aschie30 wrote:

Dmnkly wrote:

brandon_w wrote:I just looked at last season. Norman showed up win episode two of the Miami season. So they got a Miami judge in one episode earlier.

If you're just passing along factual material, okay. But if you're suggesting that we should be pissy because "A Miami chef was shown in episode two, but a Chicago chef wasn't shown until episode three", I think that's incredibly petty and screams "we're trying really, really hard to come up with something to get pissy about".

Yes but our episode 2 was about molecular gastronomy -- something that should have been a shoo-in for a Chicago judge -- and their inclusion of Wylie Dufresne as the sole representative of MG is a slap in the face.

How was the episode about molecular gastronomy? The only thing MG about it was that Wylie Dufresne was the guest judge. The challenges had nothing to do with it.

Are we that insecure here that we're grasping at straws for something to be offended over?

riddlemay wrote:

jesteinf wrote:I agree, the city shots are gorgeous...

I'll say. The crew seems to spend a lot of time sprucing up the areas they shoot before shooting. (As any film crew more concerned with glamor than gritty realism would.) Case in point: The very brief exterior shot last night of the building that contains the Top Chef kitchen. If that's Belmont and Knox (and I'm willing to believe it is), it looked about 4000% better than anything I've ever seen in that neck of the woods.

And...the green city market wasn't muddy and torn up at all!

Dmnkly wrote:

brandon_w wrote:I just looked at last season. Norman showed up win episode two of the Miami season. So they got a Miami judge in one episode earlier.

If you're just passing along factual material, okay. But if you're suggesting that we should be pissy because "A Miami chef was shown in episode two, but a Chicago chef wasn't shown until episode three", I think that's incredibly petty and screams "we're trying really, really hard to come up with something to get pissy about".

I'm just posting that for reference. I'm not upset about the lack of Chicago judges, but I'm not from Chicago either. My guess would be that they asked some Chicago Chefs and schedules just didn't work out to be on the show. Again, that is jut my guess.

Dmnkly wrote:

aschie30 wrote:

Dmnkly wrote:

brandon_w wrote:I just looked at last season. Norman showed up win episode two of the Miami season. So they got a Miami judge in one episode earlier.

If you're just passing along factual material, okay. But if you're suggesting that we should be pissy because "A Miami chef was shown in episode two, but a Chicago chef wasn't shown until episode three", I think that's incredibly petty and screams "we're trying really, really hard to come up with something to get pissy about".

Yes but our episode 2 was about molecular gastronomy -- something that should have been a shoo-in for a Chicago judge -- and their inclusion of Wylie Dufresne as the sole representative of MG is a slap in the face.

How was the episode about molecular gastronomy? The only thing MG about it was that Wylie Dufresne was the guest judge. The challenges had nothing to do with it.

OK - but there was a lot of narrative buildup about Wylie's restaurant and his specialty in MG, as well as Richard's permitted use of his toys, and Rocco's discussion of MG on his blog - in other words, there was enough focus on the subject, which was introduced by Padma in her opening narrative, to lead someone to believe that the show wanted a judge who specialized in MG. If so, then I don't think Wylie was the sensitive choice.

aschie30 wrote:

Dmnkly wrote:

aschie30 wrote:

Dmnkly wrote:

brandon_w wrote:I just looked at last season. Norman showed up win episode two of the Miami season. So they got a Miami judge in one episode earlier.

If you're just passing along factual material, okay. But if you're suggesting that we should be pissy because "A Miami chef was shown in episode two, but a Chicago chef wasn't shown until episode three", I think that's incredibly petty and screams "we're trying really, really hard to come up with something to get pissy about".

Yes but our episode 2 was about molecular gastronomy -- something that should have been a shoo-in for a Chicago judge -- and their inclusion of Wylie Dufresne as the sole representative of MG is a slap in the face.

How was the episode about molecular gastronomy? The only thing MG about it was that Wylie Dufresne was the guest judge. The challenges had nothing to do with it.

OK - but there was a lot of narrative buildup about Wylie's restaurant and his specialty in MG, as well as Richard's permitted use of his toys, and Rocco's discussion of MG on his blog - in other words, there was enough focus on the subject, which was introduced by Padma in her opening narrative to lead someone to believe that the show wanted a judge who specialized in MG. If so, then I don't think Wylie was the sensitive choice.

Yeah, but you've got it backwards. That stuff came about because Dufrense was the judge. And Richard talked about his MG approach last episode too. Was that an MG-focused episode? Of course some of the chefs and judges are going to bring it up when he's judging. But the challenges were in no way structured around him. What you're saying is that the effect caused the cause. If the episode had been set up the exact same way but Nobu had been the guest judge instead of Dufresne, they would have mentioned seafood and neo-Japanese instead of MG.

