Yeah No

I've been watching Tony for over 15 years and by now I'm a little tired of his romance with Asia, but I did enjoy this episode and the food looked fantastic. Why can't I get short rib in my wonton soup? I related to the bits about gentrification. It seems to be a trend around the world and people are not happy about some of the great things being lost as a result.

I liked Hillary Duff's episode, but it was a lot like other episodes where they get all fascinated finding out they're descended from royalty 22 generations ago. It was an interesting history lesson, but even Blackbeard himself couldn't really rescue this from being a little bit of a snooze-fest, and I like history. They had her zig-zagging back and forth to Virginia so many times she even joked about it and my husband made a drinking contest out of it, loudly proclaiming "VIRGINIA" and tipping his wine glass every time it was mentioned, lol. I think most people of European descent are probably descended from Royalty somewhere along the line. I do like Hillary, though. She has a modest, poised way about her that's very attractive. I like her on her role on "Younger", which probably not-so-coincidentally is starting its 5th season tomorrow.

I think she thought the fish was already fermented when she got it. How she thought that is beyond me because it would not have looked or smelled like a fresh fish if it was one. I'd say it's no wonder she went home, but it sure did look like they were going out of their way to save Adam. I don't think they wanted to get rid of Adam yet, but they also thought Debby was so ridiculous that they should change up the rules to allow for someone on the winning team to go home. How someone could jump from "molded" to "moldy" makes no sense and even the picture of the cooked fish her dish was supposed to be based on didn't appear moldy at all, so her assumption was just way out there. Even a basic knowledge of English grammar could have prevented her from doing that, but I guess we can't expect that of anyone these days. I agree, but I think Adam is the Matthew of this season, not in terms of personality, but he's a device they're using for entertainment, like a place holder until the one they really want gets appointed. I doubt very much that FN has any real interest in him. Matthew hosted a food show on Canadian TV and that didn't stop them from putting him on this show again and again, and eliminating him again and again. Even if Adam were to make it through, there's no way they would let him win FNS.

Maybe in the '60s they would have had a hard time writing for her, but I don't agree that this was true in the late 80s after we already had shows like "Mary Tyler Moore", "Murphy Brown", "MASH", "Moonlighting", "Golden Girls", "Murder She Wrote", "Designing Women", "Wonder Woman", "Maude", "Kate and Allie", "Cagney and Lacey", etc. "Roseanne" was part of a trend at that time to feature strong independent women on TV, and actually came along late in the game compared to some of these series.

https://www.realityblurred.com/realitytv/2011/10/next-food-network-star-guy-fieri-david-page/

It wouldn't be the first time Guy was accused of being "lewd", and in this case from 7 years ago, also homophobic: https://nypost.com/2011/10/18/ex-coworker-calls-fieri-lewd-and-homophobic/

It happens because the networks put as many commercials as possible in the middle of a show, when they know people are watching, which often makes them run overtime. The cable box is set to record a show when it's supposed to begin and end, which is exactly on the hour or half hour depending on the show. I complained to Comcast about this a few years back and they said there was nothing they could do to prevent it, but offered the ability to record a few extra minutes as a work-around. I've noticed lately that Comcast has found a way to know when some shows are going to run overtime and will extend the recording time to account for it, but they don't catch every show so I never know when it's going to happen. I saw the bloopers at the end of this episode but even if they got cut off I could always catch the episode on Comcast's "On Demand" feature.

I agree. I think the show is intentionally painting Georgie as dim to contrast that with Sheldon's super intelligence and be consistent with Mary's "dumber than soup" reference. I don't think that's too fair to Georgie's character and not really realistic as the overwhelming evidence is that siblings don't differ THAT much in intelligence. They can differ a little but not as much as they're depicting here. I'm with you in hoping they make Sheldon's siblings seem a little brighter in the future.

