S14.E14: Comida Final

[rustyspigot]

On 3/3/2017 at 3:14 AM, biakbiak said:

Brooke wasn't clueless about cooking octupus, she asked Sheldon how he long he cooked the octupus four days earlier in the Patron challenge because he had just recently served it to the judges to good reviews (She might have said a few but she was clearly asking him because he just made it and Sheldon basically acknowledged his octupus wasn't on point to her because he said she should cook it 2 minutes less). We don't know how long she cooked it for and clearly she did more than he said because she finished on the flat top, she picked her team and was asking for advice based on a recent experience.

We can agree to disagree. Aren't subjective opinions fun?

[Jamie Satyr]

1 minute ago, rustyspigot said:

We can agree to disagree. Aren't subjective opinions fun?

I barely watched it, but looking at it briefly, wasn't she about to use a pressure cooker? Maybe she was just getting the length of time it took in a different vehicle! I'm still quite paranoid about using them; nightmares going back to the 60's the way people talked about them exploding in one's face! ;-(

[PamelaMaeSnap]

4 hours ago, Blonde Gator said:

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. 

Especially since, at the point she was shopping, she didn't know if she'd get the pork bellies or not so she might have wanted to rethink the iffy dessert (she seemed to know from the get-go she was taking a big chance with flan since she admitted later, IIRC, that she had never actually made it!) ... now I may be overthinking this or misremembering the order of what they did, and giving too much credit to the possibility of being able to change direction on the fly like that. But if I'm shopping and realize that one of my planned courses may have gone in the crapper, I'd probably shift gears and go with a dessert that I could make in my sleep. 

[jaync]

Quote

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

The exclamation points ate it?

Quote

Judging from Brooke & Shirley's reactions, I think they were overjoyed to see their own sous chefs walk in. 

I believe they were their chefs de cuisine.

Edited March 6, 2017 by jaync

[WearyTraveler]

Cooking is affected by many things, among them are the equipment you use (different brands of pressure cookers might require different time),  how your ingredients were grown and the temperature/humidity of the place where you are cooking.  I'll offer an example, once I was making a custard and I followed the recipe to the letter (I'm no chef, but I know my way around a kitchen and I certainly know how to follow a recipe), but it never set because the place where the recipe was created (US) didn't account for the humidity of the place where I was cooking (Venezuela), and so, it was too liquid when it went into the refrigerator, and it was never going to set.

Octopus (like custard) is a very tricky ingredient to begin with, one minute could be all the difference between chewy and perfectly cooked.  Brooke asked Sheldon how long because he had done it a few days before, he knew how the other factors in Mexico would affect cooking times.  Note two very important things, IMO:

1) She didn't ask him how to season it, or how to flavor it.  She had already decided her flavor profile.  A perfectly cooked octopus without any seasoning or flavor is quite bland.

2) Sheldon suggested she actually cook it for less time than he did.  He said he'd cooked it for 16 mins. but that she should do 14 mins. because he felt his octopus was a tad over

So, even Sheldon, who some are arguing knows how to cook better than Brooke told her that he'd overcook his protein and the concept of the dish was totally hers.  I don't see how any of this makes Brooke any less of a chef. 

Edited March 6, 2017 by WearyTraveler

[lololol]

On ‎3‎/‎3‎/‎2017 at 10:22 PM, RealReality said:

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.

I don't like Brooke either. Don't see ANYTHING likable about her. I don't see her as confident. I see her as someone who thinks she's BETTER than she REALLY is.

On ‎3‎/‎4‎/‎2017 at 10:48 AM, film noire said:

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.)  

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:

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.

IMO, Brooke is UNLIKABLE and comes across as ENTITLED.

[breezy424]

Well, Brooke won.  So does that make her better than her cooking skills?  Viewers don't have to like her and their opinion doesn't have anything to do with her cooking skills because the viewers don't get to taste the food. 

I use to like Shirley a lot.  During the last few episodes of the seasons I found her annoying.   But if she was the best chef, I'd have no problem with her winning.  It's not a 'personality' competition.  And one's personality has nothing to do with the food one produces.

