Maysie
-
Posts
628 -
Joined
Content Type
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Discussion
Posts posted by Maysie
-
-
Also, is it just me, or has this season suddenly taken a weird turn? I was very much enjoying the first six episodes, and then with Francis' recovery, now the tone has abruptly shifted. Some of the stories seem to have had swift resolutions (Lucas- admittedly the other reporters are still slowly coming around; Dunbar; Francis and Claire at each other's throats), and now they're focusing on a brand new, only briefly mentioned till now character and the general election. Just seems very jarring to me, but they've done well so far, so hopefully it won't seem quite as much of an about face with the rest of the season.
I was thinking the same thing after this episode, though I haven't been so keen on the storytelling throughout the season. I feel like it's been very uneven and unrealistic at points. For example, one moment Claire's inept at foreign policy, politics, strategy, etc., and now she's brokered a deal with the Russians, seemingly out of the blue. (There was nothing in that meeting that led me to believe Petrov was even considering entertaining the offer. And Claire only has to say the word "dignity" and he's convinced?) I'm not entirely sure why Dunbar had to go or why Frank and Claire couldn't be adversaries for the entire season, but in one episode the show took a hard turn off the storyline it'd been following for six episodes. I kind of wonder if they felt they had to tie up the election by the end of the season since we're actually in an election year, so they dispatched with all the primary stuff to go straight for the general election.
I have to say, between last season and this one (at least to this point), I learned that if Claire wants something she'll damn well get it. Frank will kill to get what he wants, but he also has a pragmatic streak in him. Claire seems to become so focused on what she wants that she can lose touch with reality. I think she's one of those people who simply thinks that because she wants something, it will be as she wants it.
As for the Conways, I can't say I like them, however if they were super-awesome, squeaky clean it would be too easy to root for them and they'd be boring. I suppose they're positioned as Underwood2.0 - their generation of Frank and Claire.
I don't see the value of the ex-general as Conway's running mate. Sure, he can hit Frank on his lack of military service, and his weakness against ISO, but all Frank really has to do is order a few bombing runs or come up with a carefully timed foreign policy (whichl will also benefit Cathy, although I assume she is a placeholder for Claire as the VP) as a "November surprise."
Is military service that much of an issue any more? Seriously, it seems the last time anyone made any kind of a deal over it was in 2000 (and then it wasn't even a big deal like it used to be). And hell, now presidential candidates can mock a former POW and it doesn't seem to affect how voters react. I think having the military service is a plus for candidates, but I don't think people see the lack of it as such a negative any more, so that felt a bit dated to me. Plus, Conway was in the military, I think. (And he sounded like he did it for the political benefit it would provide).
-
1
-
-
It said so much that it was Stamper and Blythe waiting out Frank's surgery. As awful as Doug is, I find him pathetic in his absolute, unquestioning, slobbering devotion to Frank.
Edited to add:
I think I missed what Claire's motivation was for inserting herself into the negotiations with the Russians and the Chinese and that whole situation. Was she counting on Frank dying and then somehow using her experience to build her own political career? What exactly did she have to gain by manipulating that entire situation, including winning over Blythe and all that stuff?
-
My main takeaway - what a thoroughly decent guy Vice-President Blythe is, so I'm sure he will be destroyed sooner rather than later.
Oh yeah. He's not only decent, but incredibly naive and probably a bit dim-witted (which would explain why Frank would choose him as a Vice President). And I had to laugh out loud that Claire was sequestered elsewhere in the White House sending Blythe crib notes on his lap top as he talked to the Russian. I don't know, but based on her previous track record I don't know that I'd be relying on her for sensitive political negotiations. Has she suddenly become a brilliant strategist? Or is he that stupid?
I don't even know what to think at this point. When Frank started having some sort of attack that looked like it might kill him I found myself thinking "please, just die already and get it over with!" And of course, part of that's because he is just that loathsome. But I think I'm also getting tired of all the mustache-twirling. So far this season has been Frank takes two steps forward, then Claire does, sending Frank back a step. Then he takes two steps forward and sends her back one. And back and forth and back and forth as they lurch along. Every step, every turn, propels each of them to a new low and I get it: they are ambitious, ruthless and have no morals at all.
