House of Knives

Loved all the chefs. The cooking itself was great. The judging was detailed. But poor Scott Conant- it seemed as though he might pop a vein at any time. The premise was just hokey. House of Knives, culinary council, a throne. Just ridiculous. I was embarrassed just watching it.

Scott is a great chef and has been a judge on Chopped for Years. He has always made insightful comments. Apparently the producers of this show wanted drama and made poor Scott practically shout when he would say things like "take the throne!"and "your house has fallen." It was just too much. I laughed so much I started crying.

Great cooking. The rules are what feel new here. It's going for the throat of the top dog. Contrary to letting the worst pick each other off. Very medieval. I think that's is why I liked it so much. It's cutthroat because of that.

The judging could be improved. TOC and next level chef are more fair because it is truly anonymous. It is hard to not agree that it feels like decisions are what makes it for good TV. Reads as less than meritocratic a couple of times and that's a letdown.

Also feel like it's unbalanced when you end up being on the throne near the beginning is nowhere near as important as being on the throne going in to finale. It is very lopsided. Not sure how to fix that but that should be addressed in season 2. Otherwise winning 5 times in a row is meaningless other than bragging rights unless you made it happen at the right moment.

So in my opinion , anything artistic weather it be photography, painting, cooking ...etc should be anonymous judging, meaning the judges do not know who cook what, so you you have to judge the food not the cook and be persuaded by personal bias. That's why i love watching Tournament of Champions or Triple Threat. This is neat twist in cooking but the Judging is Joke. No disrespect to the judging I'm talking about the judging format. They probably already have their winner picked out.

We all love watching our favorites cook I just think to be a fair format the judges should never know who cooked what especially if its something that produces a finish product. They didnt say they were being judge on watching them cook, from the judging it looks like they just want to make sure the food meets the challenge and the test. Theres not even a score card to average the scores like they do on Guys Grocery Games. Just my opinion, I think it be more interesting if it was a blind taste test and the judges never know who cooked what. Go TOC.

This is a classic cooking show. Nothing more and nothing less. It's Chopped with a slight twist (which frankly isn't that interesting of a twist). Scott Conant is engaging BUT as a judge. As the lead he's just not engaging which is a shame. It's not a bad show but it tries way too hard to be interesting. If you want to watch it as a competitive cooking show it works. It you can't get past all of the big time over production, manufactured excitement, "exciting" music, etc I get it. If there is a Season 2, my advice is stop trying so hard. You're Chopped and that's okay. Just making an organically interesting show and maybe you have a future. It's also tough to watch Anne Burrell. May she rest in peace . . .

I'm not sure what the Food Network was thinking. This show is just same 'ol, same 'ol. Same concept as Iron Chef, Chopped and all of the other imagination-free cooking competitions on the Food Network. Same boring hosts, judges and outcomes. The concept has been done to death with different themes/cooking sets and, by far, the stupidest. Just the fact that Anne Burrell was a competitor tells me they know they're in trouble with the series. Big surprise she won.... Rigged as usual. In the end, she totally embarrassed herself by taking such a step down. Who's next, Bobby Flay? Don't waste your time watching this predictable show.