Masterchef Goes Large 2008

[Andy Lynes]

Is anyone watching the series this time around? Two observations:

1. If any of the dedicated home cooks on eGullet were to enter, they would wipe the floor, walls and ceiling with anyone who has appeared so far this week. So why haven't any of you, given the success (book, TV series, restaurant) that previous winner Thomasina Meirs has subsequently enjoyed?

2. As the BBC are very keen to make the most of their presenters by getting them to appear across the schedules, can we have darts commentator Bobby George as a judge for next year please: "He's scoring heavily on all the big flavours in the main course, but it's his finishing at the dessert stage that's letting him down". At least as insightful as the "big flavours mixed well together" and "its flavoursome, but not wow flavoursome" comments that were uttered on last night's episode.

[algy]

2. As the BBC are very keen to make the most of their presenters by getting them to appear across the schedules, can we have darts commentator Bobby George as a judge for next year please: "He's scoring heavily on all the big flavours in the main course, but it's his finishing at the dessert stage that's letting him down".  At least as insightful as the "big flavours mixed well together" and "its flavoursome, but not wow flavoursome" comments that were uttered on last night's episode.

←

brilliant suggestion - if only he could be paired with Ron Atkinson it would be the dream ticket.

[sunbeam]

I was at a previous filming. I am not naive but even so I found it quite shocking

Each of the two presenters and chef record 3 options to camera each as their verdicts, basically

1 Great loved it

2 No good

3 Not bad

The decision as to what gets broadcast is left to the production company's agenda

BTW Thomasina's success is ill-deserved, but she has some influential friends and is agreeably middle class.

S

[Matthew Grant]

Is anyone watching the series this time around? Two observations:

1. If any of the dedicated home cooks on eGullet were to enter, they would wipe the floor, walls and ceiling with anyone who has appeared so far this week. So why haven't any of you, given the success (book, TV series, restaurant)  that previous winner Thomasina Meirs has subsequently enjoyed?

2. As the BBC are very keen to make the most of their presenters by getting them to appear across the schedules, can we have darts commentator Bobby George as a judge for next year please: "He's scoring heavily on all the big flavours in the main course, but it's his finishing at the dessert stage that's letting him down".  At least as insightful as the "big flavours mixed well together" and "its flavoursome, but not wow flavoursome" comments that were uttered on last night's episode.

←

Personally the thought of being judged by a fruit and veg salesman and a short order chef doesn't appeal. Also I don't think I could stand there listening to Torode's lip smacking, spoon on teeth rattling without ramming my Santoku somewhere life threatening.

[Matthew Grant]

I cross posted with Sunbeam and that just about seals it for me. it's quite clear they choose on personality/broadcastability rather than decent cooking. Hence those crappy "He's only just started cooking but once he calms down and learns he could be fantastic...." type comments that we often seem to get. I haven't even bothered one episode of this series.

[naebody]

Each of the two presenters and chef record 3 options to camera each as their verdicts, basically

1 Great loved it

2 No good

3 Not bad

←

Is that true? At a time when the BBC One controller has to resign for suggesting the Queen exited a room in a huff (rather than entering a room in a huff), it seems foolhardy to say the least.

I'll keep an eye out for the tabloid expose from the disgruntled loser within the next week or so.

[CalumC]

One tires of the restauranteur and his mediocre veg man. I was interested by the guy in the first episode, made pork chop with chocolate sauce. Ignorant vegman decided he didnt like it, wouldnt ever, and would never order it in a restaurant. Which is interesting, because many people have shown it can be done effectively. Martin at khymos is one example.

[sunbeam]

Each of the two presenters and chef record 3 options to camera each as their verdicts, basically

1 Great loved it

2 No good

3 Not bad

←

Is that true? At a time when the BBC One controller has to resign for suggesting the Queen exited a room in a huff (rather than entering a room in a huff), it seems foolhardy to say the least.

I'll keep an eye out for the tabloid expose from the disgruntled loser within the next week or so.

←

I was at the next table and that is honestly what I saw and heard. I would make the point that this was Celebrity Masterchef, perhaps I should have mentioned that straightaway. Sorry.

I was impressed at the way the presenters were able to do it so easily, which is not the same thing as being impressed by the programme.

The female producer basically called the shots, literally. But working as I do as an advertising copywriter my house is too well glazed to throw too many stones.

It's telly. It's about entertainment after all.

