Jump to content
  • Welcome to the eG Forums, a service of the eGullet Society for Culinary Arts & Letters. The Society is a 501(c)3 not-for-profit organization dedicated to the advancement of the culinary arts. These advertising-free forums are provided free of charge through donations from Society members. Anyone may read the forums, but to post you must create a free account.

Top Chef: Masters


Recommended Posts

I knew Chef Bayless was going to win. The look on his face, the tone in his voice, when the last challenge was presented to them, told me I didn't have to watch the end to know the outcome.

Theresa :biggrin:

"Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power."

- Abraham Lincoln

Link to post
Share on other sites
All 3 of the chefs are obviously class acts and put out great dishes.

What's-his-name from Saveur seemed to have a personal vendetta against Chiarello.

Yes, and you have to credit Chef Chiarello for letting him know that he's aware of it. I found it hysterical.

Theresa :biggrin:

"Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power."

- Abraham Lincoln

Link to post
Share on other sites

I loved last night's episode, too -- as much as the chefs did. Fantastic idea.

I know it was due to editing, but I couldn't believe that judge complained about his polenta at the last second. Now, I know that he had said things earlier that must've been left on the cutting room floor, but it just seemed out of left field so that he could find a way to give Chiarello 3.5 stars.

I enjoyed one of Chiarello's wines last night while watching it. Good excuse to open a very good bottle. I had picked him early to win, but I love that Bayless won, too. Three great chefs at the end. I love what he does with -real- Mexican food, because it is so much better than most Americans know.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It's funny.  I thought Bayless did a great job and clearly is a master but I'm underwhelmed by his restaurants.

I agree. I really like the man, though, and I'm happy he won, but I would have been just as happy with Keller winning. And while I don't dislike MC and agree that he certainly can cook, I walk away with less respect for him as a person than I had at the beginning of this contest. He is not as warm and generous as either Bayless or Keller.

The challenge, though, was hands-down my favorite in any of the Top Chef events. I liked it that we were afforded the opportunity to know them through the dishes, and it was great that there was no trickery before the end. It was, We will give you the money and tools you need to cook whatever you want, and you have the liberty to cook your best and show us whatever you want to represent your chef's ability. That was great.

Rhonda

Link to post
Share on other sites
I knew Chef Bayless was going to win.  The look on his face, the tone in his voice, when the last challenge was presented to them, told me I didn't have to watch the end to know the outcome.

Besides that, one of the food blogs ran a spoiler about 2 months ago.

Glad I missed it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoyed last night's episode as well, I wish that they expanded the episode timewise to show the chefs working with their teams and focusing a little more on each dish's composition and presentation . . . . it seemed a little to rushed.

Glad Bayliss won, wanted either Bayliss or Keller because they are class acts, seems that MC forgets where he came from with his cockiness . . . .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Imagine, a cocky chef. What is the culinary world coming to? :wink:

Chef Chiarello seemed to have a good rapport with his real sous chef. Kudo's for not putting up with Spike's and Dale's unprofessionalism. Additional Kudo's for the Saveur doily.

Nothing wrong with cocky if you've earned it and don't overdo it.

Holly Moore

"I eat, therefore I am."

HollyEats.Com

Twitter

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO Chiarello was just trying to make sure the sous chefs knew who they were working for...

What was the point of going to the Getty Villa? I thought that the finale would be there...but it was on a stage next to the TC kitchen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I to would have been happy with any of them winning. All very respectable guys. I personally feel last weeks episode made MC look like a jerk all by editing. I didn't see him as a douche at all. I actually thought he was doing some good natured ribbing of the chefs. I think if that was the real him you would have seen glimpses of it in the previous episodes. Anyway, I hope they continue this series. It was very entertaining for me to watch. I wouldn't even care if they let previous contestants enter again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Imagine, a cocky chef.  What is the culinary world coming to?  :wink:

Chef Chiarello seemed to have a good rapport with his real sous chef.  Kudo's for not putting up with Spike's and Dale's unprofessionalism.  Additional Kudo's for the Saveur doily. 

Nothing wrong with cocky if you've earned it and don't overdo it.

Exactly, Holly.

The real douche happens to be Saveur boy.

And you'd think the Rick's overcooking of the seafood would have been more of a negative than MC's polenta being mis-seasoned. Rick even said so himself during the show.

To think, 3 great chefs, and not a pierced face among them.

Mitch Weinstein aka "weinoo"

Tasty Travails - My Blog

My eGullet FoodBog - A Tale of Two Boroughs

Was it you baby...or just a Brilliant Disguise?

Link to post
Share on other sites
And you'd think the Rick's overcooking of the seafood would have been more of a negative than MC's polenta being mis-seasoned. Rick even said so himself during the show.

