S14.E14: Comida Final

[DarkRaichu]

Pretty good finale.  Shirley did not have the chance when Tom and the judges criticized her ramen.  The judging might be close to neck to neck depending on how bad Brooke's flan was, but IIRC Tom got the tiebreaker on those kind of situations, so Shirley still did not have a chance :P

Shirley and her mom FTW!

Shirley's sister is pretty

I'd rather see longer scene of the chefs shopping than the porkbelly drama

I want Shirley's dessert.  That looked like a very refined version of shaved ice + fruit dessert one can find at various street vendors in parts of Asia 

Oh and Brooke won.  Man, I was hoping to see a picture of a forum member eating a laptop.... maybe next season ?? :P

[spiderpig]

It's Friday night, I'm feeling mellow, so I'll say something nice about Brooke.

We saw her softer side with her son, who was adorable.  I keep wondering how she kept Hudson from spilling the beans for months after she told him "Mommy's Top Chef".

[breezy424]

Geez, can anyone here make any determination about 'who' should have won?  Those who have tasted the food, please raise your hand.  Um....

On another note, if head chefs and sous chefs are 'sharing' a kitchen there should be a certain amount of consideration.  Shirley's loud voice and constant loud talking was inconsiderate at the very least.  Brooke did not twist Shirley's arm or intimidate her to get the pork belly.  Shirley's a big girl.  Her voice and attitude in the kitchen shows that.  She gave Brooke the pork belly when she decided she didn't need it.  Please.  Shirley is no shrinking violet when it comes to playing the game and being in the kitchen.  What happened with the order?  I don't know.  Bottom line is that big girl 'Shirley' decided to give Brooke the pork belly when 'she' decided she no longer needed it.  Brooke 'had' a back up plan.  Shirley's decision didn't make or break Brooke's menu.

As for 'calling' the winner any given number of episodes ago....is it about conspiracy or is it about editing?  The editors know who wins.  Does that influence the process?  Of course. 

[Drumpf1737]

Quote

I still feel like Brooke was just way too smug. She's got skills for sure, but holy cow she bugs the crap out of me.

I don't see a huge difference between Brooke's attitude/demeanor and Michael V's.

The world just doesn't like women who know they're good at their craft. Women are supposed to feign modesty; be less confident and direct than Tom Colicchio.

Sheldon seems like a great guy. He's going go really far. I do hope he comes back and wins this thing someday.

Edited March 4, 2017 by Drumpf1737

[Toothbrush]

I thought that being 99.9% certain that Brooke was going to win would make me relax and enjoy the finale more. Truth is, I missed the anticipation. Congrats to Brooke!

Congrats to Sheldon for winning Fan Favorite!!! 

I am glad that there was no drama/sabotage with the sous chefs. The only 1 I trusted completely was Sheldon. 

On 3/2/2017 at 11:09 PM, LotusFlower said:

 

But....  Shirley's mother learning how to say "I'm proud of you" in English after the meal almost made the season worth it.  I'm tearing up just typing about it.  As trite as it sounds, I'm sure Shirley considers that a big win.

I was moved to tears when she was asking for Shirley's sister's and husband's assistance in getting the pronunciation just right. Especially knowing that being a chef was not her dream career for her daughter. 

23 hours ago, spiderpig said:

 Anyway, both women looked drop-dead gorgeous.

ITA that both Gail & Padma looked beautiful! 

20 hours ago, Snarklepuss said:

I'm sorry but after several seasons of "Food Network Star" where all the contestants got the judges' sympathy by using every dead grandmother story in the book to win them over, I am just so over this tactic.

Good Gawd, yes!

9 hours ago, essexjan said:

Best things about this episode:

- the white shirt Shirley was wearing at the start and when they went shopping. Gorgeous.

- Jonathan Waxman. I have a huge crush on him, and the roast chicken at Barbuto is the best I've ever eaten.

- Shirley's mom.

Yes, yes, & yes. Except I have not had the pleasure of eating Jonathan Waxman's food. 

[TomTraubertsBlue]

7 minutes ago, Drumpf1737 said:

I don't see a huge difference between Brooke's attitude/demeanor and Michael V's.

The world just doesn't like women who know they're good at their craft. Women are supposed to feign modesty; be less confident and direct than Tom Colicchio.

Sheldon seems like a great guy. He's going go really far. I do hope he comes back and wins this thing someday.

And not just Brooke.  In that interview someone linked, Shirley talked about how she got promoted much faster because she was better than all the male line cooks.  Anyone at their level is very confident in the abilities.  I'm sure the editors could find plenty of quotes from all the chefs talking about how good they are.

[RealReality]

22 minutes ago, Drumpf1737 said:

I don't see a huge difference between Brooke's attitude/demeanor and Michael V's.

The world just doesn't like women who know they're good at their craft. Women are supposed to feign modesty; be less confident and direct than Tom Colicchio.

Sheldon seems like a great guy. He's going go really far. I do hope he comes back and wins this thing someday.

I think this is an unfair assessment of people who don't like Brooke.  There are plenty of confident women out there that I like.  Kamalah Harris, Sandra Day O'Connor, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Condelezza Rice, Margaret Thatcher (who I loved because of her strength and resolve).  None of these women are shrinking violets, but I find them all likable.  All own their intelligence, competence and phenomenal ability, and i admire and like them all.