And then there's Doug. Gah. When he attacked Seth in his apartment, I thought "well, of course he'll kill him because it's Doug!" and I was genuinely surprised he didn't kill Seth. I can only guess he didn't because there's no way he could get away with it or keep the scandal from damaging the president. And it was kind of humorous that Doug couldn't donate his liver because of his alcoholism. I know it isn't really funny, but I found it so because simply because I hate Doug so much.
At this point I'm trying to make myself finish the season. I hate to quit a show that I initially enjoyed so much (seasons 1&2). Watching this season reminded me how much I really disliked season 3. A year is a long time to go between shows, particularly when you binge watch, so I was looking forward to this season. And then I started watching again and a lot of it started coming back to me. Claire and Frank bumbling and miscalculating their way to success and power only because everyone else is even more stupid or naive than they are is dull and frustrating. As well, there's not really anyone to root for, which I get because it is the highest level of politics, after all. And I can live with a show filled with "bad" people - I loved the Sopranos, for example - so long as they're interesting bad people. Claire and Frank were interesting in the first two seasons but now they're cartoonish. The show is becoming very predictable.
-
6
-
-
Come on and get in this boat with me. Now I am actually looking for it and don't really see it. And Isaac seems like he would not put up with someone being an asshole to him for long. Be interesting to see what they say about each other after the show.
One of the local papers does a follow up interview with Isaac every week. A couple of weeks ago the interviewer asked Isaac about Marjorie's continuing criticism and whether the two of them got along while they were filming (so it seems other people are getting the vibe, too). Isaac responded that he hadn't noticed the trash talking until the episodes aired and that during the filming they were "very civil," "hung out" and were "always good natured." It didn't seem to bother him because he said expected some trash talk. I don't know if there are any similar interviews with Marjorie since the episodes have aired. It'd be interesting to hear her take on it.
-
5
-
-
bitchin camaro, that tuna stew sounds like some straight up food trauma.
-
1
-
-
Re seafood and cheese: I grew up with crab au gratin and Isaac has an exquisite seafood fondue on his menu. The fondue wasn't quite what we expected (we thought melted cheese in a pot), but it was a large ramekin - like 6 or 8 inches - with gruyere and plenty of crab. I don't typically think of something like fish-fish with cheese (unless you're talking about a tuna melt, but that's a different story), but shellfish seems to lend itself to some cheesing up in the right circumstances. And I recently made some crawfish nachos that were chock full o cheese that were awesome!
-
4
-
-
Richness, I think you may be referring to jette's post about the appearance of the unrefined beef stew at the table giving you a giggle? I didn't think about that until I read that post, which I think brings home the point that good food is good food. It doesn't always have to have an architectural element or layers of new flavors exploding on your palate, or other hallmarks of "refinement" to be a wonderful dish.
That may say more about the grace of her competitors than anything about her. Not to mention that it really wouldn't be in their best interest to say anything negative about her no matter how she behaved. I don't know one way or the other, but I wouldn't point to the fact that no one has particularly called her out as evidence that she isn't the way she comes across on TV.
Generally, this group has seemed to be pretty professional. I may have missed something because I haven't watched every episode this season, but I can't remember any negativity about other chefs, other than Marjorie's snarky remarks about Isaac (which may be why it's a topic of conversation - it stands out because there is so little complaining about the other contestants from the other contestants). I remember Jason whining about the other chefs early in the season, but it seemed to be coming from a position of him feeling like an outsider and not directed at one particular chef. Occasionally you'll hear the conversations after the elimination, but they haven't seemed to be nasty or snarky. And really, props to them for maintaining that professional attitude. I think it must be hard to live with a group of people you may or may not like in close quarters and then compete against them, all while being away from your home, family, kitchen, comfort zone.
