom Pérignon 1955, prompting 007 to counter, "I prefer the '53 myself." Sales of DP soared—and kick-started what has come to be known as "product placement," whereby companies pay high fees to have their products displayed in a movie. By the very next film in the series, From Russia With Love, Bond is conspicuously drinking Taittinger Blanc de Blancs in two different scenes. Starting with Live and Let Die (1973), Bollinger arranged to have 007 drink their brand in at least eight Bond films.

By the time License to Kill (1989) appeared, such promotions had become blatant in Bond films: Timothy Dalton tells room service, "And of course, I'll want a bottle of Bollinger R.D. sent up right away." During the making of For Your Eyes Only (1981), a spokesman for the film told the press, "We don't know what Bond will be drinking this time. We had a little trouble last time getting enough of the right Champagne. Maybe he'll switch to Campari."

One can only imagine, then, what Stolichnaya paid to have Roger Moore hold up a bottle of Stoli to the camera at the end of A View to a Kill (1985); the word is that Bond will switch to Finlandia in Die Another Day. And one wonders what Hennessy forked over to have Bond, in On Her Majesty's Secret Service (1969), tell a St. Bernard that has restored him with brandy after a near fatal avalanche, "Good fellow, but I do wish it had been Hennessy." So important have these product placements in action movies become that companies paid $25 million in fees to have their products featured in this summer's Minority Report, and an astounding $70 million to be in the James Bond spoof, Austin Powers in Goldmember.

Since Fleming's death in 1964, two authorized successors, John Gardner and Raymond Benson, have continued to detail Bond's gourmandism in a series of novels. In the most recent, Benson's The Man With the Red Tattoo (2002), 007 enjoys a JAL airlines executive-class cabin meal of prawn sushi, crabmeat egg roll, whitebait in soy sauce, boiled shrimp with fish roe, fried chicken in ginger sauce, miso soup, Japanese pickles and steamed rice, along with a sweet sake from the Kyoto Prefecture. ("Bond thought it did nicely as an after-dinner drink.") Later, he has an extensive kaiseki dinner with his Tokyo colleague, Tiger Tanaka.

Bond's high-living does take its toll. In the second movie based on the novel Thunderball (1961), Never Say Never Again (1983), M shows concern over 007's physical condition. Citing his furred tongue, high blood pressure and a liver "not palpable," M chastises Bond for his consumption of "too much alcohol, fatty foods and white bread." Bond replies, "I don't eat all that much white bread, sir." Sent off to Shrublands health clinic to purge his body of "free-radical toxins," Bond refuses a meal of "lentil delight" and goat's cheese brought by a beautiful nurse. Then he seduces her by breaking out his secret hamper of beluga caviar, foie gras ("Strasbourg, of course"), quail eggs and vodka.

Not that any of it seems to threaten Bond's longevity (although he did stop smoking cigarettes on-screen—a three-pack-a-day habit in the books—many movies ago). Bond seems to thrive on what he eats and drinks. Truly a man of the world, his stamina never flags, his interest in exotic food and drink adds to his knowledge, and he always seems to have time to dine even though he only has 48 hours in which to find and defuse an atomic bomb.

Fleming summed up Bond's world-weary gourmandism in On Her Majesty's Secret Service. "When travelling abroad, generally by himself, meals were a welcome break in the day, something to look forward to, something to break the tension of fast driving, with its risks taken or avoided, the narrow squeaks, the permanent background of concern for the fitness of his machine." Fast cars, beautiful women, fine food and drink. What more could a man want?

Oh, there is one more thing that makes Bond a male fantasy figure, as enviable now as he was when he first appeared 50 years ago. While on assignment, 007 has an unlimited expense account.

