I stopped watching after last week. No interesting chefs, food looks OK, but no chef where I say "Let me spend an hour seeing what this guy came come up with."

I agree that it's hard to watch a season where the interpersonal drama is much more central than the food. I also think many of the D.C. tie-ins to the challenges have seemed forced.

I think Michelle Bernstein took a little too much pleasure deflating Kenny's ego at judges' table. Whenever she smiled, I could not help picturing this little guy:

Yeah, I'm just not feeling it this season, either. I'm watching but I'm almost completely indifferent to the results. Nor do I care very much about any of the contestants, which is usually not the case for me. The content seems alternatingly tired or stretched. This past week, having the contestants choose the top and bottom dishes from each group was a real groaner (even though I don't think the concept is entirely new for this show). I really hated seeing Top Chef turned into Survivor. One thing I've enjoyed about this show in seasons past is the relatively firm separation between the episode outcomes and the interpersonal dramas. I doubt we'll see it again this season but once was more than enough, IMO.

What I cannot determine is whether there's actually something less interesting about this season (and its participants) or if I'm just growing tired of the overall concept and formula of the show.

=R=

I also think many of the D.C. tie-ins to the challenges have seemed forced.

I live in fear there will be an episode set at the Holocaust Museum

ronnie_suburban wrote:What I cannot determine is whether there's actually something less interesting about this season (and its participants) or if I'm just growing tired of the overall concept and formula of the show.

Yeah, I'm trying to decide if the cooking and personalities are much less interesting than, say, Season 1 or if it just isn't that compelling anymore. This is a formula show and it seems there is a thin line between something worth watching and something that isn't. In previous seasons, I know I would read Dom's blog with zeal and think about how the contestants stacked up against each other or how they might take on the next challenge.

Now, I'm passively sitting by and following Bravo's advice to just 'watch what happens.'

It's probably nothing a Voltaggio brother couldn't fix, though.

Best tension right now is who is going to go first: Stephen or Amanda.

Yeah, I think it would be a whole different story if you had chefs who had a clearly discernible style which was showing up week after week. Last time there were at least four who fit that (Kevin, the Voltaggi and Mike I.) and probably more (Jennifer, even Ron). I don't know that there's anybody like that this time; they're all kind of treading water week by week, which just isn't very interesting.

I agree -- I think I would even prefer having stereotypes like 'oh he's the guy who always does Asian-style fish; she's the Italian comfort food caterer' than to have everyone just kind of floating in an undefined style.

I wondered why they were out on the Sequoia other than to see them plotting/scheming? That could have been done anywhere. Not really enjoying this year and I don't think I could even tell you who is who, no one stands out.

It certainly seems that they selected (and continue to enhance via editing) "personalities" versus cooking styles--but even the personalities are flat and uninteresting. There's cocky latino guy, hot messed up girl, chill island chick, etc...but I couldn't tell you about any one of their culinary POV's. Ultimately, they still have to show a lot of cooking and that takes away from the "character" development and altercations. In other words, it doesn't have time to become "Real Chefs of Washington DC", no matter how hard they try to take it there. It's really a shame too because I thought I read that their ratings were up last year --you'd have thought the team would've recognized how much creative cooking and serious competitors contributed to that. I'll take happy-go-lucky, pig loving, country boy or intensely focused, mad skills, brother combo over this lot any day

I wonder if in that last episode Kenny realized they were going to throw him under the bus, and just phoned it in.
I thought it likely they'd pan his food regardless of how it came out, but it truly looked like he messed up.

Then again, he seems to be more about knife skills and plating than flavor, from the start.

Angelo may still be a threat, but he's not looking as strong as the first week or two.

I agree with the other posters above: there's no leader pack here... but it does seem pretty obvious who's going home soon, on any given episode.

ok, I'll be the lone dissenting opinion here. I do see at least a few personalities (and distinct cooking styles) that I'm interested in seeing more of.

Kenny is technically proficient and a beast of a workhorse, but he frequently overreaches, putting too many elements on the plate, perhaps sacrificing flavor, cohesion, and an overall focused viewpoint.

Angelo is also technically proficient, but brings a very manhattan sensibility to his plates; minimalist, very refined, super-simple and straightforward, but with strong, distinct, focused flavors.

Kelly is my dark horse this season. her viewpoint is simple, more rustic preparations, focusing on quality of ingredients...more of a franco-italian style. she also appears to be kind of unhinged, in some way. when I say dark horse, I mean dark. she's also extremely smart and strategic with how she goes about the various segments of the show. very diplomatic at judges' table, preferring to say nothing when possible. she's trying to fly low, stay off the radar, and quietly win a couple challenges and hang around.

