This is the 2nd episode from Top Chef and I was looking for more people's personality to come in this. My favorites are still basically Tre & Hung. Hung won immunity from being eliminated by winning the quickfire. So he was safe. I love his energy in the kitchen, but Tre end up in the bottom line up in the end, but thankfully he got to stay. Some other personalities flared up during this episode. Namely Joey, who was blaming people for this and that. Even if someone steals your idea, my opinion is that you better make sure you do better than the next person and have a better recipe or @ least cook it better. Stop complaining about it. I don't think he really had any reason to say something to other guy about anything. With Joey its seem to be New York this and New York that. The best female cooks seems to be between Micah and Sara with Sara being my favorite. Surprisingly, in the end Sandee went home who really didn't stick out all that much out of all the people. I think she overshot her goal and although she went upscale with her dish, she didn't do barbecue which was a major part of the challenge. So she went home basically for cooking the wrong thing.
I was quite impressed by this episode’s guest chef, although reading some of the blogs at bravotv.com, it seems as if some found his commentary on the harsh side. Remembering some of the guest judges from seasons past, who seemed to relish the opportunity to pick on others, I thought that Norman van Aken gave honest constructive criticism without being overly critical. Watching this episode I started to think about the editing, and a level of distrust arose within me. Obviously, when there are fourteen contestants and this week there will only be one winner and one person sent home, there needs to be some selective editing to show the highlights, especially as they relate to those two individuals. I wonder, though, if other individuals are fairly portrayed as characters in the drama (for example Hung, Joey, and Micah). There are always the protests that it’s “all about the food,” and perhaps from the judging standpoint this is true, but not from a television producers’ perspective. I just wonder when you hear comments like Hung’s callous remark about Micah not truly missing her daughter, or the way in which Joey reacted to Hung’s “stealing” – was there something that couldn’t fit into the editing? What if Joey and Hung had a conversation about said watermelon drink, which would be the only way I think I could side with Joey? It would put a different spin on the situation than what is now presented.
The kiss of death at eliminations has to be when one of the chefs standing before the judges admits that they don’t understand why they are standing there. Last week, Clay tried to say that he stood behind his dish but then backed down; this week, Sandee replied to one of Gail’s questions that she was “astonished” to be standing there. While those were both probably honest statements, and the chefs probably had good reason to say them, I think there comes a time in everyone’s life when it is necessary to sling the bull. For example, when writing college papers... Or, in a situation more relevant to the task at hand, when one knows that s/he is one of the bottom four chefs in a challenge.
Obviously this means that there was something wrong with one’s dish – as no one is perfect, maybe it would be beneficial to go ahead and admit SOMETHING that went wrong. If Sandee had said something – maybe, that her water took too long to boil – not something that the judges had in mind when calling her out, I doubt that it would do anything than give her some points. Last week the judges were impressed at how humble (well, to various extents) and loquacious the chefs were in defending themselves (I’m especially remembering Dale here). Unless the admission is that the chef actually cheated while preparing the dish, I don’t think that recognizing a mistake made would ever count against someone in the judge’s deliberation. Rather, admitting that one feels “astonished” to be in the bottom four seems to imply a lack of understanding either in the challenge or in cooking – neither being things a cheftestant probably wants the judges to know.
My early observations are as follows. This group seems more laid back in the early going. There seems to be more "professionals" then before. The good chefs are good, the others are mediocre at best. If I were to hazard a guess at this time, it would be that if Haung does not misstep he could win it all. I was thinking Tre, but he kind of got ahead of himself, and I am not sure that that will not happen again.
I like Howie (the big lug), I just can't believe that he overcooked the pork. Joey is playing the arrogant New Yorker and it really bugs the crap out of me. If he stays around, he needs to tone that act down.
A pretty decent episode, overall. The twist of being outdoors and next to the water gave the episode some flare. The guest judge was very honest and critical- during the quickfire, almost nobody slipped by without some complaint. Hung and Joey were especially annoying this episode. Hung rushed around, breaking glasses and insulting others behind their backs ("don't use your daughter as an excuse for crying", about Mikah to the camera). Joey, on the other hand, kept blaming other contestants. First, he criticized Hung for "stealing" his watermelon recipe, and then placed Howie as the one to be eliminated, even though he had never tasted Howie's dish. This episode was, on the whole, okay: not perfect, but interesting enough to keep me watching next week.
Please read the following before uploading
Do not upload anything which you do not own or are fully licensed to upload. The images should not contain any sexually explicit content, race hatred material or other offensive symbols or images. Remember: Abuse of the TV.com image system may result in you being banned from uploading images or from the entire site – so, play nice and respect the rules!