S

[jayrayner]

Wasn't sitting at the table with you so can't comment on what you saw or heard, save to say as a judge on the semis of both this series, and the forthcoming sleb version, that was in no way my experience. At no point were we told what to say by producers and, as I think you can imagine, I wouldn't have hung around for long if they had attempted that.

[Andy Lynes]

The female producer basically called the shots, literally.

←

Don't really understand how this works - the decision as to who wins can't be left to the editing stage so the fact that they have alternative footage of the judges saying contradictory things doesn't really help that much does it? If its the producer deciding who wins, then why do they need to get three seperate takes - can't she just tell them what to say? I'm not doubting the veracity of your post, I just don't understand why on earth they would make things more complicated than they need be.

[naebody]

Sunbeam, perhaps what you saw on the Celeb version was for the protection of some precious D-lister's ego. To routinely prepare alternate endings does seem an absurd amount of rigmarole, unless they were counting on putting out an enhanced DVD version of the series.

Edited January 10, 2008 by naebody (log)

[sunbeam]

Sunbeam, perhaps what you saw on the Celeb version was for the protection of some precious D-lister's ego. To routinely prepare alternate endings does seem an absurd amount of rigmarole, unless they were counting on putting out an enhanced DVD version of the series.

←

It took them so little effort, bish bash bosh - done - all first take stuff, and they seemed so slick at doing it that it cant have been the first time. It's not really a rigmarole, it's telly. One rule of any sort of filming is to get as much varied footage as you can at the time because it's so much cheaper than doing it again later - recreating the clothes, light, hairstyles etc etc. Plus the people might not be available.

But I take your point that it may be different when celebs aren't involved, although I suspect they will still want to cover their bases in the same way. It's belt and braces. No producer wants to get caught out and most TV is made in the edit suite

S

[sunbeam]

The female producer basically called the shots, literally.

←

Don't really understand how this works - the decision as to who wins can't be left to the editing stage so the fact that they have alternative footage of the judges saying contradictory things doesn't really help that much does it? If its the producer deciding who wins, then why do they need to get three seperate takes - can't she just tell them what to say? I'm not doubting the veracity of your post, I just don't understand why on earth they would make things more complicated than they need be.

←

I think it can be left until the edit, with celebs especially they know the game and are happy to be filmed doing alternates.

The producer wont/cant decide until reviewing the footage later and so it is wise to leave options as open as possible. This is not complicated production; it's hand held cameras and simple lighting so the set ups are very easy. Unlike say feature films where each shot takes at least an hour to set up and so must be decided in advance.

As I say above, video tape is cheap so it makes sense to cover all bases

S

[Prawncrackers]

1. If any of the dedicated home cooks on eGullet were to enter, they would wipe the floor, walls and ceiling with anyone who has appeared so far this week. So why haven't any of you, given the success (book, TV series, restaurant)  that previous winner Thomasina Meirs has subsequently enjoyed?

Because it would take all the effort in the world not to plunge a knife into slaphead's eye! That man is surely the most annoying on television. How is he qualified to judge on that show? He started off as a "veg expert" now he's apparently a "food writer and ingredients expert". Talk about self-aggrandisement, he's like a bogus GP; you look closer at the diplomas on the wall behind him and you see they're all signed in his own hand. He's just another wannabee celeb.

[martinwa]

I think it can be left until the edit, with celebs especially they know the game and are happy to be filmed doing alternates.

The producer wont/cant decide until reviewing the footage later and so it is wise to leave options as open as possible. This is not complicated production; it's hand held cameras and simple lighting so the set ups are very easy. Unlike say feature films where each shot takes at least an hour to set up and so must be decided in advance.

As I say above, video tape is cheap so it makes sense to cover all bases

S

←

[Richard_D]

Is anyone watching the series this time around? Two observations:

1. If any of the dedicated home cooks on eGullet were to enter, they would wipe the floor, walls and ceiling with anyone who has appeared so far this week. So why haven't any of you, given the success (book, TV series, restaurant)  that previous winner Thomasina Meirs has subsequently enjoyed?

←

I agree with Andy, I'm sure some egullet readers would wipe the floor with most of the contestants and should apply.

The first series enraged me so much that I applied the year after Thomasina won as it did my nut in to see what a load of drivel it all was, but unfortunately they called me for a screen test just as I was leaving for a holiday and the year after I didn't even get that far, ho-hum.