I don't see Kenny making the top three. Kelly and Angelo will be there along with someone else who I'll probably dislike, like the goofy guy with the ugly glasses or the really dumb guy with the thick eyebrows.

Kenny reminds me of Tiffany from season one -- If I am remembering right, I think she did lots of duos and trios, to her own detriment.

elakin wrote:ok, I'll be the lone dissenting opinion here. I do see at least a few personalities (and distinct cooking styles) that I'm interested in seeing more of.

Kenny is technically proficient and a beast of a workhorse, but he frequently overreaches, putting too many elements on the plate, perhaps sacrificing flavor, cohesion, and an overall focused viewpoint.

Angelo is also technically proficient, but brings a very manhattan sensibility to his plates; minimalist, very refined, super-simple and straightforward, but with strong, distinct, focused flavors.

Kelly is my dark horse this season. her viewpoint is simple, more rustic preparations, focusing on quality of ingredients...more of a franco-italian style. she also appears to be kind of unhinged, in some way. when I say dark horse, I mean dark. she's also extremely smart and strategic with how she goes about the various segments of the show. very diplomatic at judges' table, preferring to say nothing when possible. she's trying to fly low, stay off the radar, and quietly win a couple challenges and hang around.

I don't see Kenny making the top three. Kelly and Angelo will be there along with someone else who I'll probably dislike, like the goofy guy with the ugly glasses or the really dumb guy with the thick eyebrows.

I agree, Kelly is the chef I'm rooting for thus far. She does seem to have a distinctive style, is avoiding drama, and just cooking her food.

gastro gnome wrote:I agree, Kelly is the chef I'm rooting for thus far. She does seem to have a distinctive style, is avoiding drama, and just cooking her food.

Well, she almost bit it this week via the extreme overuse of salt. Still not sure why she was crying in the stew room but hey, this is reality tv, so I guess crying is just part of the package.

Frankly, this episode irritated the crap out of me. The unresolved "mystery" of the pea puree was entirely manufactured. I refuse to believe there wasn't enough video coverage taken during production to definitively know whether or not Alex stole Ed's pea puree. Yet, instead of actaully answering the question, the audience is intentionally left dangling. The issue was never brought up with/by the judges either. There was one point where the editing implied that Alex was at least lying about some aspect of it when he was shown hearing about Ed's pea puree after claiming to not even know what Ed was making. I refuse to speculate (or read more about it in the Bravo blogs) because I will not waste any more of my time trying to guess about or research an incident that was intentionally left vague during the episode by editors and producers. This was unquestionably a moment that will permanently reduce my enthusiasm for this show.

Speaking of manufactured drama, in the previews for this week's episode, we continually saw Andrea making a comment about how Tiffany's fiance wouldn't be happy about Ed's flirtations with her. Yet, in the episode itself, the only footage we ever saw to support this clip was of Ed and Tiffany, sitting on separate beds, chatting with each other. The additional soundbite of Tiffany addressing the non-issue was clearly nothing more than a response to a question she was asked during an interview. *Yawn*

Throw in the all the ridiculous fawning over The Palm, a mediocre steakhouse that serves overpriced, oversized food and the show's gone from Top Chef to Real Line Cooks of Washington, DC. It'll be a perfect fit with Alex's dish on the menu and his picture on the wall there.

=R=

I am usualy a week behind on this show as I catch up when they run alot of previous shows back to back. I also watch The Next Food NEtwork Star in the same manner.

Many times I need to be reminded which cooks are on which show. Seems Top Chef has really dumbed down their show this season to the level of TNFNS.

This season's Top Chef seems to be more about personalities, and the cooking is secondary for me as I have not seen one technique or dish that has blown me away. The characters I like are Kenny, Kevin & Kelly. Amanda really seems out of her league, the two I dont like are Angelo & Tamesha. I am also glad Tracey & Arnold are gone.

Really not much cooking to get excited about, just story lines imho. I do enjoy Padma & Tom though.

ronnie_suburban wrote:Frankly, this episode irritated the crap out of me. The unresolved "mystery" of the pea puree was entirely manufactured. I refuse to believe there wasn't enough video coverage taken during production to definitively know whether or not Alex stole Ed's pea puree. Yet, instead of actaully answering the question, the audience is intentionally left dangling. The issue was never brought up with/by the judges either. There was one point where the editing implied that Alex was at least lying about some aspect of it when he was shown hearing about Ed's pea puree after claiming to not even know what Ed was making. I refuse to speculate (or read more about it in the Bravo blogs) because I will not waste any more of my time trying to guess about or research an incident that was intentionally left vague during the episode by editors and producers. This was unquestionably a moment that will permanently reduce my enthusiasm for this show.
=R=

You might want to read Tom's blog, which at least provides a little more detail on the pea fiasco. That being said, with all of the cameras in place, I refuse to believe that they can't get to the bottom of this issue. And if Alex stole the pea puree, he should be booted from the show (even if it costs Bravo/Top Chef in the drama category).

