S14.E07: Booty

[bluepiano]

I don't think they should've allowed Jamie to give up immunity. So the rules of the show can be overturned by the contestants at will? That seems wrong. If I were to play amateur shrink I would say that Jamie's decision was tied in somehow to his gratitude about having overcome drug addiction to become a successful chef with a family he loves. It's like he's already a big winner.

But that aside, I think he was being unfair to himself on two counts. Had he not had immunity, he wouldn't have been working with those ingredients and would have made a different dish. More importantly, he didn't win immunity in a lottery. He earned it. So why does his making "the worst dish" in the elimination challenge matter more than having made the best dish in the QF?

Even if one cancels out the other, he still didn't deserve to go home over Emily, who was in the Sudden Death and had the next to worst dish in the elimination challenge.

The judges should've taken all that into account, and since Jamie's dish was only marginally worse than Emily's (if at all), he should've stayed. But I guess she was kept for the drama, and so that they could make Jamie's giving up immunity have maximum impact. 

Edited January 13, 2017 by bluepiano

[GaT]

Treasure hunting for ingredients in a storm? BULLSHIT. I hated the “chop the ice for ingredients” challenge, I hated the biathlon challenge, I hated the gondola challenge, & I HATED THE STUPID TREASURE HUNT CHALLENGE.  Why is this show going back in the direction of their worst season?

[Vermicious Knid]

The return of Top Scallop!

I hope they got to keep the pirate themed aprons.

[biakbiak]

I didn't find the quickfire that gimicky. The all had a wide variety of available items and in the end didn't have to cook them with the utensils provided.

As a Virgo this reaffirmed the notion that the commercial kitchen would not be the place for me. Not really because I don't believe in it bit I briefly found it amusing that none of the chefs were earth signs (had to look up what element Virgo was) and then I realized some PA, intern or Culinary producer must have noticed how many duplicate signs there were and invented this challenge because there were no earth signs.

Edited January 13, 2017 by biakbiak

[RealReality]

I kept yelling "no, don't do it!" at the TV.  I have both respect and anger for Jaime.  I respect him for his thought process that if a person doesn't have a good enough dish to stand on its own, they shouldn't stay in the competition.  At the same time, I'm mad at him because the only reason he was in that position was because he was stuck with two of the worst ingredients because he had the immunity.  If he didn't have the immunity, he would have had better ingredients and a better dish than Emily's.

I partially blame Padma.  I think her constant nettling of him (well, I hope you do something better than slack off and not give me any food!) probably played some part in his decision.  I think we've all seen contestants that have specifically used immunity to skate by, and its seen as something less than honorable.  Immunity should be the opportunity to really make a dish that shines, not an excuse to make a shitty dish.  And I think that Padma's comments last week and this week may have made him feel like he was one of those contestants that was using immunity as an excuse to make a shitty dish, or to not work as hard.  Or at least that that was the rep he was getting.

I just don't like John, he is one of those guys that will probably get far by taking as much advantage of people as possible.  I think he took advantage of Emily's youth and probably her desire to try to get along since she is the crappiest chef.  Getting her to break down all the lobster, and do his busy work so he could focus on his dish, IMO was taking advantage.  Yes, Emily could have stopped him at any time...but how many times has that girl been fired for talking back?  I'm guessing she is trying to just get along.  And also, him planning the night before to give Jaime any crappy ingredients was also taking advantage.  

He is a talented chef, and this is Top Chef, so maybe he wins it all.  

Also sad to see Jim go :(

Glad Sylva was able to pull it together.

[rho]

Sheldon stole my heart when he invoked Captain Planet. I love him!

I know the judges say they vote based on the plate but I really think that this one was for the ratings. Jamie tossed them a soft ball and they took it. I get where he was coming from though. A few years ago, in an otherwise forgettable season, an otherwise forgettable chef became known as the shithead who screwed his team but didn't give up his immunity and still won the season. I get it. If he does win, it would really put a damper on things if he's constantly second-guessing.

But he didn't think it through and now he'll always be remembered as the shithead who kept Emily in the game. It's not even a satisfactory plot twist because she's still fucking there and my fave Jim is battling it out in the rejects' kitchen. I will not be rooting for Jamie's valiant return until she is gone!!

[Ellee]

Wonder who turned off the grill?  One of the 'game players'?  Would it have mattered?

Guess it is a vets season to win.  Funny how the competitive newbies go home.  

I've enjoyed Jim. Sorry to see him go.  When judged, what was the look for regarding how Jim handled his egg?   Honest question. 

It appears to me that the goal of most chefs is to 'get Emily gone' over taking care of their own business.  Kind of sad.  Maybe I'm not reading the situation accurately.  Don't know.  Maybe I'm falling for what the show is trying to sell. Again don't know.  

Jaime -- Have a feeling that revoking the decision on keeping immunity won't be one of the things you regret if you regret.  I think the 'decision you might regret' was to let John tell you to take the ingredients HE didn't want will be the one. 

I know Emily is not a fan favorite but appreciate that she said what she did.  Both in how she felt the initial conversation went down and how the elimination challenge played out as well as saying she'd rather go.  How dare she correct a vet on how a conversation went down?   Actually I would love to see all the footage on this as I'd like to see who the victim(s) is/were and who the perpetrator(s) is/were. 

