Top Chef Masters: entire series discussion (spoilers)

I thought the premier was great. Very lighthearted and fun and it was interesting to see the chefs recognize how the pressure can mess you up.

Best moments for me were:

- the "I don't shop, I'm a chef" part
- them trying to figure out how to use microwaves
- seeing Hubert Keller as a DJ

As far as the food goes, that mac & cheese looked great. Rinsing the pasta in the shower would be OK for me ... it's not like Keller was brining pork chops in the bathtub. Also interesting to see the critics basically give good reviews and then say "two and a half stars", which seems odd but is usually considered "very good" in restaurant review parlance.

Liked the show a lot. Liked the semi-transparent cumulative judging and the attitude of the contestants. I did notice that the cooking segments ended 38 minutes into the show which seemed way to short. I can only speculate that filming in the dorm rooms was too difficult to get a lot of footage.

I also enjoyed the premier and liked the attitude that these Chef's brought, trying to make good food but keeping things fun. Hopefully the future episodes have a bit more cooking footage than this one.

Does Kelly Choi remind anyone else of Giada De Laurentiis, but Asian, I thought she also sounded a bit like her.

The three judges that were on last night were great and would have all been better choices than Toby Young for alternate judge in Season five. Maybe they were choices for that position but their current jobs kept them from being able to accept a more lengthy guest TV spot.

I thought it was an enjoyable hour, overall.

For me, the best part was seeing the genuine confidence of these accomplished chefs, as opposed to the braggadocio often displayed by far too many conventional Top Chef contestants. These folks possessed a calmness and self-assuredness that made the outcome of competition less perilous, yet still more interesting. I think each of the contestants knew that last night's outcome wasn't going to have a major impact (if any) on their careers. That made for more interesting competition, contestant-interaction and interview comments. Even when things went badly, the humor and confidence of the chefs was clear to see. Combine all this with the complete lack of snarky cheftestant interpersonal politics, and the show was a veritable joy to watch.

I also appreciated the candor of the judges and contestants. They seemed to be quite honest and analytical, which was refreshing. I loved when Hubert Keller admitted to being aprehensive about shopping for ingredients because it's not something he normally does at the store. And a cooking reality show which doesn't have to take the contestants' attitudes into account during the judging is just wonderful. What this series might lack in artificial drama, it should more than make up for with actual coverage of food, cooking and chef insights. At least, that's how it looks right now.

=R=

I thought the premier was entertaining. It's nice to see the "Masters" sweat a little bit and have some fun with the situations that Top Chef throws on its contestants.

tem wrote:Also interesting to see the critics basically give good reviews and then say "two and a half stars", which seems odd but is usually considered "very good" in restaurant review parlance.

I'm wondering, and future episodes will bear this out, if the chefs were guaranteed that the judges would not be too critical. Seeing that it is for charity and many casual viewers will not know these chefs outside of their performance on this show, I could see there being an under-the-table agreement to take it very easy on them even if they botch something.

Did anyone notice Hung in the previews for future episodes? That could be cool to have past winners and maybe Richard and Marcel working as sous chefs for the 6 finalists.

Go Bayless!

NOTE:

The term "spoiler" in the thread title has nothing to do with me somehow knowing the ultimate outcome of an episode or of the series. It is meant only as a warning to those that may not have watched that week's airing yet.

Big Willi wrote:I'm wondering, and future episodes will bear this out, if the chefs were guaranteed that the judges would not be too critical. Seeing that it is for charity and many casual viewers will not know these chefs outside of their performance on this show, I could see there being an under-the-table agreement to take it very easy on them even if they botch something.

Or maybe they just figure there isn't the teaching dynamic that's existed since Project Runway. That show was explicitly about discovering new designers and bringing them along, with Tim Gunn as mentor. On TC, Colicchio often made the point that he wasn't a Tim Gunn figure, but most contestants were presented as emerging chefs and the judges' comments were in a similar vein to those on PR. Here it wouldn't be appropriate.

The circumstances of the elimination challenge were fairly brutal, which I liked, and clearly artifical and stunt-like. It would be inappropriate for a judge to scold a contestant: "One day you'll be out there in the real world having to cook in a dorm room." There just isn't that aspect like there was on the regular TC. On the other hand, what screw-ups there were were apparently on clear display. Others may have been hidden and some may have been made to appear worse than they really were, given that it's Bravo. Actually, that is what would have worried me, going on as a pro: what incident might they manufacture out of whole cloth? That would worry me more than any verbatim comment from judge.

