Werdna

It's amusing to watch top-chef canada at the same time. In the latest episode of TCC the judges latched onto a contestent's pavlova as being too upscale and fancy, not pedestrian enough (although it looked to be a great dish). All I can think of now is the guy in Glee "I'm taking classes on judging reality shows" now. Also a Canadian food celebrety (not for long if his viewers see that episode) Michael Smith showed up to make an ass of himself. Wow, what a dork.

I disagree on this one. I like Flay, and seeing some of the food he produces on iron chef makes me realize that when he challenges someone on throwdown he's actually bringing a lot of business to that kitchen. He seems almost appologietic when he wins and doesn't strike me as a poor loser when he doesn't win. I know he brings a stocked pantry with him when he goes on a challenge, but it doesn't always help him as the judges are almost always local and can tell the difference between the real thing and what Flay has made. I also get a huge kick out of his two lovely assistants who always roll thier eyes at him. They're just so 'not impressed' by him. They treat him like he's more of a pain in the ass, but they also clearly get along. I admire Flay and think that in a way he's a very smart television personality with at least two shows that celebrate the average home-chef's talents. It endears him to the public a lot more than someone who talks down to, or simply instructs, the audience, or their guests. Throwdown is the show that made me like Bobby Flay. The free advertising on national tv for tasty non-chain food. And he does not try to win IMO. He goes in there and makes his own, upscale version of whatever the food is. Then they have the regulars judge it. More often than not, the locals win because they like the food they have been eating more than some foo-foo experiment that Bobby did. The locals get to look good, win quite often, and no shame if they loose to some famous dude. We get some interesting spin on a favorite, close-ups of the original dish. All win.

I can't stand up for the show anymore. It's not a cooking competition, it's a bunch of chefs in a cage and the judges are the poo-flinging monkey jailers.

So seal was ok but horse is not? You know, if someone were cooking dogs on the show, I would find it very offensive. On the flip side, a vegan is going to be offended by everything on the show.

If you read through the other top-chef threads here, contestants playing it safe has been a major issue and has spoiled several entire seasons. I'm not saying that bad food should get a pass if it's more creative than good food, just that (more) points should be given for creativity. I'm thinking like the iron chef scoreing, something like 25 points for flavor and 10 for originality. With 0 points given for originality as it has been in Top Chef eliminations, a smart contestant will not try to cook new/unusual dishs.

Yet another thing I like about this show (just watched episode 3, the bugs episode) 3 people as to-be-eliminated contenders. 2 messed up their dishs. 1 made technically ok food(was there because it was just an average dish, nothing special about it). And my jaw dropped when the ok-but-boreing food was choosen to go home. This addresses a big problem that's been happening on Top Chef, the 'safe dish' of boreing food gets a pass while the chefs who push a bit and mess up are eliminated. Good for the judges! I would rather see chefs eliminated for making boreing food than eliminated for trying creative ideas and messing up. (left out references to the food in case someone has not seen the episode yet)

I enjoyed it, the passing of plates looked really awkward, but I betcha they were feeling it to and that's something that can be easily fixed. Some of the comments about plating seemed odd to me (criticisms of what looked fine). I wonder if the food shown in the closeups was the same food served to the judges? My comment is regarding the Lamb, which did not look undercooked at all, just a nice rare, but was described as inedible. If you missed the first 15 minutes, one of the female chefs was shown holding up a pig face and kicked butt in the quickfire, I'm rooting for her and seal-flipper guy so far

As a regular-joe viewer, that means close to nothing to me. I did not recognize almost any of the names from the first 2 seasons before watching them either.

The format of the show. I like the drama and watching/rooting for particular chefs. With the format of 4 chefs/1 winner/back at end of season I never got to sorta know the contestants. I'd be watching it anyway with the old format, but having them all at once gives more of a feeling of continunity between episodes, something that makes me eager to see the next one. I already like Suvir and want to see if he can cook up to his ego! I'm glad to see James Oseland back as one of the judges too, and miss Gael Greene.

