I had never before been a part of the experience that Iron Chef gives its viewers, and I have to say that i enjoyed it very much.
I was slightly disappointed, as the Iron Chefs won in both versions that we saw. In Iron Chef America, I wanted the competitor to win simply because all of his dishes looked so beautiful and were made with such style, but I guess the taste of his foods just weren't up to par with the Iron Chef. Both Iron Chefs were stranger than I expected them to be. The hosts on both versions were eccentric and had funny/serious facial expressions. It was interesting to see that in Iron Chef Japan, the judges were very involved in the entire process, from the food preparation to the judgement. They commented on everything throughout the 60 minutes. Whereas in Iron Chef America, others commented on the food, and the judges' main role was to taste the dishes and make their judgements.
I was actually happy the Iron Chefs won in both episodes. Their success showed their mastery of cooking. It really shows that they were flexible within their culinary repertoire and truly deserved their titles as Iron Chefs.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Nabila. As we discussed in class, i think the fact that the iron chefs win 90% of the time takes away from the competitive spirit of the show. Everyone likes the underdog to win every now and then (Like the yellow jackets beating VT last night!!!)
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI liked the commentary in the Japanese version as well. It seemed much more personal. I disagree with some of the comments made in class regarding the professionalism of comments by the Japanese judges. On the American show, I was bothered by the tone of the judges, I felt as if a wall, a class, was dividing the chefs and the judges, whereas the Japanese show felt more personal.
ReplyDelete