When it comes to reality tv, I try to give some benefit of the doubt to the person who comes off negatively because he/she be a victim of a "bad" edit, however I always come back to the feeling that editors can only use what they're given. It's hard to know how Marjorie really feels about Isaac (or why she feels that way), but in my view, there's definitely a difference in the way she feels and talks about him compared to the other chefs. I can't put my finger on whether she dislikes him or it's merely a lack of respect (which is worse, in my opinion). However, it's definitely affected my attitude about Marjorie. When someone talks negatively about someone else, I usually end up feeling more negative about the one doing the actual talking, and it's definitely happened in this case.
-
6
-
-
I get the feeling Marjorie doesn't have a lot of social skills. If she grew up with missionary parents and did lots of time in soup kitchens (I seem to remember that from a past episode), perhaps she didn't have the opportunity to really learn how to interact with peers. I also wonder if she's a bit ill at ease with men, or perhaps she feels like she has to compete with them in the kitchen and this is how she acts out to be one of the guys. I don't see any animosity in the shut-up or punching (which I hate, by the way); it seems more like arrested development. It sounds weird, but there is a difference in the hitting/punching thing. For example, I worked in a place where the owner regularly would hit the women employees with whatever he was carrying (a newspaper, empty water bottle, and once, a fire poker). He would have said it was all in good fun (what the hell?) but it was definitely a sign of his dominance and continued til he hit the wrong woman with a newspaper.
Though I don't like Marjorie, I don't take her punches as a dominance/control thing, nor do I consider her "shut-ups" to be verbally abusive. It puts me in mind of an awkward teenager trying to fit in. However, if I was on the receiving end of one of her punches, I think I'd grab her hand and said "do not do that again!" or I'd give it back.
I think my issue with her is the basic lack of respect she gives to certain people, such as in this instance, Isaac. Maybe he reminds her of someone she doesn't like or had a bad experience with, but she seems very harsh and judgmental of him for no obvious reason. If she doesn't like him, I can accept that; some people rub you the wrong way. If that's the case, she needs to grow the hell up and learn how to be professional about it because life, and the kitchen, is going to be chock full of people you don't like and don't like you. Her dislike of him has shown up in subtle ways and it's been particularly glaring because she's been the only contestant I've noticed throughout the competition who's regularly condescending/dismissive of another chef throughout the competition. And since Isaac has been so go-with-the-flow and hasn't taken it personally, her animosity towards him stands out even more, to me. And when you throw in the Angelina adoration (which I'm really having a hard time understanding, for some reason), the disparity is even more glaring.
Marjorie's what? 30 years old? And I think Angelina is 25??? Everyone acts like Angelina is a teenager, but she's not all that much younger than many of the other chefs. I know the five years difference in their careers is a lot of time in terms of a culinary career, but ffs, it's not like Angelina is young enough to be Marjorie's daughter or even her niece. Kwame is about the same age as Angelina, and while the other chefs talk about his youth and his potential career growth, he acts far more grown up than Angelina, and I felt that any protective inclination the other chefs felt toward him was because he is such a nice, sweet guy and not so much because he's young. Kwame, in my opinion, was much more mature than Angelina and Marjorie. Though his past issues affected his performance in the competition, he was always professional, respectful and took criticism well. I can't say that about Marjorie or Angelina (or Man Bun).
-
11
-
-
So I hope Isaac learned his lesson: if you wish you'd have more time to do your dish, maybe you should rethink it. I love Isaac, but Carl saved his ass by choosing a dish that required days, not hours. (What the everloving fuck Carl???) I noted that Gail said Isaac's dish wasn't refined and had to wonder if Marjorie was cackling in her living room as she watched the episode.
Over the course of the season, I've come to kind of dislike Jeremy and haven't had much interest in anything he makes. But I have to give him props this episode: he killed it on all fronts and if nothing else he's had a strong finish, which is really all that matters. Since he's lived his dream, I won't be sorry if he chokes next week in Vegas. I'm tired of him.
