1013 replies to this topic

[sabi]

I'm wondering if this was the first season if I would have stuck with the show and I'm inclined to say no. I didn't see last season until midway through and it was one of the Marathons Bravo loves to run and the show really hooked me. The chefs all seemed to have a great food sense even the wild Irish guy who's name I forget. Am I jumping the gun or has this show already jumped the snark. I can't see any of these chefs standing up to Harrold or Tiffani(I gotta give her cooking props) or Leanne or Dave "Cry Me A River" London. Even Miguel, who I was a tad leery of as a Top Chef could cook the panties off Flounder. Although the challenges have been on the lame side I don't see their presentations being in the running either. I think some posters may agree from comments I've read. What do you think?

[safranal moeity]

I totally agree with you sabi. I knew that I wouldn't enjoy this season like I did the first simply because I adore several of S1 chefs, but I thought that I'd at least be rooting for one or two contestants by this time in S2 and I'm still unsure of who stands out as the best. As much as people have commented on this cast having all around better credentials I just don't find much of what they've done (so far) to be too impressive. The thing is, I don't know whether the blame for that lies with production, editing, the chefs themselves or their challenges. It's just something I can't exactly put my finger on.

I'm trying not to be sour towards this season but I'm honestly disappointed with the direction this season is heading towards. I really wish production had stayed in San Francisco; don't know how much of a difference that would have made, but at least it would 'feel' more like the same S1 show. I have a lot more to say on the subject but I'll leave it at that for now!

[BocaChic]

I'm finding season two more enjoyable. It seemed like Season one had a lot of "kinks" that needed to be worked out. I watch the show for the reality show factor, not for the food, since that's pretty subjective anyway.

[Fukui San]

I think the last two shows' challenges have been structured to produce foods that don't look outwardly impressive. Dishes meant for TGIFridays is not going to look impressive or gourmet, nor is low calorie food that have to appeal to kids.

The dishes made on this season's first show lead me to think that these are indeed capable chefs overall. The first season's chefs I thought that only five of them really belonged there. This season, I think that Flounder and maybe Otto were the only ones that don't really belong, just on the level of how I perceive their food to be. I may be proven wrong in future episodes, but that's how I perceive things right now.

[beccala]

I loved season one, and agree that if this season was the first time that I watched this show I probably would not have continued. Season one had better challenges, better food, and better personalities. I hope that the season gets better because this is a good show that has the potential to be very entertaining.

I also wanted to comment on the bad behavior or cheating of this season. It is weird how in the preview for the next episode the chef stays in the kitchen for the entire challenge because he can't trust anyone. I think that this hurts the season, because they will not be able to converse as they would without the chef being present. I hope that this passes over. I do not think that this makes the show more interesting or dramatic, instead it makes this season seem like less qualified cheaters.

[416]

Both seasons are equally bad. It's just Bravo's brilliant marathon marketing that hooks people in.

[beccala]

That is true about the marathon marketing. Anyone that did not start the show from the beginning can jump in at any time, and catch up with the rest of the die hards. It also is helpful if you miss an episode or detail that you didn't catch the first time around.

[Blueicus]

I think another thing is that with the first season that although there were only a half-dozen or so challengers that I thought had a chance, when the field whittled down I really started enjoying the show (I'm watching for the food, though a pinch of "appropriate" drama's [such as the clashing of colourful personalities and not continuous cheating allegations] nice too). Perhaps it will be that way this time around too.

Edited by Blueicus, Nov 14, 2006 @ 10:17 PM.

[theWoebegone]

Bravo seems to be having issues this season. Both TC2 and PR3 claimed to have contestants with better credentials than seasons past, but the cast just isn't gripping the audience like it used to.

[kappy72287]

My general opinion of season two in comparison to season one is that season one was primarily about the food -- everything else, i.e. pointless drama, was largely secondary, while season two has been a lot less about the food itself. There's less process edited into the show (or at least that's how I perceive it), and there's just a lot more b.s. in terms of cheating, drama, etc. etc. Maybe that is a consequence of there just being more egregious cheating (i.e. how can you focus on the quality of food when team members are stealing lychees or skirting rules on sugar), but in season one, even the drama was tied into the food itself, whether it was Stephen's trio of seared smears in Chinese soupspoons, issues with wedding cakes, etc. I watch Top Chef for food first, drama second, and I can only hope that that drama is related directly to the food, and not to whether or not Marcel is an immature egomaniac or petty accusations about lychees and sugar.

