So, I went to the movie last night. To be honest, I didn't really have high hopes. I was looking forward to it, mostly for the interviews, but I intentionally didn't read any of the blog-o-globe chat about the movie beforehand. I knew that sites like Beer Advocate and the Burgundian Babble Belt must be laden with head swelling opinions on the film's premise. Rather than adopt an opinion before seeing the film, I tried to keep an open mind.
Aside from seeming low-budget and a little hokey (I also cannot stand Ben Stein), I had a hard time getting swept away with the message, particularly because the writer/director/producer, Anat Baron, admittedly does not drink beer. How exactly does one advocate for craft beer if they don't even like craft beer? In fairness, she has worked in the malt beverage industry (I have a hard time calling Mike's hard lemonade "beer") and the film was presented largely from an industry perspective. But, apart from that I was left feeling a bit conflicted about the content of the film. The majority of the film was dedicated to excoriating Anheuser Busch for all the evils they commit and for the swill they produce. The end of the film did shed some light onto the insidious nature of Washington beer politics and how the "three tier system" is really just a tool to protect the big 3 (Anheuser Busch, Miller and Coors) and their distribution businesses. They also made some really compelling arguments about the over legislation and antiquated regulation of the industry, and showed that today the laws really only exist to limit the chances of success for smaller brew ops.
However, the vast majority of the film was dedicated to highlighting how terrible fizzy yellow beer tastes and how much better 'craft beers' are. I might agree that there is no comparison between Stone IPA and Bud light, but to be honest, I don't really care how small or large Stone's operation is. I do like supporting breweries where I know the brewmasters and owners and I really like the community of the craft beer movement, and I feel proud to support it. But, that doesn't make Budweiser any less of a beverage. I drink Stone IPA because it's a great beer, not because Greg Koch is cooler that August Busch. The truth is, AB makes a fine product at a fair price. Some people may not like it (though, I'd ask them to try and brew an American light lager as clean as Budweiser). I may even like 100 other beers far more than I like Bud, but that doesn't make AB evil. That just means that, in my opinion, Russian River, Pizza Port, Dogfish Head, Cantillon, and Hair of the Dog all make far superior products.
The other gripe I have with AB bashing is that nobody likes to point out all of the good that the company does for the industry. Places like the brewing program at UC Davis would not exist if it were not for Budweiser. AB has continued to keep brewing a science. While I will admit that in doing so, they've stripped the art completely out of their process, but in the same breath I have to give them credit for continuing to encourage and fund research into brewing practices and techniques.
In a nutshell, I don't really understand this whole "Beer War." If we're fighting against some archaic, mercantilistic legislation and business practices, then let me be the first to pick up arms. But, if we're fighting to promote snobby beer, then I think I'll sit this one out. I don't love a beer because someone tells me its great. I love great beer because it speaks to me the same way that a great meal or a great painting or a great film might. In my opinion, great beer doesn't need to proclaim its greatness. Great beer needs no explanations, and it surely should not need to be compared to Bud light for me to recognize its brilliance.
EDIT: I just have to add that I absolutely love Charlie Papazian. He was the best part of the movie IMO.