I couldn't exactly tell what it was about Marjorie's dish that the judges didn't like. There appeared to be an issue with the fact that she chose boneless lamb, and then there was something about she should have let it sit for 45 minutes, but I seem to think someone wasn't happy with the seasoning (or lack of it???). I got that Isaac's was dry and Carl's was just under-developed, but the criticism for Marjorie's lamb seemed to depend on who you were listening to (and some of the guests pronounced it perfect, if I remember correctly). I didn't feel she was ever on the bubble to go, but it was clear she wasn't going to win it.
And I agree that Amar probably would have nailed the challenge; it sucks that he got sent home for toast. Listen: I like bread (LOVE bread, actually), so I can dig some good toast. But I can just imagine that this "toast" that's becoming quite the rage is probably upwards of ten bucks a plate when it's all gussied up with fresh veggies or a bit of meat, which pisses me off for some reason. It may have something to do with a restaurant in Pioneer Square in Seattle that actually charges $7 for a plate of toast with some homemade jam. SEVEN DOLLARS! So when I see a challenge that perpetuates that nonsense it drives me a little nuts.
Based on the three that are left, I will pick Marjorie for the win, though my heart kind of wants Isaac. Whatever her beef was/is with him (if there ever really was some kind of beef), hopefully he's earned some respect from her now that he's made it to the final three with her.
The other thing I noted was that all four chefs seemed visibly nervous when they presented their dishes - high pressure, indeed.
-
9
-
-
My take on celebrity judges varies according to who the judge is and how they behave. I was NOT impressed with Chrissy Teigen or whoever she was. Giggle giggle, innuendo, giggle and bounce just doesn't appeal to me, which is all I got out of that little bit. I didn't have a problem with Hammer showing up because he wasn't acting a fool. He tasted the food, talked about what he liked or didn't like and announced a winner, which is really all I want out of a judge. I sometimes wonder if Padma's comments influence the guest judge, or if she has any say over the winner - I honestly can't tell with the slicing and dicing done in the editing process.
Just because someone isn't a food "professional" doesn't mean he/she doesn't understand what's good food. The quickfire challenge is pretty straightforward and isn't elimination, so I don't see the harm in having a mere human (meaning someone whose only tie to food is enjoying a good meal) do the judging. If it helps tie in to the location and adds a little personality to the segment, why not? I remember in the New Orleans Top Chef Dr. John was a quickfire judge. I will never forget that because it introduced us to the phrase "hip-tang." I'm sure there were plenty of other culinary options the show could have tagged for that quickfire segment, but having a great local musician added a bit of Nola flair to the challenge and we have a new go-to phrase in our vernacular. Hammer wasn't quite as colorful as Dr. John was, however now I know he's from Oakland and that he's still alive and well (because you never know these days). Plus we got a few chefs doing the Hammer Walk or whatever it's called.
-
13
-
-
ETA: I couldn't make out all of the other locations that didn't get chosen. It looked like somewhere in North Africa, somewhere in West Africa, and maybe Persia? Nobody took Mexico? or was that even a choice?
Italy was one of the choices (and I would have liked to see that simply because I love Italian food).
-
1
-
-
I was wondering how much the judges knew about the food/history of what they were tasting. I'm assuming (dangerous, I know) that after the chefs chose their categories that the judges at least had a rundown of what was going on food-wise. So did they know that at that particular time in Japan that the Chinese influence was beginning to appear, or did they have to rely on Karen for that information. On one hand I liked the challenge because it gave the chefs the opportunity to learn about a specific time and place and produce a piece of food that's appropriate to it. It's harder to rely on your bag of tricks, unless you're smart like Amar and choose something you already know about and are good at. However, if the judges really knew little about the context of the food they were tasting, I kinda call foul on that because I think it's not right to hold someone up to a historical context that you aren't even sure about yourself.
-
Loved it when Padma kissed Kwame! Lucky guy! I don't believe she's ever done that before.
