User reviews

Cinematography is the strongest aspect of this film. Some scenes look like paintings by Dutch Golden Age or Flemish Baroque artists. I had to pause several times to admire the tables tastefully laid with food. However, the main focus of the plot is not on food, like most of the reviewers seem to think. It shows the viewer why revolutions happen. Up until the rather stupid, highly unrealistic Hollywood-style happy ending. I guess the ending is the reason the film is listed as a comedy? Which it is not.

It's set in 1789 France just before the Revolution in a rural fictional dukedom of Chamfort. It tells the story of the invention of the modern restaurant concept in a time when only the nobility ate well.

Pierre Manceron (Grégory Gadebois) is the master chef for Le duc de Chamfort (Benjamin Lavernhe). Chamfort loves Manceron's cooking, but insists that he stick to set menus and not be creative in his recipes. When Manceron creates a little appetizer he calls "Délicieux" that contains potato, Manceron is dismissed after refusing to apologize for serving such a dish.

He returns to his rural home with his son, Benjamin (Lorenzo Lefèbvre), and together with an elderly mentor, Jacob (Christian Bouilette) runs a relay (postal) station that also serves basic food. Suddenly, a mysterious woman appears and asks to be Manceron's cooking apprentice. Louise (Isabelle Carré) claims to a former jam maker, but Manceron believes she actually must have been a prostitute. He refuses to accept her for a time, but ultimately agrees to train her.

They create dishes based on local produce and local livestock, and begin to attract a significant clientele. The duke is intrigued, misses his cook who he has not been able satisfactorily to replace, and offers to stop by for a traditional feast. If successful he'll invite Manceron back into service.

The film then takes a sharp departure into the pre-Revolution politics of the day, we learn the truth of Louise's background, and the story unfolds in unexpected ways.

This is beautifully-filmed movie. The scenes of food preparation reminded me of "Babette's Feast." The unfolding interaction between Manceron, Benjamin (who is pro-class struggle), and Louise is well done. The sharp departure two-thirds of the way into the movie started to to make it go off the rails for me. I expect minimal plausibility in historical films; this one drifted too far in its link to the French Revolution and ended somewhat unsatisfactorily.

Still, the cinematography and the initial storyline made it a good watch.

From the first scene I was delighted by the food and characters. While the movie moves forward you get more and more attached. It's a great, creative story. Contains love, passion and a great narrative.

Well shot, well acted, entertaining and will have you salivating. Please eat beforehand. Gets a bit ridiculous when going overboard with having LITERALLY EVERYTHING being invented by the two sidekicks, from menus to pommes frites to table service to desserts and cheese platters. But it's so engaging that it's easily overlooked.

After chef Manceron is sacked by his fussy aristocratic boss, a woman appears out of nowhere and asks him to let her be an apprentice chef. He is unwilling as he thinks that chefs should all be males. She hands him some money for her tuition fees and finally pursuades him to teach her. He teaches her how to identify plants suitable for eating, and how to cook animals. She becomes an excellent cook, and we see some of the delicious looking food that she produces. We learn about the poverty of the local peasants and how many are starving. The arrogance and condescending attitude of the Duc de Chamfort and his fellow aristocrats give us a taste of the unfair treatment given to the poorer people which eventually led to the French Revolution.

Since this film begins with a history of dining out before the restaurant and is touted as being the story of the first restaurant, let me start by saying I'm an actual food historian. I know not only the REAL history of the first restaurant, but the far lesser known story of eateries before that. This film has NOTHING to do with any of that. It reminds me somewhat of the disastrous "Affair of the Necklace" which took an actual and interesting story featuring an anti-heroine and made it into a banal tale starring an idealized and completely invented heroine. In this case, whatever is going on has nothing to do with any real food history and is something of a hodgepodge of (very appetizing) eating scenes and a basically familiar tale of a lesser-status man resisting power and confronting an aristocrat in a way reminiscent of one of Clint Eastwood's heros in his early films. Almost nothing about the intrigue is credible for anyone who knows the period. For a food historian, there are a few cute touches, starting with the suicide of a "La Varenne" early on. This is kind of an in-joke, since La Varenne wrote the first major cookbook to show the newer approach to French cuisine, but in the previous century. The reference to French fries is casual, but blithely ignores the actual chronology of their appearance in France. Never mind that the first restaurant was established long before the Revolution began to foment. The main story here - delivered carelessly and with little regard for history - is the beginning of the overturn of the Old Regime. But to the degree that that story is told it is in a very metaphorical and allusive way unrelated, again, to actual history. This is basically a lively costume drama with a lot of food.

My Rating 9/10

I'm no expert on Foreign cinema but I know what I like and I liked Delicious very much .

I just judge any film in any language on my own test.

Just 3 criteria. : Was it well produced and enjoyable to watch ?

Was I interested in the characters and story.?

And were the performances convincing?

