My Dirty Little Secret: The Next Food Network Star

Most people don't freely admit they watch this train wreck of a show, but I do. I think I watch for the worst, ill-informed contestants and who will be sent home for what nonsense. And, yes, it is terrible.

I simple couldn't resist sharing this:

Tonight, when Bobby Flay asked a contestant to tell him what prime meant, the contestant responded, "beef tenderloin filet is first, then comes prime under that" Bobby's look was priceless.

This is also the same person who put a "tri-berry" sauce on his steak dish and when Bobby came thru the kitchen and asked what a "tri-berry" sauce was, the contestant replied, "you know, strawberry, blueberry, raspberry"

Suffice it to say, he went home tonight.

I will also admit to watching this here and there -- although I often have to look away from the incompetence.

If they hadn't found Guy Fieri, I suspect this show would have died a natural death. But they're always hoping to catch lightning in a bottle again. Guy has certainly proven to be a cash cow for the Food Network -- so they keep soldiering on in their little contest.

They all seem sooo inadequate to the tasks at hand.

Yeah, I'm watching and it's totally brutal. There are, at most, only 2 or 3 contestants on this show who could even legitimately dream about hosting their own shows. These people are almost completely inept. They lack cooking ability, charisma and camera presence. What bemuses me is that even though there are so many "no way'ers" competing, the show plods along, week to week, eliminating only 1 person at a time, when they could right now get rid of nearly everyone. I guess the show must do well ratings-wise because why else would it continue but sheesh, what a mess!

=R=

If they hadn't found Guy Fieri, I suspect this show would have died a natural death. But they're always hoping to catch lightning in a bottle again. Guy has certainly proven to be a cash cow for the Food Network -- so they keep soldiering on in their little contest.

I don't think the point of the show is to find a new food network star. The point is to put on a competitive reality show that attracts viewers. In that sense, the success of Fieri does serve to provide some legitimacy to the contest in the eyes of the viewing public. FN, however has a lot better ways of finding hosts.

That said, Aarti, the woman doing Indian food on this show, has more potential than most of the stuff on FN.

It's ironic that a cooking show such as "Next Food Network Star" could produce so many gag-inducing moments.

On the season that the charming Melissa D'Arabian competed, a cherubic, tattooed guy won one particular week's challenge and blurted out, "I'm so excited, I could just make out with Bobby Flay!"

Why the editors chose to include this quote on the show instead of leaving it on the cutting-room floor, I do not know. Keep your fetishes under your flowery toque, Contestant Number Two--they have nothing to do with either cooking or broadcasting. I can only imagine how Bobby Flay reacted upon hearing this contestant's emoting...

Good thing this contestant didn't cop to a crush on Bourdain instead. Now THAT would have gotten ugly.

Why does anyone these days want a cooking show on the Food Network? I guess if you'd like to be the next Rachael Ray®, and hope to build a cookbook empire, a line of dishes, etc., but apart from insta-fame, what does this current crop of contestants think they can add to the current conversation about food? At least when RR's show came out, it was original in that she really was (ostensibly) making a meal in 30 minutes. Now, there's a gazillon shows involving marginally camera-ready hosts who all have "secrets" about how to entertain on a budget, in five minutes, etc.

If you want to make a living in the food biz, why would you NOT want to be on Food Network? Having a successful television show is less difficult and less expensive for the chef/host than starting a restaurant, no?

Chefs have been on TV forever, with every angle imaginable. Think the Galloping Gourmet, with his wine-induced flameouts in the '70's morphing into his Minimax healthy eating show. Or Jeff Smith starting with a cooking segment called something like the Chaplain's Pantry (he was an ordained minister) and ending up with the Frugal Gourmet (and a lot more less savory stuff, proven or not). My personal favorite was Justin Wilson; he never claimed to be able to cook well, it was all about friends, wine, and sharing a good time.

