Chefs compete using cooking, strategy and survival skills for the throne. Weekly rulers are chosen through cultural challenges, with eliminations and new entries keeping six players. Winner ... Read allChefs compete using cooking, strategy and survival skills for the throne. Weekly rulers are chosen through cultural challenges, with eliminations and new entries keeping six players. Winner gets $100K.Chefs compete using cooking, strategy and survival skills for the throne. Weekly rulers are chosen through cultural challenges, with eliminations and new entries keeping six players. Winner gets $100K.
Browse episodes
Photos
6.2147
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Featured reviews
I cant
Ive watched alot of chooking shows some are ok and some are great this one is not good. It might be the first that i really disliked from the first words uttered by the host ....issues i have with this
1. The host has absolutley no flare for hosting a competive cooking show he has no inflection when he talks he waves his hands like an idiot and looks uncomfortable doing it.
2. The premise of the show is ok i guess but its judging aspect is really stupid ...im guessing they are trying to be different but it doesnt work ....oh we do are judging in secret? And the host is one of the judges? Really dumb they all know who cooked what and although other shows have done this they usually watch how its made and give feedback while tasting...this show just seems off.
3. The constant ONE of you is going to be banished? Banished? Why why use that terminology. Eliminated is fine ...the throne for a winner? Why highest graded dish is safe why this goofy throne ...
4. The loser of the winner of the second cook can go head to head with "ruler" (stupid title) or send in someone else and whoeber wins gets to be next ruler....overly complicated on top of that after someone is "banished"( very stupid) they bring in another chef...thsi show could easily be rigged so that it plays out how they want it too.
I doubt this will get any better but ill give it another episode if that next one is just as bad ill be done watching it.
1. The host has absolutley no flare for hosting a competive cooking show he has no inflection when he talks he waves his hands like an idiot and looks uncomfortable doing it.
2. The premise of the show is ok i guess but its judging aspect is really stupid ...im guessing they are trying to be different but it doesnt work ....oh we do are judging in secret? And the host is one of the judges? Really dumb they all know who cooked what and although other shows have done this they usually watch how its made and give feedback while tasting...this show just seems off.
3. The constant ONE of you is going to be banished? Banished? Why why use that terminology. Eliminated is fine ...the throne for a winner? Why highest graded dish is safe why this goofy throne ...
4. The loser of the winner of the second cook can go head to head with "ruler" (stupid title) or send in someone else and whoeber wins gets to be next ruler....overly complicated on top of that after someone is "banished"( very stupid) they bring in another chef...thsi show could easily be rigged so that it plays out how they want it too.
I doubt this will get any better but ill give it another episode if that next one is just as bad ill be done watching it.
High level cooking
Show itself is unspectacular but good, the whole theme and host delivery is pretty cheesy but in a very deliberate way that makes it kind of acceptable.
The real star of the show is the competition and level of cooking. Most of the contenders absolutely bring it, and the ones that cook anything that isn't incredible really stand out. Really high level cooking and competition.
The judging is ok. They're animated and it's fun to watch them eat a dish that you can tell they're really enjoying. But they do know who cooks what - anonymous judging is preferable IMO.
If you like competitive cooking shows, it's worth watching. There are cooking shows with better formats, but the competition is quite fun to watch nonetheless.
The real star of the show is the competition and level of cooking. Most of the contenders absolutely bring it, and the ones that cook anything that isn't incredible really stand out. Really high level cooking and competition.
The judging is ok. They're animated and it's fun to watch them eat a dish that you can tell they're really enjoying. But they do know who cooks what - anonymous judging is preferable IMO.
If you like competitive cooking shows, it's worth watching. There are cooking shows with better formats, but the competition is quite fun to watch nonetheless.
Great cooking, ridiculous histrionics
Loved all the chefs. The cooking itself was great. The judging was detailed. But poor Scott Conant- it seemed as though he might pop a vein at any time. The premise was just hokey. House of Knives, culinary council, a throne. Just ridiculous. I was embarrassed just watching it.
Scott is a great chef and has been a judge on Chopped for Years. He has always made insightful comments. Apparently the producers of this show wanted drama and made poor Scott practically shout when he would say things like "take the throne!"and "your house has fallen." It was just too much. I laughed so much I started crying.
Scott is a great chef and has been a judge on Chopped for Years. He has always made insightful comments. Apparently the producers of this show wanted drama and made poor Scott practically shout when he would say things like "take the throne!"and "your house has fallen." It was just too much. I laughed so much I started crying.
No spiked hair, jewelry draped Guy here
Another reviewer complained that many of the competing chefs were little known. I think that's wrong, although talented chefs not frequently seen on television are a real positive. The episode I am watching now (S1 E3) features Ann Burrell, Shirley Chung, Jonathan Sawyer. Hardly unknown. Chefs Claudette Zepeda, Hign Tesar, and Martel Stone are impressive. Other chefs are skilled and not out of place.
Marcus Samuelsson and Judy Joo are very successful in their culinary careers and both are capable and fair judges here.
Host Scott Conant may be more conventional than the spiked hair, jewelry draped Guy that dominates food shows on TV, but Conant is knowledgeable, respectful, articulate, and authentic.
Marcus Samuelsson and Judy Joo are very successful in their culinary careers and both are capable and fair judges here.
Host Scott Conant may be more conventional than the spiked hair, jewelry draped Guy that dominates food shows on TV, but Conant is knowledgeable, respectful, articulate, and authentic.
Unchallenging viewing
I enjoy most of the cooking shows on the Food Network with the exception of the kiddies' shows and some of the baking is boring.
This is also OK. I recognise most of the chefs even though I'm not a committed viewer and mostly watch late at night when I want something light and unchallenging.
Season 1 is currently on repeat and I don't mind watching it again.
Just a question - has the host had a hair transplant? It seems rather "high".
As for anonymous judging, has no-one ever seen any of the Masterchef series? The judges are present in the kitchen and comment on the cooking and then call the contestants up one by one to taste their dishes and give them feedback in front of everyone. If you want highly produced just look at the Australian version, yet it's hugely popular in many countries. The format works.
It's the first time I've seen Anne Burrell since the tragic news and it was very poignant.
This is also OK. I recognise most of the chefs even though I'm not a committed viewer and mostly watch late at night when I want something light and unchallenging.
Season 1 is currently on repeat and I don't mind watching it again.
Just a question - has the host had a hair transplant? It seems rather "high".
As for anonymous judging, has no-one ever seen any of the Masterchef series? The judges are present in the kitchen and comment on the cooking and then call the contestants up one by one to taste their dishes and give them feedback in front of everyone. If you want highly produced just look at the Australian version, yet it's hugely popular in many countries. The format works.
It's the first time I've seen Anne Burrell since the tragic news and it was very poignant.
Details
- Color
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content