And I don't find Brooke likable at all.  So it has nothing to do with her "knowing how good she is" although arrogance is annoying from everyone, man and woman alike.

I get slightly annoyed when people try to reason that if someone is unlikable, the problem must be something with the person that doesn't like them, it must be some unfair prejudice, and not that the person that is disliked is simply unlikable.  Sometimes the world just doesn't like unlikable people.

Edited March 4, 2017 by RealReality

[Snarklepuss]

12 hours ago, Jamie Satyr said:

It's gotta be something outside that's giving people this ridiculous feeling; maybe some kind of transference! Brooke was nice, humble, and appreciative unlike some other egomaniacs who truly feel entitled for some reason! ;-)

ITA, I've said something like this before and I'll say it again, I think whenever a confident, talented, intelligent, unapologetic, driven, poised young woman comes along the bar is raised WAY high for her.  If she doesn't smile, kiss everybody's rear end and win "Miss Congeniality" she's automatically labeled a bitch and therefore not worthy of whatever accomplishment she's achieved.

Personally, I didn't see where Shirley won any awards for selfless saint either.  In fact, I'm with the others who were kind of off-put by the way she attempted to screw with Brooke's head about the pork belly.  I see through any "accent barrier" to what she was really trying to do there.  She wasn't "joking" with Brooke, she was deliberately upping the tension with her to soft-sabotage her.  Just because she was smiling and acting acquiescent while saying it doesn't mean she was being "nice", IMO.  I see that as a smoke screen.  Now, if the tables were reversed, and Brooke acted that way she'd be called a bitch for not being a good sport, etc., etc.

[Norma Desmond]

Yay Brooke! Am elated. The best chef won. Great season all around.

[RealReality]

2 minutes ago, Snarklepuss said:

ITA, I've said something like this before and I'll say it again, I think whenever a confident, talented, intelligent, unapologetic, driven, poised young woman comes along the bar is raised WAY high for her.  If she doesn't smile, kiss everybody's rear end and win "Miss Congeniality" she's automatically labeled a bitch and therefore not worthy of whatever accomplishment she's achieved.

I think this sort of thinking is too bad, because it allows a lot of people an excuse when they don't have one.  "well, it can't possibly be that I'm unlikable, there must be something wrong with everyone who doesn't like me!"

It was this same excuse mentality that annoyed me with Marjorie.  There was an idea that if you didn't like her, it must be because you were some sort of sexist. Not because she was just unlikable.  And sadly, I think its a disservice for those women because if they walk through life thinking everyone else has the problem, and they NEVER have the problem its hard to take an objective and hard look at themselves.  Which is what everyone should do.

People will say that John Tesar and Katsuji are assholes, and I think they both are.  Maybe they both will be free to assess their behavior without people automatically dismissing any criticism because of their gender.

People have pointed to multiple examples to illustrate why they don't like Brooke, or incidents that informed their opinion of her.  So, this isn't all coming out of left field, people have a reason why they find her unlikable, or entitled, or whatever.  If you don't agree with those reasons and you like her, thats fine, but not liking her doesn't mean that someone is automatically sexist.

[Snarklepuss]

8 minutes ago, RealReality said:

People will say that John Tesar and Katsuji are assholes, and I think they both are.  Maybe they both will be free to assess their behavior without people automatically dismissing any criticism because of their gender.

People have pointed to multiple examples to illustrate why they don't like Brooke, or incidents that informed their opinion of her.  So, this isn't all coming out of left field, people have a reason why they find her unlikable, or entitled, or whatever.  If you don't agree with those reasons and you like her, thats fine, but not liking her doesn't mean that someone is automatically sexist.

IMO putting Brooke in the same ball park let alone category as people like John T. and Katsuji is a downright insult to her.  I saw absolutely NOTHING remotely similar between her behavior and theirs, historically or in this season.  I would like someone to enumerate for me the many so-called "asshole moves" or comments Brooke has supposedly made on Top Chef that in any way compare with John or Katsuji.  The so-called transgressions attributed to Brooke are very minor and IMO often just a vague, nebulous, SUBJECTIVE impression compared with anything either of those two assholes has done.  And again, I didn't come into this with Brooke as my favorite.  I never loved or hated her but seeing all this stuff has shocked me because it's based on IMO very very little to nothing concrete.  And yes, I still think it's sexist because I have been on chat boards for over 20 years and in my experience, consistently a LOT more leeway is given to the men on these shows than the women.  All the women have to do is have a mildly bitchy resting face to be convicted of all sorts of horrible transgressions in the court of public opinion, while the guys pretty much have to be flaming assholes before they receive similar status.  Just my personal experience, which seems to get confirmed pretty much every single time. 

Also, for the record, speaking of subjective opinions, I am usually all over a smug, entitled bitch.  I am just about the opposite of that and if there's even one part of that per million in a woman, I'm all over that like white on rice.  And with Brooke I just didn't see it.  And I generally trust my gut on that kind of stuff.

[Christina]

The Media thread keeps giving me an error that I'm not allowed to post there. If past experience is any indication, the following link will post there about three times in an hour or so, but I'm posting it in this thread just in case.

Shirley and Brook gave a long interview to Uproxx where they talked about a few different things than the earlier articles I've read.