Why do they do it? Who knows. Does anyone really know why they do the things they do?

little500 wrote:If you want to make a living in the food biz, why would you NOT want to be on Food Network? Having a successful television show is less difficult and less expensive for the chef/host than starting a restaurant, no?

Chefs have been on TV forever, with every angle imaginable. Think the Galloping Gourmet, with his wine-induced flameouts in the '70's morphing into his Minimax healthy eating show. Or Jeff Smith starting with a cooking segment called something like the Chaplain's Pantry (he was an ordained minister) and ending up with the Frugal Gourmet (and a lot more less savory stuff, proven or not). My personal favorite was Justin Wilson; he never claimed to be able to cook well, it was all about friends, wine, and sharing a good time.

Why do they do it? Who knows. Does anyone really know why they do the things they do?

Well, I'd like to live under the delusion that I have at least some idea about why I do what I do. My point, though, is about cooking shows TODAY. Today, they're a dime a dozen, not cable-access oddities with hosts who really believed they had something to teach people about cooking. (Obviously, the pinnacle in TV cooking is Julia Child.) But today, every halfway competent chef has a cookbook and TV appearances under his or her belt. You'd have to live in a bubble to avoid a TV show where a celebrated chef (Mario, Bobby, Jacques, Lidia) is trying to teach you about food. I can certainly understand the temptation to try to get on the Food Network, build a fan base, and ride fame down easy street. But, if you're serious about food, you have to wonder what you'll be adding to the already-large ocean of food-related information that includes such big fish as Keller, Ripert, Collicchio, and Pepin, to name a few stalwarts.

If I were in these contestants' shoes and serious about food, I'd have to ponder what I think I can contribute and question whether the Food Network can take me there. Every few months it seems the Food Network rolls out a new lineup, as old shows are quickly relegated to the scrap heap. Its lineup emphasizes lightweight, interchangeable "cooks," with not a lot of substance, and is heavy on schtick (such as the Nealys and Paula Deen). On the rare occasion I turn on the Food Network these days, I wonder who more than half of these chef-hosts are, but don't worry too much about getting to know them, as they'll be gone sooner rather than later. If you have a Food Network show, the reality is, the best you can hope for is to become the next Guy Fieri, Sandra Lee or Paula Deen, and unfortunately, those are people who have morphed in caricatures of themselves during the chase for fame and fortune. Is that what these contestants want? Because look what the Food Network did to New York's king of Italian food.

If you have a Food Network show, the reality is, the best you can hope for is to become the next Guy Fieri, Sandra Lee or Paula Deen, and unfortunately, those are people who have morphed in caricatures of themselves during the chase for fame and fortune. Is that what these contestants want? Because look what the Food Network did to New York's king of Italian food.

But these contestants are not Mario Batali or Eric Ripert. if you're a bartender, out of work chef or local caterer, like most of these people, I think a FN gig looks pretty good compared to what they're doing now. For them (or most people) being the next Paula Deen or Guy Fieri looks like a dream come true.

Is this not like asking why any actor would want to become a Hollywood star and make stupid, mindless blockbuster movies that pay them millions of dollars and make them household names? Because I'm pretty sure the answer is obvious.

everyone has a price, no matter what they might say.

Fresser wrote:It's ironic that a cooking show such as "Next Food Network Star" could produce so many gag-inducing moments.

On the season that the charming Melissa D'Arabian competed, a cherubic, tattooed guy won one particular week's challenge and blurted out, "I'm so excited, I could just make out with Bobby Flay!"

Why the editors chose to include this quote on the show instead of leaving it on the cutting-room floor, I do not know. Keep your fetishes under your flowery toque, Contestant Number Two--they have nothing to do with either cooking or broadcasting. I can only imagine how Bobby Flay reacted upon hearing this contestant's emoting...

Good thing this contestant didn't cop to a crush on Bourdain instead. Now THAT would have gotten ugly.

homophobic, much?