[sportsgirl]

I loved this season -- I think there appeared to be excellent cooking, and it made for terrific TV, and because we knew so many of the chefs, their familiar personalities really invigorated the show. I also liked seeing people who knew the ropes, who weren't thrown by the competition, cook in these parameters without it being an "All-Star" environment. I really do feel as if the final three and the final two were the best of the season, and that Brooke more than earned Top Chef honors.

I hope they do this again next season: and I hope the four returning chefs are Sylva, Jim, Silvia, and OK, maybe Jamie (though his failure with vegetables in the first few weeks was, to me, his worst sins of the season). Because as much as the returning crew made for good TV, it was definitely not a level playing field for the new chefs and I'd like to see at least those 3 or 4 chefs get another shot at the show.

[HawaiiTVGuy]

I find it interesting but Shirley's desire to have a great story go with her dishes contributed to her demise.  She really wanted to make ramen because of her personal connection, however, like Tom said, 10 years ago, they would have thought Shirley's ramen was great, but now with the inundation of authentic Japanese ramen places in the US, if you are going to put something like ramen in front of a panel of judges like this, the broth needs to have cooked for double-digit hours at least so Shirley's dish was pretty much doomed to fail from the start.  Not sure how much the pressure cooker would have helped in this situation, but once she decided she couldn't even try to adjust by using the pressure cooker, it probably would have been best to adjust.  Instead of making ramen, make a fried noodle dish.  In fact, Sheldon got rave reviews just a couple competitions earlier when he made the Chow Fun.

[LennieBriscoe]

FWIW,  as a female, I'm pretty sure my dislike of (not "hate" for) Brooke is not "sexist." Also, I can't stand Michael V. :-P

Re: Pork belly. This was the Finale. Asking one's opponent for any of her major ingredients is mind-bogglingly brazen to me. Not only is it a display of entitlement by the beseecher; it is also a distraction, mental and physical, to the other Finalist. Kind Shirley went on to lose. 

[WearyTraveler]

Asking someone for something is not a display of entitlement, IMHO.  There's a difference between saying "may I have some of your pork belly if you will not use it?" vs. "give me your pork belly!".  

Also, she had a plan B and she had the ingredient for it (short ribs), it's obvious to me that if she ordered the plan B ingredient, she probably ordered the plan A one.  The Hotel probably made a mistake because both contestants ordered the same ingredient.  Who knows how that list was passed along to the hotel shoppers, or how that whole thing went down.

Pork belly was Shirley's Plan B.  Piglet shanks was her plan A.  She was happy with the state of her Plan A protein and didn't need the Plan B, so she gave it to Brooke.  She wasn't hindering herself or altering her plans to do so.  She didn't give up anything she desperately needed and she waited until the last minute to give it, when she was absolutely sure she was happy with her plan A.  I fail to see how this messed her up in any way.

For all we know Brooke's recipe would have been as good with short ribs as it was with pork belly.  But, for argument's sake let's say it wasn't.  Let's say there was no pork belly on either side and she used short ribs.  It seemed to me that the original meal score, from the comments was:

Course 1: Brooke's oyster

Course 2: Brooke's octopus

Course 3: Tie between Brooke's pork & beans and Shirley's shanks

Course 4: Shirley's rice pudding

Let's say Brooke had to use short ribs and this resulted in her loosing course 3 to Shirley.  It would have been a tie, in which case they would have evaluated the whole meal as a progression, and that was a tie too (from the comments, the judges were split with some thinking it was too bold of an entrance by Brooke and both Gail and Tom thinking it was OK to be bold).  Then it would have been left to who had the most wins in the competition, and there, Brooke had Shirley beat too.  So, IMO, the whole pork belly debacle is moot. Brooke would have won either way.

[RabbiBeth]

Good finale.  Can I just say - I was staring at Shirley's mom's INCREDIBLE SKIN. Oh man, what are her beauty secrets?  No wrinkles! Glowing! Plump skin!  Enquiring minds want to know!

[Tara Ariano]

In case you missed it, here's the Previously.TV post on the episode!

