snarktini

Do you mean Kathy Lee?

I read that so differently! I thought he was being very smart there. The point I heard him making was the judges often come down on chefs that mis-name their dish. We've seen that happen a number of times. I remember at least one coq au vin incident -- the chef got lambasted for calling it coq au vin but making it with chicken. Tom said she should have just called it braised chicken. It's just semantics, but the judges sometimes get their britches in a twist. If it wasn't technically dolmas but they claimed it was, the judges would call them on it. It's better to call it by its ingredients than use a name that's inaccurate.

This will be in my head making me giggle for the next day or so. Thanks! Well, I can't let it go at all. But agree that from chefs it's inexcusable. I kept checking to see if the closed captioning had it spelled right despite pronunciation. (Yes, I'm that person. Sorry.)

The episode was ok, but I think it would be a lousy intro for anyone new checking it out because of the new night! Wonder if they tried to plan for that. I always love how well they write Jake and Charles. And agree with possibilities about Jake's take on parenting. (It really bothers me IRL how many people won't even consider it. Adoption can be a really hard road so i get why people don't do it but when they reject it because they want "their" kid or none at all it makes me rage-y.) On Amy's story, it jumped out at me she didn't say whether she wanted to be mentee or mentor and figured that would roll around. Both B plots were kinda meh.

Just saw a Tuesday promo running in the middle of the day on Esquire, and they did good job. It's such a fun show, I hope the advertising is effective. Can't wait to see what looks like Holt in a dance-off! Charles: "Do you think that will work?" Jake: I don't just think it will. I know it might!"

OMG, I can't believe how many of those I missed on Leverage! It was a show I tended to watch with one eye/ear, in my defense. Thanks for posting mahree!

Watched "School Reunion" today and it is Rose at her worst. She's so bitchy and petulant towards Sarah Jane and Mickey. Knowing how the whole Rose + 10 story ends, their relationship bugs me in reruns. At the time, it was not clear to me what the writers' intent was. I mostly read it as a one-way crush on Rose's part -- not unrequited exactly, clearly they loved being around each other, but I read it more as flirty BFFs. So I was confused later when they wrote Rose as deeply in love, and even reciprocated when 10.5 goes to be with her. The scene on the beach confounded me at the time. It was not how I understood that relationship. Maybe my wishful thinking filtered out all the signs. I really didn't think they'd ever let a Doctor fall in love with his companion. And I particularly couldn't comprehend 10 falling for Rose. I mean, seriously? As much as 12 hasn't worked for me, it's been refreshing having an older Doctor for the lack of romance. Ten and Eleven were so young and charming it made it quite likely companions would be attracted. Not that I blame them, I had crushes on both. :)

Just rewatched the movie for comparison. (It's the holidays, I'm bored.) I like the show so much better!

My question, too!

The condition in Christmas was they couldn't *lie*. But they could withhold. In their first meeting with locals, the guy suggested they stop talking until they got used to it since they were spilling way too much truth.

Finally getting to see these. Stupid malfunctioning season pass. Loved the weirdness bubbles! Has anyone seen the animated Christmas episode of Eureka? They did something similar, cycling through iconic styles. Using live action Ritter and Cardellini was a fantastic idea.

Wasn't the tie-in that he brought the solar ovens/stoves to *don't remember which* natural disaster, and now to the challenge? They're his pet cause -- solar cooking that saves lives. I thought it was confusingly worded when she said it (why say clean energy instead of solar energy?), but later when he spoke I understood the meaning.

Exactly. Their PR engine has cracked the code. (That's not even cynical, really. Press coverage is rarely accidental.) Yet another article -- this one talks about their marketing group boosting "integration" and partnerships. That generates a lot of media coverage. http://www.adweek.com/news/television/hallmark-channel-christmas-most-wonderful-and-lucrative-time-year-168275

I usually filter her imperiousness as an outsized TV-judge-persona, but this was spectacularly condescending. Grayson's snotty answer of "Well, i moved it A LITTLE" -- as though she couldn't be bothered to put in the effort -- made me think she probably didn't actually understand adequately. Not everyone struggled to get heat.

I did it! Deleted my Quantico season pass. If I thought I was going to solve the mystery in the near future I might have hung in there. Nope.

For a moment there I thought Boyle was genuinely asking Brian what the alternate scenarios might have been to avoid shooting Casey, through the all-seeing NZT lens. I thought that was an interesting character beat, with Boyle believing he did the right thing but still wanting to learn from the experience and play out the scenarios. (Because being responsible for killing someone sucks, even when it's necessary.) Or perhaps the scene would have been a learning exercise for Brian instead, realizing his scenarios didn't work as well as he thought and coming around to agreeing with Boyle's action. But a second later I realized I was totally wrong on that, so never mind.

Interesting. In the Jake Stone thread there's supposition Jake basically wears what Christian Kane wears. Certainly efficient from a wardrobe perspective, but less than ideal for character building and visual storytelling.