I didn't know what to think of it, but I loved his reaction. I get the vibe that just about everyone who encounters Kwame likes him. It may all be in the editing, but he's coming across as that rare guy who has a sense of humor about himself and life, though he takes his work seriously without being a dick about it. Perhaps I'm seeing what I want to see, but it feels like just about everyone on the show - including the judges - like Kwame and seem to feel almost brotherly/sisterly towards him. As for the rapping, I would have allowed myself to be offended if we hadn't had Kwame's talking head about his rapping past. I'm sure Padma knew that and I give her a pass on that.
I am surprised Marjorie did not just dump the bread once the ghee kept burning on her.
Yeah, that surprised me too. She knew it wasn't right and with Padma in the mix, it was a foolish risk to take, particularly since it was an aside to the rest of the dish.
I admire that many of the chefs have figured out how to win at this game-make good food that they are comfortable with and fit it into the challenge. Isaac is the perfect example of that, although he is going to have trouble if/when he has to step out of his Cajun and meat centric comfort zone.
I agree with the meat-centric thing. His restaurant is "Toup's Meatery" for heaven's sake! I worry less about the Cajun thing; he didn't do anything to Cajun up his venison and I was kind of worried about the risk he was taking because it sounded like he was kind of guessing about how to season the venison since the Vikings didn't use much in the way of spices, etc. I think his bigger risk would be a vegetarian challenge. Perhaps his training and years working for Emeril will kick in there if it ever comes up.
I really wish Jeremy would have gone home because of course he's thatguy who can't help his deep-seated need to enthrall a restaurant full of people with his mad drum skillz. Tool.
Yeah, that was weird. Jeremy definitely put off the "that guy" aura to me this episode. The drums and surfing class (that's what he said in the library, right? Credit for surfing?) showed a new side to him that I take is kind of a "forever young dude" thing he's got going on. Not that it's a bad thing, but it just surprised me a bit.
I'm very fond of Jonathan Waxman and it's a shame the chowder wasn't made exactly the way he would have made it himself, but get over it. This chef didn't want the clams in his CLAM CHOWDER overshadowed by big chunks of juicy crabmeat. You'd have thought he elected to omit the clams.
Did Jeremy discuss clams in the chowder? I wasn't sure he was making actual clam chowder. I know he put a big lump of fish in there (can't remember what kind). I have to agree with the judges, based on the shot of the dish, there was nothing in that bowl that screamed chowder to me. It appeared to be various types of seafood and bits with a big dose of sauce ladled over it.
-
6
-
-
I was surprised Jeremy got a pass, but I can't put my finger on why, other than they all kept saying they wished they'd had some actual crab on their dish. It sounded like he totally missed what they were expecting in execution. There was no surprise Amar won (and it looked delicious!) - I don't know how he pulled all that together in three hours. It was nice to not have the obligatory shopping excursion to Whole Foods. And seeing what the kitchen was already stocked with surely gave them some idea of what the judges were expecting. I mean, Isaac had wooden plates to choose from, so that must have been a bit of a guide.
When Kwame rapped during the quickfire I realized how much I do not want him to go home. There's something very endearing about him to me.
-
11
-
-
I kind of agree with skipping the selected tributes in the show. Few of them will ever really be all that good anyway - I mean look at what Gaga did to Bowie (that was not a tribute, imo) - and it becomes dicey with who's going to be offended or have hurt feelings. I understand Natalie Cole's family being hurt with the short shrift she got. I seem to remember her being all over the place when I was growing up and I didn't remember she passed until the end of the memorial segment. No, she didn't have the impact Bowie had, but that doesn't minimize her importance to the musicians she influenced nor to her family. I can see doing an extended segment where some music of the deceased artists accompanies the photo montage, perhaps sung/played by other artists. Yep, it would be long, but probably not as long as each individual tribute + the in memorial montage ended up being.
