Toast (2011)

hyped garbage

Don't listen to the negative reviews

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

Worth seeing just to witness how winsome it is.

I had never heard of this food "celebrity," though I am not immune to the charms of cooking and food.In order to enjoy a movie I have to feel some sympathy with the main character. They don't have to be the most likable person on the planet, but I have to have a connection to them somehow. Even if they are a strange evil genius, I can usually find my way in and relate.But this main character was hideous: A spoiled, whiny, bizarre little kid, who expected the world to revolve around him. There is an attempt to make a saint of his inept, sickly mother, but she was despicable as well. The child loathed the father, but despite seeing the father through the lens of that hatred, I felt the most sympathy for that character. Surely he had thoughts of infanticide but did not act on them. Now there's a saint.In no sense that this provide any insight into the human experience. I didn't care about anyone. I was glad when it was over.

he does a great job in a not really comfortable role. and that could not be a surprise. but, working with Helena Bonham Carter , he sustain, in better manner, the expectations inspired by the other performances. because he does a realistic Nigel Slater. because it gives a character who has small references to the lovely boy from his filmography. because the war between Nigel and his stepmother, amusing, cruel, almost grotesque, is the perfect arena for proof his talent. it is not a film about jealousy or food or black humor, crazy competition or homage to the 1960 years. it is only a too clear portrait for the mistakes and need to survive. and one of films who gives the chance to Freddie Highmore to impress.

This movie is based on the ultimate conceit, that we know about the central character and recognise that he is brilliant and famous. I had never heard of Nigel Slater before I watched this movie, although the people I watched this with had, and indicated that he is a famous "food writer", whatever that is. OK, we all have to do something, but in my book, "food writing" does not rank in my top 1000 meaningful professions that have made the world a better place. A film about the early life of Napoleon or Alexander the Great I can understand, but about a food writer? Give me a break. My hosts told me that Nigel Slater abhors the "celebrity chef" phenomenon, as well he should, but I find it hard to reconcile this statement with someone who has written his autobiography in his relative youth and who not only endorses but appears in a cameo in, a movie about himself.OK, on to the film itself. It is basically a tale of nothing at all, the story of all our lives. Which one of us hasn't had issues growing up? Who hasn't been a surly teenager? Who hasn't had differences of opinion with their parents? Why we should feel sorry for poor Nigel is hard to imagine and given that he is portrayed as an unpleasant child who morphs into an unpleasant teenager why should we care? The film ends with the young Nigel being taken under the wing of an established chef, who nudge, nudge, wink, wink, for those in the know, happens to be played in a cameo role by the famous Nigel himself. Well isn't that just cute. It ends on a note of "and the rest is history", but certainly in my case it isn't because I had no idea who he was and after enduring this conceit-fest had not the least desire to find out.A complete waste of a few thousand feet of film and a few million dollars.

Great cast (everyone), acted well (everyone), well written, filmed well. But the story itself is just not appealing. Apparently a story based on a shallow little prick that due to his lactose intolerance throws up on his teacher; due to his selfishness made his fathers life miserable and despite the movie's insistence that he has some talent or respect for food he tears down the only character in the movie that shares this love. There is a nice scene where a young man creates a masterpiece of a salad and but we are left to believe this culinary performance is somehow better (or executed more naturally) than Mrs. Potter's years of consistent good cooking; yet when the lead character tells the chef at the Savoy why he should be hired, he says it is because he can make a great Meringue Pie (the recipe he lifted from Mrs. Potter.) The very idea that the chef the story was written about actually plays the chef at the end of the movie that gives him a job, is so laughably bad cinema as to sort of make me angry I watched the entire thing expecting at least something more than a bore. Instead the prick is rewarded, the real life chef winks and the viewer gets absolutely nothing. That's all folks.This movie would do well to have a twist in it similar to "It's a Wonderful Life" but instead after this main character jumps off the bridge...he's gone from the movie...and the father and HIS love live happily ever after in Pottersville.