Phantom Gourmet sucks. I used to like it, but they changed the formula a couple years ago so it's no longer worth watching.

The big problem is that the show is too lowbrow. The hosts don't seem to care about food at all. Their favorite restaurant is a cheap bar known for its wings, and they also have segments about their favorite cereals and fast-food places. I've never seen any of them talk about enjoying a real restaurant or any kind of good food.

And the actual restaurant reviews are the same way. Every time I turn it on, it's a theme show about something lowbrow. It's always "Best Burgers", "Best Hot Dogs", "Best Comfort Food", etc. I don't mind that sometimes; I like burgers and fries too. But most of the time, the show seems to focus on the same few topics, and it's boring.

Reply

All I have to say is that Phantom Gourmet chose Fuddruckers as it's best burger in town. The Andelman bros. are food hacks who bow down the the almighty advertising $$$. Fuddruckers...blech.

Reply

I gotta say I have pretty much the same complaints---I don't really trust the Phantom Gourmet's judgements. It seems like it really is all about advertising dollars and corporate chains. And I LIKE Fuddrucker's burgers. Well, I like them in California. The one time I went to a Fuddrucker's here it was sadly, sadly disappointing. Which makes it even more surprising that TPG judged it the best burger. Perhaps I should check out TV Diner?

Reply

I agree completely that Phantom has gone WAY downhill. I watched them when they were the only game in town. TV Diner is far superior. The Andelman's are just out for the money. Their Phantom Gourmet event in Boston was a disgrace. Take people who know nothing about food and give them a food show and this is what you get. I don't put any faith in the Phantom reviews at all.
www.TheBostonFoodie.blogspot.com

Reply

I've been doing restaurant reviews for a local paper for a few months now and one of my rules is that I need to have eaten somewhere at least twice and that I always bring people with me so I can get a good understanding of the variety of foods. Very strange that the Phantom would only visit once. You just can't have any sort of accurate understanding of a location with only one visit.

I never manage catching Phantom that often but TV Diner is on a lot and I usually watch it although I think that they are also quite advertising focused. Plus they aren't very hard-assed about any of the restaurants-Costa is so busy schmoozing it up with chefs that I doubt places get their fair dues. Plus he's so smarmy (in the same annoying way that Todd English is) that I have a hard time watching him for long.

Reply

As a veteran restaurant reviewer in Boston, I have to confess that I don't watch television. I think it's hard enough to describe food in printed words without also having to make taste visual. That said, I take exception to the blog's position that one visit is insufficient because any restaurant can have a bad night. In my view, if they are charging the public, they are subject to review. Also, after decades on this beat, I have a sense of what kinds of problems are transient (waiter spills soup) versus structural (vanilla and carrot juice are never going to be a great sauce for lobster). I do sample from a least three or four full-course dinners, and try to make multiple visits to get a better sense of the atmosphere. On the other hand, when I do eat alone, I have a lot more time to think and concentrate. But at today's prices, very few publications can afford multiple visits, and one cannot do a consumer column without the publication paying all expenses. My expenses are now sometimes more than I get paid for my time and writing! This is not a healthy market unless you think that fine dining should be once again reserved for the rich.

Robert Nadeau, restaurant critic
The Boston Phoenix

Reply