The whole point of TV is entertainment and Scalper has hit the nail on the head. MK is simply not entertaining. It's hard to stay focussed on it and I find my mind wandering. There have been some excellent suggestions on how to improve, nay SAVE, MK on other threads but no action yet that I can detect.

I just love your Acorn Antiques analogy!

And you're right...all a bit sad, really.

There is little to be added to the comments from "Scalper" & "GFL Forever".

GFL was an extremely hard act to follow, but MK is not the answer! Close the debate and change to something more appropriate to the needs of the vast majority of food-orientated viewers.

"(Unfocussed) Great Scot"

This board is for food chat, if you want to chat about MK move to the MK board, you will get more responses and leave this free for those who want to talk about food.

Scot

I too do hope UKTVFood does change to something that more suits the needs of the viewers...and QUICKLY! They're commiting hari kari.

Cheers!

When are you going to start talking about food MickeyT?

Look back through my posts to see when I started way before your time posset.

Have done MickeyT. Everyone has to start somewhere! Huge gap in postings thats not all I noticed. Have a lovely week-end. What you cooking?

def Fatuous: Vacuously, smugly, and unconsciously foolish. Scalper, probably.....

Vacuous, surely. The content of the show is often very thin (although not always) and at times a bit childlish (eg How to cook an egg, etc) There does seem to be a vacuous approach to the dialogue with an over-reliance on teleprompters.

Smugly, partially.... with Mr Parker Bowles at least. and often you can perceive the viewer being "talked down to" by others, although this could just be the writing of the script.

Unconsciously foolish, definitely. The presenters do not know how they are coming off and the dialogue still brings a smirk to many viewers. The contrived "cafe" and backdrop are so artificial it makes one cringe.

So I am forced to agree Scalper, fatuous is a pretty accurate description.

posset, MickeyT may have started earlier than you [as if that's relevant in any way] but he's only recently resurrected after a two year hiatus! I wonder what has revved his propeller?

anyway, enough comments on the lack of "entertainment" provided by MK, we all know it's dreary and dull. What's up with the recipes??

I've tried a few from the website here and they all seem quite bland...even tasteless. The ingrediants seem to always lack enough spice or any method to introduce flavours (eg heavy caramelisation or deep suace reduction)

This can't be a co-incidence?? Or is it on purpose?

Fatuous!? I love it, I never heard of this word until this thread. Very educational.

GFLForever...glad to help!! (I admit I had to look in the dictionary!)

Scalper, Matthew Fort has done serious damage to his credibility and his standing as "impartial" as a critic. You are so right. "Greatest dishes in the world is one thing", but presenting and (egad!) cooking cheapens his authority enormously.

Can he honestly comment on a dish being he's presenting on the show? No, it will always be "wonderful" and "unctuous"...

Or has he put his "critic hat" on the side for the duration of the show? Who knows, but I won't trust his opinion as much as I used to...

But the worst thing is just being associated with this horrible production!

TV Foodie

Matthew Fort has 'guested' as a cook on other programmes (Nigel Slater and Rick Stein that I know of) and, to date, this hasn't affected his credibility. I don't agree that his involvement with Market Kitchen will do any damage at all.

IMHO

jan

Jannymac..maybe you're right, he's been on so many other programs that perhaps his credibility is already damaged.

Where I come from food "critics" tended to be somewhat secretive/anonymous and his extremely high profile must make his work near-impossible. It is difficult to do their job if they become a "celebrity" unto themslves...sort of like Paris Hilton in a way.

He's probably got little credibility at all anymore due to his over-exposure and involvement with so many in the "business", regardless of MK.

TV Foodie

I can't agree with you (although I LOVE your comparison to Paris Hilton ) I think that food critics are making a conscious decision to become more visible and I can only see that as a positive move. I'd much rather see them and try to get a feeling of the person behind the critic, than have this stern 'on high' individual making grandiose pronouncements.

