In Kitchen Nightmares, celebrity chef Gordon Ramsay performs restaurant makeovers.
Ramsay visits restaurants that are losing money and about to close. He investigates problems, cleans up kitchens, updates menus, redecorates dining rooms.
This TV show isn't educational. It's mainly just entertainment. It isn't really about food; it's about people. Although it might be described as reality TV, much of what's presented isn't entirely true.
The recurring theme is that restaurants are failing, and they're failing because the owners or managers are delusional. Their food's perfect. It's the best. Customers aren't returning and the restaurants are losing money. No idea why, but it can't be the food. The food's terrible. No, it's the best. No, it's disgusting. No, people love it.
Of course, the food is always the problem, or at least that's the way Ramsay tells it.
Many restaurants have complained, after the their episodes aired, that they were misrepresented. Some have even sued. So who's right and who's wrong?
Kitchen Nightmares is not a documentary. It's about entertainment. The events shouldn't be taken as literally true, because in many cases, they aren't. Statements are taken out of context. Snippets of video are pieced together to create fights that never happened. Crucial details are intentionally suppressed.
One episode shows a cook dropping a piece of chicken on the floor, picking it up, and placing it back in a fryer. What they left off the show: the cook wasn't an employee at the restaurant. He was hired by the producers of Kitchen Nightmares to work there temporarily, while they were filming.
That the events are sensationalized is self-evident. In nearly every episode preview, the narrator proclaims that the next restaurant to be helped is 'the worst restaurant ever' on the show, or 'the most disgusting kitchen', or the episode is 'the most explosive'.
While Kitchen Nightmares is not literally accurate, it does effectively convey what Ramsay feels. Restaurant owners don't want to face reality, don't listen to feedback, and won't change. The steak's undercooked. No, it's good. The onions are burnt. No, they're correct. The customers are unhappy. Well, they're wrong. Customers aren't coming back. My food's the best. We have to fix these problems. No, we don't need to change anything. So Ramsay resorts to yelling, swearing, drama, and over-the-top theatrics. Explaining calmly didn't work, so maybe something else will.
Having been to hundreds of restaurants myself, I'm fairly sure Ramsay is right about this point. Whether they are ultimately good or not, the vast majority of restaurants refuse to listen to criticism and can't fix mistakes.
And this is where Kitchen Nightmares is brilliant. It takes a fairly complex industry and makes it accessible. We see what Ramsay sees. We face challenges as he faces them. We experience his vocation.
Kitchen Nightmares glorifies Gordon Ramsay. Nearly all episodes end on a happy note. Ramsay has turned things around. He's their savior. They can be proud of their food again. Does Ramsay deserve such high praise?
The real numbers are grim. About two-thirds of restaurants on Kitchen Nightmares closed within a few years. 80 percent have now closed. Maybe Ramsay's method of screaming at people doesn't teach them anything. Maybe most people simply aren't capable of learning. Maybe the TV show was just about money. Maybe people aren't willing to change.
It's unclear how much Ramsay has helped these restaurants. Different viewers will come to different conclusions. What isn't controversial is this: it was a fast-paced, eventful, provocative attempt.
Ramsay visits restaurants that are losing money and about to close. He investigates problems, cleans up kitchens, updates menus, redecorates dining rooms.
This TV show isn't educational. It's mainly just entertainment. It isn't really about food; it's about people. Although it might be described as reality TV, much of what's presented isn't entirely true.
The recurring theme is that restaurants are failing, and they're failing because the owners or managers are delusional. Their food's perfect. It's the best. Customers aren't returning and the restaurants are losing money. No idea why, but it can't be the food. The food's terrible. No, it's the best. No, it's disgusting. No, people love it.
Of course, the food is always the problem, or at least that's the way Ramsay tells it.
Many restaurants have complained, after the their episodes aired, that they were misrepresented. Some have even sued. So who's right and who's wrong?
Kitchen Nightmares is not a documentary. It's about entertainment. The events shouldn't be taken as literally true, because in many cases, they aren't. Statements are taken out of context. Snippets of video are pieced together to create fights that never happened. Crucial details are intentionally suppressed.
One episode shows a cook dropping a piece of chicken on the floor, picking it up, and placing it back in a fryer. What they left off the show: the cook wasn't an employee at the restaurant. He was hired by the producers of Kitchen Nightmares to work there temporarily, while they were filming.
That the events are sensationalized is self-evident. In nearly every episode preview, the narrator proclaims that the next restaurant to be helped is 'the worst restaurant ever' on the show, or 'the most disgusting kitchen', or the episode is 'the most explosive'.
While Kitchen Nightmares is not literally accurate, it does effectively convey what Ramsay feels. Restaurant owners don't want to face reality, don't listen to feedback, and won't change. The steak's undercooked. No, it's good. The onions are burnt. No, they're correct. The customers are unhappy. Well, they're wrong. Customers aren't coming back. My food's the best. We have to fix these problems. No, we don't need to change anything. So Ramsay resorts to yelling, swearing, drama, and over-the-top theatrics. Explaining calmly didn't work, so maybe something else will.
Having been to hundreds of restaurants myself, I'm fairly sure Ramsay is right about this point. Whether they are ultimately good or not, the vast majority of restaurants refuse to listen to criticism and can't fix mistakes.
And this is where Kitchen Nightmares is brilliant. It takes a fairly complex industry and makes it accessible. We see what Ramsay sees. We face challenges as he faces them. We experience his vocation.
Kitchen Nightmares glorifies Gordon Ramsay. Nearly all episodes end on a happy note. Ramsay has turned things around. He's their savior. They can be proud of their food again. Does Ramsay deserve such high praise?
The real numbers are grim. About two-thirds of restaurants on Kitchen Nightmares closed within a few years. 80 percent have now closed. Maybe Ramsay's method of screaming at people doesn't teach them anything. Maybe most people simply aren't capable of learning. Maybe the TV show was just about money. Maybe people aren't willing to change.
It's unclear how much Ramsay has helped these restaurants. Different viewers will come to different conclusions. What isn't controversial is this: it was a fast-paced, eventful, provocative attempt.