This show does romanticize and aggrandize talented chefs and the food they make. That's the premise, if you don't like it, you won't enjoy the show. If you don't like science fiction, you won't enjoy Star Trek, if you hate organized crime movies, you'll never appreciate The Godfather. Same here.
The show beautifies the work and one might say genius of great chefs, it has very artistic cinematography and editing, moody classical scoring, and even pretentious captioning. It's great if you're a long time fan of food TV or probably just food in general.
Sadly the show really declined over the last couple seasons, as it seems the producers have gotten tired of the food. I know they got some pushback to feature more diverse chefs after the first season, which they did, but they've pushed it further with some episodes featuring a supposedly talented chef that barely touch on their food or their talent.
One chef was an illegal immigrant, they did quite a biography on her time growing up in Mexico, stretched it thin as humanly possible to cover as much running time as they could, and then when they were done, that was it, her food didn't much matter. Another chef owned a successful Indian restaurant in England, they discussed how she decided she wanted to cook her whole life and how eventually she did, and then that was the end of the episode her food or talent was nowhere to be found.
This was supposed to be "Chef's Table" about chefs and their food. If you want to make a show about the life struggles of various diverse women, then you are free to make that show, and maybe I'll watch it, but that isn't what they've chosen to do. They're supposed to make a show about chefs, but their culinary talent is beginning to be an afterthought that may barely even make it on the screen for a few seconds. How much do you respect them as a chef if you aren't willing to see them and appreciate them as a chef? Is that really respectful to them or their talents? Or did the producers select them with no consideration or belief in their abilities, but merely because they thought they'd make a good, politically appropriate story?
The last season featured a chef who owns a restaurant in Georgia, who was a black woman. The makers were so fascinated by this situation, by the opportunity to talk about race and racism, that they never got to her food beyond the widest of descriptors. Her training and backstory was worth telling, but the main gist of it is she's a hard worker, she studied in France, she studied under another talented chef upon returning to New York, and then you can get on to her work now, but they didn't. They took forever going through that backstory, intercutting it with their "social" dialogue. They feature a food critic praising her food and creativity in two five second segments, good to know! Apparently that stuff isn't worth focusing on and discussing though. Heaven forbid a viewer interested in food and the thinking of chefs want to find out about her food and how she thinks. It's just a real disappointment so often in the last two seasons.
The show beautifies the work and one might say genius of great chefs, it has very artistic cinematography and editing, moody classical scoring, and even pretentious captioning. It's great if you're a long time fan of food TV or probably just food in general.
Sadly the show really declined over the last couple seasons, as it seems the producers have gotten tired of the food. I know they got some pushback to feature more diverse chefs after the first season, which they did, but they've pushed it further with some episodes featuring a supposedly talented chef that barely touch on their food or their talent.
One chef was an illegal immigrant, they did quite a biography on her time growing up in Mexico, stretched it thin as humanly possible to cover as much running time as they could, and then when they were done, that was it, her food didn't much matter. Another chef owned a successful Indian restaurant in England, they discussed how she decided she wanted to cook her whole life and how eventually she did, and then that was the end of the episode her food or talent was nowhere to be found.
This was supposed to be "Chef's Table" about chefs and their food. If you want to make a show about the life struggles of various diverse women, then you are free to make that show, and maybe I'll watch it, but that isn't what they've chosen to do. They're supposed to make a show about chefs, but their culinary talent is beginning to be an afterthought that may barely even make it on the screen for a few seconds. How much do you respect them as a chef if you aren't willing to see them and appreciate them as a chef? Is that really respectful to them or their talents? Or did the producers select them with no consideration or belief in their abilities, but merely because they thought they'd make a good, politically appropriate story?
The last season featured a chef who owns a restaurant in Georgia, who was a black woman. The makers were so fascinated by this situation, by the opportunity to talk about race and racism, that they never got to her food beyond the widest of descriptors. Her training and backstory was worth telling, but the main gist of it is she's a hard worker, she studied in France, she studied under another talented chef upon returning to New York, and then you can get on to her work now, but they didn't. They took forever going through that backstory, intercutting it with their "social" dialogue. They feature a food critic praising her food and creativity in two five second segments, good to know! Apparently that stuff isn't worth focusing on and discussing though. Heaven forbid a viewer interested in food and the thinking of chefs want to find out about her food and how she thinks. It's just a real disappointment so often in the last two seasons.