Top Chef Season 7 - Washington DC

So, the Top Chef Masters thread fizzled before the season even came to a close. Is anyone excited about / planning to watch the new season of regular ol' Top Chef?

I'm curious to see how they decide to reflect DC in the challenges and design of the competition. Any guesses about local restaurants or chefs they may feature? Has anyone heard of any of the cheftestants?

(I just saw they have some info. about all this here, if anyone wants to read up on the details.)

Also, do you think Eric Ripert will make a good addition to the judges' panel? Or will you miss Toby Young sorely?

Finally, was Padma pregnant during the filming of this season, or had she already had her child?

I'm looking forward to Top Chef-Regular.

I don't know what it was about this season's Masters edition but it really turned me off after a while. Not enough cooking. Inconsistent rules. Unlikeable personalities (I liked Rick Moonen the first time around, but this season he came off as a total prick...that and he spoiled just about every episode on Twitter).

And I'm definitely looking forward to Eric Ripert as a judge. Just about anyone would be an improvement over Toby.

There's an article in the LA Times about season 7. Interesting comment from Tom Colicchio about seeking professional chefs, as opposed to beginners.

Also, this:

This time around, with “Top Chef” moving from Las Vegas to Washington, D.C., there’s another “Top Chef” cook with a Michelin star under his toque: Angelo Sosa, who has cooked alongside Jean-Georges Vongerichten (Jean Georges), Alain Ducasse (Spoon Food & Wine) and Stephen Starr (Buddakan) and currently cooks at New York's Xie Xie.

Sosa is not shy about promising a lot. “I want to be the first contestant,” he says in the opening episode, “to win every single challenge.”

I saw Padma on somebody's show yesterday, and I think she said that she had the baby part way through the competition, and that production shut down for 6 weeks until her doctors released her back to work. I think the 6-week shutdown could totally change the dynamics of the competition.

Also, she said that Nancy Pelosi would be on, and that they'd gone to the CIA and done something with Leon Panetta. Err, the spy group, not the Culinary Institute....

I thought it was a pretty good opening. Decent combination of focus on food and personalties. Definitely some people that I want to watch cook and definitely some (the fat woman from the south in particular) that likely go far but be hated.

Ripert was good. Padma always seemed to be trying out for Zoolander II -- she seemed to be working on her version of Blue Steel.

I saw Padma on somebody's show yesterday, and I think she said that she had the baby part way through the competition, and that production shut down for 6 weeks until her doctors released her back to work. I think the 6-week shutdown could totally change the dynamics of the competition.

Yesterday's show was apparently filmed at the end of March (Cherry Blossom festival) and she had her baby in late February.

No surprise on the guy from MI going home first...

yet another episode where the chefs are forced to serve their dishes from chafing dishes onto paper plates. wtf???? why don't they allow these people to cook off of a hot line for service, like they do 99% of the time?

I'm honestly aghast that the judges were judging these folks based on tiny cocktail-party portions that they ate from paper plates with plastic silverware. were they unable to get wedgewood to pony up for product placement? folks, you're in the major leagues here--please use china and metal flatware.

didn't get enough of a sense of the chefs to offer an opinion other than it seemed like the right person went home. what was up with that guy's friggin' hair? he was a walking health dept violation.

Honestly? I was most relieved when two interview contestants set themselves up for math folly, but landed safely:

"My confidence? On a scale of 1 to 10 [pause] it's a 10."

"When I commit myself to something, I'm committed 100%."

I saw alternate futures full of 110%. Some food looked good, but in the melee of the early season, this early triumph was promising.

I liked the format for this first episode because and was glad we got to hear the judges comment about all of the dishes. In Tom's blog, he noted that one of the groups had four very strong dishes, any of which could have won the competition. He also writes that there were many very good dishes prepared and thinks this season will be quite competitive.

Unfortunately, it will take a few weeks before the weakest competitors are weeded out.