Secondly, there is no love lost between I and TC2 challenges, especially in comparison to TC1. I really feel that the TC2 challenges have been far more restrictive than TC1 challenges, and that the TC1 contestants had a lot more freedom in terms of style and substance. Of the 11 TC1 main challenges, only 2 had significant specific ingredient-related restrictions (monkfish and truffles, if you can even consider mandating use of truffles a "restriction"), 1 had a significant broad ingredient-related restriction (the street food challenge), and 1 had a significant style-related restriction (the TV dinner challenge). Of the 4 TC2 main challenges, all of them have had either ingredient-related restrictions (Camp Glucose and frog legs/escargot) or significant style-related restrictions (TGI Fridays and Teams Vietnam/Korea). We have yet to see anything that would really let the chefs shine in a gourmet way, if you will. Even the wedding challenge from TC1 allowed a degree to freedom to let the chefs determine style and ingredients within the given chronological and financial parameters, but there's really been nothing like that this year, and that's a real disappointment for me, and I hypothesize that the lack of freedom for TC2 chefs has compromised the ability of the audience to really see who ought to be there and who their favorite is.

[DjLexxy]

Just some quick complaints, I hate not being able to really see what the chefs are doing. In season 1, they would focus more on the prepping of the dish, and would cover all of the cheftestants. This season, it feels like we don't get to watch the chefs in action as much. Its like they are making their food and I'm trying so hard to follow along. I'm like ok they have this ingredient and they are doing this....and later the (oh-so-reliable) chyron explains the dish and its like wtf?

I guess its because they have more chefs, but its annoying. Oh and they don't even show what some of them made on some of the Quickfires. They focus way too much on a small group of people during each episode, and it really telegraphs who is gonna be on top and on the bottom when the results come in.

[BeanyMalone]

My principal complaints with this season is the same I had last season. The chefs seem joyless about the food. They are focused on how the challenge is cramping their style and not on how they can adapt their style to the challenge and present the customer with a memorable food experience.

It's just possible that the editors are choosing to air the face screwed up in frustration moments over the "Eureka, I've solved it" moments, but I'm not so sure. Still, I'm waiting and seeing. It took me until the final six and the restaurant concept challenge to really warm up to the cheftestants last season. It's easy to forget in retrospect, but for a good long while in TC1 Harold was just crabby, not endearingly crabby and Tiffani was just bossy and not a villianess extraordinaire.

I do think that the rushed production schedule (TC1 wound up in May, and I get the feeling filming of TC2 started around July) probably meant some challenges this season weren't sufficiently brainstormed, either to improve them or identify in advance and try to prevent the things that could go wrong. For example, an extreme low calorie challenge could have been interesting. But did they think through all the ramifications of locking a recipe a day early? Why a children's weight loss camp and not a high end spa? What a tremendous opportunity a spa would have been to showcase presentation skills. Anyone who has ever been on a diet knows that making the food look appetizing is half the battle, which is why the turkey meatballs and veggie lasagna failed so miserably for me. It looked so ugly on the plate.

The herd has yet to be culled. Then we'll see.

[katarzyna]

This season, it feels like we don't get to watch the chefs in action as much.

I think part of the reason is that there are more cheftestants this season, and it's hard to keep track of them all. It was difficult to keep track of the cheftestants last season, even though there were fewer of them. I thought season one's first challenge, the signature dish, was done too early. It might have been a good way to get to know the chefs, but we didn't get to see some chefs prepare at all. And it was tough to remember who did what.

Season 2--I haven't been as impressed with the early challenges, but I'm ok with that. I'd rather see the lamer, more casual, and goofy challenges early on. After the group of cheftestants have thinned out a little, then get to the better challenges. Maybe do a signature dish challenge when half of them are gone.

[bbcookin]

Maybe do a signature dish challenge when half of them are gone.

Aww I'm torn. OTOH, I agree. But seeing Frank's and Mikey's signatures dishes could be so much grimey & snarky fun!