I watched the second and third season, but somewhere after that I lost interest of most food cooking shows, even Top Chef DC, I'm over it and have zero interest. As in all reality contest shows, there is the villain, there is the dummy, there is the lazy, there is the smart ass, there is the one really good person, etc etc etc. Personally it's played out and I'm over it all. Sorry to rant, just thought I'd add my two cents.

Dmnkly wrote:Is this not like asking why any actor would want to become a Hollywood star and make stupid, mindless blockbuster movies that pay them millions of dollars and make them household names? Because I'm pretty sure the answer is obvious.

Exactly. Which is why we also see "Keller, Ripert, Collicchio and Pepin" appearing as judges, commentators, etc. on these shows. It's always about money and, to a lesser extent, fame.

Shaggywillis wrote:I watched the second and third season, but somewhere after that I lost interest of most food cooking shows, even Top Chef DC, I'm over it and have zero interest. As in all reality contest shows, there is the villain, there is the dummy, there is the lazy, there is the smart ass, there is the one really good person, etc etc etc. Personally it's played out and I'm over it all. Sorry to rant, just thought I'd add my two cents.

Ditto. Although in my case it was primarily because I got fed up with Tom Colicchio for so many reasons I began to understand why people joke about throwing bricks (and other things) through their TV sets. I'll save myself the aggravation (and everyone else the time) of expounding on how many ways I can't stand him. (Or Padma, for that matter.)

I guess it's hard for me to understand why they keep having this show and not actually giving the winner a show. Or, a show that lasts for more than two episodes. I remember when the Hearty Boys won the first season, and their show seemed to last just a few cheesey-quality episodes. I seem to remember another woman with brown hair whose name escapes me winning a few years later? I think I saw one episode from her. it just seems like a lot of money for a competition that doesn't seem to result in much (Guy Fieri excluded).

The woman from the second season was Amy something with bizarre hair. Her show was on Sundays at the crack of dawn. I think it had two eps. Melissa D'Arabian also was put on at the crack of dawn on Sundays. Again, I think her show lasted a few eps.

I guess Sundays at 6 am is designated "star" time.

Melissa, she of the screechy voice, bug-eyed "enthusiasm" and craptastic knife skills, was on Sundays at 11:30 a.m. She's been picked up for a second season. Shame, that. Saddled with a b.s. concept of $10 dinners (grocery prices vary far too much for that conceit to hold up), she jitters around the kitchen, babbles, and clearly is the vested property of the network hoping to get another Rachel or Guy. Not here, folks. Otoh, at least her time spot isn't being taken up by another cupcake challenge.

The Hearty Boys and Amy (who reportedly declined her second season) were voted in by viewers (as was Guy, I think). But since the VPs of programming and marketing "tell us your story!" are so uncomfortable not controlling who wins, they've taken over the selection. Far less interesting for me. And having produced the spectacularly unimpressive Aaron McCargo and Melissa D'Arabian, the show's moving off my radar. Although seeing a bit of Giada as a mentor has been laughable.

I think they even gave a runner up a show. Adam or something. Shouldn't only the winner get a show?

I thought I heard that the winner 'may' get his/her own 'web' show. I was multi tasking at the time and not really paying attention. The winners yesterday get to do a segment on Food Network's spawn The Cooking Channel.

It's like a train wreck--I can't stop watching. I do like Aarti--I think I'd watch her show if she had one (and I don't watch much TV). But if Herb wins, I will never, ever set my television to the Food Network again.

thaiobsessed wrote:It's like a train wreck--I can't stop watching. I do like Aarti--I think I'd watch her show if she had one (and I don't watch much TV). But if Herb wins, I will never, ever set my television to the Food Network again.

Agree completely. I couldn't help but wince at the "squee" that went off between the contestants on a recent episode in which the prospect of having their own line of food products was dangled before them. Like the world needs another $12 buck jar of "authentic" pasta sauce with an Italian name on it. Having said that, I think that Aarti is the only one who has something to contribute more broadly to the world of Pop Food; approachable Indian food is a good idea and there's a void in that regard. As for Selena, if Giada has any power over it, she won't be winning.