Dmnkly wrote:Yeah, but you've got it backwards. That stuff came about because Dufrense was the judge.

We don't know why they brought it up, which came first; but I think that MG was discussed enough on the episode, in large part because they need to provide some mainstream context to Richard's techniques. Nevertheless, I still think if the subject is going to be raised like it was, whether or not the challenges center around MG in general, they should have had a Chicago judge, in fairness to Chicago, because we have gotten almost all the press about being the American center of molecular gastronomy (sorry, New York).

I thought the dishes from the Green City Market challenge were pretty uninspired. Although I don't remember the specifics of the dishes, my impression at the time was that they seemed quite boring -- a seared piece of meat with roasted vegetables.

Now, I realize they could only use five ingredients and that limits what you can do. They are also under a lot of time pressure. So maybe my expectations were unreasonably high. But I expected to be a bit more impressed with what they came up with.

And they never really said what the penalty was for the guy who used an extra ingredient. Frankly, I think this first challenge is a bit too unconnected to the second half of the episode.

My fiance and I got a laugh from the guy who expected larger tenderloin tips than what he got. There is a meat stand at the farmers market that has always underwhelmed us with strangely cut meat (usually cut too thin, or ribs with hardly any meat on them, etc.) I don't remember the name, but he was shown in the Top Chef episode.

FWIW, I agree with the posts above that the lack of Chicago judges is strange, especially for the deep dish pizza challenge.

aschie30 wrote:

Dmnkly wrote:Yeah, but you've got it backwards. That stuff came about because Dufrense was the judge.

We don't know why they brought it up, which came first; but I think that MG was discussed enough on the episode, in large part because they need to provide some mainstream context to Richard's techniques. Nevertheless, I still think if the subject is going to be raised like it was, whether or not the challenges center around MG in general, they should have had a Chicago judge, in fairness to Chicago, because we have gotten almost all the press about being the American center of molecular gastronomy (sorry, New York).

Soooooo, if they have Dufresne as a guest judge, even if the episode hasn't been designed with any MG challenges in any way, they're supposed to intentionally edit out any comments the chefs or judges make about MG because Achatz or Cantu don't also happen to be there? That's ludicrous.

And of course we know which came first. The producers didn't psychically know that the chefs were going to talk about MG in episode two and decide to book Dufresne instead of Cantu or Achatz. They booked Dufresne far in advance for that day of taping, he came in, the chefs and judges met him and, naturally, talked about his specialty. How is that some slight against Chicago?

Dmnkly wrote:Soooooo, if they have Dufresne as a guest judge, even if the episode hasn't been designed with any MG challenges in any way, they're supposed to intentionally edit out any comments the chefs or judges make about MG because Achatz or Cantu don't also happen to be there? That's ludicrous.

That's not what I'm saying . . . even though this thread is already off-track, I'll make one more comment: I don't buy that the lead-up and explanation of MG was some coincidence due entirely to Dufresne's presence as a guest judge. Let's face it, Dufresne is known solely for his avant-garde cooking. So if Dufresne was not there as an "ambassador" to MG, then what was his purpose in being there? He's certainly not a household name.

I don't think there was any molecular gastronomy angle to the show, other than WD being a guest judge and the one contestant who does that kind of thing. If there was a slap in the face to Chicago, it wasn't that WD was picked over Cantu or Achatz, but that they haven't used any Chicago chefs in the first two episodes.

But there is a long way to go. We'll see who shows up later in the show. We know that Bayless is up soon. I'm sure there will be more. Personally, I would have had a Chicago chef in the first episode, but that's just me.

aschie30 wrote:

Dmnkly wrote:Soooooo, if they have Dufresne as a guest judge, even if the episode hasn't been designed with any MG challenges in any way, they're supposed to intentionally edit out any comments the chefs or judges make about MG because Achatz or Cantu don't also happen to be there? That's ludicrous.

That's not what I'm saying . . . even though this thread is already off-track, I'll make one more comment: I don't buy that the lead-up and explanation of MG was some coincidence due entirely to Dufresne's presence as a guest judge. Let's face it, Dufresne is known solely for his avant-garde cooking. So if Dufresne was not there as an "ambassador" to MG, then what was his purpose in being there? He's certainly not a household name.

So what you're saying, then, is that during Top Chef Chicago, MG chefs cannot appear on the show unless they're from Chicago, because the resultant comments will turn it into an MG episode which should, in turn, then feature a Chicago MG chef?

Of course they're not going to completely ignore the pedigree of their guest chef. They're going to say something about it. Are they supposed to pretend that Dufresne's specialty isn't his specialty and not mention his restaurant or style at all? How does that make any sense?