Rightly or wrongly the whole application process seems to be geared towards the people who 'live for food', 'wanted to cook for ever' or 'dream of running a small bistro' rather than having anything more than a modicum of skill/ability. The previous Loyd Grossman/Gary Rhodes had some drawbacks, such as the irritating bit where we got to see what terribly upper-middle class hobbies people had, but it at least had a full off camera round to determine the set of contestants and that ensured a certain level of ability. This one you just have to turn up with something that can be plated up cold and the main reason you get on seems to be that you ticked the right boxes on the form/phone interview.

But I suppose that makes good TV?

[naebody]

But I suppose that makes good TV?

←

That's where you're wrong.

Back to the editing issue: I'd not be particularly surprised if there were alternate reaction shots made for the slebs, as the likelihood of at least one requiring to drop out mid-series is pretty high. After all, these are the type of people for whom panto is their annual money-spinner.

I doubt the practice is that common though the industry though. Recently saw an episode of some ill-conceived nonsense featuring Angela Hartnett and that odious Burton Race man where, over the end credits, they admitted on voice-over that one contestant couldn't be arsed going on to the next round and the runner-up would be featuring in future programmes. If there had been any editing slack, surely that's the kind of thing they'd be avoiding.

[Baggy]

In the short bits I watched of the last series all I ever heard was ‘not seasoned enough’. At least, this has been toned down. Or is it the Salt Police who’s on their case?

One reason that more able competitors don’t appear could be that it’s been well nigh impossible to find out how to apply to get on the series. My partner thinks I ought to go and show them how an amateur can do ‘molecular gastronomy’ in a home kitchen (not that I was volunteering). She can’t find any way of making a nomination.

I also wonder at the way the emphasis of the programme has shifted. I thought the byline was ‘…to find the UK’s best amateur cook’. Now all I hear is that it’s a search for someone who wants to become a professional. Is that why the selection of winners seems a bit odd?

[Andy Lynes]

One reason that more able competitors don’t appear could be that it’s been well nigh impossible to find out how to apply to get on the series. 

←

You can now apply online.

[Baggy]

Thanks. Now I have to decide if I'm going to pass the link on...

[Richard_D]

But I suppose that makes good TV?

←

That's where you're wrong.

←

Really? Surely the producers will want people who come over well on TV. It's all well and good being a good cook but if you look like a startled rabbit when veg man and torode turn up then it's not good tv and the series won't get recomissioned.

They probably could make more of an effort when selecting people but hey I still watch it (despite my better judgement...)

[Richard_D]

Just found this on youtube just in case you'd like to relive any of it

[RDB]

Not a show I tend to watch, but having caught it tonight I was highly amused by Greg's analysis of a dish. Some chap had cooked sea bass and sucotash, which appeared ok, but Greg was not interested in combination of flavours or how the dish was cooked, oh no, his critiscisms had much more meaning that.

Greg: Did you know that sucotash was a dish that came out of the Great Depression?

Bewildered Contestant: Erm no.

Greg: Well it did, and it is a peasant dish.

Even more bewildered contestant: Oh.

Greg: Here you have used a luxurious and expensive piece of sea bass on top of peasant food, the two just can't go together.

So chefs be very wary of the combintions you put together, as you could be breaking some social or moral codes.

Mark my words the next new thing will be politically correct food combinations!!!

[Prawncrackers]

I’ve caught bits of it this week and one of the bits was what you’ve just described. The dish looked very nice, tidy presentation just a shame that the fish wasn’t cooked well enough though. If it had been done well then a good piece of bass on a bed of broad bean and sweetcorn etc would be good eating, wouldn’t it? Well it seems unless you know why, when and how succotash was invented then you couldn’t possibly start to use it in your final dish! Especially if you plan to pair it with such a “luxurious” piece of sea bass. That little extract just screams of the man’s hideous preconceptions of food.

Exactly why personally i could never conceive being on that show; if you put me in a room with slaphead only one of us would be walking out. What a twunt.

Poor chap, did he get through? I switched over after catching those comments.

[Carlovski]

Yeah because combining an expensive piece of seafood with something rustic is completely beyond the pale for a restaurant menu... Perhaps somebody should tell 90% of chefs they need to take their scallops + xxxx dishes etc off the menu.

And does Succotash really stem from the great depression? I'm somewhat sceptical about the accuracy of that remark.

I do wonder why some of these people enter this competition. None of them want to be a chef (not surprising, it's bloody hard work) - what they want is to be a CELEBRITY chef.

I'm constantly amazed, a few of them sometimes cook decent stuff on the cook your own 2 course menu stage, probably better than I could do (although if I practised something endlessly before going on I could probably manage it) but on the invention test I am sure most of them have either no cooking skill, no taste or both.