Infie

I actually went back and watched the whole battle. The ONLY comment that he made that even peripherally referenced race was in interview - not in front of Maneet or anyone else - where he said that "[winning] would mean so much to me and to [people] who look like me." Statements like this aren't game playing, they're just fact. There wasn't any 'playing of the race card' at any point by Tobias that I could see. I'm sad that you think there was. From my perspective, Tobias seems to be a lovely person and an excellent chef who is gracious in both victory and defeat. Now, it is possible I missed something. If so, please feel free to be specific.

Both sets of dishes looked amazing. I wanted Antonia to win SO much - I remember how lovely she was with Shota last year and similarly this year with Kevin. That being said, I could see how Maneet deserved her win. She's saavy and clever and plays to the natural weaknesses in the game. Taste and presentation tend to be more subjective and therefore less of a lever for a chef to pull to control their scores beyond cooking well, but use of the randomizer is like having an explicit rubric to the score, and she's very good at pulling every point possible out of that section. Of course, it wouldn't matter if she wasn't also an excellent chef with technique, taste, and the ability to construct a beautiful dish, but at this level really everyone can do those last three things. Congratulations, Maneet.

I was cheering so hard for Esther by the end, and she lost by just one point! Well done, especially given how the deck was stacked against her. I hope she gets to return as a challenger for second season. I don't think that the result was necessarily pre-determined - Stephanie Izzard won Iron Chef Gauntlet in its first season which had a similar (though one dish at a time) idea of beating all three Iron Chefs - but I think that she leaned away from the seafood a couple of times and that was what took her out. I enjoyed the Iron Chef teams vs each other episode! Maybe I watch for a different reason than other folks - I just really enjoy watching people have fun and being creative doing the things that they love, whether it has a specific narrative point or not. I roll my eyes at MD, but he's also clearly having a blast, so I say go for it. My favourite Iron Chef America episode was the one where the challenger did not bring sous chefs with him, and so Michael Symon decided to also cook alone, so his sous chef team got to drink and heckle him from the sidelines. So much fun! Anyhow - I loved getting to see Kitchen Stadium again, and I will definitely watch if they do another season.

So much fun. I loved pilot Tommy, and the whole Poseidon theme, and while I think they probably could have done it in two episodes, I do think that they wanted to switch networks with a bang and they did that.

I already want to fire everyone, even more after seeing this episode. I was sympathetic to Nick's frustration right up until he gave his reasons. Then, ARGH! Do the writers actually think this is GOOD behaviour to have in doctors, anywhere? I am out.

I was so irritated with Nancy Silverton being ... offended? that Karen did such a good job with the canned green beans, outright saying that she felt like Karen elevated them undeservedly. Isn't that supposed to be a plus in this competition? Taking a randomizer ingredient and making it shine? Nancy, your snobbery is showing!

The battles this week were fun to watch, but it weirded me out to see the editing the way it was. In at least two cases (Britt's battle and I think Jet's battle) they showed the chefs both with and without gloves in shots a few seconds apart. It was to the point that I was wondering if they'd re-done some of the shots later or if the whole competition was just faked - it was SO distracting.

Re: taking a job without telling your partner I think Meredith, Maggie, and Kai are all very different situations. Maggie's married. Her doing it was just completely outrageous. A marriage isn't something you ignore for your job. Meredith doing it was rude and dismissive of her relationship with Nick. While they aren't married or engaged, he had demonstrated his commitment to her by moving his life to Seattle when she asked him to. He deserved to be treated with respect, and their relationship did too. Kai, though, was in a long distance relationship with someone who they are not engaged or married to. The extent of their commitment was that they're exclusive while they otherwise live separate lives. I think it was insensitive to not disuss, but I don't think it was the offense that the other two were. On the Maggie topic - I am so annoyed that the writers somehow decided that this whole storyline with Maggie and Winston was actually about Maggie's empowerment as a woman. Essentially, she loves her job more than her husband, which is OK, you do you, but then she told him that HE had to love his job more than her or she couldn't respect him. More than that, when he said that he needed to switch so that he wasn't working under her because he felt the need to grow as himself, and that he wanted to be able to maintain the marriage while he did so, she completely lost it and told him that he would be wasting himself by not saving lives the way that SHE wants to save lives. So, I am all for female empowerment, and I am all for couples working together to have them both thrive, but I am not a fan of stories where it's so blatantly hypocritical as here. Maggie isn't empowered in this; she is a bully who flatly refuses to see any side of the issue other than her own narrow point of view, and who is judgemental in the extreme to anyone who doesn't completely align with that view. Just ... UGH. I am glad that the character is gone.