Katsuji and John can go find a corner and 'play games' all they want with each other.  That I do know.  How I feel I mean.   Can't see my feelings changing either.   I think I'd be more embarrassed at playing the game like they do than putting out a dish that sent me home.

Need to end on a positive note ..... Sheldon and Shirley.  Love the two of them together and as individuals.  :D

Edited January 13, 2017 by Ellee

[Primetimer]

A pirate party produces slimy scallops, and one chef's exit is written in the stars!

View the full article

[Constantinople]

I believe in Season 2 of The Apprentice -- Don't judge me!  I haven't watched that show in over a decade! -- Trump fired someone for being stupid enough to give up immunity.  But that made sense in that context since it was a bad business decision.

Similarly, in Survivor, contestants are able to give-up or transfer immunity.  That often blows-up in the contestant's face, but Survivor is a game about the contestants' social IQ, ability to manipulate others, etc.  Plus, transferring immunity can benefit the person if it works (such as by keeping your alliance intact).  So it makes sense for Survivor to permit it (though the purists might argue.  I don't think transferring was permitted until Season 4 or thereabouts).

But I think Top Chef shouldn't permit cheftestants to give up immunity.

[Court]

Emily blames John for giving Jamie crap ingredients. However, I didn't see her offering to give her ingredients to Jamie. So,all her talk means nothing. She was complacent and was OK with it since it benefitted her.

[rose711]

Never give up immunity. You earned it fair and square here. No reason to give it up. Just a stupid thing to do.

[FormerMod-a1]

13 minutes ago, Court said:

Emily blames John for giving Jamie crap ingredients. However, I didn't see her offering to give her ingredients to Jamie. So,all her talk means nothing. She was complacent and was OK with it since it benefitted her.

And also, John took the canned peas, one of the "bad" ingredients.  She took nothing.  So, it may have been John's idea, but no one said anything about it.  Not her, except in talking heads, and not Jamie.  Do I think it was bad strategy?  Yes.  But they all rolled with it.

[beaker73]

5 hours ago, RealReality said:

I just don't like John, he is one of those guys that will probably get far by taking as much advantage of people as possible.  I think he took advantage of Emily's youth and probably her desire to try to get along since she is the crappiest chef.  Getting her to break down all the lobster, and do his busy work so he could focus on his dish, IMO was taking advantage.  Yes, Emily could have stopped him at any time...but how many times has that girl been fired for talking back?  I'm guessing she is trying to just get along.  And also, him planning the night before to give Jaime any crappy ingredients was also taking advantage.    

And this is why I really don't hate Emily.  She openly admitted that she's been fired for talking back and having attitude and I think she really is trying to get along with the other chefs hence her not pushing back during that team challenge with Brooke and also last night with John.  Will she win Top Chef? Of course not, but it certainly sounds like Jamie's dish was far worse than hers.  

Speaking of Jamie, he agreed with John's idea for him to take the worst ingredients so he wasn't stuck with anything.  He made that choice and put out a crappy dish.  I admire the hell out of him for giving up his immunity and I strongly suspect he'll make it all the way through LCK to the finale. 

Actually, I thought that the judges might declare both the red and black teams as losers and send Casey away for her bad scallops. Sounds like her dish might have been worse than Jamie's.  She owes Katsuji for saving her ass.  

[pbutler111]

So, the suspense builds as we wait to hear which of the three sudden death Quickfire chefs will be eliminated. Just before the announcement, they cut to commercial, but not before they show a little bit of what's coming up on the show after the commercial break. We see all the chefestants running around in slickers and, right in the front of the pack, are two of the sudden death chefs, obviously still in the competition. And that's how I found out who lost the sudden death Quickfire challenge. Well done, Bravo, well done!

On 1/13/2017 at 8:42 AM, rose711 said:

Never give up immunity. You earned it fair and square here. No reason to give it up. Just a stupid thing to do.

I know, right? Has he never watched the show? I'm pretty sure that every person who ever made that grand gesture of giving up immunity ended up being eliminated. Watch and learn, people, watch and learn!

[AriAu]

Well, that was just plain depressing! Between the sadness of a sudden death quickfire (and losing one of the most pleasant cheftestants), the rain, the fact they all seemed so miserable about the rain and then seeing Jamie throw himself under the bus, it was not a pleasant way to spend the evening.

I love Casey, but watching her try and defend her dish was pathetic....right up there with Jen Carroll on All Stars, without the anger! Whether something smells fishy is not something you can really argue. By the way, were they really using the product that had been sitting in the chests? Were the chicken breasts sitting there unrefrigerated??

Quote

otherwise forgettable chef became known as the shithead who screwed his team but didn't give up his immunity and still won the season. I get it. If he does win, it would really put a damper on things if he's constantly second-guessing

Funny you should say that since, if I remember correctly, everyone wanted Nick Elmi to give up immunity during TC New Orleans since his terrible dish caused his team to lose and got a deserving chef sent home.....and Nick then won the whole thing.