Top Chef Chooses Its Champion

On the finale of the show's best season yet, Shirley and Brooke go head-to-head one last time.

[HawaiiTVGuy]

7 hours ago, LennieBriscoe said:

FWIW,  as a female, I'm pretty sure my dislike of (not "hate" for) Brooke is not "sexist." Also, I can't stand Michael V. :-P

Re: Pork belly. This was the Finale. Asking one's opponent for any of her major ingredients is mind-bogglingly brazen to me. Not only is it a display of entitlement by the beseecher; it is also a distraction, mental and physical, to the other Finalist. Kind Shirley went on to lose. 

IMO the difference between Top Chef as a "competition" show versus others reality TV  competition shows, these chefs who come on are all pretty accomplished and the culinary world at their level is pretty cliquish where everyone knows everyone.  They are all pretty confident in their own abilities and foremost in their minds is to cook something great tasting more than "winning".  That is why "sharing" or "helping" with ingredients among the competitors seems pretty common.  Like in the bar-b-que challenge, even though it was a team challenge, Katsuji provided John with some ingredient for John's dish, even though it put the rest of his teammates at risk, no one questioned the decision to share.

It was unfortunate that Shirley had a bad second dish so the suspense on who was going to win pretty much ended halfway through the tasting (these are the instances I wish they wouldn't show insta-feedback) but damn the judges for making me believe there was still a shot for one minute for Shirley when they raved about her shanks, but then were quick to praise Brooke's dish later.  Personally, I think shank is a more interesting ingredient (and harder to make right) than pork belly, so I would have given Shirley the win in that round.  But even with that, I think that Shirley's ramen was just so bad in comparison to all the other non-dessert dishes served it still would have doomed her.  Based on their feedback and the fact the stock was only cooking for 3 hours, I am guessing the broth probably didn't taste any better than what you would have gotten out of a Top Ramen packet.

Edited March 6, 2017 by HawaiiTVGuy

[spankydoll]

Worst season to date. Returnees get an unfair advantage coming into the competition with prior knowledge of the TC protocols. Don't want to see Casey on my TV again please or either of the finalists

[hks]

While I am STILL disappointed that Sheldon didn't win, I wanted the win for Brooke more than Shirley. Based on the number of wins - she seemed to have the most talent. As for likability: Brooke seemed cold, for sure, but I don't know her in real life. She seemed determined not to let her feelings in during the show. And just as I found her cold, I found Shirley inconsiderate for yelling ALL the time. (It specifically annoyed me in the hidden family quick challenge where it hindered the work other chefs were doing). And yes, in the finale, Shirley was so much more likable than Brooke - especially regarding her mom. I cried during that for sure. But Brooke did better - and where it always matters most to the judges - (savory foods). She deserved that win.

Of course, if Sheldon had been in it, I probably wouldn't have cared - I wish he had won it all.

[Jamie Satyr]

1 hour ago, hks said:

While I am STILL disappointed that Sheldon didn't win, I wanted the win for Brooke more than Shirley. Based on the number of wins - she seemed to have the most talent. As for likability: Brooke seemed cold, for sure, but I don't know her in real life. She seemed determined not to let her feelings in during the show. And just as I found her cold, I found Shirley inconsiderate for yelling ALL the time. (It specifically annoyed me in the hidden family quick challenge where it hindered the work other chefs were doing). And yes, in the finale, Shirley was so much more likable than Brooke - especially regarding her mom. I cried during that for sure. But Brooke did better - and where it always matters most to the judges - (savory foods). She deserved that win.

Of course, if Sheldon had been in it, I probably wouldn't have cared - I wish he had won it all.

It really didn't matter to me who won since all were nice guys! Sheldon and Brooke seemed to have an edge on Shirley, so I'm not unhappy Brooke won! She needed the redemption more after Kristen eviscerated her in the original season! ;-)

[ratgirlagogo]

On 3/4/2017 at 9:18 PM, riverheightsnancy said:

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.

I agree with this and would add that since, as we know, all this editing was done AFTER the editors knew who had actually won - it was done to make Brooke seem more likeable.  It's not that Brooke just forgot to order the main ingredient for her dish (which is what happened) - it's that Shirley might not give it to her because she's a BITCH!!(which ended up not happening).