Hubert Keller is the Man. the care and thought that went into that sweet but elegant dessert presentation for the Girl Scouts was so impressive. His skill set seems nearly unlimited.

Interestingly, the Create channel is curently re-airing his fine PBS series, and I caught the crab cake/burger ep earlier in the day on Wednesday. He doesn't use any bread product as a binder - he made a mousse of sea scallops and heavy cream, and bound the crab together with that, shaping each cake in a ring mold. The 'burgers' were dressed with a lightly pickled fennel condiment, and boy, did the finished product look fabulous. What a great aperitif for the Bravo show!

Let me be the first to disagree.

I thought the show was horrible. It took four talented chef, and rather than letting them cook, added idiotic challeges and miserable judges.

These people are not pastry chefs. So what was the point of having them do dessert? What in the world would that show? And the main challenge also was way too clever of a way to showcase sponsor products and not to show what these guys could do. One other note -- not to rip the guy from Texas since his food seemed pretty good, but why go the obvious route of having a guy from Texas who cooks steaks? Wouldn't it have been interesting to have somebody from Texas who cooks something else? It ended up being a good choice. The chef was interesting and it was worthwhile seeing what he could do. But the choice seemed like a cliche.

And finally, the judges. As a guy who likes food way too much, but considers himself (hopefully others will agree) pretty normal, why did ALL the judges have to be eccentric? Color is nice, but when everybody is an oddball, nobody is. The judges were tedious. Rather than focusing on the food, I found myself thinking "I don't care who this person writes for. The person is strange and I don't care about his/her opinion."

If the four chefs had been in an Iron Chef competition, the result would have been fascinating. But this? Another reminder to find other ways to be amused on a Wednesday night.

I enjoyed the show. It was a lot of fun to watch the friendly competition between very established chefs. I thought they all came off really well, especially Keller.

He doesn't use any bread product as a binder - he made a mousse of sea scallops and heavy cream

Our favorite crabcakes in the world do the same thing. The recipe is from Charlie Trotter Cooks at Home, I believe. They are fabulous.

Anyway, I like the show. Not crazy about the judges...hopefully they'll have some guest judges at some point. I liked the attitude of the chefs. They seemed very happy to participate and had good professional rapport with each other.

DML wrote:And finally, the judges. As a guy who likes food way too much, but considers himself (hopefully others will agree) pretty normal, why did ALL the judges have to be eccentric? Color is nice, but when everybody is an oddball, nobody is. The judges were tedious. Rather than focusing on the food, I found myself thinking "I don't care who this person writes for. The person is strange and I don't care about his/her opinion."

My oddball meter must be calibrated a bit more differently than yours. I didn't think any of them were very odd or strange.

I loved how the French guy blew everyone else away. So stereotypical.

French chefs with skills like that make me swoon.

brandon_w wrote:

DML wrote:And finally, the judges. As a guy who likes food way too much, but considers himself (hopefully others will agree) pretty normal, why did ALL the judges have to be eccentric? Color is nice, but when everybody is an oddball, nobody is. The judges were tedious. Rather than focusing on the food, I found myself thinking "I don't care who this person writes for. The person is strange and I don't care about his/her opinion."

My oddball meter must be calibrated a bit more differently than yours. I didn't think any of them were very odd or strange.

Too funny. That annoying eccentric old woman? Sure she's got writing cred, but still, eccentric and strange. The mannnerisms of the guy in the red sweater? Very "look at me!"

For what it is worth -- they do seem to appeal more to a "Bravo" typical audience, where, despite the fact that I like eating a lot, my default channel (as soon as the television goes on) is the ESPN news channel. It might be a smart play by Bravo, but it sure turned me away.

Looks like the debut was a big hit for Bravo . . .

Andy Dehnart @ Reality Blurred wrote:Despite having a new host and judges and a one-off episode format for the first six episodes, Top Chef Masters drew a record audience to Bravo.

