Kitchen Confidential TV Show on FOX

[jesteinf]

Not impressed with episode 1, but I'll give it another shot. Some questions that really bothered me:

1. Would a major restaurant critic who had booked a reservation under a fake name really forget that she had done that when showing up for her table?

2. Would she then use her real name?

3. Wouldn't any experienced waitress either recognize the critic, recognize the critics real name, or recognize the critic's fake name?

The Jack-critic relationship seems like it could be funny, but there has to be at least SOME realism.

[BryanZ]

This pilot episode had its funny moments, though I'm not sure if it will have the staying power to remain on the air for any extended period. As a previous poster said, if it was smarter it could be like the culinary version of Scrubs. I'm curious to see how the show will progress.

[Jason Perlow]

The Jack-critic relationship seems like it could be funny, but there has to be at least SOME realism.

As I said previously on the thread, this would never, ever, ever happen in real life. The food reviewer for the New York Times gets sent to review her ex's restaurant? The conflict of interest would be disastrous for the reviewer if that information came to light, which this day in age it definitely would have. Can you imagine? No, it's total bullshit. Think about the stink that happened when Jean Georges wrote a liner note for Amanda Hesser's book and then she went on to review Spice Market -- this is even more of a breach of ethics.

[Megan Blocker]

IThe show closed with a revelation (SPOILER ALERT) that may lead to a more interesting story as the relationship between Jack & the reviewer is revealed in more detail.[edited for a typo]

←

The reviewer? Try the daughter of the owner/the waitress. They so CLEARLY are setting up a love/hate/His Girl Friday relationship there.

Yes, it was full of stereotypes. Yes, it was annoying that none of the chefs or sous-chefs were women. But, I suppose there's time for them to correct that stuff.

Plus, I just luuuurve Bradley Cooper. I can always watch with the sound off.

[Megan Blocker]

The Jack-critic relationship seems like it could be funny, but there has to be at least SOME realism.

As I said previously on the thread, this would never, ever, ever happen in real life. The food reviewer for the New York Times gets sent to review her ex's restaurant? The conflict of interest would be disastrous for the reviewer if that information came to light, which this day in age it definitely would have. Can you imagine? No, it's total bullshit. Think about the stink that happened when Jean Georges wrote a liner note for Amanda Hesser's book and then she went on to review Spice Market -- this is even more of a breach of ethics.

←

How about writing a review of a restaurant after only one visit? Same deal.

I suppose it could have been a "Diner's Journal"-type thing, but I doubt it. Plus, even then, multiple visits would be expected.

[Jason Perlow]

How about writing a review of a restaurant after only one visit? Same deal.

I suppose it could have been a "Diner's Journal"-type thing, but I doubt it. Plus, even then, multiple visits would be expected.

That too, but then again, it is just television. I can put up with that specific suspension of reality more than the other one.

[BigboyDan]

"You put the Ho in hostess."

Jack

[Jason Perlow]

The blood gushing out of the fingers bit was funny, even though it was a cheap joke and a direct rip off of the classic Julia Child skit on SNL.

I'm also certain the "lost body part" gag was on an episode of CHEF! but I can't be certain.

And wasn't the scene where Jack sits down with the group of inebriated women a overt nod to Rocco Dispirito and "The Restaurant"?

[Megan Blocker]

How about writing a review of a restaurant after only one visit? Same deal.

I suppose it could have been a "Diner's Journal"-type thing, but I doubt it. Plus, even then, multiple visits would be expected.

That too, but then again, it is just television. I can put up with that specific suspension of reality more than the other one.

←

Fair enough. The lack of multiple visits actually stood out more to me - maybe because, unlike the critic-chef relationship, it didn't pay off in a scene where BC took his pants off.

You can probably tell what my reasons are for watching this show...

Edited September 20, 2005 by Megan Blocker (log)

[BigboyDan]

The blood gushing out of the fingers bit was funny, even though it was a cheap joke and a direct rip off of the classic Julia Child skit on SNL.

I'm also certain the "lost body part" gag was on an episode of CHEF! but I can't be certain.

And wasn't the scene where Jack sits down with the group of inebriated women a overt nod to Rocco Dispirito and "The Restaurant"?

←

On Chef they lost a flesh-colored bandaid.

And Rocco probably doesn't think of himself now as anything other than a fictional character.

Edited September 20, 2005 by BigboyDan (log)

[Jason Perlow]

On Chef they lost a flesh-colored bandaid.

Yes, they lost it in the soup, right? On the night a major food critic was visiting?

[BigboyDan]

On Chef they lost a flesh-colored bandaid.

Yes, they lost it in the soup, right? On the night a major food critic was visiting?

←

Yes, the kitchen staff was to wear blue-coloerd "angioplasts" but as usual the First Aid kit was empty of them, hence the commis using one that he had in his car glovebox.

[Jason Perlow]

Thats actually a classic example how differently an American sitcom and a British sitcom approach the same joke -- the American version is dumbed down, meant for instantaneous shock value, and the British one is funnier by virtue of putting some actual thought into the joke and a lot more set-up. I think the joke went throughout the entire episode in Chef whereas on KC it only was one scene.