Edited March 8, 2017 by ratgirlagogo

[Jamie Satyr]

3 hours ago, ratgirlagogo said:

I agree with this and would add that since, as we know, all this editing was done AFTER the editors knew who had actually won - it was done to make Brooke seem more likeable.  It's not that Brooke just forgot to order the main ingredient for her dish (which is what happened) - it's that Shirley might not give it to her because she's a BITCH!!(which ended up not happening.

Reality has always been a misnomer since everyone knows it's all but scripted with heavy production editing! One of my favorite shows is "Dance Moms" and it kills me having the world think that it's anywhere near real; esp. the child abuse & ranting by Abby! If anyone is abusing the kids, it's the parents that have them working 60 hours a week, cashing those big checks, and b!tchin' the entire time! It's not as entertaining as it once was, but it's still my show until canceled! ;-)

[lololol]

23 hours ago, spankydoll said:

Worst season to date. Returnees get an unfair advantage coming into the competition with prior knowledge of the TC protocols. Don't want to see Casey on my TV again please or either of the finalists

Especially Brooke.

[Mellowyellow]

Loved Shirley, loved Brooke. I thought it was a terrific final.  My only gripe is that I wished Shirley had made a better ramen and Brooke a better dessert. They are great chefs it seemed kinda weird for them to throw out those 2 dishes. 

Despite the editing to amp up a bit of drama I found  both contestants delightfully boring and likeable. It amused me to see them try to create footage from these two. I also liked that they were so different but got along so well. LOVED all the stuff Shirley said about seeing Brooke be a mum made her think she can have a family of her own too. Made me go "Awwwww".

I must be from another planet because I found Brooke to be reserved and hard on herself but she'll stand up for a dish she believes in. I found her very hard on herself and not arrogant at all. 

[film noire]

On 3/6/2017 at 7:58 AM, WearyTraveler said:

Let's say Brooke had to use short ribs and this resulted in her loosing course 3 to Shirley.  It would have been a tie

Screwing up your protein is a major hit for a chef in this competition. The judges (especially Tom) see it as baseline cookery gone bad, and that's close to unforgivable -- so Brooke screwing up the most crucial part of her meal would carry far more weight than a "one course loss".  (And very possible, given the limits of trying to tenderize ribs using the same weak pressure cookers that kept Shirley from developing flavor in her broth). And if Brooke is perceived as screwing up the most important element in the most important course in her meal, while Shirley's shank (considered a gutsy move by all the judges) and dessert come on strong, then Shirley's overall progression overtakes Brooke as the meal builds. Ending strong vs starting strong. That's why sharing ingredients shouldn't be allowed, imo;  it skews the win. Nobody should have to face the choice of competing as hard as possible vs. being filmed and possibly presented as a total bitch or bastard. And because of that, we'll never know what would have happened if Shirley had been given the freedom to play to win, instead of playing nice. 

Quote

Then it would have been left to who had the most wins in the competition, and there, Brooke had Shirley beat too.

It's that meal, that night.

Edited March 9, 2017 by film noire

[WearyTraveler]

2 hours ago, film noire said:

Screwing up your protein is a major hit for a chef in this competition. The judges (especially Tom) see it as baseline cookery gone bad, and that's close to unforgivable -- so Brooke screwing up the most crucial part of her meal would carry far more weight than a "one course loss".  (And very possible, given the limits of trying to tenderize ribs using the same weak pressure cookers that kept Shirley from developing flavor in her broth). And if Brooke is perceived as screwing up the most important element in the most important course in her meal, while Shirley's shank (considered a gutsy move by all the judges) and dessert come on strong, then Shirley's overall progression overtakes Brooke as the meal builds. Ending strong vs starting strong. That's why sharing ingredients shouldn't be allowed, imo;  it skews the win. Nobody should have to face the choice of competing as hard as possible vs. being filmed and possibly presented as a total bitch or bastard. And because of that, we'll never know what would have happened if Shirley had been given the freedom to play to win, instead of playing nice. 