Edited January 13, 2017 by AriAu

[hkit]

1 hour ago, beaker73 said:

And this is why I really don't hate Emily.  She openly admitted that she's been fired for talking back and having attitude and I think she really is trying to get along with the other chefs hence her not pushing back during that team challenge with Brooke and also last night with John.  Will she win Top Chef? Of course not, but it certainly sounds like Jamie's dish was far worse than hers.  

I don't want to say she's growing on me, but I don't hate her as much as I did at first. When she originally spoke about her bad attitude and being fired, it came across like she was proud of it and was bragging. That may have colored my opinion of her a bit, but I think it was more of a socially awkward way of describing her struggles. In the episode where her former boss was guest judging, she actually came off as completely self aware and remorseful. She knew why she was fired, she owned her behavior, and regretted the burned bridge. I know so many non-cheftestant adults who are completely incapable of such honesty, so I respect it when someone puts it out there on TV for all to see.

[dgpolo]

I don't know, when the first thing I want to say each week is 'shut up, Padma' maybe it's time to stop watching. On the other hand this from the recap:

Quote

"I like everybody," Jim says. "There's no one on my list." It's exactly like the private in a WWII movie showing a picture of his girl back home. The minute he does that, you know he's dead. Sorry, Jim, I don't make the rules. I just follow them.

Poor Jim. I just can't see how anyone can be called Top Chef if each challenge is it's own competition. What you're really doing is having mini-top chefs along the way, and if you're lucky, two competent chefs left at the end. To me a Top Chef is someone who can cook great food and if they have one bad challenge, their past work should count for something.

 

8 hours ago, windtrix said:

What is the freaking point of immunity if you can't use it? The ONLY time you would use it is if you have the worst dish so why would they allow someone to give it up because they had the worse dish? It makes no sense at all!

Agree with this so strongly, if you make a good dish you don't need immunity, it is precisely for making a bad dish and needing to be saved. I also think the judges did a disservice (no surprise, really) by not pointing out, at that point, just how bad Emily's dish was. I'm not sure that was made clear enough to Jamie before he decided to give up the immunity.

[FormerMod-a1]

I could kind of understand Jamie giving up immunity if his was the only bad dish and then feeling bad that someone with a good dish would get sent home.  But he wasn't the only one - Emily, on his own "team" had a really bad dish.  I know he couldn't know the judges were split on it, at first, but he had to know hers was really bad, too.

[Archery]

I am bummed that Jim went home on the QF.  Of all the chefs, he was the only one who was able to convey the joy of cooking. 

His departure was almost made up for by this gem from Padma:  "I would rather eat Brooke's acid bomb than Emily's mud chowder."  Ha! And hee!  I love snarky Padma.  (It's right up there with last week's jab at John for using curry in his veggie burger:  "Is it because we're (she and the Surgeon General) both Indian?")

Edited January 13, 2017 by Archery
grammah

[Rachel RSL]

1 hour ago, Constantinople said:

I believe in Season 2 of The Apprentice -- Don't judge me!  I haven't watched that show in over a decade! -- Trump fired someone for being stupid enough to give up immunity.  But that made sense in that context since it was a bad business decision.

Bradford!! I immediately thought of him too. (Don't judge me either. I stopped watching that show years ago because I couldn't even stomach Trump as a reality show host. Don't know how you guys are gonna stomach him as President. Yeesh.) I seem to be the exception to the way most fans reacted but I have absolutely no respect for Jamie giving up immunity.  In fact, I immediately decided I wanted him to get booted just for being a dumbass. He didn't win some random lottery, he *earned* that immunity. Not getting sent home for having a crappy dish is literally the only reason immunity even exists.  Yep...dumbass.

[PamelaMaeSnap]

I can't help but wonder if Jamie would have given up his immunity had he not ALSO had immunity last week and screwed up by not plating that last portion ... so this made two weeks in a row where a) he had immunity and b) he would likely be eliminated for his showing in the elimination challenge.  Once, okay.  Twice spread out over the course of a season, maybe okay.  Two weeks in a row? I think he had too much pride for that.

That said, I'm not sure if it was due to the (possible sabotage? I wasn't sure what happened there) malfunction of the grill that made him have to go to Plan B or C or D with the chicken, but a nice simple chicken satay should NOT have been the worst dish in that trio.  He could have played it safe and made a perfectly edible dish with his ingredients.

AGREE times 4,587 with the people who also noticed Sylva (hard to miss him!) in the treasure hunt so I knew he wasn't going anywhere in the sudden death elimination. And they showed it either two or three times. Dummies. 

VERY sorry and surprised to lose Jim ... I had him pegged at Top 3.  Such a likable guy ... though I doubt I'll ever be invited to dine at the state house in Alabama to enjoy his cuisine.

Can't wait to be rid of Emily.  Her misplaced sense of entitlement has worked my last nerve ... I am also surprised by the result because from what we could see, at least (which needless to say means nothing if we don't taste it) her dish seemed equally as bad as Jamie's and they could easily have gone with the drama of:

Jamie, are you sure you are willing to be eliminated? Are you positive? Okay.

Emily, please pack your knives and go.

