Photo du Jour 516
Tiger Woods In "Serious" Condition After Car Crash
Welcome Back! Um, Why Are You at Work Today?
-thumb-110x110-461569.jpg)
Photos from Black Friday
Builder of Oakland's Fox Theater Once Imprisoned For 'White Slavery'
If "a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds," then the folks over at Bravo's Top Chef sure have some huge brains. Because this season reeks of inconsistency. And it's starting to piss us off. Major, major misstep, Tom, Gale, and Co.
(Let us state up front: it's only because this show can be, is often, and should always be so freaking good that these missteps get to us).
Let's give credit to some of elimination-style reality shows--we've seen episodes of The Apprentice and Rock Star where the judges weren't afraid to make a bold move and eliminate more than one contestant.
But never -- NEVER -- have we seen a show like this wimp out and send NOBODY packing.
This is crap for many reasons. First of all, when you know the judges have the power to not dismiss anyone, it really reduces the drama of the show. We'd rather see a miscarriage of reality TV justice than a cop-out like this.
Secondly, by not eliminating anyone, they totally discounted Carlos' Quickfire Challenge victory--his first positive performance on the show. The contestants were tasked with creating an amuse bouche using just a couple bucks in quarters' worth of product from vending machines. Carlos created a vegetarian loaf ("sunflower seeds & carrot loaf, with cilantro, sesame & Squirt"); not too sexy (well, we do love us some Squirt), but clever and evidently delicious. Guest judge Suzanne Goin pronounced him the victor.
Other notable entries were Frank's ham & swiss cheese quiche (with a glass of mint infused tea) and Ilan's deviled egg with corn nuts, deep fried salami, pear nectar & fig paste (which was evidently too sweet to be the victor). Notably bad entries? Michael's "cheeto snicker lollipop." Dude stuck a cheeto in some nougat. Good job by the pride of Stockton. Mia made a dessert, which was pronounced to be yummy, but an amuse bouche ain't no dessert! Silly chefs.
So, Carlos wins.
Now, if a nutritionist were brought in to verify the caloric value of your meal, would you change things the next day, when the monitor is gone? Umm, someone did.
The main challenge: the chefs were split into teams of three; each team had to come up with a whole meal of less than 500 calories for kids at a weight management camp. All meals were checked during a trial run for caloric content. The following day, the chefs had to recreate their pre-approved meals to deliver to the camp kids.
Frank, Betty, and Astro Boy know their audience: kids. They made pizza, chocolate cookies, some fruit, and lemonade.
Mia, Michael, and Marissa want to leverage Marissa's dessert expertise (because it's served her so well to this point, ha ha), and made a fudge cake, chicken skewers, and poorly-executed cole slaw.
Cliff, Sam, and Carlos presented with turkey meatballs, corn on the cob, and an over-tart smoothie.
Josie, Elia, and Ilan made a sort of lasagna, chicken parm, and some a very successful berry yogurt "cheesecake."
Let's cut to the chase: Betty, Frank, and Marcel get the team win; Frank is the special individual prize winner for his well-executed pizza.
Mia, Michael, and Marissa's team and Cliff, Sam, and Carlos' team are given the bad news that one of their members must go. Carlos, of course, is immune, so one of the other five should go.
But wait! Sam raises the specter of cheating--he thinks folks may have used olive oil in squirt bottles. Mia names names and confirms that Betty added sugar to her cookie recipe. The judges follow up.
Betty freely admits she changed up the recipe, using a little sugar either along with or instead of Splenda for her meringue-style cookies. And she's probably right that their meals still didn't exceed 500 calories; they had a little wiggle room. But that's not her call to make! She should have had the foresight to ask a nutritionist if she could "add two packets of sugar" or whatever the prior day. Lack of common sense is no excuse, just because she won twice (three if you count this tainted team victory) doesn't mean that she shouldn't have to use her brain.
The judges are torn: should they eliminate an accidental cheater for a recipe that probably had no effect on the outcome? And is is fair to eliminate one of the five susceptible chefs when they obeyed the rules and the winner didn't?
As we've told you, they took the chicken way out and gave everyone a pass.
Why is Betty a sacred cow? She cheated. Period. When in real business or real life has "I wasn't sure of the rules" or "I thought I understood the rules" an excuse? She changed her recipe--not proportions, she changed ingredients.
Why is Sam a sacred cow? Because he's personable and good looking? Same with Cliff. They are both people we're rooting for on this show, but if the judges weren't going to send Mz. Sunshine home for breaking the rules, then one of these guys had to go for their team's dishes sucking (again, Carlos was also on the team, but he had immunity).
Josie gets pissed when she finds out about the cheating, because her team would have likely won. On a relationship level, things amongst the chefs could get very interesting.
So, all the more reason to FIRE PEOPLE. Stop sucking the drama out of these. Tonight, eliminate someone. Maybe two people. Bounce back from a crappy decision, please.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
I daresay that if Michael from Stockton had made the sugar mistake instead of Tom C's pet chef Betty he would have gotten the old heave-ho. The fact that Betty got a pass (and hey, I like her a lot too - I dig any chick who lets loose on some snarky little punk who is talking about of his ass) proves that they are having EXACTLY the same problem as last year.
Tom (and even Gail) pick and play favorites - and then try to justify their actions in their blogs (they did last year at least - I got sick of Tom's back-peddling about the vile Tiffani - who, may I say, reinforced every negative stereotype about bisexual women - and stopped reading them).
They needs new judges - how about a chef with a sucessful restaurant (not one that is on its way out) and someone from a magazine that we've actually heard of (like maybe Christopher Kimball from "Test Kitchen" and "Cooks Illustrated"???? just throwing out a name)? Also, they need a Tim Gunn in the Kitchen - have I mentioned how much I despise Tom C?
Anyway, I'll tune in tonight, Jeremy - but if they don't shape up soon I'm gonna have to stop watching. Hell's Kitchen is MUCH more entertaining and Gordon Ramsay acts more like a real Chef than Tom Collicchio bitching about the participants behind their backs like a 7th grade girl.
*le sigh* I agree that was really unsatisfying. I think they should have taken a stand one way or another either by saying "Ignorance of the law is no defense" and ousting Betty, or saying "We didn't make the rules clear enough, so the losing team still loses, bye bye whoever."
Still. Because of Suzanne Goin, the episode balances out for me, because she is my favoritest chef. If you have ever tasted anything that comes out of her wood-fired ovens you would be too.
I wish they could replace Tom with Alton Brown. Too bad he has assigned his soul to the Food Network.
Suze -- I would love to see contestants of this quality (at least most of them) on Hell's Kitchen instead of the nimrods they usually have. I think HK picks the worst of the worst, figuring it'll be better TV. Basically, HK's contestants are 75% "Micheals".
KT -- I did dig Ms. (mrs?) CHEF Goin; I don't think the decision was her fault. Would love to try one of her places.
To tell the truth, guys, I'm a fan of Chef Tom . . . just not happy with the decision that was made this time around, nor his posturing in episode one.
Tonight should be good! I've prepared a mint-infused vodka and a cheeto-snicker lollipop to enjoy with it