I find that I can only watch Check, Please! using my DVR so I can quickly skip over the redundancies ("Joe, you picked this place, why don't you give us a recap?"...)

jimswside wrote:I dont have much use for Check Please, it is at least 6 months behind LTH and other food forums in regards to dining options.

Sure, but we're not really their target audience, so that's to be expected. It's aimed at the generalist. LTH is geared towards the specialist.

Binko wrote:

jimswside wrote:I dont have much use for Check Please, it is at least 6 months behind LTH and other food forums in regards to dining options.

Sure, but we're not really their target audience, so that's to be expected. It's aimed at the generalist. LTH is geared towards the specialist.

that is correct, that is why I stated I had no use for Check Please, the show does serve a purpose for some.

2 things I like about Check, Please!, which are admittedly, of limited value:

1) The roll-in videos, because they contain brief interviews with the restaurants' management/chefs and footage of the restaurants' food. I find these features informative.

2) I'm occasionally reminded of places I like (or used to frequent) that have fallen off my radar.

I'm not sure it's the fault of the participants, the producers or both but the comments about the restaurants are pretty close to useless because -- as others have posted above -- they're largely unsubstantiated. It's rare when someone I consider knowledgeable appears on the show. Generally speaking, I have no reason to trust the opinions of the people who appear on the show.

=R=

You know, I'd enjoy the show a lot more if they sent them in with hidden cameras and then just asked them for a 1-5 rating.

ronnie_suburban wrote:1) The roll-in videos, because they contain brief interviews with the restaurants' management/chefs and footage of the restaurants' food. I find these features informative.

Ronnie, could you elaborate on this? The reason I ask is that I typically find this part of the show to be of limited value - almost like a commercial for the restaurant.

To the extent I learn something, it's usually because I see that the restaurant is (for example) full of young hipsters or the Over-80 crowd, or I get a sense of the portion size, or the owner says something like "Our wines by the glass are the largest pours in the city!". These instances, though rare, (unfortunately) encourage me to make decisions based on stereotypes.

What we really need is a radio call-in show about food and restaurants, maybe hosted by some LTH'ers, who, as a group, have faces that are made for radio, in which we could argue about food in this town. If we think a dish is horrific, we could go on about it for 15-20 minutes.

GAF wrote:What we really need is a radio call-in show about food and restaurants, maybe hosted by some LTH'ers, who, as a group, have faces that are made for radio, in which we could argue about food in this town. If we think a dish is horrific, we could go on about it for 15-20 minutes.

Nick Digilio on WGN with GWiv riffing about Moon's, bad (read: seminal) movies, 60's Chicago bands that time forgot and the less than occasional Santo malaprop?

Where do I sign up?

FWIW, Saturday at Moon's the river of butter breaking the levies of the grits onto my 2 over easy's was positively (not to make light) Katrina'n (sp).

Darren72 wrote:

ronnie_suburban wrote:1) The roll-in videos, because they contain brief interviews with the restaurants' management/chefs and footage of the restaurants' food. I find these features informative.

Ronnie, could you elaborate on this? The reason I ask is that I typically find this part of the show to be of limited value - almost like a commercial for the restaurant.

To the extent I learn something, it's usually because I see that the restaurant is (for example) full of young hipsters or the Over-80 crowd, or I get a sense of the portion size, or the owner says something like "Our wines by the glass are the largest pours in the city!". These instances, though rare, (unfortunately) encourage me to make decisions based on stereotypes.

I think the interviews are good because they usually reveal something -- positive or negative -- about the philosophy of the establishment.

As for the food footage, it's by no means definitive (after all, you can't taste footage) but I like to see the dishes and the clips at least reveal if something looks good or not.

=R=

ronnie_suburban wrote:I'm not sure it's the fault of the participants, the producers or both but the comments about the restaurants are pretty close to useless because -- as others have posted above -- they're largely unsubstantiated. It's rare when someone I consider knowledgeable appears on the show. Generally speaking, I have no reason to trust the opinions of the people who appear on the show.

=R=

Civilians generally speak of food in unsubstantiated generalities. I have tried many times to persuade a person-on-the-street to say a few words about a foodstuff for Chicago Public Radio, and what I get almost every time is "It's great" or "Really good" and that's it. I've stopped trying. It's not their fault; they don't have the vocabulary but, more importantly, they don't have the passion.

Perhaps the larger world is not as obsessed as we are. Perhaps.

ronnie_suburban wrote:

Darren72 wrote:

ronnie_suburban wrote:1) The roll-in videos, because they contain brief interviews with the restaurants' management/chefs and footage of the restaurants' food. I find these features informative.

Ronnie, could you elaborate on this? The reason I ask is that I typically find this part of the show to be of limited value - almost like a commercial for the restaurant.

To the extent I learn something, it's usually because I see that the restaurant is (for example) full of young hipsters or the Over-80 crowd, or I get a sense of the portion size, or the owner says something like "Our wines by the glass are the largest pours in the city!". These instances, though rare, (unfortunately) encourage me to make decisions based on stereotypes.

I think the interviews are good because they usually reveal something -- positive or negative -- about the philosophy of the establishment.

As for the food footage, it's by no means definitive (after all, you can't taste footage) but I like to see the dishes and the clips at least reveal if something looks good or not.

=R=

I agree with ronnie on this. I find that the videos inform me far more about the ambience and quality of the potential experience than the opinions of the interviewees whose experience and expertise is, to say the least, variable. Based on the videos alone from last week's segement I've placed both Boinsoiree and Trullo in my "should-give-it-a-try" book (altho not the pasta w/mortadello from the latter which both sounded and looked "horrific") and Hamburger Mary's on my "not-in-my-lifetime" list.

