I understand the editors' desire to provide a little twist now and then, but when they show dialogue that makes it seem so obvious that one person should be sent home (Stefan) and then they send another, it makes me question whether anything I'm watching is real. I don't like it.

Kennyz wrote:I understand the editors' desire to provide a little twist now and then, but when they show dialogue that makes it seem so obvious that one person should be sent home (Stefan) and then they send another, it makes me question whether anything I'm watching is real. I don't like it.

I agree. It's getting old. Worse yet, it will undoubtedly be explained somewhere else, after the fact, (like in the judges' blogs) why it wasn't really as close as it seemed in the episode and how there was really only one person (from Team Europe) who was under serious consideration to be eliminated. Yes, we've heard it all before. *Yawn*

It certainly did seem like they came up with reasons to downgrade Fabio (in voice-over), just so they wouldn't have to eliminate Stefan.

The twist of bringing back one previously-eliminated contestant was a near-complete dead end, IMO. Ultimately, because of the fact that Jeff had to win the semi-final to advance, the final will not pit the 3 best finishers against each other. It was clear from the judges' comments during the episode (if you believe such hearsay ) that Carla, Jeff and Hosea were the top 3. But instead of the deserving Jeff, Stefan -- who, based on what we saw, really should have been sent home -- advances. Yes, they stuck to their pre-stated rules but those rules painted the show into a counter-intuitive corner that will result in a final in which the 3 best chefs from last night won't be competing. Instead, we get 1, 2 & 4. Dumb concept and a missed bet, IMO.

All that said, it was an otherwise good episode -- the best so far this season, IMO -- because all the contestants seemed to do a very good job with their stuff. Seeing skills, care -- and dishes I really wanted to try -- was a refreshing change over what we've seen so far this season.

=R=

ronnie_suburban wrote:I agree. It's getting old. Worse yet, it will undoubtedly be explained somewhere else, after the fact, (like in the judges' blogs) why it wasn't really as close as it seemed in the episode and how there was really only one person (from Team Europe) who was under serious consideration to be eliminated. Yes, we've heard it all before. *Yawn*

Been done. Clearing up why Jeff wasn't the winner:

Tom Colicchio wrote:Jeff was never in the running for a reason that didn't make it into the final edit. He did a very fine job, however he used some sort of sterno chafing dish to keep his oysters warm that, for whatever reason, imparted a taste of burning sterno to the oysters. We all smelled it and remarked on it while the chefs were setting up their stations, and then we tasted that horrible taste when we sampled his selections. So, unfortunately for Jeff, who otherwise was cooking very well, he could never have taken the top spot of the evening.

He also has some thoughts about Fabio vs Stefan, but ends with this:

Fabio was very gracious in defeat, though, and I will share with you that the following morning, I had a chance to spend a little time with Fabio, and I learned that he has a lot of exciting developments happening professionally. This is a man who by the age of thirty had run and sold several successful restaurants in Italy, come to the U.S. and created great opportunity for himself. Without spilling the beans prematurely, I'll say only that we all have not heard the last from Fabio …

Darren72 wrote:

ronnie_suburban wrote:I agree. It's getting old. Worse yet, it will undoubtedly be explained somewhere else, after the fact, (like in the judges' blogs) why it wasn't really as close as it seemed in the episode and how there was really only one person (from Team Europe) who was under serious consideration to be eliminated. Yes, we've heard it all before. *Yawn*

Been done.

Tom Colicchio wrote:Jeff was never in the running for a reason that didn't make it into the final edit. He did a very fine job, however he used some sort of sterno chafing dish to keep his oysters warm that, for whatever reason, imparted a taste of burning sterno to the oysters. We all smelled it and remarked on it while the chefs were setting up their stations, and then we tasted that horrible taste when we sampled his selections. So, unfortunately for Jeff, who otherwise was cooking very well, he could never have taken the top spot of the evening.

LMAO! They expand the episode to 75 minutes and still manage to omit even a single, casual mention of this critical detail?

