What saves Love's Kitchen from being an unsalvageable mess is Simon Callow. He positively relishes his role and is just delightful to watch. The film's also competently photographed and has charming locations. Dougray Scott and Claire Forlani perform earnestly, and are a warm, cute couple with some real genial spark.The rest of the cast do not come over very naturally, with emotions both overcooked and underplayed. This is especially true with the cameo of Gordon Ramsay, a cameo that felt like a forced gimmick above all else that takes one completely out of the film. It's not completely the cast's fault though, because of the characters only Callow's has any real juice(a large part as to why he was the one that registered most strongly, as well as that he's a talented actor) and there are too many secondary roles that have so little depth to them. The script is pretty disastrous, much of the dialogue is stilted and hollow with some very awkward tone changes, and of the romance, comedy and drama elements it only does just okay with the romantic elements, which are quite cute. The comedy however is very forced, with again only Callow being properly at ease, and the drama is caked in maudlin sentiment that it'll make one nauseous.Another major problem with Love's Kitchen is the story. A lot of romantic comedies get criticised for being predictable, but very few romantic comedies are this predictable, one where it's clear how the entire film was going to end even before it started. There is absolutely nothing fresh here and the material is treated with very little flavour or substance, everything feeling bland and shallow instead. The soundtrack is fitting but with not much memorable about it, the pacing was constantly askew being often on the dull side and Jack Hacking's direction is all over the place, pace-wise and especially tonally, only showing competence technically.In conclusion, one flavourless confection salvageable only by three performances and the production values. 3/10 Bethany Cox

As I have learnt from the multitude of reality TV cooking shows which make regular appearances in the Malone household, the secret to a good dish is carefully selecting fresh ingredients and balancing the different flavors together in order for them to all work in harmony on the plate. However in Love's Kitchen they do things in a different way. Essentially chucking a bunch of old, out of date and re-heated ideas into the mixing bowl, bunging it in the oven and after 90 mins they have produced an under-cooked, half-baked idea of film, devoid of any real flavour or substance.Love's Kitchen tells the lukewarm tale of successful chef and restaurateur Rob Haley (Dougray Scott) who looses all passion for food after the tragic death of his wife in a car accident. A scathing review of his restaurant leads to a cringe worthy intervention by Gordon Ramsey, before our Rob heads off to the countryside and buys The Boot, an old country pub which his late wife fell in love with before her untimely demise and is now frequented by an American food critic (Claire Forlani). Here Rob proceeds to try and recapture his love for food and turn around both the culinary and fiscal fortunes of The Boot. So it appears as if Love's Kitchen is essentially a 90 minute episode of Ramsey's Kitchen Nightmares, which just in case you were wondering, that's not a good thing.Most rom-coms are predictable, so much so that you can sketch out the plot within the first 5 mins or so of meeting the characters. Why some work and others don't is how much the audience grows to like and invest in the two leads. I am big rom-com fan and a huge admirer of a happy ending. I don't mind it being telegraphed, but I want to enjoy the journey. I need to want the couple to be together at the end of the film. Within 5 mins of watching Love's Kitchen I wanted to take a spatula and start slapping people around the face.Everything about the film felt forced. It felt as if they had studied what had worked in Four Weddings or Notting Hill and tried to recreate it piece by piece. Bringing together a British chap and an American lass has always worked well in the past, but this time the main leads are simply unconvincing with precious little chemistry together. They didn't seem suited to each other at all, so you just didn't care what happens to them.The supporting cast fared little better and appeared to be the dregs of out of work British soap opera actors. Eastenders was well represented and I almost fell of my chair when Nigel from Brookside turned up. I am sure if I had looked hard enough I probably would have found an extra from Crossroads somewhere in the background. There were moments when I couldn't believe what I was watching and hearing. The script sounded like it had come from a Carry On film and some of the characters felt like a cross between caricatures of English country folk and characters from Viz (get ooorffff my land!!) . At times I felt embarrassed for the cast, but mostly I just wanted it to stop.First time writer/director James Hacking did learn one good thing from Four Weddings though and that was Simon Callow. He is star of this film and simply delightful as a boozed up food critic, quite reminiscent of Keith Floyd. I could have happily have watched a film just about him.Apparently when then film opened to a small select 5 screens, it only took 121 GBP in its opening weekend, making it one of the lowest UK openings of all time. You can see why.

When I first saw this film I was decidedly unimpressed but when I had seen it 4 times I realised what a charming gem of a film it is though rather amateurish Story is a failed chef (Scott) buys an old English pub that looks out on a village green complete with pond and ducks and falls in love with a food critic Forlani. The chemistry between Forlani and Scott is really good seeing as how in real life the two just got married Sometimes I thought Forlani was going to eat Scott rather than the lovely trifle. This film could never be a financial success because no blood everywhere or dead or nude bodies. It should be watched in the atmosphere of the home not the cinema and was well worth making.

This a treat of a movie about... well, treats, actually. A straightforward script flows lightly and easily through a lovely British country-side, with leads who are having a ball and congenial supporting actors.Dougray Scott is perfect as a romantic leading man, his Scottish brawl adding a lot to his appeal. Claire Forlani is stunningly beautiful and warm, which is a rare combination. And Simon Callow is Simon Callow.What more can one ask for? Some weight possibly, more drama, more poignant villains? Yes, this could be a requirement. There is not much of this here, no suspense or action or tension in this movie. Then again: life flowing like a nice, quiet river can be lovely to watch every once in a while.