And this French film DÉLICIEUX (Delicious) gets a high score in each category from me.

Writer/director Éric Besnard's mouth-watering new historical comedy indelibly pairs Grégory Gadebois and Isabelle Carré as a gifted chef and his unlikely protégé, who must find the resolve to free themselves from servitude.

In 1789 France, just prior to the Revolution.

Very loosely based on true events because as my research informs me in reality, the first restaurant is generally considered to be Le Grande Taverne des Londres in Paris, which opened a handful years before Delicious is set. However it's refreshing to see a delightful film that imaginatively does a flavourful job of marrying an origin story of sorts with its French Revolution-adjacent historical context.

Delicious joins other films that feature gastronomical delights like Chocolat. Babette's Feast , Julie and Julia , Eat Drink Man Woman and No Reservations but it's more than just a foodie movie it's intelligent heart warming and very entertaining.

I went in expecting a somewhat schmaltzy, feel-good movie and that's what I got. But it was a beautifully done and sets itself apart from many other movies that follow the same formula with beautiful direction an underlying message of being true to a passion. It was exactly what I needed after a string of downers.

There are some tropes and cliches, any seasoned moviegoer will be able to predict the plot as it unfolds. I was unfamiliar with the cast; everybody played their parts well, but nobody particularly stood out to me. The production design was outstanding, it was a simple movie about simple people so less was more. Sometimes a simple, direct approach is the best route.

This movie was a genuine pleasure to watch... in my book it ranks way up there with a few other movies that use food and cooking as the centerpiece around which the plot was built. Chef, The Hundred Foot Journey, The Big Night, Tortilla Soup, Babette's Feast, Burnt, Chocolat and Dinner Rush are the main ones that come to mind.

Delicious, and these others, stand out as exemplary stories... beautifully photographed, directed and acted.

The natural lighting used for interior scenes sets a very high standard for fellow cinematographers... The food looked so good I wanted to try "The Delicious" myself.

The directing was right up there with the work of Lasse Hallstrom.

And I will watch all day long the subtle acting of this fine ensemble cast... preferring it to the "obnoxious excess of personality" many actors bring to a role.

To sum it up............... incroyable !!!

A very nice and pleasant story that puts food and the love of cooking in marvelous light. Good acting, good visuals and some funny moments.

I get the opportunity to write the first reviews on this site for a new release, and like an absolute muppet I fall asleep at some point in the first half hour for about 10 minutes 😓

But it had been a busy day, I'd just gone for a big run, and to be fair, the movie was a little slow going at first.

Thankfully, it picked up in its second half once the story got a bit more focused, and I managed to stay awake and engaged. I liked the look of the film, the attention to detail with period costumes and settings, and the ending was solid too.

And it goes without saying but the dishes really did look super yummy and it made me incredibly hungry, so definitely try to have a meal either beforehand or during if you plan to watch this lol.

This story (French, with subtitles) is supported by a sparsely written, script which serves the story well. One of the themes is social class distinctions in 18th century France. The cast is outstanding, particularly the two leads: Grégory Gadebois plays Pierre, who is a creative, highly-skilled chef, and Isabelle Carré is Louise, a straightforward woman with a mysterious past, who yearns for a change in her life. The script is enhanced by charming, subtle music. The production design, lighting, and cinematography are all superb; so much so, that certain scenes resemble a gorgeous tableau or painting. The enveloping French countryside acts as another character of sorts. This film might be a bit "quiet" for certain viewers who prefer fast-paced, heavy action, but if you're open to a more relaxed scenario with moments of tension and pensive, sensitive characters, then this might be your cup of tea.

The landscape and food shots are undeniably gorgeous. This is truly a food porn movie. Enough so I looked up other projects by Jean-Marie Dreujou, the cinematographer, to add to my to-watch list. Truely a standing ovation for everyone involved in making the cooking scenes the achievement they are.

However, the script is not good. The two lead actors and a few off the side characters are very talented, but as the film went on I continually zoned out once the story beat was established, waiting for the real heart of the film to return. The food and the lanscapes.

Louise's shifting backstory became dull rather than intriguing. The relationship between her and Pierre squandered its potential. Pierre's narrative was slightly better, but also felt flat after hitting the same story beat multiple times without progression. The film did not know where to focus when the food wasn't on screen.

Worst of all, there are so many moments of "did you get that reference?" The son constantly name dropping to ensure the audience never goes five minutes without being reminded that 'hey, this is the eve of the French Revolution'. He had no character, he was just a walking, annoying parody. It even invades food moments. The 'Pomme frites? That will never catch on.' line had me recoiling. It felt so out of place.

I wish I could give this film a higher rating. The parts that are good would make this a solid 8/10 film. It just has too many other scenes that drag it down.

