5 Food Shows We Loved In 2025, And 6 We Hated

Culinary TV shows are my entertainment equivalent of a cozy blanket. They're comforting to watch, even if the chef-testants on screen are sweating it out during grueling cooking challenges. I might take an hour to get a simple dinner on the table, but you'd better believe I'm expecting the stars on TV to create entrees worthy of Michelin stars in 30 minutes. I watch "Chopped" while dicing my own onions and celery, tune in to see how many Emmys Jeremy Allen White will be nominated for in each season of "The Bear," and am always intrigued by a new Gordon Ramsay production.

2026 is a new year, and with it comes a whole new slate of food and cooking shows to whet our appetites. A new year also gives us time to reflect on the best and worst from 2025. Taste might be subjective for both palates and TV preferences, but the hallmarks of a great food show are fairly easy to spot. They need to have a compelling theme, I should learn something about food while I'm watching, and you've got to give me someone to root for.

Some of my favorite programs from the past year are among the best Food Network shows of all time. Others missed the mark in big ways, with a couple even landing in my DNF queue. Take a look to see if your favorites made the list (with some minor spoilers ahead!)

Playing off of the moderately over-used kitchen catchphrase, this new NBC show claimed that it was going to rehabilitate 12 talented but arrogant chefs standing in their own way of success. It was surprisingly hosted by kitchen maven Martha Stewart, alongside fellow acclaimed chef José Andrés. The perennially controversial Katsuji Tanabe (best known for his stints on "Top Chef") and Torrece 'Chef T' Gregoire ("Hell's Kitchen") are among the familiar faces in what should have been an interesting show concept.

Unfortunately, much like the chefs themselves, the show's manufactured drama and excessive conflict got in its own way. Though it promised new outlooks in the kitchen and a ridiculously high $250,000 to the chef who survived the backstabbing and hijinks of their competitors, it simply wasn't palatable. I didn't make it past the first episode to know I was out — and I wasn't the only one. 

Naysayers on Reddit said the show was "horrible" and wasn't based on cooking at all. Some compared it more to episodes of "Survivor" than anything based in a culinary sphere, and one critic from the Boston Globe said the show had an identity crisis before it even began. Numerous reviewers said they never even made it past the preview ads to watching the actual show, so it will be interesting to see if this lackluster NBC offering gets a second season.

"Top Chef" is (still) aging like fine wine. The popular Bravo left the U.S. for Season 22 and headed for the land of maple syrup, aka Canada. Gail Simmons, a longtime "Top Chef' judge, hails from Toronto, which added an extra personal touch to the early episodes.

The chefs visited several Canadian provinces and celebrated the local cuisine, while also showcasing their own personal cooking styles. I loved seeing the chefs' creative spins on poutine recipes — what's not to like about French fries and cheese curds? — and their competitive but friendly camaraderie. Early seasons of the show were known for cutthroat drama. While there's plenty of that elsewhere in the Bravoverse these days, most of the "Top Chef" contestants were fun to watch and easy to root for. (A few were even humble!) Longstanding traditions like Quickfire challenges and Restaurant Wars got fresh looks for the season, including a few cameos from well-known Canadian celebrities who moonlight as "Top Chef" superfans.

I was hesitant about Kristen Kish taking over for Padma Lakshmi as host, but her experience as a contestant and winner on the show brings an interesting element to how she interacts with the chefs, especially as she made it her own in her sophomore season. The three finalists (Tristen Epps-Long, Bailey Sullivan, and Shuai Wang) had unique cooking styles and made it difficult to pick a favorite. If this is your comfort show, it's a great season to enjoy.

This Food Network competition had several great starting elements, but fell victim to its own medieval kitchiness. A somewhat-rotating cast of famous chefs (the late Anne Burrell being one of them) competes to sit on "the throne" and be "the ruler" who dictates the theme of the next cook-off among five other "contenders." If chefs fail to impress the "culinary council," host Scott Conant tells them, "Your house has fallen," and the giant banner with their face and last name flutters to the ground behind them. They are "banished" forever from the competition. Actual cooking techniques get buried underneath the mountain of dialogue that's forced just to fit the theme.

Aside from the pervasive tackiness, there were a few other factors about this show that made me leave this unfinished in my streaming queue in 2025. One, I think Scott Conant is an excellent "Chopped" judge. But he didn't strike the right tone as the host of this show — maybe because he had to think about fitting too many catchphrases into his intros. I was also annoyed that the "culinary council" was only ever three people (Conant, Marcus Samuelson, and Judy Joo), and that they didn't do blind tastings of the food. When you're working with high-caliber chefs like Shirley Chung and Jonathon Sawyer, it feels like blind tastings should be the standard. Reviewers online can't come to a clear consensus, though, so perhaps it'll be your cup of tea.

