I agree with this in general, half the battle of wine is finding something that brings out or at least tries not to mask the flavor in whatever foods you're serving. The value in a good sommelier is not that he can sell you a $500 bottle, but that he can enhance your entire meal experience by bringing expertise, exposing diners to new wines they might have never tried or new tastes they might have not considered pairing.
And to be fair to wine reviewers, it seemed like the score was a 3-4 point variable. That's a lot if you're in competition but in general if you only think in terms of 90s, 80s, 70s and such, you'll generally get a higher quality wine. I think the lack of value comes in when you're trying to judge between say, a 90 and a 95. That's when it becomes arbitrary and subjective.
Some of the review mags now no longer give straight scores but give instead range scores because it's true that every batch can be slightly different. I've started to see wine mags rate a wine say, 92-95 instead of 93.3434234. Seems far more reasonable to give it multiple goes to deal with variable conditions.