What you're effectively suggesting is that there's no context in which they can properly have an MG guest chef that isn't from Chicago this season, no matter the circumstances, because his presence will turn it into an MG episode which should, then, feature a chef other than him. That strikes me as both circular and silly.

aschie30 wrote:That's not what I'm saying . . . even though this thread is already off-track, I'll make one more comment: I don't buy that the lead-up and explanation of MG was some coincidence due entirely to Dufresne's presence as a guest judge. Let's face it, Dufresne is known solely for his avant-garde cooking. So if Dufresne was not there as an "ambassador" to MG, then what was his purpose in being there? He's certainly not a household name.

He isn't a household name (yet) but he is becoming well known. I suspect he is considerably more well known in NY (and isn't that all that matters....) than Michael Carlson is in Chicago. WD was on Iron Chef America. I'm sure his publicity team pushes to get him more national exposure through things like Top Chef, Iron Chef, etc. Throw Down with Wylie Dufresne can't be far away.

For me, the fact that Top Chef had Rocco DiSpirito judge the Chicago style pizza challenge suggests that they aren't trying to match the judges to the food.

To turn down the volume here a bit (and I realize I'm the one who turned it up), I didn't mean for any of my comments to be taken on a personal level, aschie30. I do think the idea that this episode was somehow a slight against our local chefs is silly, but that opinion doesn't extend past the specific suggestion we're discussing here, and I certainy didn't intend my criticism thereof to be taken in any other context.

Those blueberry and cheese mushrooms really looked hideous. I totally agreed with Nikki's teammates- the dish didn't work and you pulled it, why are you serving it to the judges? I realize it's a double-edged sword, once your dish fails, you're kinda hosed either way. You serve something sub-par and you're in the doghouse, or you refuse to serve something that doesn't meet your standards and you're dinged for not serving anything. But really, at that point, she'd made the decision not to serve it, she never even tasted it with the cheese, just don't serve it!

Rookie mistake from Stephanie, salting too early, but maybe nerves? It seemed kinda obvious from the start that Valerie would be going home, Antonia was really working that angle in all of her interiews (to a mildly junior high degree, in my opinion. "Stephanie and I did this, Stephanie and I are good at that, Valerie just sat there...")

Taking a different tack: from now on I will pronounce "blini" as in the cocktail, "bellini." Even when everyone around me is pronouncing it correctly.









see, also: "chipoltay"

Yeah, that was ridiculous. I think I heard the word pronounced correctly once. In the whole show.

Or--since the judges and host were pronouncing it consistently wrong just as the contestants were--is "bellini" some sort of ironic culinary-cognoscenti faux-proletariat way to say "blini," kind of like people who have no business saying "down wid dat" will say "down wid dat" for ironic effect?

riddlemay wrote:Yeah, that was ridiculous. I think I heard the word pronounced correctly once. In the whole show.

Or--since the judges and host were pronouncing it consistently wrong just as the contestants were--is "bellini" some sort of ironic culinary-cognoscenti faux-proletariat way to say "blini," kind of like people who have no business saying "down wid dat" will say "down wid dat" for ironic effect?

See, I missed that...I thought I heard them pronouncing it to her correctly in a presumably polite initiative to get her to conform...instead of saying, "yo...it's BLINI..."

You might be right, but my ears were waiting to hear a judge and/or host say the word correctly, and they kept on waiting...and waiting...

The one time it was almost said right, it was more like b'lini, which was better than bellini--but not as good as blini.

P.S. The next time I'm at The Bagel, I'm going to see if I can hear anybody ordering the cheese bellintzes. I'm betting not.

Christopher Gordon wrote:see, also: "chipoltay"

To me, that's excusable, like "lie-berry" or "febyou-ary" (although both are more acceptable to me than "nukular"). I have had a server, at a Chili's no less, where it's included in a half-dozen entrees, pronounce "chipotle" as rhyming with "the bottle". Sigh.

JoelF wrote:

Christopher Gordon wrote:see, also: "chipoltay"

To me, that's excusable, like "lie-berry" or "febyou-ary" (although both are more acceptable to me than "nukular"). I have had a server, at a Chili's no less, where it's included in a half-dozen entrees, pronounce "chipotle" as rhyming with "the bottle". Sigh.

off topic:

I was watching Emeril Live( I dunno what possessed me and "watching" is a strong word). And, I'm familiar with his hyperbolic pronunciation schtick, but...dang! I was shocked out of my reading material when I heard him over and again saying CHIPOLETAY(insert requisite applause) Bam!(applause). He knows better...I happen to like him removed from his middlebrow schtick.

Dufresne was in the Hawaii finale of the last season, no? Maybe they just like him and he likes them so they want to keep inviting him in, and he accepts. It's probably a lot easier to work with some known quantities.