Millins Adams Griffith Yasuda Kwan I see what you did there, Grey's.

I was wondering that too, but Five's bangs were still hanging to the same side as always. So, not a reversed camera. Either the cars are imports from the UK, or it's about the hotel being a mirror image of Oblivion somehow. (In How to Get Ahead in Advertising there is a camera reversal which I think is accidental, and everything is mirrored. Also a partial scene in Mask where the same thing happens. )

Sadly, even if the original Babylon didn't exist in this universe, shootings at gay nightclubs remain all too topical https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/two-dead-several-wounded-norway-nightclub-shooting-police-say-2022-06-25/

Hmmm. I actually really liked the show as a whole (only watched ep 1 so far). I did keep trying to align this with either a re-do (like the US show effectively 're-did' the UK one) or a tie-in, but once I let those expectations go and just learned the new characters it became interesting. I think that the events at Babylon were an acknowledgement of the miasma of hate and violence that is occurring and the fact that those events affect the entire community all the time. It would be fatuous to have the characters existing in an AU without that environment, but it would feel unearned in-show to have them afraid without providing context. I think that they did a pretty good job overall, especially given all of the expectations that fans of the first two iterations would have going in, and I'm looking forward to seeing more.

Yeah, for me, I'm with Toby on this. Kate demanding to know 'the number' - If he'd responded to that WITH a number, there would be no path forward that doesn't end badly for everyone. Providing the number just leads to a deep dive on the details of the number. Now, maybe that's ultimately what they need - Kate has not shown any particular skills at money management other than not really graciously accepting other people supporting her - but in a fight is the wrong place to take that path. I've got altogether too much experience with people who argue just like Kate and if you hit the 'just give me your completely detailed example' stage then it's time to stop for a while. Toby could have taken out a spreadsheet with all of the miniscule details written out ad nauseum and Kate would have pointed to a single cell with $500 in it and said 'That is actually $495' like that changed the whole picture. I didn't feel that Toby was making an ultimatum. He was just being clear. If Kate wants to move ahead with the family together then it would have to be in San Francisco. Not because it gives Toby everything he wants, but because the logistical problems of being separated are not sustainable - which was what Kate initially said - and the only way forward right now that lets them plan to provide *together* for their son is San Francisco. Now, sure - Toby could stay in San Francisco and Kate can stay in Los Angeles and Toby can provide for Jack, but that would not be together. Toby can't quit his job and move back to Los Angeles and have the whole family live on Kate's part time teacher salary. Toby can't quit his job and move back to Los Angeles and have the whole family live on and provide for Jack's needs on Kate's full time teacher salary. If Toby quits *three months* into his job, his chances of getting hired anywhere else drop dramatically. That is a huge red flag on a resume, and he had already looked in Los Angeles for a long time before the San Francisco job came up. Yes, he got a job offer in LA - which he turned down because it wasn't enough to both support the family and provide for Jack's needs, and likely also because if you drop jobs three months in it hurts your credibility for a long time. What if the LA job didn't work out - you're usually on probation for a period of time - and he was unemployed again? He has to stick with the known option because he has a wife and two kids to support and one of them is special needs. Toby's job isn't like working in a diner where if you leave you can just get the next one. Being out of work in IT is a multimonth effort to get hired elsewhere, and that's if you look great on paper, and I know because I essentially have Toby's job. So frustrating.

Nooooooo Ginsberg!

I agreed with Kevin being upset about Thanksgiving, especially since they'd already talked about it and had made an agreement. I get that Madison is allowed (encouraged, even) to move on, but I also feel strongly that her being the mom doesn't automatically confer to her all of the rights to make all of the decisions about the kids. She should have discussed it with Kevin before discussing it with Kate, especially if they were going to exchange all of those meaningful glances right in front of him. I'd be pissed too if the implication was that my ex should get to move ahead with her life with a new man and our kids, and I should just ... what? Step aside and stop being a father to our children so that my ex can enjoy being in love with another man without having to take me into consideration? Kevin actually wants to be a dad - it is not reasonable to assume that he should give up his time with them for Madison to start her new family, just as it would not be reasonable if the situation were reversed and Kevin had a girlfriend and was making plans for himself, the girlfriend and the kids and just assuming Madison would be out of the picture. These people need a neutral third party to help them negotiate their relationship moving forward. I completely agree with Runningwild - those guys need a custody arrangement because it is clear they're not going to be able to just wing it like they're trying to.