And we all would have been happy as clams.  Or stinky scallops.

VERY VERY VERY happy to see such good showings from Sheldon (still my favorite) and hoping he can stay healthy. He's just adorable.  I think he may be my new TV boyfriend.  And glad to see Sylva recover from slip up on the quickfire ... oh, and finally, also glad to see a slightly better edit on Katsuje (whom I think is hilarious) ... it had seemed like he was getting more of a bad-guy edit past few weeks.  Now he's just slow-talking-slow-walking-Jones Katsuje.

All of that said? I still think this is Brooke's to lose. Not rooting for her (or against her actively), just think she's going to win it.

[VintageJ]

11 hours ago, lordonia said:

So Emily is now the only "new" contestant remaining. Inspiring.

Sylva is still there, thankfully.

Edited January 13, 2017 by VintageJ

[HunterHunted]

2 hours ago, rose711 said:

Never give up immunity. You earned it fair and square here. No reason to give it up. Just a stupid thing to do.

This goes to one of the perennial questions on Ink Master and Cutthroat Kitchen. Do you want to win by beating all of the strongest contestants or do want to set it up to make it easier on you? Jaime articulated something similar as well on Last Chance Kitchen. I also suspect having the veterans in the competition may have influenced some of Jaime's perspective on "earning" his continued participation on the show. Sam and Casey are cautionary tales on how a brief fuck up can follow you forever. Sam is still trying to prove that the one hour of his life ten years ago when he was an epic douchebag is not who really is. I never blamed Casey for Carla's loss, but many people did and do. Her later rant didn't endear her to viewers either.

Quote

otherwise forgettable chef became known as the shithead who screwed his team but didn't give up his immunity and still won the season. I get it. If he does win, it would really put a damper on things if he's constantly second-guessing

1 hour ago, AriAu said:

Funny you should say that since, if I remember correctly, everyone wanted Nick Elmi to give up immunity during TC New Orleans since his terrible dish caused his team to lose and got a deserving chef sent home.....and Nick then won the whole thing.

 

I think this is precisely why Jaime gave up his immunity. I had no recollection of who won that season. I just remembered that Nina didn't and that it felt like the winner was a little bit undeserving. Or Robyn on Las Vegas who really did have that reputation for undeservedly staying in the competition. I think having the veterans around has highlighted the secondary aspect of the competition. What you do on this show impacts your career as much or more than winning. 

[chiaros]

There have been various comments, in the context of Jamie giving up his immunity, but relating to NIck Elmi who did not (in his season) and who went on to win Top Chef. I for one would defend Nick as a deserving winner. His dishes were subtle and pleasing, to me, insofar as I could determine from just watching the show and not tasting it** and I think the opprobrium he has received on this and other forums is not warranted.

** That includes Tom C & Co. requiring more salt from him than most normal diners would. This has been discussed before, here and elsewhere. Certainly his restaurant in Philly has been a great success with both his diners and the food critics of Philly.

[HunterHunted]

@chiaros my point wasn't that Nick didn't deserve his win, I actually think he did. My point is that some of the game play aspects of Top Chef can give the viewers and contestants a sense that a contestant doesn't deserve to continue in the competition. I think some of that feeling contributed to Jaime giving up his immunity. For as much as we can't stand Emily, she has managed to not have the worst dish week after week. Robyn on Las Vegas kept winning immunity and bombed the elimination challenges. Emily isn't even doing that. No immunity. She's always the next to worst, but never the absolute worst dish.

[meep.meep]

Was it Sylva who said to Emily "that's the only nice thing I've heard you say about anyone" ?

Loved Katsugi's "fuck me" in the rain.

I'm sorry that Jamie got cut, but who can't cook chicken breast pieces and make a tasty peanut sauce in 2 hours?  I once amazed my children by doing exactly that in 20 minutes.

[Randomosity]

10 hours ago, spiderpig said:

Not our Jim!  (*looking daggers at Emily*)  Didn't Jim want to do steak and potatoes, but John and Emily kept saying "steak tartare"?  Emily skates.

Is there a reason they had to be so specific? Now that you write it this way, I wonder if they couldn't have just decided "STEAK!" and everyone got to do their own preparation of it.

 

2 hours ago, AriAu said:

By the way, were they really using the product that had been sitting in the chests? Were the chicken breasts sitting there unrefrigerated??

As I was watching, I wondered if the 'chests' were actually decorated coolers, or if they had dry ice, etc. in them. But thinking back, it couldn't have been the true ingredients in at least some of them - didn't Emily have to break down what looked like 8+ lobsters? That many lobsters didn't physically fit in the treasure bag/chest. Maybe some were the actual thing, particularly the small things, like raisins or peanut butter.

 

1 hour ago, aquarian1 said:

I could kind of understand Jamie giving up immunity if his was the only bad dish and then feeling bad that someone with a good dish would get sent home.  But he wasn't the only one - Emily, on his own "team" had a really bad dish.  I know he couldn't know the judges were split on it, at first, but he had to know hers was really bad, too.

Yeah, that's the difference to me. No one would give a rat's ass if Emily went home instead, as she had a bad dish too and some judges even put it at the bottom. Stephanie was not even close to getting sent home were it not for Nick's immunity.

