In fairness… why?! Wimpy is a (frankly appalling) imitation of an American chain, with a terrible reputation. Far better, surely, to go to a real English restaurant, or if you want US-style food, to go to an American chain, of which we have several ubiquitous examples.
Re: the ridiculous editing, I once listened to someone who’d done one of the wife swapping shows talk about the experience. He said the contract they had to sign to be on the show specifically and assiduously waives any right to sue for defamation. Basically it said, “We can present such a misleading picture of you that it is pure fabrication, and terribly damaging, and you agree to hold us harmless.” I’m betting that’s boilerplate for these shows, and they get a LOT of use out of that clause.
One reason I like to watch either the British or American version is I find the psychology fascinating. Chefs and owners who get into trouble seem to think MORE is always the answer. They hire twelve managers, or develop a menu thicker than the OED, or go all gimmicky, all the while missing the fact that the food doesn’t taste good and doesn’t get to the customers in a reasonable time. And even though they’ve asked for help, when Gordon tries to convince them that customers will come for delicious, straightforward food and good service, they cling to their old ways like a worn security blanket, and question his knowledge and ability.
The other thing that fascinates me is the chefs with no palate. It seems more prevalent with the smokers, but that can’t be the whole reason. If you can’t identify simple, strong flavors like peach and chocolate, maybe it’s time to hang up the toque.
Reading this thread makes me wish I could see the BBC version (I don’t have cable). It sounds so much more real and interesting. At present I’m enjoying the Fox version but I can see myself getting tired of its weaknesses – the obvious editing and the easy answers ($$$ makeovers).
One thing I love about Chef Ramsay (and have since the “Hell’s Kitchen” days) is that he’s just as abusive toward customers who give him trouble as he is toward the kitchen/restaurant staff. I was amused during “Hell’s Kitchen” when customers would come up to complain about how long the food was taking and he told them they could wait until the food was up to his standards or go somewhere else. Recently there was one “Kitchen Nightmares” episode where a customer at the restaurant’s re-opening was complaining loudly and repeatedly about the food and when Chef Ramsay tried it himself and there was nothing wrong with it, he basically told the customer (loudly and repeatedly) to go to hell.
The other thing I love about Chef Ramsay is the shirt-changing.
I find it odd that in US programs he’s referred to as “Chef Ramsay” while over here he’s always “Gordon”.
The BBC version is one of my few must-see TV shows - I hardly ever watch TV. Another being “The F Word”, which is another of his programs, which is like a highly entertaining food-oriented chat show.
I bet they do too, but not when they have celebs like Ramsey. Unlike we common slobs, he no doubt had senior partners at a prestigious law firm combing the contract, and very possibly even made specific changes in it that would otherwise be deal breakers. It’s true that his compensation, both in terms of money and exposure, is probably pretty good, but I bet the consideration a network gets out of the deal is far far more (assuming the show is successful). Another example might be Donald Trump and his Apprentice show. You can bet your sweet ass there were no clauses in a signed contract exposing him to ridicule or damaging fabrications.
Oh, I absolutely agree - I was referring only to the restaurant owners and staff. Surely Ramsey could write his own ticket with Fox, and would have told them to go fuck themselves (verbatim) if they tried that with him.
That reminds me, the other thing that makes me dislike the American version is the bleeping is really intrusive. On BBC America, they simply bleep some of any form of “fuck,” and not too heavy handedly, so you can still understand the conversation. Shit, cock, bollocks, etc. are broadcast as is. On Fox, not only do they bleep those words as well, but they feel they must visually obscure his mouth as he says them, and it makes it damn hard to follow a conversation, given how much he swears. Compare: “The truth is, you’re in the _____king shit. You need to grow some bollocks. Jesus Christ.” versus “The truth is you’re in the ________ _________. You need to grow some __________. ________ _________.”
Gotcha! Definitely. 
I could go to one of the restaurant that was on the show and see how it is now. (Sebastian’s) I go past it every day on the way home from work and they don’t ever seem to be busy. The local reviews of the place were pretty mixed, but leaning toward bad. (From well before the KN episode)
When various posters talk about “the BBC version” is this because it’s shown on BBC America ? The British version of the programme is not made or shown on BBC TV in the UK. It’s on Channel 4.
In one of the BBC episodes Ramsey did a blind taste test with fresh noodles he had made and Pot Noodles (Dehydrated instant noodles, served in a plastic cup). Both the Chef and the restaurant manager picked the Pot Noodles as the best tasting.
Ramey’s point was they had been serving shitty food for so long they no longer had the palate to discern good from bad. (He had found a supply of Pot Noodles in their storage area and was flabbergasted that they were charging 60 pounds for a meal and serving crap like that.)
Probably the extra salt in the instant product. A lot of chefs - even some very good ones - instinctively overuse salt.
To most of us over here, if any regular character/celebrity on the show has an accent that could vaguely be called British (even if it’s Irish. Or South African. Or Kiwi), it’s BBC.
I think BBC America buys in stuff from the other national channels. It’s also a commercial station.
I’ve seen this in real life many times around town. A “grand old family establisment, a real treasure” will ask the city, the union, or someone else, for a lot favoritism, concessions, or bailout, on the basis that they represent something special. The family just laments that the city has changed and people don’t care about the right things.
So it gets debated at city hall and the union hall, and in the end it’s declared a lost cause, is boarded up and forclosed and sold at auction.
And there is a lot of crying when some “corporate” owner takes it over.
Within two months the place is freshly painted, new carpeting, tables and chairs, better than ever, has better food at higher prices, and is packed every night.
All things the family could have done.
And one of the family members is paid an advisor fee to do the promotional ads
and everyone forgets what was so bad about corporate owners.
Not much to add that hasn’t already been said. I like how Chef Ramsay emphasizes fresh, local food that’s prepared simply but is somehow unique and special; and I’m appalled at the state of some of the kitchens and storage areas.
But I’m not keen on “Ramsay’s Design Team,” and the sponsoring of various local events. Part of the charm of the British version of the show was when the restaurants had to make do with what they had–and it was interesting to see what they had when they thought about it. Anybody remember the flambe waiter at La Gondola who wasn’t flambeing (sp?) because nobody wanted him to? Sure, Ramsay ran impromptu taste tests in the street, but there were no firefighters, mayors, or family picnic days “sponsored by Chef Ramsay to celebrate the grand re-opening of…”
Outside of that, it’s still pretty good. It seems as if we’re seeing places that have egotistical owners, complacent chefs, and out-of-fashion food, and repairing those problems still makes for an interesting show.