It's that meal, that night.

I didn't say Brooke would screw up the protein, I said that her dish could be the losing one against Shirley's by switching the protein because maybe the combination is not as successful.  Big difference.

In the past, I have heard the judges comment on the history of the cheftestants when the final meal is "too close to call", for lack of a better term.  Paul and what's her name in the Texas season had me worried because Paul had been stellar all season and what's her name was up and down, but to hear the judges comments on the food they were served that night, it was neck and neck.  Apparently she cooked the meal of her lifetime, the judges said it was all delicious (as was Paul's).  Had the judges decided that night that what's her name should have won, I'd have accepted it because I can't taste the food; so, if they had said she cooked the better meal, then she did, but I was hoping Paul did better than her because I liked him better (and it turned out he did)

[film noire]

4 hours ago, WearyTraveler said:

I didn't say Brooke would screw up the protein, I said that her dish could be the losing one against Shirley's by switching the protein because maybe the combination is not as successful.  Big difference.

I think my point still stands, regardless of how we get there -- losing the main course (whether due to a major screw up or the dish not being as good) is close to insurmountable in a Top Chef finale (especially when cooking short ribs vs something as daring and hard to pull off as a shank). I'm sure there must be somebody who lost the main course and won the competition, but off the top of my head I can't think of one, which tells me how rare (if ever) a win that has been. IMO, it's a much more fair, interesting  and less manipulative competition to forbid chefs to fix mistakes or save each other - that dynamic just undermines the whole season. 

Edited March 10, 2017 by film noire

[biakbiak]

Brooke said in her post interview that the meat in that dish was not the main component of the dish and that it only had a little bit of pork belly in it, so yes the short ribs might have changed her dish but the meat wasn't the focus of her 3rd plate.

[WearyTraveler]

7 hours ago, film noire said:

I think my point still stands, regardless of how we get there -- losing the main course (whether due to a major screw up or the dish not being as good) is close to insurmountable in a Top Chef finale (especially when cooking short ribs vs something as daring and hard to pull off as a shank). I'm sure there must be somebody who lost the main course and won the competition, but off the top of my head I can't think of one, which tells me how rare (if ever) a win that has been. IMO, it's a much more fair, interesting  and less manipulative competition to forbid chefs to fix mistakes or save each other - that dynamic just undermines the whole season. 

I actually like it when there's an even playing field and the competition is about skill.  If everything is the same for two contestants, it's down to ability, and so, the one with the best ability wins.  I think good competitors, who are sure of their skills, want to beat someone "for real", not because the other person was handicapped in some way.  I've lost count of the amount of chefs (including Shirley in this very episode) who have said that they don't want to win because their competitor was hindered by something out of their control.  I think it's a lot more satisfying when you know you have beat the best, at their best.  There's less satisfaction in winning a race because the front runner got a sprain close to the finish line, IMO.

I think, IIRC, that Mike Isabella's famous pepperoni sauce, which had Gail drooling, was part of his main course when he competed against Blais. That was the winning dish in that round and he still lost the title.

Side note: I recently watched the last season of Master Chef The Professionals (UK version) and was hooked.  There is no drama, no fake situations, no hyping up supposed personal fights between competitors, no budgets, no catering events for 100 people, no limits on ingredients or cooking with one hand tied up behind your back.  Only great chefs cooking great food.  It was highly satisfying to watch.

Edited March 10, 2017 by WearyTraveler

[archer1267]

Finally saw the finale and while I would have been fine with either of them winning, I thought Shirley was more gracious in losing than Brooke would have been. I know it's not about personality, but I felt badly for Shirley making comments about how Brooke is an inspiration to her (in managing to have a family as well as a career) and meanwhile, Brooke is snarking about Shirley's voice in her THs and asking her to quiet down. I thought Brooke could have been more appreciative about the pork belly thing, too. 

[kitten59]

On 3/9/2017 at 10:09 PM, WearyTraveler said:

Side note: I recently watched the last season of Master Chef The Professionals (UK version) and was hooked.  There is no drama, no fake situations, no hyping up supposed personal fights between competitors, no budgets, no catering events for 100 people, no limits on ingredients or cooking with one hand tied up behind your back.  Only great chefs cooking great food.  It was highly satisfying to watch.