Its 1.37 million viewers represent “the highest rated Wednesday series premiere ever for the network in all key demos in the 10 p.m. time period” and a 96 percent increase over the show’s very first season, according to a Bravo press release. In addition, 907,000 people ages 18 to 49 watched. The 11 p.m. repeat brought another 636,000 viewers. 18-49.

Record ratings for Top Chef Masters debut

=R=

DML wrote:It took four talented chef, and rather than letting them cook, added idiotic challeges and miserable judges.

DML wrote:These people are not pastry chefs. So what was the point of having them do dessert?

DML wrote:And the main challenge also was way too clever of a way to showcase sponsor products and not to show what these guys could do.

Do you watch the regular TC series? This episode struck me as pretty par for the course for the franchise.

I would say that any chef who agreed to participate thinking that they were going to get all the ingredients in the world to cook their brains out were pretty misinformed. I think Top Chef is better characterized a show about overcoming cooking challenges than a show solely about cooking skill.

Do you watch the regular TC series? This episode struck me as pretty par for the course for the franchise.

I would say that any chef who agreed to participate thinking that they were going to get all the ingredients in the world to cook their brains out were pretty misinformed. I think Top Chef is better characterized a show about overcoming cooking challenges than a show solely about cooking skill.

Right. The point of the program is to show how real first class chefs perform in the types of challenges you see on Top Chef. Otherwise it would be a show like Iron Chef, which is already on another network.

rickster wrote:

Do you watch the regular TC series? This episode struck me as pretty par for the course for the franchise.

I would say that any chef who agreed to participate thinking that they were going to get all the ingredients in the world to cook their brains out were pretty misinformed. I think Top Chef is better characterized a show about overcoming cooking challenges than a show solely about cooking skill.

Right. The point of the program is to show how real first class chefs perform in the types of challenges you see on Top Chef. Otherwise it would be a show like Iron Chef, which is already on another network.

Exactly; if they didn't have the stunt challenges, it wouldn't be Top Chef.

Thing is, I thought it showed their personailities in an interesting light. I loved the little swans and mice HK made, and the way he gave his mixer to the other guy. And what they all said about their charities, their kids etc. And the way they interacted. A lot of people don't like the format Bravo has concocted, and that's fine. I don't think it started out being for hard-core food enthusiasts.

You all might be right. I might just be missing the point.

But I'm still trying to figure out why people would care if these guys can cook dessert. It is not what they do, so why bother? You might as well take a "Top Lawyer" and say, "For our next challenge, we want you to play power forward for the Bulls." Playing power forward has nothing to do with practicing law, just as cooking dessert has nothing to do with what those four guys do. I just considered it a waste of their talent. I have to add that they all showed class and a great sense of humor in attacking that challenge.

It is one thing to have a twist -- limited time, ingredients, conditions, etc. -- but another to have them do something completely outside what they do. I was more bothered by the dessert thing than with the main challenge, which at least gave them some opportunity to show what they really can do.

But, as was referenced, at some point during that hour, I had to conclude that my Wednesday night is better spent watching ESPNnews, or a tape of the Champions League final (still trying to figure out how Man U lost so bad) or even in my kitchen, trying to figure out just how to get a sauce that brings out the flavor of seared tuna, without overwhelming it.

DML wrote:You all might be right. I might just be missing the point.

But I'm still trying to figure out why people would care if these guys can cook dessert. It is not what they do, so why bother? You might as well take a "Top Lawyer" and say, "For our next challenge, we want you to play power forward for the Bulls." Playing power forward has nothing to do with practicing law, just as cooking dessert has nothing to do with what those four guys do. I just considered it a waste of their talent. I have to add that they all showed class and a great sense of humor in attacking that challenge.

But that's not an accurate analogy. It's more akin to having a 'Top Criminal Lawyer" do a product liability case. It requires the same sort of background and training but is a different speciality. And my, wouldn't that be an exciting show.

And of course it has something to do with what the chefs do. They all certainly had pastry classes in cooking school and have done *some* sort of dessert since then. It's about showing how they can be creative and show their personalities. Some failed, some, like Keller, succeeded.

I think you're taking the whole thing a little too seriously.

I don't think the fact that I didn't find much to enjoy in the show showed that I take it too seriously. It showed that I did not find the hour of television worth watching.