BR wrote:You might want to read Tom's blog, which at least provides a little more detail on the pea fiasco.

Nope, not gonna do it.

If understanding what actually happens in the course of an episode requires supplementary reading, I'm out.

=R=

Yeah, I jinxed Kelly but good. I'm not sure what bothered me more, the added drama of crying after making a mistake (for a formerly even-keeled, drama-free contestant) or the fact that she equated oversalting meat with serving bold flavors.

Again, could be out of context editing. Maybe what she meant was that she thought the judges seemed to prefer salty foods.

I also don't care about pea-gate except it really made me want a pea puree and, alas, the short season has passed.

We caught up on the last three episodes tonight and I think I figured out what my problem is with this season.

Most of the contestants are assholes. They're just jerks, and pretty much talentless jerks at that. Sure there are exceptions, but that's just the overall sense I get from this group.

I'll probably keep watching, but here's to a better crop of talent for next season.

It's a good thing the government instituted that toothpick rule, so that we no longer have any politicians corrupted by the influence of lobbyists!

I completely agree with jestef's assessment of the season. Assholes, most of them. Not interesting enough (like Hung or Stephen) but just people you'd really not like to be around much.

The few I like are mostly the women and I don't think they're going to make the distance. It's a really disappointing season.

I would just like to interject here that when they tape this show they are often exhausted -- this can lead to crying and bad behavior from that exhaustion. So...Kelly may have just lost it. The stress of taping this show, coupled with the assholes all over the place -- well...it probably just put her over the edge. I still think she's one of the more thoughtful chefs on this trainwreck of a season and I think she's being judged a little too harshly for the wrong reasons. Condemn her for the egregious use of salt but not her little breakdown. I'm sure I'll get some flaming here but it's my 2 cents.

Can anybody tell me what the connection was between the down state Congressman and food? He seemed like an odd choice.

DML wrote:Can anybody tell me what the connection was between the down state Congressman and food? He seemed like an odd choice.

He look purty on the tee-vee.

eatchicago wrote:

DML wrote:Can anybody tell me what the connection was between the down state Congressman and food? He seemed like an odd choice.

He look purty on the tee-vee.

That, and his "following." When I saw him on the show, I had to laugh realizing once again that as a happily married father, I'm not in the show's typical demographic.

So I did give it another try. I may tune in again, but as before, very unimpressed. As others have noted, it is combination of things. Not many likeable chefs, and definitely none who at this point have shown me that I should care about their cooking.

DML wrote:

eatchicago wrote:

DML wrote:Can anybody tell me what the connection was between the down state Congressman and food? He seemed like an odd choice.

He look purty on the tee-vee.

That, and his "following."

And who would that be?

I don't know, the theme of the show seemed to be DC "power players", and having the youngest member of Congress appear was certainly an interesting angle. It's hard to find someone in Congress (of either party) that people both recognize and don't actively despise.

gastro gnome wrote:Yeah, I jinxed Kelly but good. I'm not sure what bothered me more, the added drama of crying after making a mistake (for a formerly even-keeled, drama-free contestant) or the fact that she equated oversalting meat with serving bold flavors.

Again, could be out of context editing. Maybe what she meant was that she thought the judges seemed to prefer salty foods.

I also don't care about pea-gate except it really made me want a pea puree and, alas, the short season has passed.

This may have just been the editing again, but it sure seemed like Kelly oversalted her steak not so much in an attempt to adjust for the judges palates, but so that she could justify her refusal to share her salt.
Bravo manufactured karma-drama? Maybe. But if not, it's hard to feel for her, despite her blubbering.
--Rich

Another editing oddity this week. When Tom was making his way through the kitchen while the cheftestants prepared their food, he asked Alex was he was making. The reply was that he couldn't get veal cheeks and was using veal shank instead. Lo and behold, when they presented, the screen graphic showed "veal cheeks..." and Alex made no mention of shank while dishing.

Sorry to see Sad Sack Stephen leave. He never really accomplished anything, but his disasters were fun to watch.

little500 wrote:Another editing oddity this week. When Tom was making his way through the kitchen while the cheftestants prepared their food, he asked Alex was he was making. The reply was that he couldn't get veal cheeks and was using veal shank instead. Lo and behold, when they presented, the screen graphic showed "veal cheeks..." and Alex made no mention of shank while dishing.

We caught the same thing and assumed he simply misspoke since he'd originally intended to do cheeks.

I was a little surprised that Ed and not Andrea was in the bottom three. I guess his duck must have really been awful.

Stephen's been a week link for a while, but I would not have been sad to see Alex go.