I couldn't agree more. although I'm in the U.S. (Hawaii ;-)), I have seen every season of Masterchef the Professionals UK. I have long thought that those chefs would smoke everyone else on every other cooking competition show anywhere! No bullshit, no drama, just straight up cooking at its finest. I love me some Top Chef, but really, THAT is how it's done.

[lololol]

On ‎3‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 11:11 AM, archer1267 said:

Finally saw the finale and while I would have been fine with either of them winning, I thought Shirley was more gracious in losing than Brooke would have been. I know it's not about personality, but I felt badly for Shirley making comments about how Brooke is an inspiration to her (in managing to have a family as well as a career) and meanwhile, Brooke is snarking about Shirley's voice in her THs and asking her to quiet down. I thought Brooke could have been more appreciative about the pork belly thing, too. 

Brooke is a TOTAL b and thinks she's ALL THAT. Too bad she won. NOT surprised since she was Tom the dick's favorite.

[pennben]

5 hours ago, lololol said:

Brooke is a TOTAL b and thinks she's ALL THAT. Too bad she won. NOT surprised since she was Tom the dick's favorite.

I dOn'T AgREE.  I am HAPpY for her that she won.  I tOo BELIEvE that Tom liked her cooking THE best all season long, so I wasn't surprised WhEN she won. 

[spiderpig]

My Thursday nights are so strangely empty right now. :-(

[meep.meep]

On 3/5/2017 at 6:23 PM, lololol said:

I don't like Brooke either. Don't see ANYTHING likable about her. I don't see her as confident. I see her as someone who thinks she's BETTER than she REALLY is.

IMO, Brooke is UNLIKABLE and comes across as ENTITLED.

I do LIKE Brooke.  She's LAID BACK and CONFIDENT.  If Sheldon likes HER, then THAT's GOOD ENOUGH for me.

And she won.  

On 3/12/2017 at 0:12 AM, pennben said:

I dOn'T AgREE.  I am HAPpY for her that she won.  I tOo BELIEvE that Tom liked her cooking THE best all season long, so I wasn't surprised WhEN she won. 

Robert MacElwaine ?     Yes, I am very old.

[Swedee]

I started to actively dislike Brooke in the blind challenge when she kept telling Shirley to be quiet. Part of the challenge was to communicate through an obstacle. It wasn't a normal cooking environment. Shirley had every right to talk as loud as she needed to. The fact that Brooke couldn't deal with the noise (pretty sure the noise was designed to be part of the challenge) and felt ENTITLED to tell fellow chef to be quiet made me start looking at her differently. After that, Brooke's entitlement was front and center in every challenge. Everyone was supposed to fall on their sword to allow the Queen to move forward. I agree with the comparison with Blaise (who I also cannot stand). I was also disappointed, but not surprised at how ungracious Brooke was in winning.

[biakbiak]

Shirley talks loudly regardless of the challenge, she was the only person who felt it necessary to shout in that challenge, heck theywere in separate kitchens and Shirley could still be heard because she shouts. I don't see why Shirley can act however she wants and people can't call her on it that is acting entitled to me.

[lololol]

4 hours ago, Swedee said:

I started to actively dislike Brooke in the blind challenge when she kept telling Shirley to be quiet. Part of the challenge was to communicate through an obstacle. It wasn't a normal cooking environment. Shirley had every right to talk as loud as she needed to. The fact that Brooke couldn't deal with the noise (pretty sure the noise was designed to be part of the challenge) and felt ENTITLED to tell fellow chef to be quiet made me start looking at her differently. After that, Brooke's entitlement was front and center in every challenge. Everyone was supposed to fall on their sword to allow the Queen to move forward. I agree with the comparison with Blaise (who I also cannot stand). I was also disappointed, but not surprised at how ungracious Brooke was in winning.

GREAT post! I totally agree with your opinions about Brooke. She's conceited, entitled, and thinks she's ALL THAT.