[RealReality]

10 minutes ago, Snarklepuss said:

IMO putting Brooke in the same ball park let alone category as people like John T. and Katsuji is a downright insult to her.  I saw absolutely NOTHING remotely similar between her behavior and theirs, historically or in this season.  I would like someone to enumerate for me the many so-called "asshole moves" or comments Brooke has supposedly made on Top Chef that in any way compare with John or Katsuji.  The so-called transgressions attributed to Brooke are very minor and IMO often just a vague, nebulous, SUBJECTIVE impression compared with anything either of those two assholes has done.  And again, I didn't come into this with Brooke as my favorite.  I never loved or hated her but seeing all this stuff has shocked me because it's based on IMO very very little to nothing concrete.  And yes, I still think it's sexist because I have been on chat boards for over 20 years and in my experience, consistently a LOT more leeway is given to the men on these shows than the women.  All the women have to do is have a mildly bitchy resting face to be convicted of all sorts of horrible transgressions in the court of public opinion, while the guys pretty much have to be flaming assholes before they receive similar status.  Just my personal experience, which seems to get confirmed pretty much every single time. 

Also, for the record, speaking of subjective opinions, I am usually all over a smug, entitled bitch.  I am just about the opposite of that and if there's even one part of that per million in a woman, I'm all over that like white on rice.  And with Brooke I just didn't see it.  And I generally trust my gut on that kind of stuff.

Not really, all three are unlikable to me.  For different reasons, yes, but I have my reasons for disliking all of them.  Which has nothing to do with their gender.

First of all, people don't need to enumerate it for you, or justify why they don't like someone in order to prove that they aren't sexist.  Nor does a person automatically become likable because there are other people less likable.  This test isn't graded on a curve....everyone can be unlikable.  Three people can be unlikable.  One person can be the most unlikable and two others be slightly less unlikable.

Second, people HAVE enumerated exactly why they don't like Brooke.  To which people respond that it must be for some sexist reason, or the reason isn't good enough.  

Third, what is minor to you, may not be minor to others.  Why your opinion of what is "unimportant" or "minor" is somehow more valid than anyone elses is a mystery to me.  Its not up to people to find a good enough reason for you, or else they are branded "sexist."

Fourth, one could make the argument that Katsuji and John's transgressions were also minor, as this is a subjective matter.  

Fifth, I think this seems like a self fulfilling prophecy for you....you think everyone is sexist, and therefore you likely see sexism where there is none.

You can trust your gut on things, but your gut should guide your own feelings towards Brooke and not everyone elses, nor should it guide you to call everyone who dares to not like Brooke a sexist.

Edited March 4, 2017 by RealReality

[Snarklepuss]

I don't think it's inappropriate to ask for concrete behavior to justify putting Brooke in the same category with John and Kasuji at all.  Maybe I missed something, who knows?  I don't think so but I'm willing to be convinced, although I personally don't think the list of things that make John or Katsuji assholes would contain stuff as "nebulous and subjective" as any such list made for Brooke because she really hasn't pulled any "dick moves" on anyone that I can remember.  All she is accused of is being "smug and entitled", whatever that means.  Both John and Katsuji have engaged in concrete behavior to deserve their asshole status.  I don't know of anything similarly concrete that can be pinned on Brooke.  And I've been reading this board so unless I missed something really big, if there were anything I'd have seen it.   I can accept not liking Brooke if in the process it's admitted that it's a subjective opinion based on an impression, but comparing her to people who have had concrete, provable, behavioral reasons for such dislike is not a fair comparison, IMO.  Feel free to disagree, that's just my opinion.

Also, and here's another reason I think this is so unfair to Brooke - I think it's often uncomfortable to see a woman act more like a man in a competition and not always apologize for themselves.  I watch MANY cooking competitions and in a lot of them the women are their own worst enemies, second guessing themselves, falling on their swords (like Kristin in her season), taking responsibility for things that aren't their responsibility, worrying about how they will be seen if they push themselves to win over others, thus putting themselves at a disadvantage and getting so into their own heads they sabotage themselves.  I thought it was VERY refreshing to watch both Brooke and Shirley not "apologize" for themselves, AND not feel like they had to resort to being "bitches" to win.  And I personally think it does Brooke as the winner a major disservice to discredit her accomplishment based on something so arguably nebulous.  Hey, I'm all over a real villain no matter the gender.  I just don't think Brooke was anywhere NEAR being one.  YMMV.

Edited March 4, 2017 by Snarklepuss

[RealReality]

22 minutes ago, Snarklepuss said:

I don't think it's inappropriate to ask for concrete behavior to justify putting Brooke in the same category with John and Kasuji at all.  I don't think the list of things that make John or Katsuji assholes would contain stuff as "nebulous and subjective" as any such list made for Brooke because she really hasn't pulled any "dick moves" on anyone that I can remember.  All she is accused of is being "smug and entitled", whatever that means.  Both John and Katsuji have engaged in concrete behavior to deserve their asshole status.  I don't know of anything similarly concrete that can be pinned on Brooke.  And I've been reading this board so if there were anything I'd have seen it.   I can accept not liking Brooke if in the process it's admitted that it's a subjective opinion based on an impression, but comparing her to people who have had concrete, provable, behavioral reasons for such dislike is not a fair comparison, IMO.  Feel free to disagree, that's just my opinion.