In my humble opinion, Fox's "MasterChef" is one of the best shows that highlights the skills of home cooks on a national stage. The stakes are high — and restaurateur Joe Bastianch's expectations are higher — but the winners are always fresh faces in the culinary world. More refreshingly, they often go back to simply being their neighborhood's best cook instead of showing up on a million new TV episodes.

"MasterChef" entered its 15th season in 2025, and recently has been changing things up a bit to keep things fresh. Tiffany Derry replaced Aarón Sánchez as a judge, alongside Bastianich and series front man Gordon Ramsay. The show also featured competing pairs instead of individuals. Several pairs were couples, while others were friends, siblings, or even exes. Unlike other seasons when the paired challenges were hard to watch, this season celebrated duos that worked well together and rooted for each other — even during the notorious Wall Challenge and other difficult cook-offs.

The resulting season was a wholesome competition, with enough drama to keep things interesting. My favorite duo, married couple Rachel Sanchez and Julio Figueredo, didn't walk away with the $250,000 prize, but made it to the finale. Boston-bred couple Jesse Rosenwald and Jessica Bosworth earned the MasterChef trophy and the cash — and have plans to expand their culinary influence throughout the city. I'd be happy to see the show return to individual competitors for Season 16, but this version was a fun twist to watch.

I enjoyed earlier seasons of this show, in which acclaimed chef and Food Network star Alex Guarnaschelli takes on three chefs from across the country in a themed challenge, like cooking rice or lobster. Guarnaschelli is a force to behold in competition mode, and I can appreciate that she regularly puts her skills to the test in blind tastings — even if the judges are often her buddies.

Unfortunately, Food Network execs have decided that famous chefs make the best TV, instead of leaving room for fresh faces in the competition lineups. The show rarely features unknown chefs anymore; it's mostly stars from other Food Network shows coming on to try to win another couple grand, which feels a little gross. Yes, perhaps the stakes are slightly higher for Guarnaschelli, who in past seasons rarely lost a battle. But even though I love Jonathon Sawyer and Geoffrey Zakarian, I don't really need to see them competing on a show that was originally meant to test the mettle of sous chefs and brunch cooks.

"Alex vs. America" isn't the only show with this problem. Not only will a "Guy's Grocery Games" contestant one day be a "Beat Bobby Flay" judge the next, but they're not even mentioning playing for charities these days, as one astute Redditor pointed out. This seems to be padding the pockets and egos of famous chefs who already have a lot going for them. Give us a true underdog to root for, please!

I know this pick will seem a little contradictory based on my previous review of "Alex vs. America," but hear me out: I don't like when food shows are supposed to highlight underdog chefs and warp into only featuring an echo chamber of Food Network personalities. I do like, however, when a show pits star chefs against each other from the start. You have an all-star season of "Top Chef"? I'm there. You want me to watch a "Chopped" tournament of previous winners? Sign me up. Enter Food Network's "Tournament of Champions," which delivers on this type of premise in spades.

The show is set up in a bracket to have top-seeded chefs like Brooke Williamson and Maneet Chauhan cook against lesser-known but still proven chefs, ultimately working their way through multiple rounds to crown each season's winner. I've never been a Guy Fieri fan — sorry, not sorry — but I will begrudgingly admit that he does a fantastic job of hosting this show. The randomizer, blind judging, and the range of chefs represented on this show are top-notch. It also includes enough variety across ingredients, chefs, and judges that each season feels fresh.

Season 6 was notable if you're a fan of Antonia Lofaso, because she took home her win after several almost-victories in previous seasons. I've loved watching Lofaso cook in competition shows since her time on "Top Chef," and I've been rooting for her to win a TOC belt since the series began.

I'm not sure how many shows Gordon Ramsay is contracted to produce with Fox, but in the myriad collection of "MasterChef," "Next Level Chef," "Hell's Kitchen," and more, there are bound to be some misses. "Gordon Ramsay's Secret Service" is one of those — and a big one at that. The premise is that when Ramsay previously went into professional restaurants for "Kitchen Nightmares," they would know he was coming and try to clean up their act before he arrived. In "Secret Service," Ramsay is fed information from an "insider" and watches from behind the scenes to see where the problems really lie. He also sneaks into the kitchens and investigates cleanliness, the restaurant's setup, and whether there are rodents (eek) on his own.

