Top Chef: Season 6 – Las Vegas

[rickster]

I didn't see a problem with the mystery box concept. I liked it.

I agree that the sous chef selection was terrible, as was the knifing of Kevin. There was no need to misdirect and embarass him for a split second of audience suspense..

Edited December 11, 2009 by rickster (log)

[oakapple]

The knife draw, the surprise box, the moms, the short prep time, cutting Kevin off at the knees on camera, the additional course: what a pathetic, insulting sham. It's as if the original producers were shot and stuffed into wine barrels and the producers of a third-rate game show were flown in as subs. In particular, forcing these three outstanding chefs to work with random sous chefs -- from a group including some of the worst contestants in the show's history -- flushed the show's integrity down the drain.

I agree with a lot of that, though I wouldn't go as far. The only thing you've mentioned that actually affected (or could have affected) the outcome was the random drawing of knives. There was no excuse for that.

Bringing in the moms was hokey, but you got the sense the chefs themselves did not mind. The ingredients in the "surprise box" weren't crazy, the way they sometimes are on Chopped, and the chefs had a reasonable amount of time to figure out what to do with them. As I recall, an additional course was thrown in at the last minute last year, too. In fact, the chefs mentioned that they were expecting this to happen. Prep time didn't seem crazy; the chefs appeared to be no more hurried than they usually are.

The way Kevin was treated at the end was absolutely disgusting, but obviously it affected only the last 60 seconds of the show. I would be much happier if I knew for sure that Padma had done that on her own, as someone upthread had stated. From various comments made about Padma over the years, I would not be shocked if that were true.

[hsm]

They usually bring back some of the knifed, so that wasn't a surprise. That Kevin got screwed getting Peeti? Foreshadowing the inexcusable PYKAG Padma gave Kevin. After last season's poor performance, they attracted a much higher caliber of chef/cook. Perhaps they promised it would be more about the food and less about the 'drama.' And they mostly delivered. Until that last minute. Here's hoping Kevin's $30k, new kitchen and chance to compete for the US Bocuse D'Or team makes up for Padma's or the producers' bullshit.

edited because I'm not sure who to blame for that craptastic moment..

Edited December 12, 2009 by hsm (log)

[gfweb]

BS artificial drama inserted into an otherwise good series. Sleazy reality TV move on the part of somebody. "Kevin you are thrown off the island" He deserved better, as did we. Top Chef has left a bad taste in my mouth.

[CtznCane]

I strongly disagree with Robert's "the best cook won." Yes, the best cook on that night won but not the best cook.

Yes, it is television and I guess that means we have to put up with the b.s. Does it have to be piled that deep though? Us foodies are a small, even minute portion of the viewers and I guess they need this crap to some extent to keep jane and joe couch potato tuned in. I like some of the drama myself and yes, they even get us to buy in (at least in small part) to the hype. I didn't care for Mike V regardless but they blew things way out of proportion to make him the villain for tv's sake. So be it.

I can't believe the misfortune of Kevin having to go try to compete in the finals, tense enough on their own, but having just split from his wife. His cooking and flavors are just so deep and soulful that there had to be a reason part of that was missing and we know the answer to why.

One of the most interesting points of all I feel is that the cooking of all 3 of the finalists seemed throughout to mirror their personalities so well. Mike V's personality was brash, bold, a bit contemptuous and out on a limb and his cooking was the same way. Bryan's personality was the most subdued, almost rigid, stoic, and just very planned. For him too his food followed his personality. Kevin's personality is playful, loyal to his roots, upbeat, with lots of conviction and depth. His food mirrored perfectly his personality. In the previous seasons, we haven't seen the high level of competiton we did here, nor did we see this mirroring of food and personality like we did either.

It is just such a shame that the show itself sold out so much this year. Maybe the show needs to learn something from the food. If the food is high quality you don't need gimmicks.

[Jan Stoel]

I've watched the entire season and must also say the final had a strange feel, however I think some of the reactions are a bit harsh.

Should the elements of the entire season, chance, low on time, cooking out of your comfort zone/known ingredients, surprises, and more not have been part of the finale?

If you purely look at the cooking of the day, and not the entire season, Kevin and Bryan seemed to deliver subpar, although, as a viewer, you have to go on the reactions of the judges.

[Chris Amirault]

Should the elements of the entire season, chance, low on time, cooking out of your comfort zone/known ingredients, surprises, and more not have been part of the finale?

It's a matter of degrees. Saying "You have to add a course" seems like a reasonable twist. IMO, forcing a bad sous chef on you while you add a fourth course -- all in six hours -- is absurd.

Compare to "Project Runway." Finalists have weeks to design and prepare a line. The tweaks are all relatively minor and don't compromise the quality of the final product. This show didn't merely "challenge" the chefs in the last episode; it prevented the chefs from doing what they were told to do, which is "make the best meal of your life." There was no way any of them could have done that.

[Werdna]

The ingredients in the "surprise box" weren't crazy, the way they sometimes are on Chopped, and the chefs had a reasonable amount of time to figure out what to do with them.