Also, and here's another reason I think this is so unfair to Brooke - I think it's often uncomfortable to see a woman act more like a man in a competition.  I watch MANY cooking competitions and in a lot of them the women are their own worst enemies, second guessing themselves, falling on their swords (like Kristin in her season), taking responsibility for things that aren't their responsibility, worrying about how they will be seen if they push to win over others, thus putting themselves at a disadvantage and getting so into their own heads they sabotage themselves.  I thought it was VERY refreshing to watch both Brooke and Shirley not "apologize" for themselves, AND not feel like they had to resort to being bitches to win.  And I personally think it does Brooke as the winner a major disservice to rob her of her accomplishment based on something so arguably nebulous.  Hey, I'm all over a real villain no matter the gender.  I just don't think Brooke was anywhere NEAR being one.  YMMV.

It actually is, people don't owe you a list so they don't have to be labelled as a "sexist."

All three are in the category of "people I do not like."  So telling me I need to justify why I put all three in the same category is asking me to justify why I don't like Brooke, or why anyone doesn't like Brooke.  Which people have gone over multiple times why they don't like Brooke.

Your standard for unlikable behavior is subjective.  So is everyone elses.  Your standard is no more better, or more worthy than anyone else's standard.  Nor does it make someone a sexist for not having the same standard as you.

Furthermore, one person being super unlikable doesn't make another person likable.  A person who is moderately unlikable is unlikable as well as the person who is very unlikable.

Again, people have given specific instances, which you seem to have chosen to label as "not good enough" reasons not to like her.  The reasons aren't good enough for you not to like her, but that doesn't mean that those people are sexist, and its unfortunate to think that your opinion is objectively so much more worthy that if people disagree they must be sexist, or there must be something fundamentally wrong with them.

LOL @ "provable" reasons.  People have given specific reasons why they don't like Brooke.  Over, and over and over.  And it has everything to do with her behavior towards others.  If you don't agree with those reasons, thats fine, but that doesn't automatically mean that someone is a "sexist" because you disagree with why they don't like someone.

I can't say much about your last paragraph, because I think people act like themselves.  "Acting like a man" is something I don't recognize as a thing, and I think its too bad when people actually ascribe specific behavior to a gender.  I've never thought someone was "acting like a man" when they were confident, I just thought they were confident, man or woman.  If someone is easy going and gets along with people, I don't think of that as "acting like a woman" I just think that is who they are.  Honestly, to ascribe personality traits to a gender seems more sexist to me than not liking Brooke.   But I think its likely part of the self fulfilling prophecy of seeing sexism where it may not be.

I don't think its unfair to call Brooke unlikable if you don't like her.  I don't think anyone is in a position to have to prove why they don't like someone on a reality TV show in order to not be labelled a sexist.  And even if people were in a position to have to prove it to you, people have given reasons why they don't like Brooke, and instances to support their reasoning.

I mean, I thought manbun Phillip was smug and entitled....its funny that no one asked me to run down the specific instances so I could prove to them that I didn't just hold that opinion because Phillip has an outtie and not an innie.

Edited March 4, 2017 by RealReality

[Snarklepuss]

@RealReality, I'm not going to respond at length to your post because I think it's taking a personal turn that I don't feel comfortable with.  A lot of times people ask questions (me included) that are more rhetorical than anything else so there's no need to feel like I'm challenging anyone to justify an opinion, especially if they admit it's subjective.   I'll just agree to disagree as I think you and I are too far apart to find any common ground.  And I don't think Phillip was just "smug and entitled", he was a lot more Looney Tune than that and in his own world, IMO.  Again, not what I see as a fair comparison but feel free to disagree.

[RealReality]

@Snarklepuss -- every opinion is subjective, when something is objective, its no longer an opinion, its a fact.

But I'm happy to leave it at that.

[biakbiak]

11 minutes ago, RealReality said:

thought manbun Phillip was smug and entitled....its funny that no one asked me to run down the specific instances so I could prove to them that I didn't just hold that opinion because Phillip has an outtie and not an innie.

Because it was obvious when he  proclaimed nearly every second his and his wifes genius and when challenged said the challenger didn't understand their genius.

[RealReality]

1 minute ago, biakbiak said:

Because it was obvious when proclaimed nearly every second that no one respected his and his wifes genius.

his wife was an actress, baker, astronaut, ballerina, mathematician and probably a CIA agent.  If you couldn't see the genius, you were probably objectively crazy :P

Edited March 4, 2017 by RealReality
forgot she was an amazing baker, responsible for the dessert no one liked.

[biakbiak]

5 minutes ago, RealReality said:

his wife was an actress, baker, astronaut, ballerina, mathematician and probably a CIA agent.  If you couldn't see the genius, you were probably objectively crazy :P

I imagine his grandfather who in case you hadn't heard was Phil Silvers rolled over in his grave at ever mention. 

[RealReality]

Just now, biakbiak said:

I imagine his grandfather who in case you hadn't heard was Phil Silvers rolled over in his grave at ever mention. 

I had forgotten about the grandfather.  He probably died eating a raw oyster off a hot ass rock.  :P

[Ellee]

Just want to say that I appreciate the varying opinions and the manner in which they have been expressed.  

I have a tendency to decide 'this is what it is' and the truth is it is not cut and dried.  Ever. 