Hey, both are cool in my book The first 2 top chef masters left me flat. Anyone who has not checked out season 3 should: -No longer masterchef format, they have all the chefs there at the same time -Curtis Stone is very not-annoying. I hated him in 'next great resteuraunt' and find him just fine here. Plus, he is like Padma and Tom in one body (the job he does on the show that is) In fact, it looks like they copied Top Chef's format entirely, which is a very good thing IMO. I'm looking forward to the rest of this season a lot, after being ready to give up on it after season 2.

Tom used to wander around comenting on dishs more, he was good at it and I miss that. The time's now used for extra shots of the chefs in their underware and smoking cigarettes.

I'd be ok with watching an all-stars with other chefs from past seasons. There were plenty of people who did not do this all stars that would have been worthy contenders. Maybe every other year to get a really good cast? Bravo to Richard for winning, and to Mike, Carla, and all the other chefs who really made a great show and name for themselves, I have a hard time believing any of them are losers even if they did not take the grand prize. Also, the challenges are getting better. If I watched it for 90 instead of 60 minutes though, I'd vote for the lion's share of that extra time devoted to discussing/watching the cooking. Especially in earlier episodes where there are just so many people.

This episode was the final straw for me. Your notes (ok, now the customer's breath after eating is a factor...?) and a couple times this episode model-guy-judge said 'we don't want you to be the next Chiptole'. Huh? I thought that was the only frickin theme of the show?! I do like to watch these shows and complain about silly things, it's part of the fun. I like Bobby Flay. But this show lost me as an investor

Or when they sent them out of the room and called them back in they could have been standing in opposite spots. Anyway, I make a point of not watching for that sort of thing, as it spoils the show for me.

I noticed that they did not broadcast tasting taco-guy's food in the last episode. I'm not really sure what this show is about anymore, other than a long Chipotle commercial. I've never been in a Chipotle, but I can't help but notice from the show that that it's an expensive-looking taqueria. "Cafeteria-style" is so hard for them to say!

Aside from the usual drama, I came away thinking Mike Issabella is still an ass, but I gotta overlook it and respect his cooking. I cannot belive Michael Voltaggio would throw that challenge either. Top chef has not been as guilty of it as other food shows, but the food-discussions are still biased for maximum drama. The Masterchef series for instance, will 2 out of 3 times air only negative comments about good dishes and positive comments about bad dishs to confuse the audiance about the outcome. Then the third time they play it on the level, to keep you confused. Tension/drama for the price of making no sense, sigh. Still rooting for Richard! And how do you cook sweet potato 'noodles'?

It occurs to me that the taco-guy must be a plant for drama's sake. I mean, the idea is idiotic ("I could put your food, ina taco!" "Why would you?" *silence*) and his acting is way overplayed in every respect ('bad-boy' sign, insulting judges, insulting other competetors, 'knowing secretly' that someone once worked for G.R. etc).

No chance, he did not even get an indian chef! I mean, seriously, indian cooking is pretty different and if they could not be bothered to grab an indian cook for the guy, he's already out and just being kept around to pretend that there is some choice going on. I think there is a choice, but right now its between about 3-4 ideas and the others are just in a line to go home. The wraps lady had to go, she seriously considered dry, flavorless chicken 'a choice of the person ordering'. I don't think I want to go to a place where you have 'bad food' as a choice on the menu. Hicks I was totally rooting for but I think I was confused like the judges. I was thinking small plates like brisket, gumbo, charcuterie, regional cheeses, alaskan smoked salmon bread. I think the competetors were thinking jello salads and crown roast of weiners...