I'm not sure about that, have you ever cooked matsutake mushrooms? I got some a couple months ago and totally screwed the pooch cooking them, they are like no other mushroom I've ever run into. One mushroom I used, and that was enough to overpower the dish and make it inedible. Apparently a proper way to use them is to finger peel a thin strip or 2 from the outside of the cap, and to steep that in hot water... not really intuitive. I think the challenge there was to realize it was a 'bad' ingredient that the judges probably don't have a taste for yet and try to minimize it.

I'm pretty upset at the lack of class shown in the final with Kevin being dismissed first, it was shameful. Also, that should have been a 2 hour finale, damned if I knew what they were cooking when they were cooking it.

Edited December 12, 2009 by Werdna (log)

[Slamdunkpro]

Another thought....

Since he became executive producer I'm starting to believe that it's Colicchio's decision alone who wins. Perhaps Gail and Toby and Padma bring things up that he didn't notice at first, but I really think it's up to him. The winner does what Colicchio thinks is cool. Pork/Bacon being the cool thing right now, but it's not everything. Colicchio is always looking for the next thing, the thing that he is interested in rather then what we think is cool. Putting bacon in everything is so 2008. (See the I don't like bacon in my dessert comment.)

Kevin's comments about the Pork belly and the brisket were spot on. They should be soft, but not mushy. I too have eaten the short ribs at Colicchio's place and found them to be way overcooked.

[Werdna]

In that theme, my wife just commented that no on ever cooks rice on the show. And I remember reading somewhere that Colicchio hates rice...

[RWells]

In that theme, my wife just commented that no on ever cooks rice on the show. And I remember reading somewhere that Colicchio hates rice...

This is a very interesting observation. I'm a budding senior citizen who has finally succumbed to the passion and is taking classes at a very good culinary school at the local Community College. We have a wide variety of chef's from the classically trained, overbearing European to the 23 year old whiz who staged at Bouchon and Trio. We were sitting around talking during a Veg/Starch Class and one of the Chef's started talking about the total absence of rice (save the occasional screwed up risotto) on the competitive cooking shows. The consensus was that no starch was harder to cook perfectly for service. One of the old school guys suggested that he knew of no restaurant in our large midwestern city that didn't use a large rice cooker because of their superiority in holding volumes of rice for service.

Bob

[RWells]

I strongly disagree with Robert's "the best cook won." Yes, the best cook on that night won but not the best cook.

Yes, it is television and I guess that means we have to put up with the b.s. Does it have to be piled that deep though? Us foodies are a small, even minute portion of the viewers and I guess they need this crap to some extent to keep jane and joe couch potato tuned in. I like some of the drama myself and yes, they even get us to buy in (at least in small part) to the hype. I didn't care for Mike V regardless but they blew things way out of proportion to make him the villain for tv's sake. So be it.

I can't believe the misfortune of Kevin having to go try to compete in the finals, tense enough on their own, but having just split from his wife. His cooking and flavors are just so deep and soulful that there had to be a reason part of that was missing and we know the answer to why.

One of the most interesting points of all I feel is that the cooking of all 3 of the finalists seemed throughout to mirror their personalities so well. Mike V's personality was brash, bold, a bit contemptuous and out on a limb and his cooking was the same way. Bryan's personality was the most subdued, almost rigid, stoic, and just very planned. For him too his food followed his personality. Kevin's personality is playful, loyal to his roots, upbeat, with lots of conviction and depth. His food mirrored perfectly his personality. In the previous seasons, we haven't seen the high level of competiton we did here, nor did we see this mirroring of food and personality like we did either.

It is just such a shame that the show itself sold out so much this year. Maybe the show needs to learn something from the food. If the food is high quality you don't need gimmicks.

I have been around long enough to remember the original premise of the "Bravo" network. Bravo was envisioned as the network that would bring the masses opera, art house films and nonsalacious profiles of real actors above the age of 15. The total lack of commercial support for this business model caused virtually 180 about face almost immediately. So what are we left with? Project Runway, Top Chef, and, just a minute I have to gag, The Real Housewifes of ...insert your over leveraged geographic area. I suspect that we who are truly interested in food are lucky to have what we have. The stupidity, drama and total pointlessness of Project Runway and The Village Sluts has certainly crept into Top Chef but relatively only crept. The future does not bode well for Top Chef but at least they still have a lot of high level contestants.

Bob

[Dignan]

The way Kevin was treated at the end was absolutely disgusting, but obviously it affected only the last 60 seconds of the show. I would be much happier if I knew for sure that Padma had done that on her own, as someone upthread had stated. From various comments made about Padma over the years, I would not be shocked if that were true.

The whole Padma thing is silly. If she did something she wasn't supposed to do, it never would have made it into the final edit of the show! We would not know it ever happened! She was told to do it, and it was included in the broadcast on purpose because some idjit thought it was a good idea to do it that way this time.

