Burnt

Lemme guess he used to be great but 'threw it all away'. He's on a mission of personal redemption. Every one love hates him. He falls in love with his chief competition who of course hates him and adores him. He's substituted drugs and booze for being a colossal a-hole user of people because he's just that talented. He IS the most interesting man in the world. Before him no one ate food. Other than that this is movie where you hear Bradley speak pretty French where you watch people make and eat pretty good food and there's a lot and I mean a lot of histrionics.

A must see for those interested in the inner workings of a restaurant kitchen and the world of high end chefs. Most people have no clue what it is like to be at the top of the restaurant world or how difficult it is to be in this type of a service profession. The intense pressure they put on themselves to be "perfect". Is the movie a bit disjointed along the way, yes but the acting is stellar and its worth it just to see the food prep and get the overwhelming inside experience. Bradley Cooper is fantastic! Very good supporting actors. Many of them are unknowns. The kitchen scenes are the best. Watching the process and the artistry is a unique peek behind the kitchen doors. Go see this one!!

Burnt is a film about a chef (Bradley Cooper) who opens a high-end restaurant after being fired from his previous one. The kitchen heats up as he battles with his overworked team while dealing with his own inner demons. The film is a mix of passion and self-destruction, with a talented cast led by Cooper. The plot may not be very interesting, but the visuals and the intense kitchen scenes are enough to make you want to watch the movie.

Cooper shines in Burnt, playing a character who is flawed but determined. The world of high-end fine dining is in full swing, with tantalizing visuals that will tantalize your tastebuds. Burnt might not be a great film, but it is a satisfying drama for drama lovers.

Movies like burnt are so frustrating to watch and in cases like this, the fault almost always lies with the director and / or meddling producers. I am not 100% sure, but I believe that this script was on the black list and even if it was not it probably was damn good to attract the acting talent to such a project. The acting was well done (no pun intended) and none of the actors mailed in their performance. So why does the sum equal less than the parts?

In my reviews, I like to rate movies based on promise and delivery. The trailer is the promise and the viewing experience is the delivery. And I always try to give films the benefit of the doubt. Rating a movie a 1 or a 10, is not helpful to your fellow users.

When you decide to spend your valuable time and money on burnt, you know you're not getting a big budget, special effects extravaganza or a gripping whodunit. You want the movie to show you the inner workings of a kitchen, the struggle and cut throat atmosphere of creating and maintaining a top rated restaurant and some relationship drama that feels possibe. Doesn't have to be good will hunting emotion, but enough to keep us invested. The story and character motivations should never be so illogical or vague as to distract the viewer.

Burnt is not a complete misfire. I enjoyed the scenes in the restaurant kitchen, they were beautiful shots. And most of the scenes themselves were well acted, Bradley seemed invested in the role. The role actors also did an adequate job. The major problem was there was no real tension. The stakes never seemed remotely high.

SMALL SPOILERS: Bradley's character had a vague back story about drug abuse and wanting redemption, but he never seemed to really struggle. He vanishes from the restaurant scene after burning out, and then, after some self penance, he is able to finagle his way into running a brand new restaurant and in no time at all wins a Michelin star? There is some tension with the debt he owes, but you never feel worried because he could always borrow the money from the super rich Maître d'. And in the end his gorgeous ex waltzes in and pays it off?

You can tell as you watch the movie that there are some plot points that were probably compelling in the screenplay, but unfortunately just got lost in translation. I read that when the movie was edited, an actor's entire role was edited out. Maybe that was why the movie seemed kind of disjointed. Every genre of movie has fatal flaws. In niche genres like this, you never want your movie to feel "like a day in the life". It's a movie, give us some stakes. Burnt felt like I got a behind the scenes peek at running a top restaurant. If I wanted that I could watch a 30 minute Food Network show.

Final verdict: Bradley Coopers fans would enjoy. Otherwise, wait till it comes out NetFlix and you're bored one rainy night.

This question probably makes more sense in the forum section, but I find it an interesting parallel. Another food movie came out around the same time called Chef. It was marketed more as a family drama / feel good, subtle comedy. The main character also finds semi redemption by falling back in love with cooking, by going back to the basics after burning out. He also reconnects with his young son. I had the same after taste watching that movie. Cool scenes involving food, but no real stakes or unexpected turns. That movie, however, got stellar reviews. Sometimes I just do not understand professional movie critics at all.

John Wells helms a good movie, but he doesn't have a big rad plot to save him. A washed out burnt down Chef has cleaned up, buffed his act up, and put himself together in an endeavour to pursue perfection. He is reaching out for a third Michelin star and anything less would end up getting burnt by his wrath.

So we know how recalcitrant chefs are. Seen enough Gordon Ramsay to reach that conclusion. Bradley as Adam Jones touches that nerve wrecking breakdown to achieve what he has planned to do. He shouts, despises, scorns and insults his crew to get their juices running. He doesn't care how evil he might look or sound while trying to get results. He is unaffected by emotions, reckless with his life but careful with the food he is preparing. If his preparation doesn't meet the standard in his head, he flings it away and doesn't even hold himself from bashing it to the wall.

He might be a man with a mission, but he is arrogant, mean and a heartless prick. He is also in a huge drug debt which gawks him from a distance, and occasionally batters him up good. He is trying hard to reach it, and there is always someone or something that messes him up and compels him to start at Ground Zero.

What is quite interesting to watch is the brilliant presentation of its frames. The food shown in Burnt will at once make you hungry. There are great close up shots that will sizzle your palates. But everything disappears leaving you wanting for more. Also, there isn't one great recipe that is highlighted marvelously or shown being cooked proper which will bum foodies out. The story lacks substance which is sad. Screenplay of the flick is good. The score is kind of okay, but could have used some more depth.

Cooper fans are gonna love him in this new avatar. His acting is still very engaging. His dramatic bits are great to watch and Siena Miller complements him yet again quite beautifully. Daniel Bruhl plays Tony beautifully too. Emma Thompson has been given some marvelous lines, while Alicia Vikander has kind of a cameo in there.

Remember the golden rule to truly enjoy anything: Don't compare! Burnt shouldn't be compared with other similar culinary movies in the library and you might relish it.