Yep, the sweater was cat heads for sure. I agree about Megan being a kook. I wasn't thrilled with either her or her episode. The only reason I know her is from a short-lived talk show she had on NBC back in 2006. Why they picked her and her whiny voice to host a talk show is beyond me. I remember after it was cancelled (after only 4 months) one of the criticisms was that fans were expecting her to be more like her character on "Will and Grace", which she is not. I never watched that show so I don't have any opinion on that. I almost thought she was going for a running dark humor "joke" about the inter-generational wife abuse on her father's side of the family. Too bad it was anything but funny. One thing I think they should have brought out is that alcoholism and wife abuse was rampant in the latter half of the 1800s, which is what gave rise to the temperance and the women's movement, and also Prohibition. At least give that aspect of her family history some historical context and not make it seem like it was only about how messed up her father's side of the family was.

I feel for them but I also feel for the viewers (including myself). In the past few months we've been screwed out of several things because of stars' bad behavior and vile comments, including the reboot of Mario Batali's old cooking show, "Molto Mario", plus the cancellation of "The Chew", from which he was dismissed last Fall, and many thought his scandal had something to do with it. Now Roseanne can go to the "island of disgraced celebrities", which was founded by Paula Deen and getting more populated every day. What is it with these people? I am sorry but there's no excuse for them and they get what they deserve. The network knew of the risk with Barr but did nothing to put a muzzle on her. They could have warned her to STFU or force her to sign a contract agreeing to be quiet, but they obviously didn't do enough. I'm sorry but that's ridiculous. She is a loose cannon and wacko, and it was obvious that she could not be trusted. I don't think stars should be spouting off on their political views incessantly anyway. In the business world that would never be tolerated and many big companies have statements in their employee handbooks to that effect, telling employees to zip it online or else risk being fired over it if the company thinks their comments are offensive. I don't know why stars seem to be allowed to do that. I don't necessarily blame the cast for working with her. People generally don't let politics or people's personal views (or the voicing of those views) get in the way of their working relationships. That's the way I've always known it to be in our society so why should it stop now? I don't like thinking that putting that stuff in the forefront is now becoming a requirement as things get more divisive.

They could always bring back "The Middle", which just ended after 9 seasons, and there were rumors that it was ended because of the Roseanne reboot.

I agree. I love Jet Tila. Didn't they have a new woman on last season? I guess that didn't work out. I didn't think she was that good. I still wonder why Kevin didn't come back but I do still like Jet in the floor reporter role. I have to admit I tend to forgive Alton for everything because I have liked him for around 20 years now. He's like a member of my family by now. The changes to the format haven't bothered me so much except I do think they should have 3 judges and do away with the quick first course. I agree that they should have left everything like the original ICA. If it ain't broke why fix it?

Monterey was even more nervous and wacko than on her original season. It was disturbing to watch. It's pretty bad if Amy can look calm, cool and collected next to her. Right now I think she might have a chance. Jernaud is also disturbing. His act is not appealing. I'm so over anyone saying "those bad boys". I agree with the posts above that Adam Gertler has had every chance of making it on FN and shouldn't be in this group. I actually remember the shows he had but only from promos. I am sure that TPTB only put him and most of them on the cast purely for entertainment purposes because I'm sure they would never be serious about most of them.

I liked and knew all the hosts beforehand separately but together I felt like they were just too many loud extroverts yelling at the same time, especially Michael Symon. It's bad enough that I watch Jeff Mauro and Sunny Anderson do it on "The Kitchen" but at least that's only once a week.

I just heard the news - were the ratings that bad? I can't believe they'd be any worse than "The Rachael Ray Show". I'm sure the Batali thing must have had something to do with it.

I feel like they used to do more of that in Seasons 1 and 2, although we were told that one man was a cop this season. I don't think we were told about what anyone else did for a living. One of the main points of the show used to feature the person finding out they had siblings or half siblings but in recent seasons they mostly don't even mention it. That stuff was interesting and it makes the show more unsatisfying if people are expecting it but not getting it.