[WearyTraveler]

1 hour ago, biakbiak said:

Shirley talks loudly regardless of the challenge, she was the only person who felt it necessary to shout in that challenge, heck theywere in separate kitchens and Shirley could still be heard because she shouts. I don't see why Shirley can act however she wants and people can't call her on it that is acting entitled to me.

I think Shirley is a great chef, but I agree with you that her voice was unnecessarily loud.  No other chef in the same situation was screaming as loud as she was.  This became a problem for me in the latter episodes, when there were less people.  Shirley was so loud, I wanted to tell her to shut up a couple of times.

[LennieBriscoe]

Weary Traveler, You forget my point about "distraction." Five seconds or ten minutes, whatever time it took in Shirley's brain to FOCUS ON BROOKE AND HER REQUEST was TOO LONG, never mind the actual ACTIVITY TIME Brooke took from Shirley.

Shirley was in her OWN mind, focusing on her own ideas, then. "Plan A," "Plan B," or "Plan XYZ"---Doesn't matter. Brooke  HAD NO RIGHT to interject herself into Shirley's thought processes at this CRUCIAL MOMENT. And, in fact, one cannot know the actual effect on Shirley, as this interruption ultimately did not "work out" for Shirley.

THAT was what I thought was most unfair of Brooke. Brooke was thinking of Brooke, and she made Shirley think of her, too.

[susannot]

On 3/11/2017 at 5:15 AM, kitten59 said:

I couldn't agree more. although I'm in the U.S. (Hawaii ;-)), I have seen every season of Masterchef the Professionals UK. I have long thought that those chefs would smoke everyone else on every other cooking competition show anywhere! No bullshit, no drama, just straight up cooking at its finest. I love me some Top Chef, but really, THAT is how it's done.

Could not agree more.  My favorite cooking show contestant ever is Ash Mair, winner of the 2011 version.  Just insanely beautiful cooking.

[WearyTraveler]

10 hours ago, LennieBriscoe said:

Weary Traveler, You forget my point about "distraction." Five seconds or ten minutes, whatever time it took in Shirley's brain to FOCUS ON BROOKE AND HER REQUEST was TOO LONG, never mind the actual ACTIVITY TIME Brooke took from Shirley.

Shirley was in her OWN mind, focusing on her own ideas, then. "Plan A," "Plan B," or "Plan XYZ"---Doesn't matter. Brooke  HAD NO RIGHT to interject herself into Shirley's thought processes at this CRUCIAL MOMENT. And, in fact, one cannot know the actual effect on Shirley, as this interruption ultimately did not "work out" for Shirley.

THAT was what I thought was most unfair of Brooke. Brooke was thinking of Brooke, and she made Shirley think of her, too.

Given the post finale interviews already linked in this thread, where Shirley and Brooke both speak about the finale and the pork belly, I don't think this is the big intrusion you think it is.  Shirley is a grown adult, who works in a male dominated, very though business; if her focus were so shattered by something as simple as someone asking her if she could share an ingredient, then she wouldn't have lasted this long in said business or been as successful as she has been.

She went against her parent's wishes to pursue the career she wanted, something that in her culture is a very difficult thing to do.  And even though she's still affected by this, she survived and is thriving in the cooking world.  I don't think she's some delicate flower that can't handle a polite request during a competition, and I think you discredit her strength of character and her accomplishments by suggesting that she is. 

[Rachel RSL]

25 minutes ago, WearyTraveler said:

I don't think she's some delicate flower that can't handle a polite request during a competition

Yet Brooke is apparently a delicate little flower who can't handle a little noise.

[biakbiak]

4 hours ago, Rachel RSL said:

Yet Brooke is apparently a delicate little flower who can't handle a little noise.

Not delicate enough to not speak up for herself to ask Shirley to stop screaming.

[WearyTraveler]

3 hours ago, biakbiak said:

Not delicate enough to not speak up for herself to ask Shirley to stop screaming.

And not so delicate that she allowed the annoyance of Shirley's volume to interfere with her cooking the winning meal in the finale.