I'm guessing that they might've given him the benefit of the doubt on that one, since it was the last dish of a 4-course meal, and probably sat there too long. Perhaps the flavors and idea were there, but not the final execution, and the rest of the food more than made up for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
And you'd think the Rick's overcooking of the seafood would have been more of a negative than MC's polenta being mis-seasoned. Rick even said so himself during the show.

I'm guessing that they might've given him the benefit of the doubt on that one, since it was the last dish of a 4-course meal, and probably sat there too long. Perhaps the flavors and idea were there, but not the final execution, and the rest of the food more than made up for that.

As mentioned upthread, sometimes they sit at judges' table for hours, of which a few snippets make it onto the show. The editing can make it appear closer than it really was. Edited by oakapple (log)
Link to post
Share on other sites
I personally feel last weeks episode made MC look like a jerk all by editing.

Editing can emphasize or de-emphasize certain events. It doesn't create things that never happened (not on this show, anyway). The things we saw MC do, are things that he did. They aren't pretty.

True but editing can take a shot of someone praying the Holy Rosary and make them look like they are killing kittens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All in all, I think the final show was good and it appeared that the Chefs presented some incredible dishes.

I always qualify my comments on "Top Chef," by saying it "appeared" the food looked good because without actually experiencing the senses associated with food, i.e. actually tasting and seeing the dishes in front of me, I'm only going on the comments of the judges and what I'm seeing on the screen as the basis for my comments.

I thoroughly enjoyed this "Masters" series because it provided us with a window into the world of cooking at the top levels--without the realitydramady of the regular Top Chef series. It was quite refreshing.

I was disappointed that Chef Keller didn't win. I know him personally and he's such an incredible talent, not to mention a gracious host and gentleman. But I did think his presentation of the Salmon dish didn't appear to be at the precise levels I would have expected. The Choucroute Flan just sat over to the side by itself. The elements just seemed to be on the plate without a garnish or something to tie them together.

Likewise with what I felt appeared to be a lack of precise presentation in his lamb dish. The small, carved potato holding the sauce just looked sort of 70's Continental cuisine and out of place. And while the spinach-wrapped loin presentation was quite beautiful, the spinach-wrapped chop looked a bit sloppy. Overall the plates didn't have the contemporary, sophisticated yet delicious look of his plates at his restaurants. Maybe it was a timing issue or being out of his own kitchen that rattled Chef Keller, I just expected more.

I was a bit surprised that after the gushing of the judges over Chiarello's Short Rib, you would have expected they would have come out from the judges table and kissed the guys feet--and then followed that with crowing him as the winner.

I didn't feel his dishes showed a cohesiveness from course to course--Polenta with Rabbit, Asparagus and Wild Mushroom, Grilled Duck & Rabbit Liver followed by Ginger Stuffed Rouget, Mango Salad, Fresh Wasabi and Bottarga--but I suppose if you apply the challenges for each course in terms of the progression of the Chefs work, Chiarello's dishes made sense. And the variety demonstrated with each dish showed that Chiarello's talent is much deeper than the casual Italian fare we see him prepare on Food Network. (And wasn't it cute to serve the polenta in that little glass crock? How precious.)

I thought the best line of the night was voiced by Gael Greene. Something about that silly "Chorizo Air" Chef Bayless fluffed on top of his seafood stew. Help me understand--now we've come to calling "Foam"--"Air."

"Air" garnish and over-cooked seafood asisde, good for Rick Bayless. He seemed genuinely flattered to have won, in spite of not having the same type of formal training of some of the other Chefs. I'm hoping the creativity and skill shown by Chef Bayless will be demonstrated by the new crop of "Top Chef" candidates.

Link to post
Share on other sites
To think, 3 great chefs, and not a pierced face among them.

To think, 3 chefs who are actually chefs!

I love/hate when people have an epiphany about how complex Mexican food is. Somehow it's been dumbed down in this country to mean nachos, and it's such a shame. The minute Rick said he was making mole negro I knew he was bringing it. Without a recipe. Awesome. I'll never forget the tamales I had in Oaxaca either.

Link to post
Share on other sites
In the below linked interview Rick Bayless is asked if the much loved "Black Mole" recipe will make it to print. In short the answer is not likely.

I can't recall for sure but I am almost positive the recipe was in one of Ricks very early cookbooks. Anyone know for sure?

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/showtracke...k-bayless-.html

I immediately ran to the one Bayless cookbook I have hoping to find it with no luck! After reading all of the opinions about MC, I must say I am still on the he acted like a jerk band wagon. I loved his FN show and was rooting for him to win. However, even before the episode in question, I thought he acted poorly towards Keller several times. He even bugged me in the finale when he kept chiming in when the judges were commenting on the other chef's dishes.

Some of the sous-chefs weren't that much younger than he is. The youngster comments and "what do you call me" went too far. If you want people to work hard for you, that is not the way to build a team. Although I no longer think he is the greatest guy, I still think he is a really good chef.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...