HOME > Chowhound > Food Media & News >

Hell's Kitchen Week 3: Ramsay makes women barf

s
shallots Feb 19, 2009 05:25 PM

The only way I'll remember this episode is my husband's comment "Ramsay has gotten meaner"
The forced eating of beef parts that are, in the best of time, acquired tastes is a new low. The barf bags, the gagging....gosh, it just makes me want to get rid of Ramsay from my TV screen.

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
Delete
  1. r
    RGC1982 RE: shallots Feb 19, 2009 05:52 PM

    I saw the trailer, and that was enough.

    1. dave_c RE: shallots Feb 19, 2009 08:25 PM

      I kept thinking of the scene from the movie "Stand By Me".

      1 Reply
      1. re: dave_c
        l
        Leonardo RE: dave_c Feb 19, 2009 08:35 PM

        Loved Jean Phillippe's perfect imitation of Lacey's high-pitched squeaky sniveling!

      2. m
        Maximilien RE: shallots Feb 20, 2009 03:34 AM

        I don't get it ? they "forced" the contestants to eat ? or was it simply to eat non-standard parts ? raw ? cooked ? prepared ?

        1. Bad Sneakers RE: shallots Feb 20, 2009 04:23 AM

          I tried to watch it. I started about 8 minutes in and saw a competition where they had to identify where different cuts of beef come from on a diagram of a cow. Out of the 8 answers, the group got 6 wrong - I turned it off. How on earth do you get on a cooking show and not know these things? I mean I can barely boil water and I could have done better (thanks Alton Brown!).

          1. LindaWhit RE: shallots Feb 20, 2009 06:05 AM

            Yeah, I wasn't happy watching this episode. I really felt for these women, especially Andrea who was having a wretched time trying to get that stuff down.

            And why am I not surprised that Lacey and dips**t Seth screwed up the beef cut placement cards on their cows so royally? I completely understand LA's comment that she wished they had lost the challenge to get rid of Lacey and/or Colleen. Disliked that both teams tried to sabotage the other with delayed orders going up to the pass (Red Kitchen) and returned food that was deliberately misordered and then returned to the pass (Blue Kitchen).

            I'm still watching, but not sure for how long...The only ones that seem to have their acts together are Coi, Andrea, and Carol for the women, and the young long-haired guy on the men's team.

            1. NellyNel RE: shallots Feb 20, 2009 06:21 AM

              I haven't seen any of HK this year, but I recall that there was a similar challenge a few seasons ago...I can remember them sitting at a table eating all the gross bits of animal parts, and a few people gagging and I think one person tossed their cookies.
              So actually, he has been this mean before !(but I guess it's not Ramsey's actual idea - I'm sure it's the producers who are the wicked ones!)

              1. j
                jcattles RE: shallots Feb 20, 2009 06:47 AM

                I can't believe Ramsey kept Seth. He seriously needs to go, along with Lacey. Guess he makes for good tv, that's the only reason I can think of to keep him.

                1 Reply
                1. re: jcattles
                  chowser RE: jcattles Feb 20, 2009 08:34 AM

                  I can't imagine Ramsey has a real choice in who to eliminate. They pick who makes good TV, period. Would Ramsey really choose Seth to run any of his restaurants, seriously? I'm guessing he already knows who he wants to pick and everyone else is just window dressing for the show.

                  The men's team isn't made of geniuses--what kind of strategy is it to eliminate your best cooks? The goal is to win the challenge so you don't get sent home, if you send home your best cooks, you lose every time. The show is infuriating but strangely enticing. It's almost like watching a Sarah Palin interview where all you can do is shake your head. And, yeah, I still tune in. They know the gullibility of their audience.:-) How much fun is it to watch Colleen brag about knowing meat since she grew up in Omaha and getting almost all of them wrong?

                2. ChinoWayne RE: shallots Feb 20, 2009 08:53 AM

                  As soon as they had the contestants walk in to the meat processing plant and showed them a side of beef, a little light bulb should have gone off for all of them "maybe I need to pay attention to this". Understanding primal cuts of meat is just part of the job description of anyone who wants to call himself an executive chef.

                  When the teams went head to head back in the kitchen anyone who could not identify individual cuts of beef on the table would have been truly pathetic, but couple that with the fact that each team had about six chances to "pin the label on the cow", and that the last contestants in the cycle screwed up so many labels was beyond pathetic.

                  There are a few promising faces in this bunch, less so with Ji gone, and there are also plenty of losers cast in this bunch. It is truly a TV producer's dream come true with the likes of Colleen the phony Martha Stewart of Omaha, Lacy the shirker who probably lives in her mother's basement, and the clueless wannabe chef who-will-stab-you-in-the-back-with-his-chef's-knife Seth, and the quote steakhouse executive chef unquote who couldn't cook a piece of meat correctly to save his life.

                  The barf bags is part of the standard formula for this show every season, you could put together a check list of episodic "events" that will play out over the course of a season of this show.

                  When Seth "butchered" the filet was oh, so beautiful a moment. Seeing him destroy that piece of meat in his total cluelessness, it was like seeing some doufus with a car parked on a railroad track, blissfully changing a tire, while a hundred car freight train is bearing down on him at 80 mph, blowing its air horn full blast. What great TV!

                  What a totally beautiful train wreck, it is so much fun seeing the bodies thrown off this train every week!

                  The Three Stooges aren't dead, they are running around in Hell's Kitchen.

