I have to agree with you and also be a bit critical in the same vein.

No digging into formal technique or the mechanics of how dinner scenes can differ; just the observation that they do, in fact, differ.

It seemed so promising.

You could examine how the table is set, how it's lit, how it's shot. Even just where people are sitting (an obvious visual metaphor for the struggle for position dominance), or when a person is eating alone, like here. How they eat, or drink and their manners or lack thereof. When different people come to, or leave the table, whether they fidget, or play with utensils. How does it display character, or increase tension, or do other things.

There was so much promising material to be mined, yet it seemed ivery superficial, little better than mentioning dinner is a useful background, because we all eat.

The chairs all looked different in most of the scenes with not even a cursory mention, nothing about the cutlery or settings (they must have some pretty professional set designers to make such formal settings), and how formal or informal they are and how suitable that is for different purposes. Heck you could mention diners/sets that are reused in multiple films. What about picnics and drive throughs? How intimidating it can be for someone to eat your burger or drink your milkshake.

For example the scene from Alien was so good partly because it was a mess, in two senses.

There was practically no mention of the fact most of the scenes are family diners, and how that affects the dynamics. No mention of seating during a meal, and how that marginalizes or emphasizes.

It would really have helped if they looked at some dinner or meal scenes and thought about what made good ones work, and what was lacking in those that are eminently forgettable, and maybe tried to distill it, to figure it out and made that the subject of the video. It would have been entertaining to see a horrible dinner/meal scene and contrast it with an excellent one.

Gone for something that not just anyone could say without having seen or thought about it at all. As it was, it was pretty insipid. In rhetoric they call it invention. As it was they got the style arrangement and delivery ok, so it was pretty good for a first attempt. Maybe if they learned to trust their own instincts and spent less time aping Zhaos style they would have been more successful.