Artists die every year, and really, how can anyone judge the impact one artist had over another? There are people who loathe the Beatles, so undoubtedly, when Sir Paul goes, someone's going to be pissed off that he gets a big, long tribute (and you know he will). If a great writer or producer - someone who's not so visible but just as important to modern music goes at the same time, who makes the call that the ex-Beatle gets a bigger/better tribute? Elton John is a great example: I'm sure his passing would prompt a fairly significant tribute, but I doubt his lyricist, Bernie Taupin, would get more than a mention in the montage - and chances are there would be no Elton as we know him without Bernie. As well, current popular culture makes a difference as to how the contribution to an artist is seen at the time of death, I think. For example, Bowie was never not cool; Natalie Cole was more vulnerable to the whims of musical tastes.
I feel ghoulish talking about future deaths.
ETA: Oh, Johnny. I know you always wanted to be a musician rather than an actor, but seeing you these past few years has just given me major sads. Mid-life crises is so not pretty, and the only Vampire in your life is your wife Amber.
Oh good God, yes. He is the last person I expected to have the mid-life crisis (I guess that's what's going on with him). I always figured he was too cool to let a little thing like aging get in the way of having a good time but he seems not quite right the last couple of years. It'd be one thing if he looked happy with his new, young, beautiful wife, but I don't even get that vibe from him. And I know he loves music and I applaud him keeping with it. But up there with Alice et al he looked a bit like (gulp) a wannabe. A wannabe aging rock star is not a good look on him.
-
3
-
-
eta: Let me just also add that I hated Lady Gaga's tribute to David Bowie because I felt that the performance quickly veered from tribute into parody. I felt like I wasn't watching Lady Gaga honoring Bowie but doing a parody of him, down to fake British accent while singing, weird teeth, weird walk, etc. And Bowie deserved way better than that. Yes Bowie was conceptual and out there but that worked for him and for whatever era he was performing in. Gaga putting on some costume and mimicking everything about a performance of Bowie's just made it cheesy and the bad camp, as opposed to the brilliant camp that actually was Bowie.
That pretty much sums up my feelings on it. And yet, this mornings interwebs headlines are about the "amazing" tribute she paid to Bowie last night. Amazing if you're thinking amazing in its awfulness.
Taylor DID throw shade at Kanye during her AOTY speech, but of course didn't name names, because that's not her thing, LOL. She DID humble brag about winning two AOTY Grammys, though, which isn't a good look on her.
Yeah, she began to lose me with the bragging, but she reeled me in when she called out Kanye. I don't really like her - kind of over her, the same way I am with Beyonce and other people who begin to believe their own publicity. How long til she writes a song about him? Or will she be smart and ignore the asshole, which for him is probably worse.
Awards shows and me don't traditionally mesh. After many many disappointments, I've come to believe that they're kind of like popularity contests among cliques - they feel very high schoolish to me (I'm including the Oscars in this). I'm not saying they never reward the right people, but it seems to me that in the entertainment business, there's a power structure that evolves at a glacial pace and I sense that's why we see many of the same entertainers (actors, musicians) popping up everywhere, doing their jobs and then getting handsomely rewarded for it with awards and box office/chart bank. (And this is a cycle that feeds itself, imo). I imagine it's frustrating for artists to continually get overlooked or pigeonholed into a type, but I hope that for "real" artists, they're able to find their satisfaction (and reward) in just doing what they do and not buy into the myth that they're not a true success unless they win the big prize.
-
1
-
-
I'm not particularly keen on Taylor Swift - tired of the "you were mean to me so I'm going to write a nasty song to get back at you" thing from her. But I have to admit, she can write a catchy tune (I keep thinking of The Rock singing "Shake it Off" in Ballers). I also admit to getting a giggle at her little dig at Kanye (I presume).
And I like Uptown Funk. Can't help it.
-
1
-
-
Yes, that was something. I don't quite know where to go with that. I have a soft spot for Alice Cooper from my childhood and I always kind of liked Joe Perry and Duff McKagen, for some reason. I think Depp's presence threw me off. He's a great actor but I can't take him seriously when he's playing rock star.
I will have to turn this off before Beyonce hits the stage because I think I've had my fill of her.
-
Oh, Lenny Kravitz doing Fame would have been great. That's a miss. And in thinking about it, I can see where they could have had a mix of musicians come in and do their take on Bowie tunes. It could have been simple, made a point about how his music influenced so many and been so much better than that what the fuckery that Gaga did.