Well, they're nothing, if not predictable.

=R=

At least we now know why someone (Stefan?) asked "Is something burning?" - a question that the editors left hanging.

ronnie_suburban wrote:

Tom Colicchio wrote:Jeff was never in the running for a reason that didn't make it into the final edit. He did a very fine job, however he used some sort of sterno chafing dish to keep his oysters warm that, for whatever reason, imparted a taste of burning sterno to the oysters. We all smelled it and remarked on it while the chefs were setting up their stations, and then we tasted that horrible taste

LMAO! They expand the episode to 75 minutes and still manage to omit even a single, casual mention of this critical detail?

Well, they're nothing, if not predictable.

=R=

Yes, you would think something like a "horrible taste" would have come out amidst all the lauding of Jeff's dish. Ridiculous.

You know what I liked about this episode? Everybody's food actually looked good. The absence of any dog's-breakfast-looking dishes was a nice change from the whole season so far.

What else I liked? That Emeril wasn't a jerk.

Without spilling the beans prematurely, I'll say only that we all have not heard the last from Fabio

His TV presence was so strong throughout-- saving him through some decidedly mediocre dishes-- that watching him share the screen with Emeril was like seeing that bit of footage where John F. Kennedy shakes the teenaged Bill Clinton's hand. He may have lost Top Chef and won Who Will Be The Next Food Network Star...

The twist of bringing back one previously-eliminated contestant was a near-complete dead end, IMO. Ultimately, because of the fact that Jeff had to win the semi-final to advance, the final will not pit the 3 best finishers against each other.

No, I think that was right. If you're going to come back from the dead, you should have to do it in style. It really wouldn't have been fair for him to be back on an equal basis.

Still, it's hard for me to see why Stefan is still #1 when he's had to be rescued from the abyss by the judges, two out of the last two episodes. Meet Top Chef Carla.

gastro gnome wrote:My prediction? Final 3 is Stefan, Hosea and Carla. But to post a prediction publicly is to be wrong later

This would have looked a lot cooler if I had made it n November

The story line prediction is that Stefan has been set up to look like he's an overconfident punk who's dogging it - only to "come from behind" and win it all with an inspired finals performance. Carla comes in a spirited (and classically trained) second. Hosea cooks fish.

Did the producers give Toby the wrong directions to New Orleans?

Mike G wrote:Still, it's hard for me to see why Stefan is still #1 when he's had to be rescued from the abyss by the judges, two out of the last two episodes. Meet Top Chef Carla.

You believe what you've been served up on a platter by the editors!?! For all we know (or saw), Stefan's dishes were revelatory, women were flashing him (he did have a lot of beads on at the end), and men were genuflecting at his feet. I say, meet Top Chef Stefan.

It would be pretty shocking if Fabio wasn't on TV again soon. A cooking show for him would probably a big hit, and he most likely knows more about food than most of the people who now have shows on the Food Network.

Toby being gone was great, I hope to never seem him on the show again.

I thought Emeril was a good judge. Very descriptive about the food and what he liked in it. He really seemed to like Jeff, thought he might offer him a job.

The editing for this weeks show really was bizarre. It really did seem that Stefan was doomed. I still want to see Stefan win it all, because I like a villain. However I couldn't stop myself from being impressed with and happy for Carla with her big win. She has put together some really good (so they say) food in the last few episodes. I'm really wondering what she did to make PEAS taste that good in the previous episode.

brandon_w wrote:However I couldn't stop myself from being impressed with and happy for Carla with her big win. She has put together some really good (so they say) food in the last few episodes. I'm really wondering what she did to make PEAS taste that good in the previous episode.

And have you noticed that they are featuring less of the side-show Carla hair and more of a coiffed look in their shot selection? It almost seems like they are grooming her for a caterpillar to butterfly transformation. Although I agree that they have pretty much set up Stephan to win, I wouldn't be all that shocked to see Carla come from behind to be the surprise Top Chef. In any event, during the past few weeks, I've gone from being completely repulsed by her to now wanting to try her food at whatever restaurant she winds up at.

stevez wrote:side-show Carla hair

Too good not to be specifically pointed out. Outstanding.

stevez wrote:It almost seems like they are grooming her for a caterpillar to butterfly transformation...

