Spoiler Alert:
Well, Hung [heh] won Top Chef last night. I suppose he deserved to. What drove me crazy was how towards the end of the series, the producers started to humanize Hung — no doubt in part because Hung strategically started talking about his love for food, his mom all of that stuff. I don’t mind the sentimentality, but it just seemed to be a transparent attempt for Hung to rebrand himself and some CYA by the producers. Also, I thought springing a final challenge on them in the middle of the last meal was really silly. In effect, the chefs never got a single chance to cook their best meal unencumbered by gimmicks. Anyway, I’m glad this season’s over because, contrary to what the judges said, I didn’t think these were the best chefs ever.
Update: Readers so far overwhelmingly agree. For example:
“Anyway, I’m glad this season’s over because, contrary to what the judges said, I didn’t think these were the best chefs ever. “
Absolutely agree. Lamest season of all, only likeable one of the last three was Casey who of course did terribly in the final. As a female I was peeved. There is so so sooooo no comparison between the chef’s of this season and 1st season winner Harold, let alone the other finalists of previous seasons. This whole season seemed so forced and with a lot of going through the motions. Chef Caliccio (no idea how to spell) seemed to have zero emotion for any of it, challenges were terrible, the final was dumb. How do you have people make a meal with courses and then serve three meals with each course side by side simultaneously…no foodie here but isn’t something lost in how the tastes are supposed to go together when the judges palettes are muddled X 3 with each course? Were there wines? They have always seemed important in past finals but how do you choose to match dishes and then eat/drink all three together? Silly!! Silliest of all was the “live” winner announcement.