[dgpolo]

2 minutes ago, HunterHunted said:

Emily isn't even doing that. No immunity. She's always the next to worst, but never the absolute worst dish.

The thing is, I'm not sure she wasn't the worst. We didn't see anything at the JT (there may have been something, but we didn't see it) of the judges talking to her about her dish. We saw Jamie and then she exploded all those things about John. They never got a chance to call her out on her 'muddy' dish, and for the ones that though she had the worst dish, to say why. We didn't see her trying to defend her choice of flavors or what she did with her ingredient, it could be she would have dug her own hole but we'll never know because of Jamie saying he'd give up his immunity.

[snarktini]

16 minutes ago, Randomosity said:

As I was watching, I wondered if the 'chests' were actually decorated coolers, or if they had dry ice, etc. in them. But thinking back, it couldn't have been the true ingredients in at least some of them - didn't Emily have to break down what looked like 8+ lobsters? That many lobsters didn't physically fit in the treasure bag/chest. Maybe some were the actual thing, particularly the small things, like raisins or peanut butter.

I am sure it wasn't actual product. First, for food safety reasons it wouldn't make any sense to serve potentially mis-handled food to party guests. Second, food for an entire party wouldn't fit, the lobsters illustrating that perfectly. It's also unlikely IMO that production split up the ingredients (raisins go in the chest, chicken goes in the kitchen). The bags were just placeholders. 

When Tom said tasted like they'd been in the chest for four hours, he was being snarky.

1 hour ago, PamelaMaeSnap said:

I can't help but wonder if Jamie would have given up his immunity had he not ALSO had immunity last week and screwed up by not plating that last portion ... so this made two weeks in a row where a) he had immunity and b) he would likely be eliminated for his showing in the elimination challenge.  Once, okay.  Twice spread out over the course of a season, maybe okay.  Two weeks in a row? I think he had too much pride for that.

That said, I'm not sure if it was due to the (possible sabotage? I wasn't sure what happened there) malfunction of the grill that made him have to go to Plan B or C or D with the chicken, but a nice simple chicken satay should NOT have been the worst dish in that trio.  He could have played it safe and made a perfectly edible dish with his ingredients.

VERY sorry and surprised to lose Jim ... I had him pegged at Top 3.  Such a likable guy ... though I doubt I'll ever be invited to dine at the state house in Alabama to enjoy his cuisine.

Good insight on Jamie. It sounds like his dish was legitimately terrible, per the judges, and the grill was less likely the problem than the sauce. They said it tasted synthetic and implied it simply tasted bad overall. I don't think he'd have been swayed by knowing that Emily was considered to have a dish nearly as bad as his -- he was convinced his was the worst dish of the night, and he did what he. Not logical game play but I think that was part of his point.

Loved Jim, sad to lose him. Go Sheldon!

Also thought it was amusing Brooke and Casey packed their own rain gear, where everyone else had to get one from the show.

[PamelaMaeSnap]

I wish they had asked Jamie if he'd not had immunity what (if anything) would he have done differently during the challenge (from accepting the ingredients to choice of what to make to actual preparation.). 

Maybe a stupid comment on my part, but I can't help but wonder if he set out to "take one for the team" or got railroaded into it by John or whatever figuring he'd kind of skate with something "meh," but then when it was such a disaster he  had a moral/conscientious dilemma ...

We know those stew rooms can get brutal. I can only imagine what a pariah he might have been had he not gone home (though, to be honest, in that case it would have been Emily and everyone would have celebrated). 

[RealReality]

34 minutes ago, HunterHunted said:

@chiaros my point wasn't that Nick didn't deserve his win, I actually think he did. My point is that some of the game play aspects of Top Chef can give the viewers and contestants a sense that a contestant doesn't deserve to continue in the competition. I think some of that feeling contributed to Jaime giving up his immunity. For as much as we can't stand Emily, she has managed to not have the worst dish week after week. Robyn on Las Vegas kept winning immunity and bombed the elimination challenges. Emily isn't even doing that. No immunity. She's always the next to worst, but never the absolute worst dish.

this.  I think there is a feeling that its ignoble to have immunity and then fuck up.  Like you're using immunity to coast by.

And Padma was kind enough to keep twisting the damn knife at every turn ("well I hope you can at least use your immunity well and serve me some food this time!")  Like come on Padma, you didn't get food last time, he messed up, its been at least a day, get over it.  He didn't forget a plate of food just to spite you.

And I feel like Jaime didn't want to be that guy.  However, he was that guy because he had immunity because he had to use crappy ingredients.

Also, I'm not entirely sure if peanut butter/truffle satay chicken would be super delicious.  

And hats off to Jaime for not losing his shit when that grill was off.  Under perfect conditions its a high stress situation, now the grill malfunction?

[archer1267]

I'm probably in the minority, but I would have been fine with Casey going home. Her scallop dish sounded nasty, and it sounded like Brooke failed to impress as well. The only reason why they were spared the bottom was because Katsuji's dish was good? This is why I hate team challenges - the team that has the person with immunity always gets screwed.

