Thirty-six home cooks arrive with the intent of being placed in the Top 20, but the contestants must pass the audition rounds and impress the judges to earn the coveted apron; the contestants hope to...
Only eight aprons are left for the hopeful home cooks to earn so they can pass through the audition rounds, where they have less than 45 minutes to prepare their signature dish and leave the judges ...
Except the semi finale of season 1, the contestants chose what they wanted to cook for the finale. See more »
In many of the team challenges the first team that receives a certain number of votes fastest are the winners, however the speed shouldn't make a difference of which team wins and which team loses,what should determine which team wins is the team that receives the most votes overall. See more »
First .. i thought i had written a review for this before .. but apparently not?
Masterchef as well as Hells Kitchen are TOTAL guilty pleasures for me. I am fully aware how terribly aweful they are .. and i mean really, REALLY aweful in terms of cringeworthy or just pitiful.
Then again, i kind of like 3 dudes shout at a "random" assortment of nobodies.
But lets get to the details...
Masterchef is - at its core - a VERY good concept .. but the network is too cowardly to really adhere to the idea and instead makes it a meaningless soap opera or worse .. a telenovela.
The idea of professional cooks to judge homecooks on increasingly higher stakes and more difficult "challenges" .. great .. i would call that a winner .. and NOT a guilty pleasure if they actually did that.
Sadly though the quality of the food and the skill of the contestants is obviously irrelevant compared to what can only be called "drama potential". That does not mean that the finalists are not good cooks ... but the judging becomes a fárce early on .. when it becomes just too blatant that they do not judge on the quality of the dish at all.
The selection of characters to compete is usually interesting enough .. but follows typical focus group results. You get a sassy black woman, a bossy white male, a shy woman, a tough guy/girl, a very young and innocent girl and of course someone who causes the maximum drama by being antisocial or just a loudmouth with no filter. Now it is not even clear that this is actually the case, cause the episodes are edited in such a narrative .. but it does become old quckly.
What is good about it?
Aside from watching food ... there is a certain narrative of character progression. I caught myself being quite invested in start to around the end of the 3rd forth .. and then not caring much who actually won.
The challenges are often quite nice .. but it would have been interesting to see how the contestants actually prepare for them, cause they certainly do not spontanously come up with their dishes .. so there must be a lot of learning in their spare time and interaction (something that might be interesting and that Hells Kitchen does show a little more of...)
Well, but why a 9/10? that is an awefully high score i hear you exclaim!
Yes, yes it is .. and it is also a totally biased one. I just have fun binge watching this garbage sometimes. I can switch my brain off and rant at the rediculous jingoism, the pitiful veneration of military and american values, the cartoonish drama and the godlike bossy chefs that hover over everything like saints, resolving everything with amazing authority and skill.
So, its just fun .. mindless, stupid fun.
Objectively it is terrible though ....
2 of 3 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this