And it always ends in tears

On Top Chef this week (5/13), Lisa, who was given a pass for not including a key ingredient, makes sure that the judges are aware that another contestant, the always annoying Andrew, failed to include a key ingredient in his losing lunch box menu. Lisa and Andrew, but mostly Lisa, are examples of what happens when a good idea runs out of steam.

My minor reality show addiction was given impetus during the writer's strike, which introduced me to Roto Rooter ghost hunting plumbers, a family of  twins and four-year-old sextuplets, and little people in a big world. Normally, my reality limit was Top Chef and Project Runway. When the strike ended, I was frequently confronted with the decision as to whether to return to Eight and a half men, and whatever reality series was running against it. 

But what I've noticed is that Top Chef, and other contestant shows, suffer after a time because of the type of personalities who apply for participation. They are less about  the process and more about winning, like the Jag debacle on Food Network. What used to be interesting is watching talented people find ways to reinvent what they do within the parameters of the challenge becomes an ego fueled brawl between mean-spirited Tiffani and egoist Stephan on Top Chef, and the whole process becomes less interesting.

How do you know when an entire genre jumps the shark? When something called Groomer Has It shows up on your basic cable. Animal Plant, which I love, entered the competition sweepstakes with its own game show pitting dog groomers against each other on a low budget competition for the title of Groomer of the Year and $50,000. Everything about it has to be seen to be believed.

In addition to over-the-top, often  bottom feeder contestants, is the alarming number of weeping losers. Not content with a teary-eyed farewell, these losers blubber and wail their way out the door--and this is across the board. One wonders what kind of border line personality puts all of his or her eggs in a game show basket. It's like the people on Survivor who express surprise and outrage when thrown under the bus by a campfire pal. There can only be one winner and very few contestants are able to suppress their own competitiveness or trust their own creativity. If given the chance, contestants such as Lisa will be sure that the judges know that Andrew failed to include a grain in his already questionable box lunch. Had I been the judge who had already given Lisa a pass for failing to include the main ingredient in a dish, I'd have bounced her for a poor dish that matched poor sportsmanship. But that's not how these things are done because in the end these are game shows that are only loosely based on skills or talents.

So, who is the moron in this scenario? Surely not the producers who have found a way to present cheap entertainment for which they can charge top advertising dollars--which leaves the viewer sucked in by this crap. Marcel almost did it for me on Top Chef and now Lisa may have completed the process in the same way Project Runway did me in by giving Christian Siriano top honors. The problem, of course, is that the Animal Planet's Groomer Has It is so awful on so many levels that I may be permanently hooked on a genre, the high point of which may have been the first season of Survivor.