Darren72 wrote:I liked the format for this first episode because and was glad we got to hear the judges comment about all of the dishes.

Close. We didn't hear a peep about Arnold, Tiffany, Tamesha or Lynne's. Though Gail did comment in her blog that Arnold's cake deserved honorable mention.

Close. We didn't hear a peep about Arnold, Tiffany, Tamesha or Lynne's. Though Gail did comment in her blog that Arnold's cake deserved honorable mention.

Right. I was interested in the 51 year instructor from the CIA and was disappointed not to hear her dish, which was some sort of waffles, evaluated. Seems like to save time, they skipped the ones in each group they considered the middle.

rickster wrote:

Close. We didn't hear a peep about Arnold, Tiffany, Tamesha or Lynne's. Though Gail did comment in her blog that Arnold's cake deserved honorable mention.

Right. I was interested in the 51 year instructor from the CIA and was disappointed not to hear her dish, which was some sort of waffles, evaluated. Seems like to save time, they skipped the ones in each group they considered the middle.

Yup. Waffles looked good, actually. Corn-camembert ice cream, bacon praline, bourbon apple butter, maple-cardamom syrup, caramel syrup and acorn squash jam. Sounds tasty to me.

Dmnkly wrote:

Darren72 wrote:I liked the format for this first episode because and was glad we got to hear the judges comment about all of the dishes.

Close. We didn't hear a peep about Arnold, Tiffany, Tamesha or Lynne's. Though Gail did comment in her blog that Arnold's cake deserved honorable mention.

I guess you are right. I seemed to recall them saying at least something about each dish as they went through each group. When there are so many competitors, it is hard for them to show something about each dish.

Darren72 wrote:

Dmnkly wrote:

Darren72 wrote:I liked the format for this first episode because and was glad we got to hear the judges comment about all of the dishes.

Close. We didn't hear a peep about Arnold, Tiffany, Tamesha or Lynne's. Though Gail did comment in her blog that Arnold's cake deserved honorable mention.

I guess you are right. I seemed to recall them saying at least something about each dish as they went through each group. When there are so many competitors, it is hard for them to show something about each dish.

Completely understandable omissions. Frankly, I'm happy they took the time to show and describe all of the dishes. In the early seasons, the early episodes wouldn't even show all of the dishes. There were contestants for whom you'd watch the first episode and have absolutely no idea what they even made, much less what the judges thought of it.

So long, Kate Hudson. Sorry to see you go. Putting 2 pounds of sugar into the dessert was pretty much the antithesis of the 'healthy school lunch' challenge.

Sherry-braised chicken chef really should have been the one to go, though. First of all, why serve sherry to school kids? It's pointless. Secondly, why burn so much of the budget on the sherry/vinegar? Her choices were so self-absorbed and completely removed from reality, it was stunning. Hard to believe that she didn't get sent home, though it probably won't be long before that happens.

=R=

I didn't understand the elimination process on last night's episode. A couple of times they talked about how the two non-immunized contestants in Angelo's group were at particular risk because if the group lost, they each had a 50 percent (rather than 25 percent) chance of going home. This made it sound like there would be a decision first on the worst group and then someone from that group would have to go home (even if there were someone else who was individually worse from another group that had rated higher). But the critique at the end with the 4 worst contestants made it seem like an individual decision. This seemed inconsistent with how the process was described beforehand.

In fact, I thought (but am not sure) they said earlier that Angelo's group was the worst. In which case, one of the two in that group should have gone.

ronnie_suburban wrote:Sherry-braised chicken chef really should have been the one to go, though. First of all, why serve sherry to school kids? It's pointless. Secondly, why burn so much of the budget on the sherry/vinegar? Her choices were so self-absorbed and completely removed from reality, it was stunning. Hard to believe that she didn't get sent home, though it probably won't be long before that happens.