I hate that there are so few newbies left. It looks like it's on Sylva to carry the torch, as I doubt Emily's going to be around much longer.

John Tesar is his own biggest fan.

[Texasmom1970]

Just now, archer1267 said:

I'm probably in the minority, but I would have been fine with Casey going home. Her scallop dish sounded nasty, and it sounded like Brooke failed to impress as well. The only reason why they were spared the bottom was because Katsuji's dish was good? This is why I hate team challenges - the team that has the person with immunity always gets screwed.

You are not alone. Not sure why but I have never liked Casey. She seems all sweet on the outside but a stealthy bitch on the inside to me. I could be totally wrong but that's how I read her. 

[hkit]

41 minutes ago, Texasmom1970 said:

You are not alone. Not sure why but I have never liked Casey. She seems all sweet on the outside but a stealthy bitch on the inside to me. I could be totally wrong but that's how I read her. 

I loved her during her season. I lost a lot of respect for her when she took to social media after the whole Carla fiasco, but I didn't stop liking her. But last night did it for me. The pantomiming of opening a scallop "ten times" was obnoxious, but she kept saying it, and doing it under everyone else's nose, as if to indicate they were equally culpable... it was too much stealth bitch for me. She can PYKAG anytime.

[rho]

2 hours ago, chiaros said:

There have been various comments, in the context of Jamie giving up his immunity, but relating to NIck Elmi who did not (in his season) and who went on to win Top Chef. I for one would defend Nick as a deserving winner. His dishes were subtle and pleasing, to me, insofar as I could determine from just watching the show and not tasting it** and I think the opprobrium he has received on this and other forums is not warranted.

** That includes Tom C & Co. requiring more salt from him than most normal diners would. This has been discussed before, here and elsewhere. Certainly his restaurant in Philly has been a great success with both his diners and the food critics of Philly.

1 hour ago, HunterHunted said:

@chiaros my point wasn't that Nick didn't deserve his win, I actually think he did. My point is that some of the game play aspects of Top Chef can give the viewers and contestants a sense that a contestant doesn't deserve to continue in the competition. I think some of that feeling contributed to Jaime giving up his immunity. For as much as we can't stand Emily, she has managed to not have the worst dish week after week. Robyn on Las Vegas kept winning immunity and bombed the elimination challenges. Emily isn't even doing that. No immunity. She's always the next to worst, but never the absolute worst dish.

I don't doubt Nick's ability. From the little I remember, he was constantly a frontrunner and the screw up was an outlier. We could debate this all day long, and that's exactly what happens. There are so many variables, editing, was he deserving, would Stephanie have even made it to the finals, what if the judge hadn't questioned his immunity, etc. My point is Nick is more memorable for this controversial stunt than for winning the season. And I'm inclined to believe the negative feedback has hindered his career. Unlike previous winner (and non-winners) he hasn't shown up to judge later seasons nor is he popping up on other foodie shows. It's like they scrubbed that season from the lexicon of this show. I mean, this year so many of us remembered Shirley but couldn't quite recall which season she first appeared on. 

There's no way to know if Jamie was thinking that far into the future when he discarded his immunity, but I definitely understand if he did it to save face. Unfortunately circumstances are different. Emily is surely no Stephanie, in fact they are almost polar opposites in terms of fan appeal. But he did flounder his immunity two weeks in a row and now he certainly won't go down in history as the cheftestant who screwed his team when strategy backfired. It's a great PR move, whether it was premeditated or not. He could lose the season and still walk away with more opportunities for growth than Nick who won the prize on his season.

1 hour ago, PamelaMaeSnap said:

I wish they had asked Jamie if he'd not had immunity what (if anything) would he have done differently during the challenge (from accepting the ingredients to choice of what to make to actual preparation.). 

Maybe a stupid comment on my part, but I can't help but wonder if he set out to "take one for the team" or got railroaded into it by John or whatever figuring he'd kind of skate with something "meh," but then when it was such a disaster he  had a moral/conscientious dilemma ...

We know those stew rooms can get brutal. I can only imagine what a pariah he might have been had he not gone home (though, to be honest, in that case it would have been Emily and everyone would have celebrated). 

I bolded your commentary because I think that weighed into the judges' decision. There have been many times when two dishes are equally bad but they acknowledge the chef's behavior as far as attitude, confidence, leadership ability, etc. This happens especially during RW which is kind of the ultimate test for a winner. At the end of the day, someone gets a quarter of a million dollars to open a restaurant. They've got to be able to do more than cook good food. 

And the fact that Jamie squandered his immunity, didn't take any risks, and let John railroad him into failure, also speaks to his character.

[RealReality]

1 hour ago, archer1267 said:

I'm probably in the minority, but I would have been fine with Casey going home. Her scallop dish sounded nasty, and it sounded like Brooke failed to impress as well. The only reason why they were spared the bottom was because Katsuji's dish was good? This is why I hate team challenges - the team that has the person with immunity always gets screwed.

I hate that there are so few newbies left. It looks like it's on Sylva to carry the torch, as I doubt Emily's going to be around much longer.

John Tesar is his own biggest fan.

