"So... Who's it gonna be?" (Masterchef)

Member Name: yackers1

Product:	Masterchef
Date:	24/01/09 (230 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: diverse range of contestants, interesting cooking ideas

Disadvantages: You're not going to improve your cooking skills watching this

****History of Master Chef****

Master Chef was first aired in 1990 and it enjoyed and 11 year stint to 2001. During the early years Lloyd Grossman, and a panel of two experts, hosted Master Chef. During the 'Lloyd' years I never watched Master Chef and would actually make an effort to change channels when it came on preferring to watch anything else that was on. It was Lloyd Grossman that made me turned off. I find his monotone voice un-inspiring and boring and I find him the most un-charismatic person on television. I appreciate that I am in the minority with this view since he lasted 11 years on Master Chef and was also on other popular programmes like Through The Keyhole.

In 2005 Master Chef was re-branded to Master Chef Goes Large where it had a radical shake up. Lloyd, and the panel, was changed to John Torode and Gregg Wallace.

****John Torode****

John Torode is an Australian born chef that specialises in Australasian cuisine. He moved to the UK when he was 25 and soon established himself as a top chef in London where he has resided ever since.

****Gregg Wallace****

Gregg Wallace is a fruit and vegetable expert, writer, media presenter and former green grocer. Referred to as an "ingredients expert".

He is a 'pudding' fan and if contestants want to win him over then all they have to do is produce an excellent desert, but they are advised to stay well clear of the chocolate fondants.

****Format****

The heats are aired on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday on BB2. All of the heats, other than Thursday's start at 8.30 pm. Thursday's begins at 8.00 pm.

During the heats the competitors have to prepare a dish from scratch known as the "invention test" whereby the ingredients are pre determined by the producers, assist a professional chef during a lunch time session in a well known restaurant and cook a two course "signature" dish to see if they are good enough to go through to the quarter final.

There are six contestants during each invention test but only three make it through to the professional kitchen and the final cook off.

The quarter final is aired on Thursday from 8.30 pm and lasts half an hour. The quarter final sees the winners of the week's heats go head to head to see who will progress to the next stage.

During the quarter finals the competitors under take new challenges. These include identifying some ingredients through sight, taste or feel and then cooking a three course "signature" dish.

After the ingredients test one competitor is eliminated immediately. The remaining three then go on to the cook off.

****My opinion****

The new style Master Chef is brilliant. John and Gregg share a great on-air relationship that really works. Whilst the pair have their annoying habits and tendencies (I don't like the way that Gregg dresses everything up and uses flowery language like "Exquisite" and "taste explosion" etc. and the way John actually takes the food of the spoon makes me cringe) they are good to watch and I think that the producers have found the 'right' people to host the show.

John and Gregg are so much better than Lloyd Grossman and I like the fact that the revamped Master Chef no longer has a panel of independent experts and that John and Gregg are the proverbial judge, jury and executioner.

Some may argue that John and Gregg can be a bit harsh with their comments but I don't think this is the case. They are being honest and whilst negative comments may be given they are not said in a spiteful or nasty way. It is constructive criticism given to help the competitors improve and who better to get it from other than two professionals.

Whilst John and Gregg can be negative they also offer praise where it is deserved and, if I was a keen amateur cook, then I could think of nothing better than to get praise from two professionals. Forget about Auntie Doris saying your food is nice, this is where it is at.

One thing that makes this show is the diverse range of competitors. If we are going to 'pigeon hole' people then there are contestants from every social sector and background. From 'stay at home' dads to high-flying career women to students to grandmothers, only 'real life' and 'normal' people appear on this program. This is a refreshing change from the 'wannabes' and 'look at me' people that other shows like Big Brother and the X Factor seems to attract. One annoying aspect is that all contestants think that appearing on the show is going to be a life changing experience and get them in to the world of cooking, or so we are led to believe by the way the editor has cut the interview scenes.

The invention taste is predictable, but considering the competitors are all given the same ingredients this is hardly surprising. It is the signature dishes that I find really interesting. Seeing how the competitors take a traditional dish and then change it in a specific way to make it their own with varying levels of success. It is interesting to see where the competitors get their inspiration from, what cuisine they use as a base, the ingredients they use and the way in which they cook it.

I also like the professional kitchen round. All of the competitors state that they would like to cook full time and this round gives them a quick introduction to how a real life kitchen operates. If it really is like how the program portrays then I can't see why anyone would want to be a chef. It looks really stressful, really hot, really pressured and really hard work and I take my hat off to them.

I think that the ingredients test is a bit pointless and unfair for the competitor that gets eliminated and not allowed to participate in the cook off. So what if the competitors cannot identify some exotic fruit or ingredient when it is out of the wrapper or container (which states exactly what it is). Is this really going to affect the way in which they cook and the way in which their food tastes?

The only part about the program I don't like is, what I would call, the theatrical aspects. When John and Gregg are discussing who is going through and who is not they often break out in to small disagreements and the discussions always end with one of them asking "who's it going to be?" with the other person pulling some stupid face. I know it is meant to add a bit of atmosphere and tension, but it just does not work for me. It is ridiculous and I'm like stop messing around and let us know. The suspense adds nothing to the program whatsoever.

If you are a budding chef then this program may give you some ideas but I don't think that it will improve your cooking in any way, shape or form. That said, the dishes can be viewed on the BBC website should you want to try and replicate them.

Summary: A good watch centred around food