I too have wished for more Chicago judges. However we don't know who may have been approached only to turn them down for whatever reason. To me, it would seem kind of odd to turn it down if you could fir it into your schedule but again... we just don't know.

bibi rose wrote:I too have wished for more Chicago judges. However we don't know who may have been approached only to turn them down for whatever reason. To me, it would seem kind of odd to turn it down if you could fir it into your schedule but again... we just don't know.

I heard a rumor that Takashi appears as a judge...it's a rumor, I don't know for sure.

Actually, the Hawaii finale that Dufresne was in was Season 2. I have no problem with Dufresne being a judge. Because he was in the Season 2 finale, he's a familiar face to loyal Top Chef fans, especially after Marcel's incessant fawning. Plus it's no surprise that the show has a NY bias regarding guest judges.

As for why not Achatz or Cantu, Achatz has health issues and Cantu's national TV appearances have been for Food Network (Iron Chef America and Dinner: Impossible). Just speculation.

Just as the quality of cheftestants has progressively gotten better, the production of the show has dramatically improved over the years. It's gotten to the point where NO chef would refuse to be a guest judge. This is by far the best cooking reality show on TV. Food Network should be ashamed of themselves for not thinking of this first. Instead, they give us absolute drivel like "The Next Food Netword Star".

Despite the fact that it is a male-dominated industry, about half of the Top Chef constestants are women. I'm sure Bravo would LOVE it if a female took the title this season. It has to be disappointing for the producers that the first two eliminated were women, especially after the disastrous showing by the females in the last two seasons.

jaybo wrote:Actually, the Hawaii finale that Dufresne was in was Season 2.

Oh, right. Of course.

I rememebr being annoyed that that finale, that more Hawaiian chefs were not featured. (I love Alan Wong but wish Roy Yamaguchi had more of a role-- I think he kind of just appeared-- and was Chef Mavro there at all?)

I'm sure Bravo would LOVE it if a female took the title this season. It has to be disappointing for the producers that the first two eliminated were women, especially after the disastrous showing by the females in the last two seasons.

I know. Every time I see Tiffany or Lee Ann again it reminds me that they could have won any season but their own.

Here's an article on Season 3 winner Hung Huynh -

http://www.foodandwine.com/articles/top ... nners-tips

In it, he says he was a guest judge in an episode of Season 4. I found that a little surprising. I'm sure the producers aren't too pleased he leaked that info. Even though he won last season, I don't think his rep is strong enough to be a guest judge (certainly not for an Elimination Challenge).

Dale Levitski was also a bit cryptic in his blog regarding whether we'd see him in Season 4, as well. It would make sense to pair them in the same episode. I'm thinking "Restaurant Wars" (along with Casey and Brian?).

chicagogrrl wrote:I heard a rumor that Takashi appears as a judge...it's a rumor, I don't know for sure.

I hope not, because if he does, I don't think it bodes well for Stephanie.

Which other contestants have later been guest judges? Harold was I think, but I'm blanking on whether there have been others.

jaybo wrote:

chicagogrrl wrote:I heard a rumor that Takashi appears as a judge...it's a rumor, I don't know for sure.

I hope not, because if he does, I don't think it bodes well for Stephanie.

How so?

bibi rose wrote:Which other contestants have later been guest judges? Harold was I think, but I'm blanking on whether there have been others.

jaybo wrote:

chicagogrrl wrote:I heard a rumor that Takashi appears as a judge...it's a rumor, I don't know for sure.

I hope not, because if he does, I don't think it bodes well for Stephanie.

How so?

Takashi's restaurant is in the same space that used to be Stephanie's Scylla. I don't know if they dealt with each other in the transition or not, but the potential for conflict of interest/impartiality is there. If Takashi is a judge, I would tend to believe that Stephanie would have been eliminated before then.

My best guess is that tonight's "block party" took place somewhere in Evergreen Park. Richard's reference to Richmond Avenue tipped me off and Google Maps Street View seems to confirm it:

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=richmond+ ... a=N&tab=wl

cjk

Ep. 3

Ugh...that Andrew character(that is not just fidgeting...there is ahem "something else" going on)...and his whole defensive outburst.

I'm happy they called his team on their challenge condescension at the judge's table; the guy that lost made his corn dogs merely as a sop to the perceived neighborhood palate regardless that he knew they wouldn't hold.


extrapolated interior dialogue:

"Soggy corndogs!?"

shrug

"That's what these people understand."



...and first faux hawks, now it's brim-shredded hats...what else will Bravo's design team foist upon these hapless cheftestants?

I'm terribly uninformed when it comes to matching faces to names... who is the guest judge in the preview for ep 4?