I didn't remember that her family booted her, good to know! Her entire manner -- not just wardrobe -- is that of someone coddled and moneyed, not someone who's been scraping by for a decade. And since I overlooked that crucial detail, I read her youthfulness as having been sheltered from the real world due to the brain grape. Since that's not the case, this is a big disconnect in characterization.

After seeing so many comments about Cassandra's wardrobe, it cracked me up to see a young colleague show up at holiday party dressed just like her. It's not just an affectation of the character, it's a real thing. Especially the tights and shorts. I'm so distracted by the incongruity in her age. To my eye, Cassandra physically looks like Lindy Booth's age (mid-30s), but her mannerisms and dress look 10 years younger. I can't tell what age we're supposed to read her as, if she's supposed to be improbably young or if the brain grape stunted her emotional growth or what. Have we ever been told her age definitively? I assume the character is supposed to be late 20s, going on 30 if she got the Library's invitation 10 years ago. If I recall correctly (no promises!) she said in the pilot she didn't show for her interview because that's when the brain grape appeared. And she just said in the college episode that she didn't get to do college because of the brain grape. So my best guess is that happened around 18 and she was called then. Which doesn't seem realistic, but ok. (Yes, AGE is what I can't handwave in a show about magic...) Ezekiel has the opposite problem. We assume at least mid-20s for him if he was called as a teen, but the actor was only 20 when the show started. Ezekiel definitely reads like a 22 year old, not a day older. Not sure why this distracts me so much!

I thought it sounded like Rene Auberjonois. But, then, I'm often not very good at this game. :)

I was hoping Ezekiel remembered and was just faking it -- and would still love it if that's the case -- but the look he gives at the end felt definite to me that he doesn't. He gets a wondering "could it be?" expression, followed by a "nah, no way" smirk . Granted, that's not dialogue. An acting/directing choice could be contradicted down the line. Agree with Chaos Theory that the writers might not want him to mature overnight. They show us what might be, but leave room to tell those stories. TBH, I was wondering how they were going to move forward with his character after the massive emotional growth spurt he was experiencing. He'd be a totally different guy. (One I like a whole lot better.)

I disagree that Justin chased off L&C's cabbie. That's not how I read the scene. Justin wasn't doing anything particularly annoying and they only exchanged a few sentences. It felt to me like the guy just wanted out of the whole situation. He didn't know where it was, or knew it was far and lied to play dumb, and said he had a phone but couldn't / wouldn't look up the location. YMMV. And while Justin was dumb about his situation, his driver was the asshole, not him. From the interview with Kelsey, I come away with the understanding that if the cab was rolling away with Chris and Logan, the cabbie may not have registered who was in the backseat. Kelsey said had returned to the cab, stepped away for a minute, and in that gap Chris and Logan swooped in. She indicated the driver was confused: Who are these people? IMO, the driver was not about to leave with a $100 fare unpaid. Period. Chris backed this up later, saying "he wasn't going to take us anyway". Last thing: Kelsey also said it was a risk and they only had $20 at the end of the day. She indicated that they owed the cab $100, which would break down into $50 for the fare (assuming the same as Justin and Diana) and 50 to keeping the meter running during the task. If Justin had paid the driver's $100 wait fee, would he have had enough money to get to Belmont? Assuming they would all pay similar amounts to get to the first task and to Belmont, and K&J only had $20 dollars left, Justin and Diana would have been short $30.

I rewatched the cab scene: Justin asks if the driver could stay, offering him $100, meaning $100 total. The cabbie wants that $100 to be extra, not including the fare. Justin says he won’t pay $100 more than the fare, he’ll just pay the $50 they owe. Then he asks the cabbie to take off the $5 toll charge, which Justin said he’d previously paid $8 for. (Maybe he paid cash for that at the toll plaza?) Justin hands him the $50, and the guy says “No tip?” and Justin ignores him. My assumption was the toll charge wasn’t removed and Justin, annoyed, applied that $8 as tip. Not a good one, but something. Justin doesn’t bug me half as much as he bugs many others here. But this was a really stupid decision. I think his city sensibilities got in the way, mistrusting the cabbie and feeling ripped off by a high fare and further gouged by a $100 wait fee. A hundred bucks just to hold the cab? And being double charged for a toll? In that moment, he was thinking like an annoyed customer not a racer.

I was floored when they said they thought navy and fuchsia represented the 60s. Did they just make that up for the runway story or was that a real guess? Navy wasn't great for any of the 60s mini-eras. Fuchsia would have been better mixed with a different color (or five, considering the period). However, I tend to agree that this is the kind of thing a kid isn't likely know. Maybe if they're obsessed with fashion history or old movies, but overall a kid isn't likely to know iconic color palettes from before their mom was born.

Lao Ban means Boss. She's the Boss Santa, and all the white Santas work for her.