Sherry-braised chicken chef is wearing on my last nerve. Last week, she chose to give Tom Colicchio and Eric Ripert a food history lesson. I just went back and watched the 1st ep on hulu and here's what she said:
"This is a throwback to the neoclassical California cuisine from, like, the Wolfgang Puck era"
Tom clearly had to look down to prevent himself from smirking and laughing at her.

I'm not watching the show, but this short behind-the-scenes item, written by a friend of mine for the Washington Post Express (their Red Eye), might be of interest to those who are.

I was sort of surprised the judges didn't ask Sherry Chicken's teammates why they didn't try to talk her out of it. on what planet is that a good choice for a school lunch? I mean, I get trying to give kids unique flavors and broaden their horizons, but sherry is an obviously bad choice.

sweetsalty wrote:I was sort of surprised the judges didn't ask Sherry Chicken's teammates why they didn't try to talk her out of it. on what planet is that a good choice for a school lunch? I mean, I get trying to give kids unique flavors and broaden their horizons, but sherry is an obviously bad choice.

They might have. They probably did. We often see a fraction of a percent of the questioning.

I finally watched the end, and was not thrillled with the result. Basically, she got sent home for not standing up to Sherry-Girl.
She had almost no budget. She was stuck.
The person who created:
1. A dish that they said tasted (and looked) bad;
2. Used sherry; and
3. Broke the budget
should have gone home over the person who just made an unhealthy dish.
Still, a good show. They changed the format a bit, and I wonder if they had contemplated potential sab. of teammates, or if that was an unintended consequence of the format change.

By the way -- I still find Gail Simmons as creepy and unpleasant as I did in the past. She's definitely the weak link of the judges.

That sherry braised chicken looked like airplane food, but that pudding just seemed like a total disaster to me.

Anyway, this is shaping up to be a fun season. It doesn't seem like the cheftestants like each other very much, so that should keep things interesting.

jesteinf wrote:That sherry braised chicken looked like airplane food, but that pudding just seemed like a total disaster to me.

Anyway, this is shaping up to be a fun season. It doesn't seem like the cheftestants like each other very much, so that should keep things interesting.

Yeah, it was interesting that during Judges' Table, they showed a couple of the teams directly arguing with each other. I can't remember too many times where that's been shown over the years. It's taken me 7+ seasons to come to the realization that in order to really enjoy Top Chef, I need to fully accept the inter-personal conflicts that are depicted on the show. My initial reflex is to be irritated by them (and try to watch around them) but this season, I'm going to do my damndest to embrace them as an integral component of the show.

=R=

jesteinf wrote:Anyway, this is shaping up to be a fun season. It doesn't seem like the cheftestants like each other very much, so that should keep things interesting.

Unfortunately for me the fact that none of them seem to like each other makes me dislike all of them and honestly makes me want to shut the show off.

It could be my perception or my decreased tolerance for such things, but these first two episodes seem to rate significantly higher on the "contrived melodrama" scale than previous seasons.

I'm going to do my damndest to embrace them as an integral component of the show.

I've wondered about those components at times. They alway choose at least two people that seem to be completely socially inept. They always have at least two gay contestants, who usually seem intent on making who they sleep with somehow relevant to their cooking. And then there are always the "bad, but not bad enough" chefs that seem to go much farther than they should.

This year, it seems like that the good looking female got a pass, which I have to admit is nice for those of us who like women. If I don't like looking at her food, at least looking at her will be interesting. I did wonder if that was some factor in the decision (i.e. if we boot her, do we lose the few hetero males that watch this show?)

IMHO I think they are running out of ideas. I felt the one-handed challenge was just silly especially in red/blue aprons, it was so demeaning-I have watched this show since Ep1, season 1 and I feel they are scraping the bottom of the barrel for ideas....that, of course, will not stop me from watching but I sincerely hope they come up with some better challenges as they seem to have some talented chefs. Hopefully, it will get more interesting once more people have been weeded out.

I can't help but think the weird guy from Michigan would have been amusing for another couple of episodes.