On another note, I love Bonnie Raitt, so yay for that. But this Vampire thing with Alice Cooper, etc? I may have to watch to see how bad it is . . . Johnny Depp is one I used to love but I sense he's in some sort of mid-life crisis right now. He's creeping me out these days.
-
I adored Bowie and I think his impact was wide-ranging and I think a little more enduring than the Eagles (whom I liked fine, but they were very much of a particular period of time, imo). However, watching that "tribute," I found myself wondering what would have been appropriate or fitting for a David Bowie tribute. That thing Gaga did didn't feel like it for me. It felt so 70's cheesy, reminiscent of a variety show or something like that. Frankly, I would have been good watching the Flight of the Conchords Bowie episode from a few years ago, which was awesome.
As far as Gaga goes, I'm meh on her, though I was impressed with her Julie Andrews thing a while back.
-
3
-
-
Well, this Bowie tribute is underwhelming. Is it supposed to really be awesome because it's Gaga? I am not feeling it at. all.
-
2
-
-
I saw the headline about the Zuckerberg thing and had to come over here to see what's what, which led me to the Twitter feed. I honestly don't know what to think.
On one hand, it's really sad the way that Kanye is melting with the world watching. On the other hand, I'm still skeptical that this doesn't relate to the release of his new album. Is it a coincidence that his craziest rant yet (debt, Grammy's, whatever) all happens a few days after his new album drops? Maybe or maybe not.
That's partly where I am on this. Is the public being played? Is this a massive (and misguided) publicity stunt on his part? I haven't been following All Things Kardashian/Jenner/West lately, so I have no idea how things have been playing out in regards to the stuff that "leaks" its way into the headline and then subsequently ends up on the show or promoting some product they're putting out. But it seems there's been a bit of a history there: "events" happen and there's lots of little headlines and the voila!, there's a storyline or there's an app or a television show released about it! (I think Caitlyn's transition is one of the most obvious examples - all the little teases and then the pictures and suddenly she's talking to Diane Sawyer and then the I Am Cait show is announced). So, in my mind, it's entirely possible that Kanye is engaging in a good bit of shameless self promotion.
However, in scrolling through his tweets, it hit me those tweets are really kind of crazy. I do think he is deluded in some manner. The question is, is he "crazy like a fox" (as the saying goes) or is he really starting to slide? As a fellow human being, I hope this is just a massive publicity stunt (which, maybe, just maybe, will piss people off at being taken in). If it's not, he probably needs some sort of help, certainly for the sake of his children, because he's beginning to lose touch with reality. For example, is he really, sincerely asking Zuckerberg for money, or does he know that will generate attention and publicity, driving people (like me) to his twitter feed, where he can pimp his fashion line and create anticipation for his album? When I worked at the public library, it was fairly normal for some of the mentally ill/challenged people (some of which were homeless) to come in and ask for Bill Gates'/Microsoft's mailing address so they could write him and ask him for some financial help because things were tight. Really, there's no difference between that and what Kanye's doing, other than he's using a different medium to do the ask, and since he's world-famous, he's getting loads of attention for it.
So I don't know if I believe he's really off his rocker now, or if he's half faking it for the attention it's getting him. Make no mistake: I think anyone who does this sort of stuff for attention has some sort of mental illness. However, is it as out of control as it appears in his twitter feed? Again, with this crew, you don't know where the line between reality and "reality television" is.
If it's real and he's melting down, I am not entirely sure the Kardashians will throw him under the bus. I think it would depend on how broke he really is and how sick he really is. If he turns into a Phil Spector, then yeah, I can see them dumping his ass. However, if there's some sort of redemption on the horizon, I think they'll take the risk and take the ride all the way for the favorable publicity and financial payoff. Kanye has a lot of fans and respect in his industry, and I don't think Kris will give that up if she thinks sticking by him will buy them some respectability.