[marylou]

S1: Better Cheftestants, better challenges, looks like bigger budget. More cooking and less fighting. My only complaints with S1 were doing an elimination in Vegas before the final challenge (which was great) and the team not getting enough time to do the wedding.

S2: WAY better hostess. I love Padma, and not just because she's gorgeous. Girl knows her food, AND she's smart. So far the challenges have just not been all that good. I've heard they are going to have Bourdain on this season, and hopefully they will get around to having Alice Waters on. I think letting them have a little more time for some of the challenges is good, though superior time management is one of the hallmarks of being really good in the kitchen. I have seen little of the cooking from this crop of 'testants that's really wowed me.

I have the same complaint about TC that I have about PR. I want more cooking and eating, and less drahhma.



Thanks for reading. You are the winner. Here's a copy of my new cookbook.

[tvmovielover]

I still have not seen the earliest episodes of Season 1 so most of the discordant notes (aside from Tiffani-she was a decent chef but a sour person) are gone in the episodes I have seen. However, I am appalled that the cheftestants in last night's episode made no effort to coordinate the courses to make a meal that worked as a whole and not just some interesting and some terrible parts. Only the annoying Betty is shown suggesting that they talk about it. If that was the only effort to coordinate-boo to season 2. None of them deserve to win. Replay season one instead.

[heebiejeebie]

I'm enjoying this season pretty much as I did last season. It didn't come in a shiny wrapper and the new smell is more a memory. But the show still delivers the entertainment value that I got first run.

I do think this season has more skilled competitors. But I also think that most are falling into the reality show trap, which the first season, other than Stephen's artfully but woefully contrived Richard Hatch in the Kitchen persona, we saw less of and more actual cooking. And reaching. I think we saw the contestants first season try to prove something each challenge. This challenge, it seems that innovation comes in the quickfire for immunity and then falls to safe and sure. Desperate attempts to not be last but that's it. Ilan and Frank are really the only two who seem to try to be innovative and risky. Cliff seems ready to and Carlos seems like he would like to but isn't quite sure how. Sam, with the stench of last week still wafting heavily, seems more and more like someone playing the reality show game. No surprise he paired with Cliff. And while some of Sam's choices have been well executed (see fruit salad), they seem a bit calculated in the elimination challenges. They lack any real flair. With immunity and he does a pairing with Cliff. Instead of going all out and really wowing with an actual entree.

Betty burbles and bobs and dances to the judges every whim and comment. Her "enthusiastic" response to the slightest positive comment has me wondering how she'll receive a placement in the final three should it happen. Lay on her back and shoot ping pong balls out of her hootch at a dismayed and yet fascinated Tom and Gail?

Tiffani was a raving insecure bitch and yet still was definitely the second best chef there, last season. And Tiffani's talents were such, that even with her missteps, I lusted after many of her creations. More than Harold's overall, because I think Tiffani actually brought a needed desperation to many of the challenges. Harold was too busy trying to be the coolest guy on the High School Yearbook staff. In many technical aspects, Harold ruled. But a lot of that also came off stuffy to me. A bit pretentious at times. But in the end, no matter how much Harold tried to be above the contest, he clearly wanted it. True, the level of smug as he smirked and preened when it became clear that everyone on the show loved him best made the finale completely irrelevant -- I wanted Tiffani to stab Harold in frustration, have Dave scream on set and kill her then in revenge even as he catches on fire and burns the whole place down. But long before the final, I knew I would enjoy any meal prepared by both Tiffani and Harold because I knew both liked and appreciated food. Albeit in different ways from each other and from myself. This season I still haven't gotten that. Carlos seems to be the only one I really get loves food and yet he really seems out of his league half the time. Marcel, Sam, Elia and Marissa all seem more involved in cooking almost as a means of being the best. More than just the joy of cooking. And yet none have shown even a true let it all ride passion to win. Let alone win by cooking.

This season, Ilan's youth and Frank's...I dunno, midlife crises? Insecurities as younger chefs pass him by? Really are the only two factors that seem to push contestants to try a little risk. Take a little chance on something. Frank's fail as often as they succeed. Ilan though manages to deliver strongly many times in both quickfire and elimination.

Last season's challenges had plenty of the silly twist. But this season the twists have taken a stronger role in each challenge. To the point of pretty much hampering a strong field. Last night was case in point. The very nature of pairing teams that thought only one person was at risk undermined anyone taking a risk. Even Sam strangely, or not so strangely, enough.