[Tri2Cook]

I'm just kinda tired of people calling everything they don't or can't do a gimmick. The whole "MG backlash" thing has created a group of people who are snobs just for the sake of being snobbish. Doesn't matter if it works in the context of the dish, it wasn't a necessity so it's bad. "Hmmm, this is really good. And it's kinda fun too. Oh, but it could have been done in a more traditional/less fun manner and it would have been just as tasty. So now I hate it. How dare they try to make food fun! I'm too cool for fun!" A well executed "gimmick" is just as valid as any other well executed technique and a poorly executed "gimmick" is no more a sin than any other poorly executed technique. The only thing that should matter is what it brings to the final dish. I really thought Bryan was going to take it but I have to say that I'm happy Michael pulled it off. "Gimmicks" and all...

[David Ross]

..........In particular, forcing these three outstanding chefs to work with random sous chefs -- from a group including some of the worst contestants in the show's history -- flushed the show's integrity down the drain...........

Here, here. Was it really necessary to reward Robyn with a trip to the Napa Valley and tempt us with the pleasure of seeing her Sous for one of the finalists? Thankfully we were spared the indignity. Robyn will live on in next Wednesday's "reunion" show and no doubt will reign as the "bitch" of the 2009 season. What a legacy.

[gfweb]

Slightly off-topic, but not really... I remain amazed at how many chefs are willing to expose themselves on TC. Sure 100K is a big prize, but it ought to be clear to all by now that it isn't a random drawing and you have to be good and have a bit of luck to win it. By my count at least half of the chefs end looking like clowns each season. These people were predestined to be weeded out and went home with future bosses and patrons seeing their crapitude weekly. I'm sure a lender would check out anyone with TC on the resume before making a business loan, so it could hurt them that way too.

I guess the root of the problem is a lack of self awareness. How does one know when one sucks?

[Lisa Shock]

A lot of people lack perspective....or hope that they'll win by luck, or something...

I suspect that they hadn't really contemplated the fact that episodes could be airing as reruns, or online, decades from now -bringing repeated humiliation.

I am kind of weirded out that someone who doesn't like vegetables won. I know it's a personal issue but, IMO, most of the diversity in our food supply is in the plant kingdom. I also suspect that the reason he does so much with re-shaping foods is because he doesn't understand the pleasure of really good produce at its prime. -Like the tomato still warm from the vine mentioned a couple pages back....

[Jan Stoel]

How does one know when one sucks?

I think that is one of the most important questions of your life. If one can realise that one sucks and act accordingly you'll help yourself enormously.

[Doodad]

In that theme, my wife just commented that no on ever cooks rice on the show. And I remember reading somewhere that Colicchio hates rice...

The only one I can think of was Lisa since Asias was her repetoire. Remember when someone turned off the rice and she had to dump the thing?

[Tri2Cook]

I am kind of weirded out that someone who doesn't like vegetables won. I know it's a personal issue but, IMO, most of the diversity in our food supply is in the plant kingdom. I also suspect that the reason he does so much with re-shaping foods is because he doesn't understand the pleasure of really good produce at its prime. -Like the tomato still warm from the vine mentioned a couple pages back....

I thought the "didn't like vegetables" was a childhood thing. I don't remember anything being said about not liking vegetables as an adult. I could have missed it though.

The correlation between re-shaping/altering foods and understanding food quality doesn't really work for me. If you take a really good tomato and decide to restructure it, you better understand the pleasure of a really good tomato because you can change the shape and texture but it still won't make a bad tomato taste good.

[Shalmanese]

Plenty of the competitors have perfectly decent restaurants where they turn out tasty food but, for one reason or another, don't adapt to the reality format of top chef. The ability to tweak a dish over the course of months is completely different from the skill of coming up with a dish on the fly in a few minutes & nobody is going to not eat your food in a restaurant if it comes out exactly 8 seconds late.

[Peter the eater]

I watched the finale last night and wasn't at all surprised who won. This season was the most enjoyable so far -- I like seeing more of the creative cooking and less of the Survivor reality show stuff. I don't imagine any of these contestants are losers, even the ones sent home early. There's so much competition out there that it must be worth something to say "Top Chef Contestant" on the cv.

[GwennP]

I'm just kinda tired of people calling everything they don't or can't do a gimmick. The whole "MG backlash" thing has created a group of people who are snobs just for the sake of being snobbish. Doesn't matter if it works in the context of the dish, it wasn't a necessity so it's bad. "Hmmm, this is really good. And it's kinda fun too. Oh, but it could have been done in a more traditional/less fun manner and it would have been just as tasty. So now I hate it. How dare they try to make food fun! I'm too cool for fun!" A well executed "gimmick" is just as valid as any other well executed technique and a poorly executed "gimmick" is no more a sin than any other poorly executed technique. The only thing that should matter is what it brings to the final dish. I really thought Bryan was going to take it but I have to say that I'm happy Michael pulled it off. "Gimmicks" and all...

What's MG? Will I say "duh" when you tell me?

[Doodad]

Molecular Gastronomy.

[Tri2Cook]

Molecular Gastronomy.

Shhhh... apparently it's evil to use that phrase now. Not only for the critics but for the chefs that once embraced it as well. They'll send the food police to hit you over the knuckles with a spatula if they hear you say it!