I believe that his credibility is enhanced rather than diminished.

cheers
jan

Jannymac...I absoultely see your point - but just don't know how a food critic can do their job if those that are being critiqued know that is they are currenlt being critiqued.

When these "high profile celebrities" arrive in a restaurant it is IMPOSSIBLE to believe they won't get special treatment, both in service and food. So their considered "critique" will have been tarnished as they will be critiquing an experience you and I never will receive.

That's why Michelin works SO very well even after a century. Totally anonymous. No kickbacks, no "mates", no favours, no "business arrangements"

TV Foodie

Absolutely agree that Michelin is the best format for food reviewing and critique. But we're not comparing apples with apples here. Matthew Fort/Jay Rayner and others are food writers and critics and they work for publications. Part of their job is for the articles they write, in order to increase circulation of their respective newspapers. The Michelin inspectors are a completely different breed and need to have that anonimity.

What I think MF and others are doing is to increase their personal visibility to the viewing public and, if in doing so, they increase awareness of cooking and ingredients, well that's a bonus.

jan

I don't know if I agree TVFoodie, although the point you are making does make me pause. His role on MK is not as a critic but as a (dreadful) presenter. The fact that he also cooks dishes is somewhat of a surprise to me also as he doesn't do it with much flair, does he??

Frankly, I'm not sure how he can perform restaurant critiques anyway as he is so well known...he certainly wouldn't get the treatment of a normal diner, would he??

Perhpas this is just another source of income for him??

I saw him receive a top award a couple of months ago. Maybe he has reached the top of his field and wants to move in a different direction. I think he brings a good depth of knowledge to the show and always in a cheerful manner.

I imagine someone like Matthew could be rather pompous, which I am sure most will agree, he definitely is not.

Grisinni

Fude...ditto...what more can really be said? The sooner this show is axed and replaced with something even remotely interesting the better!!

Dougy..a lot more can actually be said..this MK programme is so boring that it needs to be replaced ASAP....the whole UKTVFood channel is dying because of it. The fact that the is a "year's contract" is really not relevant as these things can be re-negotiated especially with the current viewer numbers.

I have tried really hard to watch MK, but really struggle, especially when Tana is on, she is so smug, and her mannerisms are just really annoying. Its the way she talks down to Matt as well, as if she knows everything better. I do wish they would replace this awful programme, it is starting to really get on my nerves now.

BRING BACK JENI PLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEZ

Pocket Battleship-completelyagree: Tana & TPB so smug they set your teeth on edge & I can only think the former owes her rather dubious claim to fame to hubbie, as a chef she is not ,whereas TPB's sole redeeming feature is that he is a chilliholic much like myself. Ditto other 'posters'-Matthew Fort's credibility has been flushed down the toilet by this diastrous move & as for Matt-I can only reiterate what I said previously ie. he couldn't present his way out of a paper bag.All in all-terrible terrible programme-the sooner it is taken off the air is not too soon in my opinion.

Nouska, you hit the nail on the head! These "celebrity presenters" - who were only chosen to try to get ratings up - are the most annoying element of this dreary programme!

If someone is looking for a positive, constructive suggestion to improve MK, retire these two characters. They are NOT telegenic, they cannot read an autocue properly and they clearly are uncomfortable in front of a camera.

Using them is simply amateurish.

Nouska...somewhat of a revelation, your comments are! I must agree the programme is particulalry grating when Tana and TPB are presenters. I could forgive the horrid camera work and the inane "cafe" backdrop if the presenteres were engaging.

Perhaps the improvement we all look for is just hinging on this one thing?

the sad thing is that the managers at UKTVfood dont take a blind bit of notice of this wingeing message board . At tthe moment the content on UKTVFood is so dire that it is simply boring and a waste of time watching . Be like me and ditch the experience . Actually it quite a nice feeling to be liberated from watching dull cr_p. Afterall , cookery programs can be quite dull with very little variation to the repertoire if not entertaining to watch. I stopped posting here ages ago when I realised that no matter how much we winge , Jenni aint coming back . I only stumlbed on the message board when i saw a posting that interested me.