I wouldn't be all that shocked to see Carla come from behind to be the surprise Top Chef. In any event, during the past few weeks, I've gone from being completely repulsed by her to now wanting to try her food at whatever restaurant she winds up at.

Exactly....
It sure looks like the story arc the editors are building goes something like this....

What a weirdo
Wow, she can cook
Hope she beat that mean & over confident Stephan!
She wins!

DeathByOrca wrote:

stevez wrote:side-show Carla hair

Too good not to be specifically pointed out. Outstanding.

Thanks, but full credit is due MJN for that descriptor.

stevez wrote:

brandon_w wrote:However I couldn't stop myself from being impressed with and happy for Carla with her big win. She has put together some really good (so they say) food in the last few episodes. I'm really wondering what she did to make PEAS taste that good in the previous episode.

And have you noticed that they are featuring less of the side-show Carla hair and more of a coiffed look in their shot selection? It almost seems like they are grooming her for a caterpillar to butterfly transformation.

I thought she mentioned that she was a former model. The look must have been on purpose. As opposed to Padma's look of an episode ago, which was due to a strong breeze.

DML wrote:

stevez wrote:

brandon_w wrote:However I couldn't stop myself from being impressed with and happy for Carla with her big win. She has put together some really good (so they say) food in the last few episodes. I'm really wondering what she did to make PEAS taste that good in the previous episode.

And have you noticed that they are featuring less of the side-show Carla hair and more of a coiffed look in their shot selection? It almost seems like they are grooming her for a caterpillar to butterfly transformation.

I thought she mentioned that she was a former model. The look must have been on purpose. As opposed to Padma's look of an episode ago, which was due to a strong breeze.

I think some amount of time passed between the last NYC challenge and the New Orleans challenge (they usually have some reasonably long lag between the initial challenges and the semi-finals/finals). I would assume that they taped the interviews regarding the New Orleans challenge at that same later date. So, not inconceivable that Carla would decide to rock a different hair style after some time had gone by. I'm pretty sure Fabio's hair was different too.

I actually think there have been at least a few semi-finalists/finalists that have come back from their "hiatus" with different hair styles.

Fabio's new hair meant Top Chef will keep its perfect record of having a mohawk in every finale (wednesday's episode was part 1 of the finale).

jesteinf wrote:I actually think there have been at least a few semi-finalists/finalists that have come back from their "hiatus" with different hair styles.

It happens so frequently that I think the producers ask them to change their hair a bit to show the time passage.

jesteinf wrote:I actually think there have been at least a few semi-finalists/finalists that have come back from their "hiatus" with different hair styles.

The most obvious one being the girl that shaved her head at the end of the season, and by the time the finale rolled around she had styleable hair again.

SSDD

All of this hair commentary is funny -- I kinda liked the SideShow Bob/Carla hair. I wanted her to take the team captive and make them sing Gilbert and Sullivan...

Anyhow..it might simply be a function of Carla seeing how she looks on TV -- once they start seeing the episodes, things change.

I am totally rooting for her. She's self-deprecating, positive, funny and seems like someone who could run a kitchen with a staff that actually likes her. She also seems to be able to cook. That sounds a lot like a Top Chef to me. And I'll also say if I had a choice between Stefan's catering or Carla's catering -- I'd pick Carla over Stefan any day of the week. She's a grown-up.

Here's an interesting article on Fabio including the revelation that William Shatner is one of his best friends!

http://www.eonline.com/uberblog/marc_ma ... _kirk.html

I'm watching Iron Chef right now, Bobby Flay vs. Amanda Freitag of the Harrison in NYC, well, I noticed that Ariane of Top Chef this season is one of her sous chef's on the show. I am guessing she is not working at her restaurant in NJ anymore, but thought this was quite interesting.