Casey's dish was the only one that made me throw up a little in my mouth.  Just the description of unfresh raw scallops...that tasted fishy...and were raw.  Blergh.

[seltzer3]

This challenge was so stupid.  I do not want to be reminded of the terrible challenges that top chef texas had.  Let's not chip blocks of ice next week, okay?

That being said, I just thought it would be hilarious if John, Emily, and Katsuji were on the same team.  John would lose it with Emily sucking at navigating and Katsuji walking. 

[bluepiano]

6 hours ago, dgpolo said:

I also think the judges did a disservice (no surprise, really) by not pointing out, at that point, just how bad Emily's dish was. I'm not sure that was made clear enough to Jamie before he decided to give up the immunity.

I thought he did know that, combined with knowing the very negative response to his dish. Which makes his decision either more courageous or more stupid, depending on your point of view.

13 hours ago, RealReality said:

I partially blame Padma.  I think her constant nettling of him (well, I hope you do something better than slack off and not give me any food!) probably played some part in his decision. 

I think you're right. Padma needed to shut up already about not getting a plate. It was like, how dare you do that to the Queen. I think she got under Jamie's skin. Instead of taking satisfaction in winning two QFs in a row, Jamie was put on the defensive,

6 hours ago, dgpolo said:

Poor Jim. I just can't see how anyone can be called Top Chef if each challenge is it's own competition. What you're really doing is having mini-top chefs along the way, and if you're lucky, two competent chefs left at the end. To me a Top Chef is someone who can cook great food and if they have one bad challenge, their past work should count for something.

Yes, for sure it would be a more fair competition if scores were cumulative. Like in sports, where you have standings based on the season. If you'd be consistently putting out great dishes, one bad week might drop you from first to fourth in the standings, but you wouldn't be eliminated. However, from the point of TV drama, the idea of "one bad dish and you're gone," no matter what you did before, really ratchets up the suspense.

Usually the people who survive by just barely not being the worst each week eventually go home. (like Jaimie with the curly blonde hair, can't remember her last name). Though arguably, Hosea and Kevin Sbraga did win despite being middle of the pack pretty much their whole seasons.

Edited January 13, 2017 by bluepiano

[Tess23]

Jim for fan favorite!

[ratgirlagogo]

15 hours ago, biakbiak said:

 I briefly found it amusing that none of the chefs were earth signs (had to look up what element Virgo was)

I did too, since earth signs in astrological thought are particularly good at getting shit actually done in the world we all live in - manifesters.

 

3 hours ago, rho said:

 

 

 

5 hours ago, meep.meep said:

Was it Sylva who said to Emily "that's the only nice thing I've heard you say about anyone" ?

 Oh no, that would be Jim, the one who always found something nice to say about everyone.

9 hours ago, aquarian1 said:

And also, John took the canned peas, one of the "bad" ingredients.

  As I said on another site, the canned peas were the most glaring Zonk of all the ingredient choices.  And then John aced it by using them in his gnocchi - impressive.  And he he insulted Philip!  

3 hours ago, rho said:

There's no way to know if Jamie was thinking that far into the future when he discarded his immunity, but I definitely understand if he did it to save face. Unfortunately circumstances are different. Emily is surely no Stephanie, in fact they are almost polar opposites in terms of fan appeal. But he did flounder his immunity two weeks in a row and now he certainly won't go down in history as the cheftestant who screwed his team when strategy backfired. It's a great PR move, whether it was premeditated or not. He could lose the season and still walk away with more opportunities for growth than Nick who won the prize on his season.

I don't disagree - but I also think that it takes away from the fun of the show, if nothing else, if a contestant can just give away a prize advantage like that - it's different on a show like Survivor where emotional manipulation is crucial to winning the game - and doing things like that are built into the gameplay.    But this is supposed to be a talent contest.  Why don't we think less of Silva and Emily because they didn't volunteer to go home instead of Jim?  Or anyone else?  Is everybody going to be expected to voluntarily give up immunity because Jamie decided it's "noble"?

ETA: why is the quote box such a problem all of a sudden?

Edited January 13, 2017 by ratgirlagogo

[bravofan27]

I understand that it was pretty horrible that Jamie won immunity and was allowed to give it up. But I think the judges sort of have to respect his decision and call his bluff, because otherwise contestants would try to pull the same thing, like, "I really wanted to be the one to go home, but they wouldn't let me!" Hopefully future contestants will learn that if they win immunity they should keep it and shut-up. I remember one Top Chef, I think it was Jeremy, that was pressured to give up his immunity because someone loved was going home, and he refused. It seemed dickish at the time, but he did win and I'm sure knowing that you have immunity effects your cooking. Who knows though. 

[essexjan]

Ah, dammit Jim, so sorry to see you go. Jamie was an idiot to give up immunity in a team that contained Emily.  If ever a chef has outstayed their welcome on Top Chef it's her. Has she made anything that the judges have liked?

I'm rooting for Sheldon now, followed by Shirley and Sylva. 

Also, not the least bit surprised to learn Tesar is a Scorpio.