So...is this called personal growth? :D

[HappyDancex2]

I enjoyed the discussion as well.  Both of you have valid points and presented them fairly and quite clearly.

i still say abolish Last Chance Kitchen.  It's served its purpose and I don't need a repeat.  The only variation might be the last episode to use it would be restaurant wars so that then the winning chef would come back after and there would still be 8... a lot more time to "earn" your way back.  Eh.  As I type that I don't even like that idea LOL!

one of my best friends just honeymooned at Secrets Akumal.  Said it was huge and meh.

[FormerMod-a1]

The Brook discussion has moved well beyond this episode.  And while it looks like it's calmed down, if you do want to discuss it further please take it to The Chefs/Cheftestants thread.

[Spaceman Spiff]

9 hours ago, DarkRaichu said:

Pretty good finale.  Shirley did not have the chance when Tom and the judges criticized her ramen.  The judging might be close to neck to neck depending on how bad Brooke's flan was, but IIRC Tom got the tiebreaker on those kind of situations, so Shirley still did not have a chance :P

Shirley and her mom FTW!

Shirley's sister is pretty

I'd rather see longer scene of the chefs shopping than the porkbelly drama

I want Shirley's dessert.  That looked like a very refined version of shaved ice + fruit dessert one can find at various street vendors in parts of Asia 

Oh and Brooke won.  Man, I was hoping to see a picture of a forum member eating a laptop.... maybe next season ?? :P

In that black dress, very pretty.

Good finale. Would have been glad with either one winning. I did get a bit tired of Shirley's loud voice and constant story telling, but over all they both did great. And I think I knew Brooke was going to win when Shirley mentioned making ramen noodles.

[TomTraubertsBlue]

LCK was just jumping on the reality show trend of giving people another chance.  Bringing vets back again and again, Redemption Island, the public voting back HGs on Big Brother, etc.  Reality show producers love the practice and I don't think it's going anywhere.

[jaync]

Quote

 Women are supposed to feign modesty; be less confident and direct than Tom Colicchio.

And fuck forbid if they're a little loud.

[Stitsch]

Yeah, sorry. The Brooke hate is intensely weird to me. Glad she won. I love Shirley, but I love Brooke a little more. 

[PamelaMaeSnap]

A few wrap-up thoughts (and apologies because one of them is about LCK and I know there's a separate LCK thread but I think this is more relevant to this convo) ... 

I like the idea that something like LCK exists because sometimes a really deserving cheftestant will get eliminated for something(s) like one small mess-up, or someone else having immunity, or any variety of events when they've otherwise been consistently creative and strong. I'd hate to see that keep someone out of the mix.

That said, I'd also like to see something a little more even-handed in how LCK is handled ... maybe blind judging (because I think one thing we can all agree on, or ALMOST all of us can agree on, is that TC absolutely has his favorites and TC's opinion at panel tends to outweigh everyone else's in the long run) ...

Or maybe having some sort of "point system" based on finishes while still on TC that could be used closer to the middle-end to rank the eliminated cheftestants (say, A points for each quickfire win, B points for each QF top 3, C points for each elimination win, D points for each elimination Top 3, and XYZ points deducted for being B3 in either round) who would then compete in bigger group competitions (not unlike the final two four-course meal) to make it back.  

I know that sounds confuzzled but it just might be able to work if better minds than mine worked out the details. It could also provide a great two hours or so of prime time TV between the pre-final elimination than making us go watch it on our laptops. 

I was not a fan of Brooke but I'm not really sure how much of it was because of her personality and how much was because the nanosecond I saw she was one of the cheftestants I KNEW she was going to win it all and that colored my perception. I certainly can't say who was/was not the best chef because I didn't taste the dishes ... I can say who made dishes I'd want to eat, but I also have a VERY picky and limited palate (only getting more adventurous in the last few years) so it's not you, it's me, Brooke. 

The one thing I can put my finger on that she said that kinda bothered me was something along the lines of how close it was when she lost to Kristen, when my recollection of that season was that Kristen was the slammiest-dunkiest of slam-dunk winners I've EVER seen on the show and everyone else was battling it out for second, her LCK visit notwithstanding (I still think that was planned to give the rest of the season a little more drama). So, no, Brooke. You were a DISTANT second at best. 

I don't know how much of it was the editing monkeys at work, but MAN did they make Shirley look bad the first half of the show (and pretty much most of it). Maybe they knew that there was NO anticipation about who was going to win once Sheldon was eliminated, because I think he was the only one who could have maybe edged out Brooke in head-to-head battle. But they did her (Shirley) no favors at all. 

So glad Sheldon won Fan Favorite ... he and Sylva by far my two favorite cheftestants and I'd been splitting my votes between them but once Sylva was gone they all went to Sheldon.  And I rarely if ever vote for these things. 

As always, thanks to everyone here on PTV ... I love reading all of your insights and thoughts after episodes! And thanks to the patient mods! See y'all (or most of you) next season! 

[film noire]

12 hours ago, Snarklepuss said:

 If she doesn't smile, kiss everybody's rear end and win "Miss Congeniality" she's automatically labeled a bitch and therefore not worthy of whatever accomplishment she's achieved.

I don't know if Brooke is a bitch; I do know someone can be charming as all get out and still behave in an entitled manner. (In this case, I find Brooke both unlikeable and entitled.)  

6 hours ago, HappyDancex2 said:

i still say abolish Last Chance Kitchen.  