JAMES BOND'S TASTES ACCORDING TO IAN FLEMING Coffee: Beans bought at De Bry on New Oxford Street (taken without sugar)
Eggs: Brown, boiled 3 1/3 minutes, from Marans hens
Butter: From Jersey
Smoked Salmon: Scottish (Bond is of Scottish ancestry)
Honey: Norwegian heather honey from Fortnum & Mason
Marmalade: Frank Cooper's Vintage Oxford marmalade
Jam: Tiptree "Little Scarlet" strawberry
Vodka: Stolichnaya or prewar Wolfschmidt's (with a bit of fresh black pepper)
Bourbon: Old Grand-dad, Walker's De Luxe, I.W. Harper's and Jack Daniel's Tennessee Whiskey
Beer: Löwenbräu, Miller High Life, Red Stripe
Gin: Beefeaters and Gordons
Brandy: Hennessy Three Star

BOND'S FOOD AND Drink MOMENTS ON FILM Dr. No (1962): Drinks a martini made with Smirnoff, as well as Dom Pérignon '55.
From Russia With Love (1963): Drinks Taittinger Blanc de Blancs—twice. Sips Turkish coffee ("medium sweet"). Realizes—too late—that no true British agent would order "Chianti ... the red kind" with fish, as did a double agent who says, "I may not know the right wines but you're the one on your knees."
Goldfinger (1964): Describes the faults of a "rather disappointing Cognac." Sips a mint julep at Goldfinger's plantation. ("Sour mash, not too sweet," Bond insists.)
Thunderball (1965): Has conch chowder, considered to be an aphrodisiac. Drinks Dom Pérignon '55. Has a vodka and Cinzano martini, and a rum Collins.
You Only Live Twice (1967): Has a martini made with Russian vodka and Noilly Prat vermouth. Voices displeasure with Siamese vodka.
On Her Majesty's Secret Service (1969): After being revived with brandy following an avalanche, he tells a St. Bernard that he prefers Hennessey. Drinks Haut-Brion '57, Dom Pérignon '57 and Campari, and eats royal beluga caviar. Diamonds Are Forever (1971): Realizes his waiters are assassins when they fail to recognize a Mouton-Rothschild '55 as a claret.
Live and Let Die (1973): Makes a cappuccino. His first time drinking Bollinger. The Man With the Golden Gun (1974): Drinks Dom Pérignon '64 ("I prefer the '62," he says) and a Thai wine named Phuyuck.
The Spy Who Loved Me (1977): Orders Bacardi on the rocks for a female Russian spy.
For Your Eyes Only (1981): Orders ouzo at a Greek casino, refuses the offer of a Robola from Cephalonia, erroneously believing it is a retsina! Drinks Dom Pérignon.
Never Say Never Again (1983): Bond sneaks a basket of Absolut vodka, quail eggs, caviar and foie gras into Shrublands health spa. When a water-skiing femme fatale splashes him with water, she purrs, "I've made you all wet," to which Bond replies, "Yes, but my martini is still dry."
A View to a Kill (1985): Dines at Jules Verne restaurant in the Eiffel Tower. Enjoys caviar, Lafite Rothschild '59, Bollinger '75 and Stolichnaya.
The Living Daylights (1987): Drinks Bollinger R.D.
License to Kill (1989): Orders Bollinger R.D.
GoldenEye (1995): Drinks vodka martinis.
Tomorrow Never Dies (1997): Drinks vodka in his room.

John and Galina Mariani's latest book is The American-Italian Cookbook (Harvard Common Press)

My Champagne Tastings LTM

‎Champagne tasting over the last twelve months:

Moet & Chandon Grand Vintage 2004

Moet & Chandon Grand Vintage 2006

Moet & Chandon Grand Vintage Rosé 2004

Moet  & Chandon Brut Imperial

Moet  & Chandon Brut Rosé Imperial

Dom Perignon 2004

Dom Perignon Rosé  2003

Dom Perignon Plenitude 2 P2-1998

Krug Vintage 2000

Krug Vintage 2003

Krug Grande Cuvée 

Krug Rosé 

Bollinger NV Special Cuvée 

Marguet Grand Cru NV Rosé 

Veuve Clicquot NV Yellow Label

Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.