Anyone see Tom C. pimping Diet Coke in the opening moments of the Oscars tonight?
His commercial took a shot at Alinea for sure... commenting on the silliness of a dish that looks a lot like some of Alinea's dishes..


and from the commercial

mhill95149 wrote:Anyone see Tom C. pimping Diet Coke in the opening moments of the Oscars tonight?
His commercial took a shot at Alinea for sure... commenting on the silliness of a dish that looks a lot like some of Alinea's dishes...

Caught it and thought it was pretty low-rent of him to take a poke at another chef, especially Grant Achatz, who's so accomplished and who's never said anything negative about Tom (at least not publicly). After Grant was on Top Chef, he told me that he came away from the experience with a solid sense of respect for the judges. Even though he's got a pretty good sense of humor, I'm guessing he won't be feeling too respectful after he sees the spot.

Taking an unprovoked shot like that at a multiple Beard award winner was pretty undignified, even though I realize that Tom didn't write or art-direct the spot himself. I'm guessing that a vast majority of the intended audience won't even know what the ad refers to. Still, it was a douchebag move, imo. After pleading with the Top Chef contestants in a recent episode to not embarrass him, he managed to do it all on his own.

=R=

jesteinf wrote:I actually think there have been at least a few semi-finalists/finalists that have come back from their "hiatus" with different hair styles.

I really wish Leah would've cut off at least 10 inches of her hair during the hiatus. I'm dying to take a pair of scissors to her hair and donate it.

I thought that Diet Coke ad was really weird. Attacking other chefs is so five years ago. And I know ads don't have to be logical and indeed often defy logic but this one? He seems to be advocating simple and honest-- chemical swill.

To top it off, I couldn't help remembering that when interviewed about his illness, Achatz cited a heavy past Diet Coke habit.

Attacking other chefs is so five years ago.

Years ago, I had a creative director who banned sushi as a punchline, because it had been done to death in much the same way.

On the other hand, there was a Dick Orkin radio spot that got great humor out of "larb." But it's all in the delivery.

To top it off, I couldn't help remembering that when interviewed about his illness, Achatz cited a heavy past Diet Coke habit.

I have a health condition where I have had tumors on my parathyroid gland (gland that sits behind the thyroid). The offset to this is that you have extremely high calcium and because the symptoms are none, it wasn't known how long I had these tumors until I went in for a blood test. After they were removed, the doctors asked that I have a bone scan to determine how much bone loss I incured, which was minimal, but I was also told by my doctor to not drink diet coke because it removes calcium out of your bones. AHHHH, I was horrified b/c I was a pure addict of the DC, but I quit cold turkey and it's been about two years now. I'm not saying that DC causes cancer/tumors, but I also think they are not sure 100% what the faux sugar does to your body.

Hello, my name is Shaggywillis and I was addicted to Diet Coke.

Shaggywillis wrote:After they were removed, the doctors asked that I have a bone scan to determine how much bone loss I incured, which was minimal, but I was also told by my doctor to not drink diet coke because it removes calcium out of your bones.

Nothing wrong with your doctors being cautious, Shaggy, but if this is what they told you, that's frustrating because this is not known to be the case. There are some studies that demonstrate a correlation between soda consumption and lower bone density, but it hasn't even been demonstrated to be a causal connection -- much less something as dramatic as "removing" calcium from your bones. That last has most certainly not been demonstrated. Some theorize that consumption of certain sodas inhibits calcium absorption, to an undetermined degree. Some theorize that those who drink lots of soda are drinking less of other beverages that contain more calcium. And yet more theorize that there's some other, perhaps habitual, reason for the correlation -- those who drink more soda tend to engage in other behaviors or health practices that affect bone density, etc.

Again, given the correlation and your condition, makes perfect sense to be safe. But if anybody tells you that Diet Coke removes calcium from your bones, that's purely speculative at this point.

(Sorry... innacurate medical information on the web... a big pet peeve.)