Me, too. Last Chance is inherently unfair; Sheldon didn't get to fix his fish, Shirley didn't get to fix her broth (btw, Shirley was told she'd have appropriate pressure cookers for the finale, but ended up with insufficient ones. That's why her broth lacked depth of flavor, her signature skill throughout the competition. Too bad she couldn't have asked Brooke to save her ass equipment-wise: )

LK means the contest skews in favor of someone eliminated near the end. (Whether or not that last eliminated person returns to the game, it still favors them). If they keep it, I think LK should be used as a way to determine second place (preferably judged by someone other than Tom "I picks da winners" C.) Create prizes interesting enough to be worthy of winning -- maybe Brooke could've received a cash prize of 15K,  been able to pick which Top Chef she wanted to work with at the finale, maybe get to cook a final dish for the judges, maybe a career planning session with a guest mentor chef, etc -- that would respect the game (great chefs get eliminated on bad nights) while allowing a worthy prize for that talent  (great chefs deserve a second chance) without screwing with people like Shirley and Sheldon (cooked successfully all the way through but not rewarded for that achievement as part of the final contest.)

eta:

Quote

So glad Sheldon won Fan Favorite ... he and Sylva by far my two favorite cheftestants and I'd been splitting my votes between them but once Sylva was gone they all went to Sheldon

I wish Sylva had been in a "normal" season (no returning competitors). He got burned being on a season all but guaranteed to keep a newbie from getting to final three, never mind winning.

Edited March 4, 2017 by film noire
spelling: "silva" is a method of meditation, not a top cheftestant

[Archery]

I think is my favorite season so far.  Change LCK to blind judging, and this show would be near perfect as a competition.

Can someone clarify for me:  Shirley said her dessert was sticky rice pudding without the rice.  I couldn't figure out what that meant--any ideas?

[Ellee]

With this new QF thing that they have on Bravo....does anyone think that LCK is on its way out?  Or is Bravo looking for more online activity only?

[dleighg]

1 hour ago, Ellee said:

With this new QF thing that they have on Bravo....does anyone think that LCK is on its way out?  Or is Bravo looking for more online activity only?

What is this "new QF thing"?

[Kareem]

On 3/3/2017 at 11:16 AM, Lura said:

...

If the truth were known, this season has been a non-season for me.  You won't believe me, but the moment I saw Brooke's name on the line-up, I knew what the ending would be.  The remainder of the episodes were merely an exercise in watching how the show played out.  Mercifully, it finally played out, but it was to mixed reactions and unanswered questions.  Even Tom and Padma have lost their earlier charm and shared laughter and have begun taking the show as a major problem facing the world, second only to global warming.

Top Chef is my favorite show.  I hope that future seasons will reflect some of the enjoyment of past seasons.

Agree.  Sat through some weird challenges, and Padma's constant cleavage, sat through watching creepy Tesar, whom I hoped would've taken a hike the first episode, but knew this would be the Brooke show before it started, so LCK was no surprise either.  I hope future seasons don't combine newbies with reruns and also hope that the season is never this predictable again.  Mahalo, Sheldon.  

[Ellee]

3 hours ago, dleighg said:

What is this "new QF thing"?

I think I can do this here. Here it is  

http://www.bravotv.com/blogs/top-chef-live-quickfire-winner-video

[Jamie Satyr]

Mon Dieu; where's the "sour grapes" emoticon? ;-)

[riverheightsnancy]

For myself, I 100% blame the editors. Brooke and Shirley are both very excellent chefs (Sheldon is an excellent chef too, any combo of those three would be a fine finale. BUT, they all seem to be nice people-oh noes-the finale will be BORING). However, the EDITORS decided that they just couldn't have them be great chefs and cook a meal-that wasn't dramatic enough. They just had to have a "drama" between the two FEMALES. Because, of course, females are innately bitchy and HAVE to create dramaaaaahh. They chose not to make the pork belly a small snafu (like the oven issue with Brooke's flan), with a mere mention of it, but a major editing, time suck and focus of a "will she , or won't she share?" narrative and what all of that meant in terms for the competition. Think of it this way, If you were rooting for Brooke and Shirley didn't share AND ended up winning, what kind of discussion would we be having? It would likely be just as negative about Shirley, as some have felt about Brooke. So, basically, the asshole editors took away a joyous win (no matter who won), by injecting this socialized gender role standard, that women need to be a certain way to be a "good" winner. Pisses me off so much. The editors CHOSE not to clarify the issue for the viewers because obviously, female chefs are not as exciting doing their "thing". We need a hook and some manufactured drama for viewers to be satisfied. SMH.

[lololol]

3 hours ago, Kareem said:

Agree.  Sat through some weird challenges, and Padma's constant cleavage, sat through watching creepy Tesar, whom I hoped would've taken a hike the first episode, but knew this would be the Brooke show before it started, so LCK was no surprise either.  I hope future seasons don't combine newbies with reruns and also hope that the season is never this predictable again.  Mahalo, Sheldon.  

Padma's constant cleavage is a YAWN. She's way TOO full of herself. She really thinks highly of herself. Of course, it was the Brooke show - she was Tom Dick-lick-io's favorite from the get go. I can't stand him.

[WearyTraveler]

If Tom had any favourites, I would say Sheldon was it.  The man heaped so much high praise on Sheldon it was hard not to notice.  As it has been mentioned before, Tom rarely says the things he said to Sheldon to other chefs on this show.  Not that I think it was undeserved, juts pointing out that Sheldon seemed to be more of a favourite than Brooke.

