I realize that it may be solely die to the editing, but can Hung possibly be any more of an ass? I agree with comments that have been made already, technically he’s as sharp as one gets - but his cooking seems to be without soul.
Anyway, farewell Brian and congrats to Dale
After being on vacation in places that didn’t have cable, I did a Top Chef double feature tonight. Sorry to see Sara go last week. I think she had good skills but lost focus over the last 2-3 episodes.
I am rooting like crazy for Hung. I think the accusation that he has no “soul” is ridiculous. The guy is the most passionate chef on the show. He so obviously lives and breathes cooking that I find that accusation asinine. Not only that but it doesn’t mean anything. What is the culinary definition of “soul?” What is an example of a dish that has “soul” vs one that does not? I think it’s an utterly fatuous and contrived criticism of a guy who works his ass off and has impeccable chops but, for whatever reason, production has decided to cast and edit as an “arrogant” villain. America once again showed how stupid and easily led it is by voting 69% for Hung as the guy they want to see eliminated. Why do they want to see the guy that Colicchio himself had admitted is the best cook on the show be eliminated? Don’t they want to see the best chef win? What’s wrong with people?
He may have the best technical skills combined with the most food knowledge but there is something missing. Based on the season episodes he has been shown as a cold uncaring in regards to his customers and clientele. I can overlook his indifferent attitude toward his fellow competitors, but not his customers. How successful of a business could he possibly hope to operate if he only cooks for himself and repeatedly refuses to listen or accept any criticism. “What, they don’t like it? Well screw them they don’t know anything.” does not make a great chef.
I’ve never seen him be uncaring to his clientele. Douchebag judges maybe (and I think Hung has generally been right about them) but not his actual “customers.” They always gobble his food right up. The coyboys didn’t seem to have a problem with his elk dish.
This was kind of a waste of an episode. When they said that they were taking 3 chefs it was a given, barring a monumental screw-up, that it was Brian going home. IMHO they screwed up by sending Howie and Tre home before Sara, Brian, and CJ because it was clear that those last 3 weren’t going to win.
I think that going into the last episode Casey is the front runner, followed by Dale and then Hung. Hung clearly has the most training out of any the contestants. He can take things from the text/cooking book and put them on a plate. However, I feel that his cooking is too constrained by that. It’s like Hung is the stereotypical Asian kid that has been trained to play the violin since age 4 vs. someone who’s ability developed more organically.
“What do cowboys eat? Beans? Beans? Beans?”
“I’m cooking for the judges, not the cowboys.”
Just Hung paraphrases from last night, the exact quotes might be a bit different.
Then he goes on about how great the guest chef judge is, and lies to his face about the lemon juice…until caught and made to 'fess up that there is indeed no lemon juice.
I found that line quite funny.
That’s not how I saw it. It looked to me like he was describing his dish as he had planned it, including lemon juice, and then corrected himself. It wouldn’t make any sense for him to try to lie about that.
I have to agree with Dio that Hung is the most passionate of the chefs, but I also agree with Colicchio that we haven’t really seen Hung’s food yet. Hung seemed to admit that last night when he talked about the finale.
I didn’t see that as a slam against cowboys as clientele but against the limitations and contrivance that he was expected to cook “cowboy” cuisine. I think he was right not to dumb it down for some kind of sterotyped perception of an uncultured, “cowboy” audience and just cook his normal cuisine instead. I think he realized that good food is good food and that it would be beyond condescending to assume that coboys are too stupid to understand anything but baked beans and barbecue.
They ALL cooked for the judges instead of the cowboys. Hung was just honest enough to admit it. Plus the cowboys liked his food anyway. None of the judges said that the cowboys were not pleased or that they had any complaints so it can’t be said that he didn’t satisfy the clients. He did. he just did it on his own terms, not on stereotyped notions about what kind of food cowboys would like.
I think he wanted to make sure Hibert understood conceptually what the dish was I think he was embarrassed that he had a brain fart an forgot a very simple part of the execution but that he wanted to make sure he communicated what the concept was supposed to be and hope he could be forgiven for the lapse in execution.
It seems to me that Hung’s passion is not focussed on reinventing the the wheel, but rather on making his wheel the best damned wheel anybody ever saw (tasted). Other than the fruit loop munchkinland Hung’s strongest dishes have been interpretations rather than his own creations. If the challenge were “Prepare one plate each of Oso Bucco, Chicken Francaise, and a vegetarian Risotto with appropriate sides” Hung would win. His would be cooked to the right temperature and look pretty. But the challenge won’t be like that and I think he won’t win.
What advantage is there to having 3 finalists?
That’s a great way tyo put it. He seems to be very good at the science of cooking, but doesn’t understand the art, and doesn’t understand the difference.
whoah. I am not sure about that. Has he never had any inventinve or inspired dishes?
That Breakfast Land dish was pretty artistic.
Colicchio seems to think that the “personal touch” for Hung = Asian when Hung’s obvious love is Classic French. Casey doesn’t get called “soulless” and “impersonal” for doing Pan-Asian dishes (her own self-professed specialty), so I don’t see why Hung gets accused of those things for specializing in a European style.