So, so far, this season holds true to last season because I don't find myself rooting for two people I actually found rather reprehensible -- Tiffani with her dysfunction and attitude; Harold with his high school cheerleader disingenuity at full throttle (you love me? you really love me? oh stop. I mean it. Stop it. Stop it. Really stop telling me how much you love me). Sam's little trick last week seems to set him to be my Harold of this season. But neither Ilan nor Cliff seem anything like Tiffani at all in terms of personality. And when it all comes down to it, I don't care if the winner is a total dick or raving bitch as long as I felt they cooked their way to the top.

[diva360]

I think Bravo changes the way they edit their shows once they start attracting a larger audience. I watched PR1 and TC1 from the beginning, because I like fashion and I like to cook. Period. I wish both shows would focus more on the sewing and the cooking.

And like HeebieJeebie, I was surprised that the chefs didn't coordinate their dishes last night. I was also surprised, and not pleasantly, by some of the ingredients they chose. Last night was the first time they had the opportunity to really show what they could do, and only about half of them did anything impressive.

[devans00]

The thing I like less about Season 2 is the skill level gap. Here it is, episode 5 of what 12, and the skill level between those who have "it" and those who are coasting or hit and miss is pretty clear.

Season 1, everyone left after Candice, was pretty much in the same league. From that point forward, people were weeded out on contest technicalities and subjective judgments more than lack of ability to put a dish together and present it reasonably.

I agree with the folks that say that the twists and restrictions of Season 2 kind of prevent us from seeing what the chefs are really about. You know, give them a chance to spread their wings a little. But then again, the real world isn't about limitless ingredients/cooking resources and wide open taste palette. People are pretty much restricted to producing what they can get people to buy. Unless they are cooking at home or something.

More Season 2 people seem content to say out of the bottom 2 or 3 rather than to knock socks off and go for the win. But then again, that could be a skill and experience issue. Did someone really make a couple of salads with a spoon drink thinking that would win? Or were they trying not to be the worst? I'm glad leadership is a component of the judging because this is definitely more follower than head chief behavior.

The passive aggressiveness of Season 2 gets on my nerves too. At least from what they showed TV watchers during Season 1, the contestents had enough respect for each other to work out a lot issues between themselves. Not wait until they are standing in front of the judges table. It gives the impression that Season 2 people are so insecure about their skills to stand on their own, they have to get rid of rivals underhandedly.

Notice, that for the most part, the more skilled chefs are staying out of the drama. They don't need it, they know what they are doing.

[biakbiak]

Season 1, everyone left after Candice, was pretty much in the same league. From that point forward, people were weeded out on contest technicalities and subjective judgments more than lack of ability to put a dish together and present it reasonably.

I disagree. I don't think Lisa and Andrea were as skilled as the other chefs. Hell, Harold had to teach Lisa how to chop something.

[zazaxux]

The big difference for me is likeability. I genuinely liked most of the season 1 contestants. Stephen grated, but he seemed to mellow later on. I actually liked Tiffani right up until the cake mix episode. Both Lisa and Andrea seemed like very nice people. And even Candice was a sweetie. Miguel was uber-competitive but hilarious. Dave annoyed me with his crying and hysterics, but he's an okay guy.

This season, I have a hate-on for almost everyone. Whiny, passive-aggressive, accusatory, dishonest, cut-throat, and mean-spirted - and not much talent to back it up. This group immediately made a lousy impression. It's been extremely difficult to find anyone remotely likeable. Right now, I'm down to Cliff and Ilan. Sorry, Sam, but that half-assed olive oil accusation was lame.

[Hunsweasel]

Whiny, passive-aggressive, accusatory, dishonest, cut-throat, and mean-spirted - and not much talent to back it up.

And those characteristics are still in effect after the cameras stop rolling, if the Chow exit interviews are any indication. Marisa, Josie and Emily have all given quite scabrous, self-justifying reviews of the show, all of which make me think that they can't use "editing" as an excuse for their on-air personality defects. Whatever one thinks of Tiff's antics last year, she has (to my knowledge) kept pretty tight-lipped about her experiences on the show, publically at least. Dave, Lee Anne and Harold all have something to do with S2 due partly, I'm sure, to the fact that they didn't go crying to the foodie press the minute their 15 minutes were up.