Boinsoiree is an absolute favorite of mine, and I've posted many times on the place, stopped because once I became a regular, it becomes boring to hear the praise. Now, I can look forward to never getting in with the "Check Please" effect. I've already emailed about NYE, and they wouldn't take a reservation (he said that hundreds have already inquired..ugh) , and I have to wait for the random email that will come out, so I am checking my email like a madwoman every hour. I'm happy for the success for the guys that cook there though, they really deserve great business for sticking it out. I was going there when they still had brunch.
I use Check Please as a weeding out show. I will never step foot in Hamburger Mary's now. I won't waste my Italian choice, when I know that places in my neighborhood will be just as good. What I would like to have heard from the "horrific" woman, was why. Did the sauce taste like it was from a can, was the pasta fresh, was the pasta mushy, was the mortadella cooked ( it didn't look cooked or crisp) was it the combination of bologna and pasta, if you know what mortadella is, then what were you expecting, and didn't receive, was the dish seasoned?
The host should pry it out of the people, she needs to ask very specific questions, it's her show for godsakes. I understand she is a sommelier, but this isn't a wine show, it's a restaurant show.

nicinchic wrote:The host should pry it out of the people, she needs to ask very specific questions, it's her show for godsakes. I understand she is a sommelier, but this isn't a wine show, it's a restaurant show.

This is a little harsh, in my opinion. I've always thought Alpina does a very good job of asking guests follow-up questions, but also keeping the show moving forward.

Really? It's not my impression at all, but she does always ask what wine people take to BYOB's.
I would have to watch the show again, but I don't remember her asking that woman any specific questions about that pasta. Every now and then she will throw out a "the chef specifically does this..." Did you notice this? To a guest.

Just one person's opinion...

Darren72 wrote:

nicinchic wrote:The host should pry it out of the people, she needs to ask very specific questions, it's her show for godsakes. I understand she is a sommelier, but this isn't a wine show, it's a restaurant show.

This is a little harsh, in my opinion. I've always thought Alpina does a very good job of asking guests follow-up questions, but also keeping the show moving forward.

She also does a very good job of NOT allowing her perspective to shape the discussion. Alpana seems to never express an opinion about a place and that is definitely by design. Small point, perhaps, but it's not her show; it's David Manilow's.

nicinchic wrote:The host should pry it out of the people, she needs to ask very specific questions, it's her show for godsakes. I understand she is a sommelier, but this isn't a wine show, it's a restaurant show.

She did ask specific questions. They edited it out of the online video but Alpana said something in the realm of, "what was the problem that made it so bad? was it the ingredients? was it the combination of flavors?"

I gave Alpana a ton of credit for challenging the guest.

She did ask specific questions. They edited it out of the online video but Alpana said something in the realm of, "what was the problem that made it so bad? was it the ingredients? was it the combination of flavors?"

My recollection was that she simply asked what made it so bad, the guest couldn't seem to formulate an answer (or they edited it out) and they moved on. Alpana did not probe any further. I think a comment like "horrific" requires elaboration or retraction, and I didn't think the host did a great job in pulling this out of the guest.

rickster wrote:

She did ask specific questions. They edited it out of the online video but Alpana said something in the realm of, "what was the problem that made it so bad? was it the ingredients? was it the combination of flavors?"

My recollection was that she simply asked what made it so bad, the guest couldn't seem to formulate an answer (or they edited it out) and they moved on. Alpana did not probe any further. I think a comment like "horrific" requires elaboration or retraction, and I didn't think the host did a great job in pulling this out of the guest.

I specifically remember, "was it the ingredients? the combination?"

Bad editing then I guess.

In either case, I just got my NYE reso at Boinsoiree, they have only been posted for an hour, all the late seatings are already gone.

Dixie Kitchen and Bait Shop reviewed on Check Please!

Regards,

Cathy2 wrote:Dixie Kitchen and Bait Shop reviewed on Check Please!

Regards,

Could the reviewer be someone with, um, executive authority?

These will be rebroadcast a few times in January.

See http://www.examiner.com/x-396-Chicago-D ... ie-Kitchen

Darren72 wrote:These will be rebroadcast a few times in January.

See http://www.examiner.com/x-396-Chicago-D ... ie-Kitchen

Check Please website

January 16th at 8:00 pm on WTTW

Now if they'd only dig out the Lincoln episode.

One of our very own is on Check Please.

Cathy2 wrote:One of our very own is on Check Please.

It is Octarine talking about Peppercorns in Evanston.

I thought he did splendidly.

Regards,
Cathy2

Cathy2 wrote:

Cathy2 wrote:One of our very own is on Check Please.

It is Octarine talking about Peppercorns in Evanston.

I thought he did splendidly.

The episode is being rebroadcast at 10pm tonight on WTTW/PBS Ch.11, for those that missed it.

Cathy2 wrote:

Cathy2 wrote:One of our very own is on Check Please.

It is Octarine talking about Peppercorns in Evanston.

I thought he did splendidly.

Regards,
Cathy2

Just watched the entire episode, and I kept thinking "this guy HAS to be on LTH Forum..." Awesome job!

bweiny wrote:

Cathy2 wrote:

Cathy2 wrote:One of our very own is on Check Please.

It is Octarine talking about Peppercorns in Evanston.

I thought he did splendidly.

The episode is being rebroadcast at 10pm tonight on WTTW/PBS Ch.11, for those that missed it.

Also available through the PBS app.

I had a great time doing this and I highly recommend sending in your suggestions to be on the show. Alpana was funny and gracious and my co guests were really nice. Foodies are good people in general.