[cooksdelight]

Brooke might be one of these people who is used to a quiet kitchen at work. At any rate, it didn't rattle her so much that she messed up her menu. But I do think it was rude to ask Shirley to be quiet. Shirley has her way of doing things, everybody does. I have worked with all kinds of people in my life, some were loud and downright obnoxious. But it's how they got the job done. You learn to adapt, accept, and adjust.

[spiderpig]

3 hours ago, cooksdelight said:

Brooke might be one of these people who is used to a quiet kitchen at work. At any rate, it didn't rattle her so much that she messed up her menu. But I do think it was rude to ask Shirley to be quiet. Shirley has her way of doing things, everybody does. I have worked with all kinds of people in my life, some were loud and downright obnoxious. But it's how they got the job done. You learn to adapt, accept, and adjust.

That's why they invented cubicles - otherwise most of us would have leapt over our desks and strangled one another.

[cooksdelight]

And noise-cancelling headphones. :)

[MajorWoody]

Late to the thread, most everyone else has said what I was thinking, perhaps said it better than I would have.

But I still have a couple of thoughts.

Claiming someone is sexist because they dislike Brooke is moronic. The same people calling out Brooke for the most part also called out Tesar and Katsuji during the season, and also supported Shirley. Sometimes , to paraphrase Freud, a jerk is just a jerk. Brooke consistently was shown smirking when another contestant was criticized, and pouting when she was not praised. While she was far from the biggest villian this show has seen, that does not mean she was Pollyanna through and through. 

Brooke also showed her arrogance with her repeated attempts in several episodes in whining about Shirleys noise levels. This is a professional kitchen, not an operating room or a library. Loud noises and voices are commonplace, and also, since this is a competition, provides additional stressors for the contestants. 

Finally, on multiple occasions, Brooke showed that while she is a talented chef when she can stick to a strict plan, she falls apart when she has to deviate in any way from her prepared plan. Again, it is a competition, with rules, sometimes unfair ones, but rules that every other chef has to abide by. 

In the finale, the main dish seemed to be much more difficult with Shirleys dish, as opposed to a pork belly on an onion sliver that Brooke presented. Even giving her the first two rounds, Shirleys dish was much more difficult and complex than Brookes, and in the dessert round, Brooke failed miserably. 

A true finale would have had Sheldon versus Shirley, but I agree with the others who feel this outcome was predetermined before the season even began. Brooke is a very good chef, but only within the strict parameters of a somewhat regimented environment. Shirley, and also Sheldon, showed that they were able to perform at a higher level under difficult and changing circumstances, which would seem to be what Top Chef actually stands for. 

[spiderpig]

2 minutes ago, MajorWoody said:

Brooke also showed her arrogance with her repeated attempts in several episodes in whining about Shirleys noise levels. This is a professional kitchen, not an operating room or a library. Loud noises and voices are commonplace, and also, since this is a competition, provides additional stressors for the contestants. 

 

Glad to see you back, Major!

I didn't get the issue of Shirley's voice for a lot of reasons.  My sister, whose background is in radio, said I have a voice that can be clearly understood.  Conversely, my adored other half, Mr. pig, has a soft New England accent and after decades I have to ask him repeatedly what he just said.  (Well, maybe I just like to yell at him ;-)

Point being, with timing being everything in a working kitchen, you can't waste time going "Huh-whu-what? I didn't hear you."

I have problems with Gordon Ramsay reading the tickets on Hell's Kitchen.  "One (mumble) two (mumble) one (mumble).  I'd prefer Shirley's strident commands.

[Rachel RSL]

On 3/15/2017 at 0:12 AM, biakbiak said:

Not delicate enough to not speak up for herself to ask Shirley to stop screaming.

And yet she bitched about it constantly to Shirley, to her fellow chefs and in confessionals. It's Brooke's world and everyone else just has to live in it. (This is one of the many reasons so many people think she came across as entitled.)

[WearyTraveler]

Well, this is going around in circles now, so, I'll agree to disagree and bow out

[dleighg]

25 minutes ago, WearyTraveler said:

Well, this is going around in circles now, so, I'll agree to disagree and bow out

I agree- I think a lot of us on the sidelines are quite over this.