I liked all of the final three, although I have to say that Shirley's voice was starting to grate on me by the last 5 episodes.  She was loud and shrill and I found myself cringing every time she spoke.  I thought it was weird because I never felt that way about her during her season. I think that the extra focus she got this season, and perhaps the editors choosing to mostly air loud Shirley were to blame for that.

This season I found Sheldon to be adorable and Brooke to be her harshest critic and too into her head.  I was happy Brooke won, I think she deserved it as much as Sheldon or Shirley.  I remember that during her original season I felt bad for her because she had solid performances and was very good, but Kristen was just on a league of her own.

Edited March 5, 2017 by WearyTraveler

[JeanneH]

20 hours ago, Snarklepuss said:

Personally, I didn't see where Shirley won any awards for selfless saint either.  In fact, I'm with the others who were kind of off-put by the way she attempted to screw with Brooke's head about the pork belly.  I see through any "accent barrier" to what she was really trying to do there.  She wasn't "joking" with Brooke, she was deliberately upping the tension with her to soft-sabotage her.  Just because she was smiling and acting acquiescent while saying it doesn't mean she was being "nice", IMO.  I see that as a smoke screen.  Now, if the tables were reversed, and Brooke acted that way she'd be called a bitch for not being a good sport, etc., etc.

On 3/3/2017 at 9:02 PM, rlc said:

Good interview of a Brooke and Shirley.

http://www.vulture.com/2017/03/top-chef-brooke-shirley-on-season-14-finale.html

This link is to a joint interview with Brooke and Shirley. It's the same interview linked to upthread, I've copied it here for ease of finding it again (it's a good interview).

In it, among many things they talk about why Shirley picked Casey over Sheldon, and then they talk about the pork belly. Shirley had IMO good culinary reasons for picking Casey, and the pork belly thing was not a big deal to either one of them. No attempts to screw people over.

Quote

 

Let’s talk about the finale. Shirley, why didn’t you choose Sheldon?
SC: Okay, first of all, if you think about it, Sheldon does not do dessert at all. So I have a plan in that I know all of this, and I’m familiar with Casey. I know she can execute a dessert. She can execute my vision without my supervision. So I literally just told her what I wanted to do. I gave her a recipe for rice pudding and I told her, “But don’t make it like that, I need to cook it longer.” So she took up the dessert, and then we’re going back and forth. I didn’t have to worry about it. All I needed to do was go up there and say, “Everything is great. I want to add this, I was to tweak this.” It took so little time. So that’s my strategy.

Because I did wonder if it was a way to try to block Brooke.
BW: Vagina-block me?

SC: No, but I know Sheldon would actually shine brighter on her team. I would never purposefully sabotage my competitor. I know who would be good and who’s best. That’s why.

I wasn’t suggesting you sabotaged her, although the show was trying to play up the pork belly thing through editing.
SC: Yeah, you can tell, right?

I assume it’s not actually that dramatic?
SC: No.

BW: No. I was legitimately worried that I wouldn’t get the pork belly, but I also originally thought I had ordered pork belly and it wasn’t there. So I didn’t blame her for needing to use it. I was just more upset that I didn’t have it.

SC: And I was totally going to give it to her, no matter what. We even talk about, “How much do you need? If both of us have to use the pork belly, what’s the minimum quantity that we could share among us?”

BW: And I actually didn’t even need that much, because my focus was actually not on the protein. It was a composed whole dish, and the protein was literally an ingredient in the dish.

 

[pbutler111]

Sam, the tallest Top Chef contestant ever? Have you forgotten the towering talents of C.J.?

[breezy424]

What's so 'interesting' about cooking competitions is that it is different from other competition reality shows.  We don't get to judge what the show is about - the food.  We can watch Project Runway for instance, and see the designs and have reasonably informed opinions.  We don't have that with 'food'.  So many opinions are formed based on personalities and interactions on all these competition shows but they are so much more a factor with cooking because we as viewers, don't get to taste the final product.  Yeah, we can have opinions on originality, ingredients and the combination of ingredients but in the end, it's not what the competition is about.  And heck,  I'm sure this has been said in the past.

Any of the final three could have won.  They're all really good.  Did Tom pick Brooke as his 'favorite' and decided the fate of the show?  I don't think so.  As someone else stated, I've never heard Tom give a contestant the accolades he gave Sheldon.  And it's interesting that the final two for fan favorite was Sheldon and Shirley.  Fan favorite doesn't mean best chef.  It's the congeniality award.  

In the end, Brooke won.  Congrats.  Yeah, she went to LCC and won that.  So did Kristen.  Someone above stated that Brooke didn't beat Kristen.  She did and that's why Kristen went to LCC in the first place.  It's a competition dependent on who is competing against who in a given circumstance.  It's not the be all and end all.  

[dleighg]

11 hours ago, Ellee said:

http://www.bravotv.com/blogs/top-chef-live-quickfire-winner-video

I think that's just some extra promotional thing that Lays paid for. I doubt LCK is going away.

