Pacionsbo
Absolutely Fantastic
Invaderbank
The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.
AStormOfSwords13
Chopped is not exactly the most prominent Reality TV competition. American Idol is having its final season next year, Survivor has been here since 2000 and is going to be at 32 seasons by this time next year, and I have watched Big Brother from the US and Canada editions (not to mention that Canada watches US Big Brother and vice versa). However, Chopped is a different kind of game.On Chopped, you are given 4 ingredients for each meal from a basket and you have to make a dish out of whatever ingredients you pull out of the box, however bizarre they are, in a given amount of time (any other ingredient and machine in the kitchen can also be used). Seems simple enough, right? Well... not really. The show has 3 judges who will eat anything off the plates, critique the dishes, and decide who goes home out of a starting roster of 4 people. The insanity that goes on in the kitchen makes for a scramble that will put avid food fans at the edge of their seats. Really, it's the scrambling to make their dishes that shines in this show because not only does it make it fun, it crowns deserving winners upon deserving winners. I have even seen 1 winner of the show appear again as a judge, so if one of the judges wanted to be in the kitchen, don't count them out.The judges critiques/comments I am mixed on. What judges make notes on while the contestants cook I do find to be positive feedback and helps us, the audience, learn about the ingredients that come out of the basket. But when giving criticism about the dishes, it can sometimes get pretty stupid real quick. Describing desserts too sweet and saying that grilled cheese cannot be a dessert are 2 examples of that and some of the eliminations are, in all honesty, kind of bogus as a result. But a lot of other criticisms are very fair and so unfair eliminations are not too much of a problem. I like Scott Conant, Chris Santos, and Amanda whatsherface especially as judges.My other big problem is that the host is way too easy to make fun of during the cooking portions of the episodes and so it makes the show more laughable at times when it really doesn't need to be as so. However, it doesn't destroy the show entirely as he does a professional job with the eliminations and introductions.All in all, Chopped is a fine choice for people who want to find something different on TV. However, it really needs to be taken with a grain of salt.
sstobierre
1. If you appreciate creativity, you'll enjoy this show. 2. To think that you have twenty minutes to plan, prepare, execute and present an appetizer; thirty minutes each to do the same for an entrée and desert? 3. It makes me wonder, how many episodes were not aired because of the numerous contestants who could not finish. 4. Oh! and did I mention the mystery basket ingredients, usually one to a few of those have not been used before by the contestants. 5. Why not use liquid Nitrogen when making ice cream? It's so much quicker. 6. For special showings like the championship series, why not award the winners of each of the four episodes the usual $10,000 like the regular showings? Their prize shouldn't just be a spot in the final championship round. 7. I suspect the judges are bored and closed-minded, how about revamping the judging panel occasionally? 8. The judges inform contestants that they can use as little or as much of the mystery ingredients as they wish, yet when the cooks do that, judges have a problem with it. Where is the consistency?
Matthew_Capitano
This show is fixed.You can tell the judges have decided beforehand which contestant they want to win. Once, they chopped a chef even though his competitor forgot to put the meat on the entree plate. Chefs with particularly troubled pasts, revealed during the bio part of the show, often seem to win the competition. The judges are predictably smug and unfriendly, oftentimes critiquing a dish by saying something really stupid, like "The dessert is too sweet." I'd like to see the judges prepare something on the clock, but they don't have the guts to do it. Every one of them knows they'd get 'chopped'.Not a real competition. A legitimate contest would be much more interesting ..... and fair.
wight425
In a world of fake reality television shows the simple idea of pairing 4 people up against each other competing for $10,000 while cooking offers more than most. Being a bit of a foodie myself I really enjoy the mystery basket approach of secret ingredients. I find this show much more "real" than say Iron Chef America. The strict time limit and need to produce all 4 plates single handedly makes for more intense buzzer beater endings to each round. The quick personal stories of each competitor in the beginning of the program set up each episode to give the viewer a sense of their expertise (or lack there of) as well as occupation. There have been teen chefs, stay at home moms, and military personnel. The recent episode of accepting suggestions from social media sites was also a fantastic idea that I enjoyed as well. My only suggestions to improve the show might be to add fan of the show to guest judge along side the professional judges from time to time. I would also like to see less "sob story" during the cooking portion of the show and focus more on the techniques and commentary from the judges. Also for those strange mystery basket ingredients I would like to hear more from the judges about what they know about it and how they might integrate the ingredient if they were competing. Overall one of my top shows to watch each and every week.