And not for nothing, whne Marcel tried to be innovative and modern he got accused of being arrogant and soulless as well. You can’t win on this show if you happen to be talented.
I’m not going to say he hasn’t had any inventive or inspired dishes, but how many times have we heard him say “very classic dish”? A lot more than we’ve heard Casey or Dale say that.
What’s wrong with being classic, though? That’s a style of cuisine as much as “Spanish” or “Asian Fusion” or anything else. He’s a classic chef. That’s what he does. If they didn’t want a classic chef on the show they shouldn’t have cast him. It seems like they expected him to be the “Vietnamese” chef just because that’s his ethnicity. I don’t think that’s fair.
What I mean is he seems to think the science is all there is to cooking. Established processes and equations. Like when he talks about flavor profiles, to him is is an exact and recorded science. The argument he had a few weeks ago about “sweetness doesn’t go with creaminess?” for example. He couldn’t understand how it didn’t work in the dish he created because the “text book” says it should, it was just beyond his comprehension that that case did work
. His science serves him well. Knowing to sous-vide to cook perfect chicken, and knowing that sea bass is good for untrustworthy ovens is why he is still in the competition.But none of the professional chefs ever seem very exited about anything he does. They say it’s techically perfect. But I’m guessing they see folks like him everyday in high-quality chef schools.
And the fact he is always done early. That’s just not a trait I see in artistically minded people. They are always tweaking and tuning and thinking and wondering how to make it just a little bit better. To Hung it is a process and a set of equations. He creates a meal idea, exectues it, and declares it done, he never seems to have any inspirations about something that may improve it, or goes with the organic flow of the act of cooking. It’s a simple known process from A to B.
Ripert, I think is one of the most interesting judges. It was great to see him really love the sauces on Casey and Dale’s Elk. And when a French chef of that calibre loves your sauce and finds it inventive you know you have something.
oh and Also. I never really thought of farm-raised elk as particularly gamey. On the gamey scale of 1-10 I would give it a 3 with beef a 1, mutton a 4, wild shot elk a 6, pronghorn a 9 and bear a 10.(I’ve never had lion or any other cat but from what people tell me I would have to totally reset my gamey scale if I did :))
The problem isn’t that his food is “classical”, it’s that his dishes are classic. Salmon Mousse, Chicken with Rice, and Tuna Tartar have been done a million times. Hung’s cooking style seems to be from the text book to your plate. Which has been great for him in the competition because he doesn’t screw up. It’s not going to cut it for the final challenge though.
There is soul and there is joy in perfect execution of technique, and I think that’s where it lies for Hung.
It was good enough for the first two winnners. Both Harold and Ilan coasted to wins on the strength of safe, consistent performances.
Which is fine but beside my point. My point is that he just makes classic dishes. There is little to no innovation and nothing that I would say that the judges have never seen before. There is something to say about being able to cook meat and such perfectly, but I feel that with practice the mistakes that other chefs have made would be ironed out. What I don’t see happening is going into Hung’s restaurant and being surprised.
I didn’t see hte first top chef, but Ilan certainly made dishes that I, at least, hadn’t seen before.
Well, I wouldn’t say that. It’s just that, as to your question of before, people don’t want to see the most talented chef win. They want to see the most likeable chef win. Part of that is because viewers really can’t judge the chefs’ talents but they can judge their likeability. And Hung, partly through edits, and partly through his own actions, doesn’t come across as all that likeable. He comes across as arrogant and proud, as isolated from the other chefs, and as dismissive of criticism. That’s why people don’t like him. It has nothing to do with his talents.
Yeah, i must say that i was rather surprised at Colicchio’s remark. Why is Hung obligated to do Asian-style cuisine just because he happens to be an Asian immigrant? I guess Dale should do “gay” food. :rolleyes:
I will say, though, that Hung spoke quite a lot in the first few episodes of the show about how he likes cooking the clean flavors and styles of Asian cooking, with lots of seafood and fresh ingredients. And his rather uncomplimentary description of the elk as a boring meat was, i thought, intended to convey how it didn’t fit with his style. If he truly is a lover of Classic French cuisine, a meat like elk should be right up his alley.
Also, Dio, while i agree with you about Hung’s skills, and also with your critique of the whole “soul” argument, i still think that Hung is a dick in ways that cannot be attributed just to the show’s editors. Some of his self-satisfied, egomaniacal comments over the past few months cannot be spun as mere unfriendly editing. Now, there’s no law against egomania or excessive self-confidence—hell, in a good chef those things seem like job requirements, in my experience—but it doesn’t mean i have to like the guy.
Also, i disagree with you that Hung has “generally been right” when he disagrees with the judges. Some of his dishes clearly haven’t been that good, and it’s only in the last couple of episodes that he has shown any grace in accepting criticism. The whole “Too classic” line regarding his chicken and rice was typical of his “It’s not me, it’s you” attitude, as was his complaint that the judge didn’t understand what he was doing in the cocktail quickfire.
I thing Hung’s an awesome cook, and if i were betting money i’d put it on him to win. But he’s still a dick at times.