A Formulaic Season of "Top Chef"

Part one of Top Chef: Chicago's season finale further proved a point that the show may be coming overly formulaic. Granted, I had not yet joined the bandwagon until Season 3 (Top Chef: Miami). However, season 4 is turning into a replay of the Miami-based season, and though I'll tune in to find out who becomes the new Top Chef champion (likely a woman since one has never won) next Wednesday, I'm not craving another helping of Bravo's hit cooking show.

Here are a couple of similarities (and turn-offs) of Top Chef: Miami and Top Chef: Chicago --

Restaurant Wars - Season 4 appeared to kick it up a notch with an extended episode entitled "Wedding Wars," where the chefs split into two teams to cater a wedding. Brilliant idea!!! Then, the series backtracked two episodes later with the return of "Restaurant Wars." Just like the previous season, the eliminated contestant was potentially one of the top 2 or 3 chefs remaining, but ended up having a terrible week in the "executive chef" position. Now, it's understandable that when a person takes charge and his team fails, then he should be the one to suffer. However, the judges seem to lack complete accountability in these decisions. There's even a statement during the closing credits that says the producers have the final say on who wins and who is sent home. Therefore, ignoring previous challenges and the talent shown by all would-be "eliminees" each week is simply unacceptable. The producers choose to shock instead of taking the competition seriously, which in turn creates viewer hatred for particular contestants.

Finale, Part 1 - Just like the Restaurant Wars debacle, producers like to surprise viewers by ignoring all previous challenges that have brought the final four to the finale. Unacceptable. Whether or not you agree with the reasons for someone getting booted in a particular episode, there is always the "three strikes and you're out" rule. Someone who has consistantly been in the bottom 2-3 and always makes mistakes on simple tasks is clearly NOT a "Top Chef." Even when Season 3's Dale arrived at the finale with his game face on, he should've received further scrutiny based on his previous performances (granted, he actually WON the elimination challenge). Still, this show is about finding the "Top Chef" in a group. There's a difference between one or two bad performances and five or more in one season. Also, if someone has consistantly been targeted by the judges as one of the "least favorite" and his/her ego only continues to grow, it's time to put that person in his/her place.

Unfortunately, "Top Chef" is quickly falling into the rut that most reality shows hit. Until reality TV raises its standards and stops rewarding mediocrity (American Idol? America's Got Talent?), it'll never achieve greatness. It's high time for reality competition producers to get creative. There's a reason The Amazing Race always wins the Reality Competition Emmy Award.

UPDATE (6/6): The Season Pass blog over at Variety (*spoiler alert*) seems utterly disappointed, too.