[easypeasy]

I'm disgusted. First losing Jim, a chef whose food I always look forward to and talking heads are actually interesting to listen to.  As the elimination challenge unfolded and I realized the judges liked John's dish, relief set in because Jaime has immunity right? Ugh

TBH, I didn't even finish the entire episode because as soon as Jaime brought up the giving up immunity bs, I went and spoiled myself. Not going to bother watching the conclusion. Emily's long overdue exit is detracting from my enjoyment of this show.

[HavartiHead42]

This was a horrible episode and I could barely bring myself to watch because I had spoiled myself beforehand. But Brooke actually made me laugh when she talked about her hatred for raisins. She's usually too perfect for me to like but I'm right there with her on the raisin issue. Of course she would have a mother that gave out raisins at Halloween. A tiny little 10-second bright spot in an otherwise super depressing episode.

[MortysCleaningLady]

On ‎1‎/‎11‎/‎2017 at 11:34 AM, Totale said:

We Tauri get off easy.

We get stuff done AND have steak and potatoes.  Win!

 

Nooooooo, not Jim.  So not fair.

 

Ditto Jaime.  The chick who I've never bothered to learn her name (is low hanging fruit not a nice name?) should have been gone.

[dleighg]

26 minutes ago, lmiller42 said:

She's usually too perfect for me to like but I'm right there with her on the raisin issue.

I missed what she said about raisins but my father always said that raisins were "flies without wings" :)

Edited January 14, 2017 by dleighg

[Empress1]

5 hours ago, rho said:

I don't doubt Nick's ability. From the little I remember, he was constantly a frontrunner and the screw up was an outlier. We could debate this all day long, and that's exactly what happens. There are so many variables, editing, was he deserving, would Stephanie have even made it to the finals, what if the judge hadn't questioned his immunity, etc. My point is Nick is more memorable for this controversial stunt than for winning the season. And I'm inclined to believe the negative feedback has hindered his career. Unlike previous winner (and non-winners) he hasn't shown up to judge later seasons nor is he popping up on other foodie shows. It's like they scrubbed that season from the lexicon of this show. I mean, this year so many of us remembered Shirley but couldn't quite recall which season she first appeared on. 

For what it's worth, Nick's restaurant, Laurel, is bomb. There was a months-long waiting list when I last ate there (the space is small), but it was worth it. Every mouthful was delicious. I went with a vegan friend and they accommodated her beautifully. The service was excellent.

Fishy scallops? No ma'am. And I'm so mad that Emily is still there - she's such obvious fodder and she's simply not good enough to be there. I'm annoyed at Jaime.

I'm rooting for Sylva, the Philly brother. I don't think he'll win though.

[Tess23]

It's pretty clear that Brooke is begin set up as the winner. Which is fine, but this season has too many Texas season overtones for my liking. For Pete's sake, just COOK! I don't want to see chef's running around in the rain. Ugh.

[sourpickles]

Well, we know next week is going to be a shit show now, don't we?  So, let us see.  I'd be totally happy to never see another SDQ again.  Ever.  It seems a easy way to get the numbers down for the next challenge, for one.  And Jim.  Dammit.  I was MAD that he left.  I agree with those who saw the he was eliminated before it was announced because of the "Coming Up..." segment.  I did too...saw Emily first, then Sylva, and was all "whoops, bye Jim!".  He really grew on me, and I LOVED his zinger at Emily about saying nice things.  Awesome.  Agreed also that the Treasure Hunt thing was stupid, even for TV.  Especially in that weather, though Katsuji was priceless.  All I can think of during these dumb hunts is chefs riding flipping bicycles to make Pee Wee Herman happy.  God, that image will never go away.  Oddly, the yellow team had the list of ingredients I personally liked the least, but they did the best.  I knew the red team was doomed.  I didn't think the whole bad ingredients thing was a bad as all THAT, EMILY.  It was like a giant conspiracy theory.  I wanted to say "you know, if someone was going to get shitty stuff to force a go home, they would have been given to you, my dear".  But whatever.  That little temper tantrum did zip to endear her to me.  And Casey, my goodness.  Yes, she is a little off putting, but she really needed to shut UP about the scallops.  I thought she was a goner for a minute, myself.  Love Sheldon.  I'm a Cancer too, and I'll confirm the two dryer sheets thing.  Love Shirley, always, she's such a peach.  As for Jamie, I admire his integrity, but he should have played the game.  Maybe he got tired of it all.

[cooksdelight]

14 hours ago, Ellee said:

 

Wonder who turned off the grill?  One of the 'game players'?  Would it have mattered?

Guess it is a vets season to win.  Funny how the competitive newbies go home.  

I've enjoyed Jim. Sorry to see him go.  When judged, what was the look for regarding how Jim handled his egg?   Honest question

 

Since Emily was working right beside Jamie, it's my guess that she did it. Maybe not intentionally, she's an idiot in the kitchen. But she was the only other person close to it.

From the funny look on the guest judge's face (the dude with the ugly beard) I think Jim miscalculated the agar he used in the egg. Something made it not work right.

I'm genuinely mad at Jamie for giving up immunity. He quickly forgot how lucky he was to have it last week. And it wasn't just his dish that put them in last place, Emily helped tremendously in that regard.