This is not to say the British don't have cheap jokes in their Sitcoms -- they have tons of them (Such as Mrs. Slocombe's classic "My Pussy Was..." missives on Are You Being Served) but they make them cheap for the sake of being cheap. American Sitcoms use cheap jokes because they can't find better ones.

[jhlurie]

To be fair, we have to remember that this was a Pilot. A lot of "setup" had to occur to put everything in play. In future episodes, the show won't need to waste time, or exposition, placing the characters in this setting, or introducing them.

As for the "shock value" thing, that's more because this is FOX than because it's American.

[BigboyDan]

The FOX formula is "wisecracks" (The Simpsons, Malcolm in the Middle), etc. - but even by BBC standards Chef was fantastic. Those writers did really well with it; the Stilton Cheese episode was almost poetic.

Edited September 20, 2005 by BigboyDan (log)

[kellycolorado]

Totally!

And wasn't the scene where Jack sits down with the group of inebriated women a overt nod to Rocco Dispirito and "The Restaurant"?

←

[sugarcookie]

To be fair, we have to remember that this was a Pilot.  A lot of "setup" had to occur to put everything in play.  In future episodes, the show won't need to waste time, or exposition, placing the characters in this setting, or introducing them.

←

Exactly. Go back and watch the pilots for Seinfeld, Cheers, Friends (hush, I liked Friends) and they all seem sort of stupid.

I'm giving KC another try.

[LoriZig]

The blood gushing out of the fingers bit was funny, even though it was a cheap joke and a direct rip off of the classic Julia Child skit on SNL.

←

I only caught the tail end, so I'll definitely tune in again to see what I missed, but I immediately thought of the Julia Child SNL skit! Great minds think alike?

Sugarcookie- you're right on about first episodes, as well.

[McAuliflower]

if done right.. which means a bit smarter.. this could be the SCRUBS of kitchen shows... it wasn't bad..

←

I was thinking the same thing. Scrubs came to grow on me- its quick and goofy funny. Also- if you are looking at Kitchen Confidential as verbatim of the book or how a real kitchen runs- give it a break- its a tv show, not a documentary. Do I yell at Scrubs for not showing enough blood and kidney stones? No, cause its a comedy.

I'm surprised more people here didn't seemingly like it as much as I did. But I understand that expectations run high.

"You put the ho in hostess..." how can you not love that!

[Pontormo]

Not Impressed!!!!

And , Excusssssseeeeeee Meee, but, Have they ever heard of Women Chefs??!!

←

Didn't you catch that one shot of the dark-haired babe in the kitchen (& plunging neckline but of course) where she complained that Jack stole all her dish washers during a cellphone call?

What I want to know is where are all the Latino...or Latina actors?!!!!!

You'd THINK there would be some color on faces of the ensemble cast that wasn't produced by a tan...

[inanimate]

Where were all the mexicans in the kitchen?

[FabulousFoodBabe]

Where were all the mexicans in the kitchen?

←

I wonder if the network is worried about negatively stereotyping Latinos by showing them in such positions. I wish they'd have a Latino cook who used to be the porter, etc. etc.

Haven't heard the Blonde lobby kicking up a fuss over the 'ho-stess, though. I liked the the scene where the two male customers were hitting on her, and that she was allowed to seem not-so-stupid after all.

[Megan Blocker]

...knowing the person and the book that the show is loosely based on makes it that much more difficult to watch, because I had very high expectations.

←

Let us remember that this is a show created by Darren Star, who also created Sex and the City (you may not all be SATC fans, but you can't deny it's incredible success and influence on popular culture). Like Kitchen Confidential, SATC was based on a book (all right, collection of columns) that were inherently dark and somewhat depressing musings on single life in New York. Star took those stories (in the first season, some almost word for word) and lightened them up for mass consumption, no doubt disappointing some die-hard Candace Bushnell fans in the process.

So, while many may have been hoping for something more Bourdain-esque , we shouldn't be surprised that Star is editing out the more foodie-oriented aspects to deliver a mainstream product.

[Jason Perlow]

SATC though was on HBO, so they were able to make the show a lot more raunchy. You have to wonder how much the show is suffering from the need to be a prime time FOX show as opposed to being for a Cable TV audience.

At the same time however, FOX has shows like Family Guy and American Dad, which have plenty of raunch (albeit in cartoon form), so maybe not.

[Busboy]

Slate magazine saw fit to recycle dueling reviews -- by Jeffrey Steingarten and Amanda Hesser -- of the book Kitchen Confidential here, in honor of the show's debut.

"The "culinary underbelly" of the title is not the dank, dismal, and disgusting underside common to all restaurants. It consists of the kinds of restaurants that were willing to hire Bourdain through most of his career--those with high volume, small and agonizingly uncomfortable kitchens, everything cooked ahead or bought already cooked ahead, rock-bottom food costs, unreliable and unskilled labor, cheap ingredients--places without pride, conscience, integrity, or taste..." [empahsis added].

As for the show? Something I'd watch if I were folding socks (or because it follows the infinitely superior "Arrested Development"). Anybody surprised by the fact that the show is unrealistic, clearly doesn't watch enough TV.