[cooksdelight]

8 hours ago, JeanneH said:

but I also originally thought I had ordered pork belly and it wasn’t there

So she didn't order it after all.....if she can't remember if she ordered it or not..... it's anyone's guess at this point and as others have said, if she ordered it and they didn't bring it, it would be easy to call up the restaurant and ask "where's my pork belly?" I think it's obvious by now they did bring enough for two people, but Brooke was scatterbrained and once it made for more drama, she went that route.

[Ellee]

25 minutes ago, dleighg said:

I think that's just some extra promotional thing that Lays paid for. I doubt LCK is going away.

You are probably right.  I like LCK mainly because everyone is so relaxed.  Re-entering the competition?  Not really sure how I feel about that. Yes, yes, I can be wishy washy. 

[tobeannounced]

Finally got around to watching this. I was kind of deflated when Sheldon left and I didn't really have a dog in the fight anymore. Anyway, apparently I recorded the rerun and not the first showing. It always shows the end of the previous show before the start of the current show. So because of where the recording started, it caught Shirley in mid-sentence and it sounded to me like she had said she won and she was going on about her family and crying. I spent the whole episode thinking Shirley had won! So I know a lot of people thought a Brooke win was preordained, but it was quite a surprise for me - lol

[PamelaMaeSnap]

14 hours ago, stewedsquash said:

I wanted it to be Sheldon, Sylva and Jim in the final three, with any one of them winning. 

 

This! I understand (I think) why Shirley didn't choose Sylva to be her sous chef, if she was still smarting over the agave snafu, but I was surprised that neither chose Jim. That trio was also my favorite three and I would have been happy with any of them winning as well. 

Also, Brooke just won me over a little with her using "vagina-block." LMAO.

Edited March 5, 2017 by PamelaMaeSnap

[VintageJ]

I would have had Sheldon and Sylva as my sous chefs.  They thought they had pick of 3 and I wonder, as much as they loved having their people from their restaurant in, I wonder if either of them regretted any of their first two choices.

I want to try Shirley's dessert.

[Blonde Gator]

54 minutes ago, VintageJ said:

I would have had Sheldon and Sylva as my sous chefs.  They thought they had pick of 3 and I wonder, as much as they loved having their people from their restaurant in, I wonder if either of them regretted any of their first two choices.

I want to try Shirley's dessert.

Judging from Brooke & Shirley's reactions, I think they were overjoyed to see their own sous chefs walk in.  But as you correctly sussed out, perhaps they'd have changed their picks from the other cheftestants, had they known they had their own sous chefs on board, first.  I think Brooke/Sheldon was a tiny bit of an advantage, they've had TWO seasons to cook together in team challenges, as well as against each other.  But Shirley also knew Casey's strengths as well.  And, last season, there was one young lady who went out early (she was a sous chef, not an executive chef) who was selected first, as she was a "beast" in the kitchen.  Many of the executive chefs who have served as sous have commented that "I haven't done this in a while", and while they are brilliant, I would imagine being a fabulous sous chef involves friable skills....use them or lose them. 

Bottom line, competent and willing help is pretty much an equal thing for the finalists.  It was interesting, though, I think Shirley picked Casey pretty much for her dessert course, and probably then allocated Casey's "supervision" to her sous chef, because he so exactly knew her desires.  Shirley figured they were good to go, and pretty much left them alone to do it.   And odd, too, that Brooke (who has a pastry background) took sole responsibility for producing her awful flan.   She knew it wasn't right, and should have had a Plan B going in to the finale, flan is one of those "maybe" dishes, particularly in an unfamiliar environment.  Bad choice that almost finished her off. 

[Jamie Satyr]

1 minute ago, Blonde Gator said:

Judging from Brooke & Shirley's reactions, I think they were overjoyed to see their own sous chefs walk in.  But as you correctly sussed out, perhaps they'd have changed their picks from the other cheftestants, had they known they had their own sous chefs on board, first.  I think Brooke/Sheldon was a tiny bit of an advantage, they've had TWO seasons to cook together in team challenges, as well as against each other.  But Shirley also knew Casey's strengths as well.  And, last season, there was one young lady who went out early (she was a sous chef, not an executive chef) who was selected first, as she was a "beast" in the kitchen.  Many of the executive chefs who have served as sous have commented that "I haven't done this in a while", and while they are brilliant, I would imagine being a fabulous sous chef involves friable skills....use them or lose them. 

Bottom line, competent and willing help is pretty much an equal thing for the finalists.  It was interesting, though, I think Shirley picked Casey pretty much for her dessert course, and probably then allocated Casey's "supervision" to her sous chef, because he so exactly knew her desires.  Shirley figured they were good to go, and pretty much left them alone to do it.   And odd, too, that Brooke (who has a pastry background) took sole responsibility for producing her awful flan.   She knew it wasn't right, and should have had a Plan B going in to the finale, flan is one of those "maybe" dishes, particularly in an unfamiliar environment.  Bad choice that almost finished her off. 

I wouldn't want to be bothered with any chef that been "auf'd" after the choices made in the past! Going back to early days with Tiffany and Marcel in S's 1 & 2 respectively picked sous chefs that actually hated their guts! Other times the sous chefs made bad suggestions like Casey in S 5 for Carla who was in the final! Having your own personal sous was great, but I'd have to check, question, and be quite leery of some of these so called "helpers!" I remember several seasons back on "Hell's Kitchen," her choices hated her so much she had to bribe them with $10,000 to straighten out and do their job to the best of their ability; she lost anyway! ;-)