                  2 Replies
                  1. re: ChinoWayne
                    chowser RE: ChinoWayne Feb 20, 2009 09:09 AM

                    ROTFL, great synopsis. You couldn't script better TV than this, not even with Lucy and Ethel on the chocolate line.

                    1. re: ChinoWayne
                      LindaWhit RE: ChinoWayne Feb 20, 2009 09:13 AM

                      "The Three Stooges aren't dead, they are running around in Hell's Kitchen."
                      ~~~~~~~~~
                      That sums it up quite nicely, CW! LOL

                    2. t
                      tjr RE: shallots Feb 20, 2009 09:17 AM

                      Yeah, they obviously kept Seth on for the drama, just like Matt last season.

                      The "gross animal bits" thing is a show mainstay, but to be honest, I've eaten all of those things before, maybe not in those quantities, and didn't throw up. It's just playing on the American fear of offal.

                      3 Replies
                      1. re: tjr
                        r
                        rockycat RE: tjr Feb 20, 2009 12:17 PM

                        Spouse and I were jealous! They got to eat liver and tongue prepared by Ramsey's staff. How could that possibly be bad?

                        1. re: tjr
                          e
                          Ericandblueboy RE: tjr Feb 20, 2009 05:15 PM

                          Makes you wonder how they're chefs when they can't eat much less prepare these foods.

                          1. re: tjr
                            m
                            maisonbistro RE: tjr Feb 20, 2009 06:42 PM

                            You know Fear Factor was much worse. Now THAT was gross. Let's not forget, and this is for the OP and the others who thought this was mean, that these people are chefs - or food industry people. They weren't asked to eat cow poop or chicken beaks or dog brains. They were given perfectly cookable parts of a cow. The fact that their "meat" reference points are low, and they're probably familiar with calf's liver and not much more isn't Ramsay's fault. And furthermore, as chef's they should have an adventurous palate instead of a squeamish one.

                            Seth is a producer's dream, cocky, stupid, looks clueless.. of course he wasn't sent home. Him and Lacey are this year's entertainment. Anyone wanna bet they'll hook up?

                            Chino - Great post! Great!

                          2. s
                            smtucker RE: shallots Feb 20, 2009 07:42 PM

                            This is the first season that I have watched Hell's Kitchen. A part of me is absolutely appalled at the crassness of the cheftestants and Gordon Ramsey's seemingly random cruelty; while another part of me is fascinated by the few glimmers of seeing how a kitchen might conceivably be run.

                            Though this will seem snobby, why are all of these hopefuls such low lifes? Their command of the English language is negligible, they have no inter-social skills... to be honest. I can't imagine any of them dealing with suppliers or high-value customers.

                            And it seems clear to me that the guys have a distinct advantage since Ramsey is the ultimate guy's guy in this show. The female reaction to his total rants is clearly different than the male reaction.

                            I find myself looking for the Ramsey that took care of Asia, the Scottish chef on Ramsey's Kitchen Nightmares.... or the one we see on the "F" word playing with his children.

                            As to the offals... they didn't looked like they were cooked with love. That stuff just looked boiled. No shallots with wine reduction. Just boiled beef bits. But why did they all feel they had to eat? Was there a mandatory amount? Or had those poor girls been starved for 24 hours?

                            2 Replies
                            1. re: smtucker
                              dave_c RE: smtucker Feb 20, 2009 10:15 PM

                              Looked like the offal was just boiled bits. Cleaned? I think the gross factor was in high gear with the women. However, just thinking of chitterlings that stuff stinks and taste off even when it's cleaned and cooked with seasonings. I can't imagine eating plain boiled chitterlings. I don't know if there was a bovine equivalent of chitterlings dished out to the women.

                              1. re: dave_c
                                s
                                shallots RE: dave_c Feb 21, 2009 06:54 AM

                                In agreement that the offal was just boiled bits, and certainly not prepared with TLC by Ramsay.
                                In addition, sitting them at a circular table, pointing out the large number of barf bags...
                                Collen had the sense to cover her ears and not look at people barfing.

                                To the editors of the show, congrats, you made it half way through the episode and made everyone unlikable.

                            2. meadandale RE: shallots Feb 21, 2009 09:49 AM

                              I find it hard to believe that any of these people are more than short order cooks or line cooks in a greasy spoon. Most have never butchered meat and were grossed out by the sight of a side of beef? I mean, seriously, wtf? Where do you think that that meat comes from? This country has lost touch with the source of their food. They think that meat comes shrink wrapped in plastic and have totally lost touch with the animal that it is sourced from.

                              And the coup de gras was the 'executive chef of a steak house' that couldn't cook a steak to temperature. I worked as a broiler chef at a chart house for a few years and I'd rarely have a steak come back for temperature. If it did, it was usually because I cooked it correctly but the customer didn't really understand what they wanted because they've been served over cooked meat for too long. Most people that order Medium Rare really want medium they just don't know it because most times they order MR they've been served M.

                              Undercooking a steak, however (especially slightly) is generally no BFD since you can always refire to a higher temp. You can't uncook a steak though. We were always taught to err on the rare side. If you overcook it and it comes back it goes in the trash. If you under cook it you can correct it and send it back out.

                              1 Reply
                              1. re: meadandale
                                bigmackdaddy RE: meadandale Feb 22, 2009 02:12 PM

                                I don't understand how anyone cannot love beef tongue, stomach and so on. Granted I hate the taste of beef liver but only because of its taste. IMO you cannot be take seriously if you don't appreciate the taste and texture of most edible offal from any animal.

                              Show Hidden Posts