The Lovely Donna wrote:IMHO I think they are running out of ideas. I felt the one-handed challenge was just silly especially in red/blue aprons, it was so demeaning-I have watched this show since Ep1, season 1 and I feel they are scraping the bottom of the barrel for ideas.

That was my immediate reaction, and then I remembered that they actually did a one-armed quickfire in the first season of Masters. To say nothing of the vending machine challenge or the one where they had to assemble an amuse by scavenging parts from the hors d'oeuvres trays from which they'd been snacking.

It's not an unprecedented level of stupid, is what I'm getting at. So long as they're getting it out of the way early, I suspect we'll be fine.

Hao wrote:I didn't understand the elimination process on last night's episode. A couple of times they talked about how the two non-immunized contestants in Angelo's group were at particular risk because if the group lost, they each had a 50 percent (rather than 25 percent) chance of going home. This made it sound like there would be a decision first on the worst group and then someone from that group would have to go home (even if there were someone else who was individually worse from another group that had rated higher). But the critique at the end with the 4 worst contestants made it seem like an individual decision. This seemed inconsistent with how the process was described beforehand.

In fact, I thought (but am not sure) they said earlier that Angelo's group was the worst. In which case, one of the two in that group should have gone.

I agree, it did seem like a bit of a bait and switch when it came to the way things were described and then how they were executed. That being said, it seems like they chose the worst 4 that they could.

- I think they made the right call. If you make a pudding that's simultaneously too starchy and too sweet, that sounds like a loser. And if the best thing about a dish was the fresh shipped-from-across-the-country strawberries, you didn't have much to begin with.

- The choice of sherry as well as the cockamamie cooking method definitely spell a short run for Amanda. Plus, when asked to explain her choice, all she could muster was something about how she likes chicken cooked in sherry. But I'll give her one thing - budget buster or not, she had an idea and executed it. She bought that sherry. And she almost got sent home with it. In case you've never watched the show, Top Chef does NOT reward team players. Simple as that. Make sure you've got what you need and your dish tastes good and, chances are, you'll cook as long as your talent will let you.

- Angelo's got a smugness that will get increasingly grating. He will have to put out some pretty great looking food to make him remotely likable if he keeps this up. It's interesting that they are playing up the gamesmanship angle. You could certainly buy it from him.

- There was some serious lack of imagination. Sweet potatoes were just about everywhere. What, that's an easy sell because it has the word sweet in it? I counted one cruciferous vegetable (in the slaw) and one other green thing - a legume. People seemed to be playing it awfully safe...

- Lastly, Stephen is just looking brutal, but in an oh-so-entertaining way. First he tries to thinly slice and then deep fry ribeye. Then he makes a bland, unimaginative sandwich with white bread. Then he serves up mush, virtually flavorless rice. Next week, he will try to gel warm water!

I actually make a sherry-vinegar chicken dish which my kids will eat under not too much duress (it's out of Sally Schneider's New Way to Cook, which is not that great a cookbook, but this is one of the good things in it). It doesn't taste that much like sherry, no doubt in part because it contains the very thing we saw somebody trying to get Amanda to use, tomatoes. But sheesh, isn't there a $4 bottle of acceptable cooking sherry at Restaurant Depot? Did she walk out with a $26 bottle of Fino? It seems like it. Anyway, what would have really killed it was... little green flecks! That, to me, was where it was just completely disconnected from kid reality.

So long, Kate Hudson.

Funny, we were calling her Laura Dern at our house. I agree that it was a little unfair to torpedo her when she got screwed by her teammates spending her share of the money, but I suspect Tom was unwilling to eat grainy pudding or mousse for a third week before getting rid of her.

The team that did the tacos, I really have to give them credit for pulling off something that in outline, looked to have as many kid-strikes against it as sherry chicken (red-wine-vinegar-marinated onions?)

Angelo started out as this year's Fabio. This week he became this year's Stephan. Next week, he'll be Hung, and he may well establish a whole new realm of his own after that.