Good concept, poorly executed.

Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.

Yes, absolutely, there is fun to be had, as well as many, many things to go boom, all amid an atmospheric urban jungle.

The movie really just wants to entertain people.

The film is quite good. However, if Nigel is this big of a c*** in real life, I wish him nothing but the most tortuous suffering he deserves. Horrible human.

Eat that bloody pie! With the same script writer as "Billy Elliot" it's easy to see they have tried you make some of the same with "Toast", except this is much more of a comedy. A strict father, not very understanding of a sons needs and dreams. The film is almost Wes Anderson'ish in it's feel. Think "Moonrise kingdom", with a dash of "Chocolat" and you're there, in the same kind of tasty childhood universe.This is based on memories of the childhood of Nigel Slater, a famous British cook and cookbook writer. He appears as a chef in the final scene of the film as a cameo.Young Nigel grows up in Wolverhampton, and as 9 years old, writing 1969, he no longer can stand his life home, with his parents. His grumpy uptight dad and his hopeless cook of a mother, suffering from bad asthma (probably due to her never eating any vitamins). Nigel has the tinned food mom put on the table, but loves her for her toasts with butter. When his father sacks the gardener dye to him damaging Nigel with the love for freshly grown veggies, he's had enough. Nigel's fantasy helps him survive. His longing for some real tasty food, and fresh vegetables and fruits makes him want to become a cook. The takes the long way to get there, as he don't even have a little encouragement back home. But the death of his mother, which he still misses after her demise, and the wise word of his young friend, "The way to a mans heart, is always through his stomach", changes everything.It's a cute story, though maybe a bit sugar coated for my taste. Still, if you can overbear that, you'll enjoy this. Cute and lovely, though quite slow. Well done 60'ies portrait, as always when it comes to British films. Helena Bonham Carter really does her best role ever here, I think. She's very strong, and very unlike other roles she's had lately, even if it's some of the same comic demands.Main character Nigel, played by Oscar Mennedy, might annoy some, but then he wasn't very loved as a child, but the older, played by amazing Freddie Highmore makes it all come right. Highmore is a real charmer. The casting of Oscar Kenbecy was impossible to fill Freddue Highmores shoes here, making some of the films main problem. Not due to him, because he does his best, but more to the extreme talent of Highmore. Not only the father, but also Nigel changes when he gets the right food. They can be used as the excuse for the change in character.

I know this movie is based on true facts on Nigel Slater's life.I can say that it is well acted, well shot, and has a compelling story line. All of the good "ingredients" (teehee) are here. However, it is very hard to figure out the message that this movie sends. It is clearly a coming of age tale but seems to lack the pride and triumph (although it attempts) that I usually see in movies like this.If the directors and screenwriters wanted to show a complex tale about a complex man, they overcooked it. I believe the main problem is the characters themselves change too much over the short period of time, and too many scenes seem needless and pointless, muddying the central message about Nigel overcoming unhappiness and great odds.Mrs. Potter may have had her issues with the ill advised competition with her stepson, but overall seemed to be a decent person. Nigel's attitude toward the end seems more jarring than triumphant.Nigel's father is painted as very harsh and unsympathetic, yet becomes a very sympathetic person toward the end.Nigel himself begins as innocent and very sympathetic, but is revealed fairly quickly on to be capable of some real nastiness.I guess my problem with this movie is the fact that it seems like it wants to clearly delineate the bad guys vs. the good guys, but loses this among some pretty complicated characterization that leads nowhere.For instance, why does Mrs. Potter cry to herself in the kitchen? What about Nigel's response then? This scene leads nowhere.What about the quick little romance thrown in toward the end? That whole part seemed too hasty.It's almost like this is attempting to be three movies in one, and failing at invoking any real passion or good feeling toward the main characters.Here's the worst part to me: One of the worst offenses Mrs. Potter seems to have committed is to be "common." I believe that this movie really wants the audience to agree with this, and to sympathize with Nigel because of that.

"The ultimate nostalgia trip through everything edible in 1960's Britain. ".ultimate....nostalgia....everything edible in the 60s???what a completely misleading statement. with a British production and cast that this could have been much better. A young boy dealing with being constantly bullied by his father, deals with the death of his mother, then more bullying, berating and violence by his father who brings on a new woman who also berates him, grows up, goes school where he is bullied, gets a job, deals with the death of his father, realizes he is gay, leaves home and the movie ends.this has NOTHING at all to do with 'everything edible in 1960s Britain' only the twice played 60s music, and a scene with hippies put it in that time frame, and the food was definitely NOT associated with the 60s because cuisine is timeless.