If I took it too seriously, I would have suggested, as an alternate use of my time, reading The Collected Works of Thomas Keller. Instead, my alternate was watching a month old soccer match. That's about as un-serious as I can imagine.

Too seriously? Not hardly.

Too Serious Reaction wrote:Hominy without pozole is an abomination. Let's rally the soup troops, lasso the Texan, and repeatedly dunk his head in a vat of the real thing until he learns the difference.

DML, I think you're safely on this side of that line

DML wrote:But I'm still trying to figure out why people would care if these guys can cook dessert. It is not what they do, so why bother? You might as well take a "Top Lawyer" and say, "For our next challenge, we want you to play power forward for the Bulls." Playing power forward has nothing to do with practicing law, just as cooking dessert has nothing to do with what those four guys do. I just considered it a waste of their talent. I have to add that they all showed class and a great sense of humor in attacking that challenge.

[/quote]
quote]

Wouldn't it be more like asking a tax attorney to handle litigation? Yes, baking and cooking are two different things, but they are still both accomplished by "chefs." Baking is more science, but it still has to do with flavors and presentation. In my opinion, an executive chef should be able to step into any job in the kitchen. They all should be able to pull off some kind of dessert. I'm training in pastry, it doesn't mean that I can't cook.

All that aside, I did enjoy the premier. I'm a sucker for Bravo's shows and especially love cooking shows. I did find the judges a bit "different," but many critics are totally different animals.

Unlike the first episode, where Keller exuded such confidence from the first minute he appeared on camera, there was no favorite in the second, and the editors certainly seemed to play up Dufresne's fame, and the instant camaradarie/rivalry with Bowles -- I thought it'd come down to them, since the two women were not given much camera time, comparatively.

If this were an Iron Chef ep, Tracht probably would not have won -- while she had great flavors (I'm surprised the big portions didn't knock out the judges, after three other plates), it looks like a bowl of stuff thrown together. She needed a bigger platter.

So in two out of two episodes, age and cunning beat out youth and strength.

I did watch last night's show, partly because I'm a huge fan of Chef GEB and partly because the only news on ESPN was Ryan Leaf's arrest. I admit that in the second half hour, I did flip from the show to Reno 911 (both were on DVR so I when I got to a commercial, I would flip to the other). Still have not gotten to that Manchester United/Barca game, but if next week's show is slow, that might be the time.

In any case, there was not doubt that GEB and WD made that show last night. With them it had some great moments. Without them, it might have been painfully dull. The two other chefs appeared talented, but were not that interesting. I did find the eventual winner a bit pompous, particularly in the quick fire. That being said, I thought a highligh was when the other chef (don't recall her name) decided to make cookies while waiting for the judges. It was a great way to show that these chefs are not intimidated by the event as the regular Top Chef people would. I thought that it showed a wonderfully human side to her.

In contrast to the prior episode, I thought this episode had more realistic challenges that showcased what the chefs could do. It just seemed like there was more of an emphasis on the food this time.

With regard to the judges: If I live a bad life and end up in hell, I am convinced that I will be forced to dine with Greene and the British judge. What amazingly self-important people. The Brit clearly thought HE was very witty. I didn't share his opinion. However, the other judge was actually calm, rational and interesting. So now we've got one interesting judge of three. At least one judge progressed from the prior week.

Finally, the best line of the night was from Chef GEB at the snack machine -- something along the lines of that "That's my lunch, now for the contest.. . "

With regard to the judges: If I live a bad life and end up in hell, I am convinced that I will be forced to dine with Greene and the British judge. What amazingly self-important people. The Brit clearly thought HE was very witty

Clearly, you did not see Toby Young on the last season on Top Chef

I intended to post here, but went to got the other thread by mistake.

Quick summation:

Week 2 > Week 1
GEB = tuna tuna tuna
Tracht = walking monotone
Chi-town = not-dissed
Hubert Keller = Mr. Silhouette

Just a warning: the identity of the winner is floating around the internet, and seems solidly sourced. So, please don't post it here and be careful what top chef related posts you read on other sites.

gleam wrote:Just a warning: the identity of the winner is floating around the internet, and seems solidly sourced. So, please don't post it here and be careful what top chef related posts you read on other sites.

Thanks, for this, Ed.

=R=

Yes. I originally thought the word "spoilers" in this thread indicated that result were here.