I know and it especially annoys me because a lot of people are salt sensitive but absolutely NO attention is paid to that by chefs and the media in general. They spend a lot of time pushing every "super food" trend but ignore the 800 pound gorilla in the room. Too much salt causes a whole host of potential medical issues, especially as people get older.

I'm related to the Pierces myself. When Ancestry.com had a "find famous relatives" function several years ago I got matched as a 5th or 6th cousin of Franklin's and there are several Pierces in my tree. I know that Barbara Bush is also related as is GW. Her maiden name was Pierce. Franklin's genealogy is easily found online so I hope you can find out. It sounds like you are, though. As for John Adams, I have several in my tree and none of them is THE John Adams, although again I think I'm a distant cousin. This man couldn't have been given that he came over as an indentured servant and I don't think that's the case with the other Adams family.

We did talk about this upthread. I said it looked like the recent seasons were concentrating only on the reunion of the parent/child or siblings and not going further into finding the other parent, or aunts/uncles and even siblings that were mentioned like it often did in the first 2 seasons. Also, there was no update series last season either, even though they left open some glaring loose ends that the audience wanted to see resolved. I said I kind of doubted that they would do it this time either. That's too bad because I often found the update shows even more interesting than the regular ones.

My theory is that they spend so much of the budget on this show for the stars' salaries that they end up slighting the prize money as a result. I can just imagine the budgetary justification for that. Also it may be me, but there seemed to be an awful lot more input from the mentors during the finale than in earlier seasons. Not that I'm against some input but it seemed like a lot more this time.

Didn't it look to you like they were sitting in the Union Oyster House with no one in it? Or was it an old tavern? I think because Cryer probably knows so much about his ancestry they had to pick someone in the tree whose origins weren't already traced and needed a little digging to find. I have ancestry in Massachusetts way back to that era (I'm also a Mayflower descendant) and most of my ancestors from that time and place appear in published genealogies and there is TONS of stuff online and on Ancestry.com about them. This man was a dead end because he came over as an indentured servant, so it was a way to make them have to do some research plus give Jon some new information he likely couldn't have found any other way. What bothers me is that this show only goes into one tiny branch of the tree and doesn't put it in context. I feel like they used to go into more relatives, but now focus in on one or two people and no one else. I am pretty confident that with that many roots in early New England Jon is probably also a Mayflower descendant several times over, plus is related to many Revolutionary War heroes and even founding fathers. If it's true in my tree and my friends' trees, it's likely true in his. Once you find you have ancestry that far back in New England it inevitably goes back to the same relatively small group of people on some branch of your tree. And when you go that far back you're descended from an awful lot of people!

I loved your post and I agree but I got a chuckle out of your typo. It's Westport, not Westpoint. West Point is the military academy in New York State. Sorry to be the "word police".

No need to feel challenged, I was just reacting to the content of what you said.

I notice that he also made it very clear in the beginning that he had a great adoptive mother and had "no complaints", as if he had no real emotional need to find his birth mother. Perhaps he is afraid of "replacing" his adoptive mom in his heart by meeting his real mom. But I think in the end he was actually coming around, especially after he met her and heard the story. And then finding out he was her only child. Yes, I know that but I still don't know why TLC is rushing this season. I notice that it's also rushing other shows, like "Long Island Medium", which also had several episodes on in one week, and now the new season of "Who do You Think You Are" is going to start off with two episodes shown in one night. It's a good thing I have a DVR - I don't have time to watch 3 episodes in one night!

How would the mother know whether or not it was scripted? She only knows what they told her. On these shows they sometimes aren't told how the sausage is made. I think it is true that both she and her son applied for the show seeking the other at the same time, were each sent a DNA test and then Jen Utley discovered the link, prompting the show to create a dramatization for them to appear on the same episode in which Chris and Lisa "accidentally" discover that they're working on the same case from opposite ends. It would be too coincidental that they would put both mother and son on the same episode and have Lisa and Chris "just happen to meet up" and find out they were working the opposite ends of the same search without someone knowing it beforehand. That's stretching credulity a little too far for me.