All of which helps justify their eliminations, in my opinion: to paraphrase something Tom said in the finale last year, being a great chef has as much to do with personality and leadership as it does with knife skills and palate.

[magpye29]

Hunsweasel wrote: Whatever one thinks of Tiff's antics last year, she has (to my knowledge) kept pretty tight-lipped about her experiences on the show, publically at least. Dave, Lee Anne and Harold all have something to do with S2 due partly, I'm sure, to the fact that they didn't go crying to the foodie press the minute their 15 minutes were up.

Tiff could probably be associated with the show, too, if she wanted to, although having been such a pill, she might be somewhat offputting to the audience. I didn't like her, but I thought she was an excellent cook.

[porkchop1]

Tiffani has just begun work for Emeril Lagasse in his NOLA restaurant in New Orleans. As a new employee probably on probation, she is in no position to take time off to participate in a reality show. Both Dave and Harold are essentially unemployed and free until Dave begins works as an Exec Chef at LOLA in Soho, NYC in January 2007, and Harold's Perilla gets off the ground. Lee Anne is able to be in the show because she brings free publicity to her employer, the FCI.

Edited by porkchop1, Nov 21, 2006 @ 11:47 AM.

[Nutjob]

And those characteristics are still in effect after the cameras stop rolling, if the Chow exit interviews are any indication. Marisa, Josie and Emily have all given quite scabrous, self-justifying reviews of the show, all of which make me think that they can't use "editing" as an excuse for their on-air personality defects. Whatever one thinks of Tiff's antics last year, she has (to my knowledge) kept pretty tight-lipped about her experiences on the show, publically at least. Dave, Lee Anne and Harold all have something to do with S2 due partly, I'm sure, to the fact that they didn't go crying to the foodie press the minute their 15 minutes were up.

And this is what is bugging me most about the cheftestants this season. We didn't hear last season's knifees complaining about the pantry not being stocked, or that the equipment didn't work, etc. It seems that the one plentiful thing for this group is sour grapes, and it's starting to bug me.

[Hunsweasel]

Just to clarify, I wasn't comparing Tiffani unfavourably to the returning S1 cheftestants in case that's how it came across: I'm impressed that she hasn't spent her time since elimination bitching to anyone who'll listen about the Krappy Kenmore Kitchen etc.

Edited by Hunsweasel, Nov 21, 2006 @ 6:12 PM.

[Number Seven]

Dave, on the other hand, is still bitching and whining about his various issues. Indeed, I find him whinier than Marisa, Josie and Emily combined.

[archer1267]

Hunsweasel, I was going to comment too on the number of complaints made about the equipment and the ready tendency of S2 chefs to blame ovens, etc. for their shortcomings. Makes me wonder how inclined Sears will be to outfit future winners with a Kenmore kitchen, given the kvetching thus far.

I can't believe I'm going to paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld, but you go to war with the army you've got. I don't care if they're given Coleman camp stoves with half a butane tank of gas - make it work!

Edited by archer1267, Nov 22, 2006 @ 1:49 PM.

[Fukui San]

Actually, the flambe quickfire did use portable butane stoves!

A campfire challenge would be a lot of fun. Imagine the equipment complaints there.

[MikeB399]

I totally agree with the person who said Top Chef is a success because of the marathons. It's much easier to watch this show in bulk than per episode.

The casting for Top Chef has consistently underwhelmed. Dave is possibly the most annoying person in the history of reality TV. Tiffani was passive-aggressive and unpleasant, but I pitied her for her alienating personality more than I hated her. Seeing her break down at the end of the show was not my idea of fun. There were a lot of boring people last season, but at least there was not as much forced drama.

This season is all about forced drama, nothing but annoying, pathetic people (with #1 being Betty with that Rickie Lee Jones beret I want to yank off her head). They are pathetic in part because they were cast based on how much drama they would cause, but just like on Project Runway, the show seems to get off way too much on treating the contestants like crap. The judges are just over the top in their hostility and their obnoxiousness.

I'm tired of reality shows that are all about making people feel like crap and all about fake drama and fake controversy.

That is the only purpose of Top Chef, apparently.