Set in 1789, right before the French revolution, a brilliant chef is sacked by his patron, an arrogant and decadent duke, for refusing to apologize for his innovative and delicious new dish. With the help of his son and a mysterious woman, who becomes his apprentice, they take a run-down roadside inn and create the modern French restaurant.

A simple story, right? But it's in the execution where this movie shines. Anchored by brilliant performances from top to bottom, this film takes flight with some of the most beautiful cinematography showcasing the French countryside and depictions of cooking and food seen in years. A lot of the scenes look like they were painted by old Dutch masters like Rubens or Rembrandt. Unlike a lot of French films, Delicious never stops the story with characters philosophizing about the meaning of life. The people in this world are straight-forward, clear thinking with practical agendas. This creates real tension and drama in a film that is ostensibly about cooking and food and makes for the one of the most enjoyable movies coming out of France in the last few years.

Delightful, pure, with great emotional payoff. I thoroughly enjoyed it. A take on aristocracy with French characteristics. Plus points for helping me improve my French listening.

We have gotten into watching series and movies with food as a central part of the story, such as "Midnight Diner" and "Burnt". We tried "The Bear" but, in spite of being set in a sandwich shop it's basically about a horribly dysfunctional family with food only incidental to the story.

"Delicious", set just before the French revolution meets all the necessities of a food movie, plus a beautiful setting with period costumes and even a dramatic confrontation that also pivots on food.

Highly recommended!

I don't quite get the high ratings in here. The story doesn't really make any sense, it is simply story with weird illogical twists. How they generate money or losing them or doing good bad or getting equipment is out of the movie. I guess this was the comedy part, like the fire and accident, making profit, having tables outside or barons eating at "gas stations". That romance was unnecessary it is about that she is woman and he is man and she even wants make assassination which the chef would be blamed for. I was waiting for Michelin judges at the end so they could add how they prepare in 2 hours to get 3 stars.

Such an intriguing movie! My 79-year-old father and I absolutely loved every second of this movie. We had to stop the movie several times so my dad could read the subtitles in a timely fashion, but the spoken French was beautiful to listen to as well. The plot was captivating, the acting phenomenal, the scenery lovely, and the music beautiful. We both want to watch this magnificent film again soon!

It's not only a movie about cuisine, earlier times, cooking and eating. It's a decent pearl of acting and story-telling. The relationships between the characters are the power of this pearl.

I shortly can say that I loved every aspect of this movie!

The story, the setting, the acting, the character drawing and developement, the directing, the production design, the ..., the ..., the ... . It's one of the rare movies that transport an interesting story easily. It's no effort to watch it. It's 1h54, but feels shorter to watch. Every minute is interesting in itself! There was no flaw in it - in my humble opinion. One of the perfect entertaining movies in a higher way. I love it, even though I know there won't be the delightment for everyone. No action, no CGI, no modern words.

I would recommend it to movie-lovers who like the times when there were no modern techniques around and story-driven movies which live by decent acting, good story-writing, near to perfect production designs and fitting atmospheres of movies according to earlier centuries.

Peinture d'une époque d'abord, ce film "historique" est, en plus, une belle histoire passionnante. Les acteurs sont très bons. A voir ........ c'est délicieux 😉

I don't focus on the film's story but rather on the technical skill levels applied.

* Dramatic Composition: Poor From my perspective, the movie wasn't able to convey a lot of emotion. Character backgrounds stayed vague. All characters stood stiff, like being nailed to the floor. Dialogues had been sparse. There was not a single dialog that would have been driving the story forward. For example: Right at the beginning, when the chef is fired, the duke's emotion confines to staying seated, merely waggling his cheeks and shouting the chef's name. Then silence ... That's all we get to see as a reasoning for why the chef is being fired and why he's feeling humiliated. Cut, next scene (as far as I remember): The chef's at his ole barn, sitting with his son and a neighbor. Not a single emotional comment on what's happened.

* Camera: Excellent The film comes with a plethora of short, beautiful still life sequences. Very nice. Still, I have a feeling that these still life sequences were just cribbed from already existing romantic painted art pictures.

* Lighting: Mediocre At many occasions in the movie, scenes were poorly lit. Lighting could have been much more dramatically set. For example: When the characters sit in the hut at night, there are no candle-like spots to highlight the texture of the room. Another example: When the apprentice enters the barn - was she supposed to be lit or kept dark? If she was supposed to be kept dark, then they should have kept her silhouette black, not just underexposed.

* Musical Score: A Nightmare The lack of dialogue and those many pauses were crying for some decent classic programme music to emphasize and convey the emotion of a scene. But all there was ... was silence.

* Conclusion The story of the film claims to enjoy all senses and to relish a good composition, but the presentation itself was merely focussing on a single sense: The visual one. My conclusion: In its mediocrity the film was not a piece of art.

I felt like each set was a like a masterpiece painting, down to placement, lighting, setting, everything.

I don't normally watch subtitled movies, but this one caught me right away with it's visual splendor. Very charming movie.