Instant Favorite.

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

I dislike "blood and guts" movies, and only saw this one because I was channel surfing, thought it was about a guy and his cooking show, and was drawn in by the time I realized its genre.For a low budget movie, I'm surprised at how good the lead actors were, and that even though both characters were impossible to like, they had strong chemistry together and there was palpable suspense over what would happen next.Surprisingly, the dialog was well-written, and there was some very dark comedy in there. The tasks that the captor demanded were not complicated nor incredible, but rather simply creative ways to make the critic "eat his words." Some of the negative reviews in here lament that there was not enough blood and/or guts/gore, but there was enough intensity and thrills created, without having to show every bloody detail.I found this to be a suspenseful, well-acted independent film.

I really enjoyed this movie, it was entertaining and worth a watch! A celebrity chef gone hell bent on torturing a guy who wrote many bad reviews on his finest cuisine. The story line is simple and the camera work in this movie was awesome!The main characters were all great, the only person I wasn't crazy about was the private investigator who seemed weird and out of place in the movie. He looked like someone who went into a coma in the 80's and woke up 20 years later. Other than that everything was very suspenseful without being too over the top. But for what was an 8/10 movie for me quickly flopped near the end.Before I go on, I say the movie IS worth a watch. I'm not a thriller fan at all but I actually watched this on TV because it was interesting. Below I explain the ending though and why I gave it a negative review. It contains spoilers so I recommend you watch and judge for yourself and unless you really don't care.* SPOILERS BELOW * The ending in my opinion is pretty horrible which killed the movie for me. Near the end the food critics girlfriend gets kidnapped and taken hostage by the insane chef. The movie went downhill from there. First off when he kidnapped her there was the horror movie forced nudity, they just had to show the girl topless in the bathtub! Second he played a silly hunting game with the critic and ended up killing him in the end. The girlfriend breaks free and she ends up killing the insane chef. We don't know how she copes or survives because the credits kick in. I thought it was because they were trying to show things from the chef's perspective but that's not true, the story in the beginning went between both characters and into the girlfriends life a little. It just didn't work.Why did I think this was a bad ending? The whole point of the movie was the chef wanted to bring pain and misery to the food critic for criticizing his food. When he kidnapped the girlfriend, I was expecting him to kill the girl right in front of him to make him upset and then I thought he would make him cook her or something sick like that. It would have tied into the story and showed how sick and twisted he was. Instead he just ties her up and plays a hunting game with the food critic. There were so many better ways to have done the ending, I just didn't like it.

Peter Grey is a pompous, talented chef whose life is about to take a turn for the worse after an unnecessarily horrible review by blogger JT Franks. Grey's already skewed world perspective changes drastically as he resolves to kidnap Franks, torturing him with a series of seemingly simple cooking tasks.Bitter Feast gets points for originality and gloss. The film looks quite good for an independent effort and the actors really throw themselves into the roles. They actually hired actors, not faces, to flesh out the interesting script. James Le Gros especially never goes over the top but plays the role rather subtly and Josh Lucas is excellent, being sympathetic and unsympathetic all at once. The always reliable Larry Fessenden shows up as a slimy private eye trying to locate Franks.Don't expect your life to change, but if you're looking for a movie with some originality and panache, then dig in!

An uptight cooking show host and head restaurant chef (LeGros)loses his jobs and takes his revenge on the critic (Leonard)that caused his downfall. After a scathing review from food critic JT Franks causes chef Peter Grey to lose his job at his restaurant, and the cancellation of his show, Grey kidnaps Franks and the torture begins. It sounds pretty cheesy but Grey reads reviews Franks has given and forces him to do better in order to eat the food he is preparing. The movie is slow moving in parts but overall a pretty good movie to watch. I was going to give it a B- mainly because the torture movie genre is all the same, but the last 20 minutes strayed away from the aspects that made this seem different and into "really, they are doing this??!".The ending brought the grade down, it could have been so much better. I give it a C.