Much like "House of Knives," the cheesiness factor in this show is through the roof. It attempts to take on an undercover or spy theme, but does so in a clunky way that distracts from the actual events. One bright spot is that Ramsay seems to fund kitchen revamps out of the show's budget, but the ick factor is high on some of these episodes, and I don't know if the revamps would be enough to see true turnarounds. Others aren't fans either, particularly of the theme and how closely it resembles "Kitchen Nightmares."

If you haven't sensed a theme yet, I'm a sucker for a quality cooking competition when it comes to my food shows. But I break the mold with Hulu's "The Bear" so I can add some fictional drama to my well-balanced TV diet. I've loved "The Bear" from the start, particularly since my husband is originally from Chicagoland, and I consider Portillo's Italian beef to be one of the best sandwiches on Earth. Add some B-roll shots of the "L" train and culinary aesthetics ripped from "Chef's Table," and I was a goner.

I personally enjoyed the character development we see in Season 4 — especially with characters like Sydney (Ayo Edebiri) and Richie (Ebon Moss-Bachrach). We see a lot of food-related prep throughout the season, but arguably the best episode was called "Bears," which took place at Tiff's wedding where all of the Berzatto family members (and found family members) collide in one spot. I also appreciated Episode 9, "Tonnato," when Carmy (Jeremy Allen White) visits his mother and reaches some semblance of reconciliation. The final episode leaves it wide open for where Season 5 will go and I'm here for the ride — as long as that ride doesn't actually say goodbye to Jeremy Allen White.

This Food Network show has all the bad hallmarks of previous shows on my "hated" list, with the addition of sleep-deprived chefs holding razor-sharp kitchen knives. A cast of 24 chefs aim to beat out their competitors over several "shifts" that total 24 hours of gameplay in the kitchen, highlighting multiple features of running a great restaurant service. The $50,000 prize isn't a bad payday for filming that takes place over just 24 hours — but that can only go to one of the 24 chef-testants. The rest might wish they'd just hit snooze on the whole competition.

Season 2 attempted to bring in a newer generation of chefs against a selection of well-known veterans — hooray! But critics online say the show is too rushed, and couldn't balance the veteran chefs and new faces well — particularly in early episodes. Others say it feels chaotic and that the judging seemed biased, particularly since it didn't include blind tastings. That said, I might be of a minority opinion here: The show averages 7.9 stars out of 10 on IMDb, meaning that a fair amount of reviewers think it's worth a shot.

New seasons of "Chopped" are produced like rabbits, but that doesn't stop me from tuning in to this favorite Food Network staple. The show has added in-season mini tournaments in recent years (like when contestants bid for better ingredients), but it stays true to its original format without too many weird gimmicks. It also celebrates up-and-coming chefs rather than relying on the same stars competing against each other, so you see new faces and unique cooking styles.

Sure, producers are trying things the show "has never done before," — as I heard host Ted Allen announce a few times while watching in 2025. But I've categorized "Chopped" as the culinary equivalent of "Jeopardy!" or "The Price is Right": It's always going to be on, and I'm always going to have it as my comfort show. (Right?!) Long live sitting on my couch, thinking I would for sure know how to make zucchini blossoms unique in an appetizer round. Give me Allen dramatically raising the cloche from the chopped dish, or give me no Food Network programming at all.

This holiday baking version of Gordon Ramsay's "Next Level Chef" on Fox was an interesting take on a holiday special, but I'm not sure I'd watch future installments. The chef version includes a variety of professional chefs, social media stars, and home cooks competing against each other on three levels. The top floor is a Michelin-ready outfit, while the basement is the stuff of Ramsay's "Kitchen Nightmares" — (hopefully) minus any vermin.

It was clear Ramsay relied on co-hosts Carla Hall and Candace Nelson (of Sprinkles cupcake fame) for much of the expertise. That's a smart move given both are celebrated judges on other shows like "Sugar Rush" and "Holiday Baking Championships." While Hall and Nelson were bright spots — along with some of the competitors — the pacing of the show felt incredibly rushed. The series only included four episodes, but began with 12 contestants. This meant that each episode had two full-length elimination challenges in each one, so you hardly got to see techniques or planning. The focus was on the ingredient grabs — notorious in the "Next Level Chef" franchise — along with snafus and the final tastings.

It was also difficult to connect to the contestants or learn much about their styles. What's more, the finale challenge included five bakers, which seemed more like a semi-final lineup. Several of the finalists were incredibly likable, but they deserved more of a spotlight than this show could give. It was just too short, not all that sweet.