Getting upset at who gets sent home here *sigh* Angelo and Dale (and Richard) are the ones I wanted to see compete in the finale the most. Not that the other chefs are not talented, but they are just not as interesting. I'm ready for the next generation of cooking challenges. One where the contestants don't get sent home at all, but instead accumilate points. Each point being worth a thousand bucks or something, so they have incentive to continue to do their best even if they are behind. Maybe a nice big prize for the winner of each episode too? Kick people if they get too far behind, but even in the judges eyes I can see the "shit, is there any way we can not send em home for this one?" I know some people are in love with the idea of giving the axe to someone every episode for the great drama, but while that's cool for idiots in shows like survivor who contribute nothing -but- drama, in Top Chef they are killing part of their show (good food porn) each time they do it. *Edited to add* I have to expand on this a bit more, it's sounding like a really good idea to me: Give points. Keep track of overall points. And, at the end of every episode, raise the bar required to stay on the show. Hell, you could have a show where everyone does ok and no one goes home. You could have a show where 3 people get sent home at once. You could have a great season where everyone cooks well and you raise the bar faster near the end to narrow it down if you want. Just staying on the show give the contestants the ability to earn points ($$$) so people on the bottom can fight just as hard as those on top. heh, I would totally watch that. Feel free to use this idea anyone, all yours

Here's how I imagine the planning of that episode going: Target Sponser: "What's the challenge?" Writer: "The chefs have to cook... At Target, using food and equipment they find in the store!" Target Sponser: "But what's the twist, don't you guys have to mess with them, make it harder?" Writer: "..." Being a big sponsor, I don't think Target wanted the 'Challenge' to be cooking in their store with crappy equipment and an even worse selection of ingredients. So they went for sleep deprivation. Oh, and lets make people run around on a shopping spree too, at 3 in the morning, shoping sprees make our store look fun!. So, 3 twists, creative use of crap ingredients with crap equipment, sleep deprivation, and a time limit... ugg. And it backfired on Target too. Note to sponsers: If you are not selling equipment/ingredients the chefs would pick normally, you ARE the challenge, not the setting.

In my mind, the use of the term foodie is one of respect. I'm not calling myself a chef, or a cook. I'm not a gourmand or a professional critic of food. I'm someone who likes to eat, who thinks about eating, dabbles in cooking, and respects all of the above groups of people enough to not artifically place myself in their categories. The foodie category is one of humility, a fan of great food and chefs and cooks, and as such I think the lightness/juvinile quality of the name is approiate.

Google image search for risotto seems similarly confused http://www.google.com/images?hl=en&rlz=&q=risotto&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=univ&ei=PBZMTffzFoa4sQO7xo3ECg&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=2&ved=0CD0QsAQwAQ&biw=1276&bih=905 also, here's Tre's winning dish from season 3 episode 1 http://recipes-stage.bravotv.com/top_chef/season_3/episode_1/seared_ostrich_filet_with_heirloom_tomato_risotto_and_abalone_reduction.php I was shocked to see Tre go, as it seemed to me that risotto made to a different standard was less of a crime than undercooked pasta.

I think that the rule for the resteuraunt wars might have been a direct attempt to fix the dim-sum problem. The rule being that the dinners judge the winning team. It's become painfully clear that the food served to the judges is the -only- consideration, and that all other rules mean nothing. If the challenge is to bake a cake, and someone does a rack of lamb they are still going to beat the person who made a lousy cake, because there is no penality for breaking the rules, only for serving bad food. They might get scolded, but a BS story ("My grandmother used to always say 'Time for cake!' right before she served lamb, so I made lamb") is enough to not get the loss. A couple episodes where they send home people who do not follow the challenge could fix it. It might mean keeping some people sometimes who served bad food, but it's top chef after all, not top cook.

Great episode, my only gripe is that they hype this guy as the best fish prep-chef in the country, then fast-forward through his breaking down of the fish. I was yelling at the tv at that point! I know some of it has to be cut, but that would have been the best part of the show for me. I was confused by the invisible potato chips, but I suppose it must have been store-bought by their mysterious absense in the footage. I'm starting to favor Dale over Richard for my favorite. Bacon dashi and skewered grilled fish liver? wow.

He appeared to be a little drunk, and with editing and all, could have been joking around. Deadpan humor taken out of context?