Finally, I may have to watch the grammy's tonight (for the first time in years) to see what he does. Come on - you know he's going to insert himself into it somehow. He needs to be tied to his seat.
-
2
-
-
I am heading to the states in a week, self driving from Chicago through Indianapolis, St Louis, Memphis, and New Orleans to Houston. I'd love some restaurant suggestions and regional specialties, Man Bun free of course.
New Orleans has many great places to eat and where you go will depend on what you want to spend and the type of experience you're looking for. If you're looking for Top Chef-centric places, there's Toup's Meatery, which is Isaac's place. Justin, from a few seasons ago, has La Petite Grocery (I think my favorite place in town) and Balise. Nina Compton moved here last year and opened Compere Lapin, which I've never been to. The other Nola chef from that season was from Galatoire's, which is real old school in the quarter. It's good and pricey, and if you want to get a glimpse of local culture/society, you go for lunch and wait for a table on the first floor. It's quite the scene; a few years ago one of the regulars' handgun fired from her purse. No one was hurt and it was a "whoops!!!" kinda thing. As far as Top Chef judges go, John Besh has several restaurants (Restaurant August, Domenica, Luke, Johnny Sanchez and Besh Steakhouse) and Emeril has Emeril's, NOLA and Emeril's Delmonico. I believe Leah Chase, of Dooky Chase, has also made an appearance (her place is open for lunch only; a landmark in many respects, including for the civil rights movement and art collection).
Shaya is considered by a variety of publications to be the best new restaurant in the country (Israeli; one of John Besh's chefs) and Peche was also high on that list a couple of years ago (owned by Donald Link, who has Cochon and Herbsaint; all three are wonderful). In my opinion, avoid Mother's and Bubba Gump. You'll find a lot of joints that will serve up great po boys, etc. You may want to check out Eater New Orleans to get an idea of what the options are for what you're looking for.
As far as Memphis goes, it's been a few years since I did much dining out there. I can say I was a bit disappointed by Rendezvous barbecue, however.
-
When we were eating lunch yesterday, I filled my husband in on this season's Top Chef - he hasn't been watching - and I noted that one of the other chefs said that Isaac's food wasn't "refined" enough. Husband agreed that the food and the restaurant definitely didn't qualify as refined; it's a pretty casual place - not white table cloth and it got pretty loud (one of the regulars was moving out of town so they were having a party for them). However, the food was great. The roasted shrimp, the crab fondue, the lamb and the chicken thigh confit were all wonderful. As well, the portions were very generous (I've got at least two more servings of my chicken to eat). I'll happily pass on the refinement if the food is good.
Although I have to say: I imagine that Isaac can do refined if he wants to, particularly after doing ten years with Emeril. Emeril's is still one of the great restaurants in town, in my opinion, and is a solid option to take out of town guests who want an excellent, refined meal.
"His food" does assume he cooked it (or even conceived it) though, and there's anecdotal evidence out there that his former partners might have done a lot of that stuff.
And this would explain a lot, including good yelp reviews vs. his ability (or inability) to do reproduce the dishes himself. We saw what happened with his wife's desert earlier in the season - the one that won a contest. It was her recipe but he couldn't reproduce it (or the contest she won was rigged).
-
2
-
S04.E06: Chapter 45
in House Of Cards [V]
· Edited by Maysie
Thank you JBC344. Sometimes I get distracted during the show. That explanation makes sense.
As much as I dislike Doug, he is an interesting character. I could easily see him killing Claire at some point for some real (or imagined) slight or threat to Frank. Doug's a little too devoted to Frank and I'm trying to figure out what it's based on (i.e., all politics, father figure, etc.)
The short hair threw me off too. However, I noticed that when seen from a distance, cropped-hair Zoe could pass for a Claire (I'm talking in silhouette). I don't remember enough about how Zoe routinely dressed, but the dress, heals and hair all channeled Claire for me. I don't know if that was intentional or accidental (going with Kate Mara's hair and wanting to make her look hot).
ETA: THREW not Through! My Engiish teachers would be disgusted with me.