S13.E04: Glamping

[Snarklepuss]

3 hours ago, Brookside said:

If David is so allergic so allergic to peanuts he should ALWAYS carry an epi pen.

Agreed, plus having known people allergic to nuts, even just being on the plate with the food he ate is enough to trigger an attack.  I doubt he could be THAT allergic if he had it in his mouth and he didn't have a full-on attack.  One guy I knew once told me that if he was in the same ROOM with a peanut he would have an attack - I know he was exaggerating but I got the point.  I notice that on some ingredient lists they make sure to specify it when something was made in the same facility with peanuts even if no peanuts were in the recipe, because even if one little tiny piece of peanut somehow got in the food it could trigger an attack.

[Snarklepuss]

"Glamping" - One of those obnoxious concepts that was probably invented by the same people that suddenly started using the word "hack" to refer to a "tip" without consulting with the rest of us.  The same obnoxious people that think up all the insufferably fussy little craft projects on "The Kitchen" that make me reach for my remote.

[smiley13]

7 hours ago, Snarklepuss said:

"Glamping" - One of those obnoxious concepts that was probably invented by the same people that suddenly started using the word "hack" to refer to a "tip" without consulting with the rest of us.  The same obnoxious people that think up all the insufferably fussy little craft projects on "The Kitchen" that make me reach for my remote.

It is a stupid term.  And I agree on "hack".  To me that is what my cat does when he hairballs, lol.

Over the years, there have been some silly challenges on this show and this one was right up there.  

[Lamb18]

Right, I didn't know what they meant by "hack." I thought it was some sort of knifework.

I actually liked a lot of this episode because it showed a lot of cooking. I always like the puzzle-solving part of these types of shows. There were a lot of segments where the cooks explained what they were making and how they were making it. I also notice how well they explain what they're doing in the talking heads - why don't they do as well in the demos with an audience? But I did notice David doing a lot of hand gestures even in his talking heads.

[cooksdelight]

12 hours ago, Brookside said:

 

If David is so allergic so allergic to peanuts he should ALWAYS carry an epi pen.

 

I can't stand Rusty, he reminds me of Lenny without the sleaze.

 

I think the thing with the peanut was nothing more than added fake drama. "Oh, I didn't mean to try and kill you." They can't buy soundbites like that.

[xaxat]

21 hours ago, bluepiano said:

Back in Queens, where I'm from, we would add, "I got your beef jerky right here."

By coincidence I received my Amazon jerky sampler pack on Tuesday.  Ten different kinds, beef, turkey, bacon. . . for only ten bucks.

So I really got your jerky right here.

(I don't even eat jerky. But at that price, plus a ten dollar credit on my next order of jerky, I couldn't resist.)

Edited June 28, 2017 by xaxat

[MajorWoody]

My idea of "glamping" is staying in a 4 Star hotel, and looking out the window to the woods off in the distance. 

[roseslg]

2 hours ago, MajorWoody said:

My idea of "glamping" is staying in a 4 Star hotel, and looking out the window to the woods off in the distance. 

Preach!  I grew up in a hurricane prone area where we would have no electricity, or running water for weeks.  One would have to go to a second location and line up with buckets for hours to get water.  I do not camp!  Glamping is stupid!  Just get a hotel!

 

amy was in a lose-lose situation.  She was damned if she spoke up, damned if she's didn't.  While I was hoping G&M would say more, they didn't, which doesn't surprise me.   Sort of tangential, but my former director was notorious for ignoring an idea when it came from a female and applauding it when a guy repeated it 5 minutes later.  The guys knew it, the women knew it.  My director is a woman who considers herself a feminist and flew to D.C. for the women's march, etc.  

 

Not at all surprised by Giada and Melissa.

[Surrealist]

5 hours ago, MajorWoody said:

My idea of "glamping" is staying in a 4 Star hotel, and looking out the window to the woods off in the distance. 

I was thinking the same when Giada announced the challenge.

Also, I thought "glamping" was the thing to do, like, two years ago.

[Totale]

16 minutes ago, Surrealist said:

Also, I thought "glamping" was the thing to do, like, two years ago.

Four years ago for Project Runway.  I had never heard the term before and for all I know they invented it.  Whenever they (PR) say something like "This is what all the guys and gals in the big states are doing" I get suspicious.

[Christina]

The more I think about it, the less I find Matthew to be sexist; he's just an arrogant ass. We saw him berating Cory, too, when he was insisting they needed to plate the chicken. Cory just shut him down with "No." In his talking head, Cory made it sound like Matthew kept pestering him to plate the chicken and he kept saying, "No." On his team challenge with Suzanne, he supported her making what she wanted because she failed when she had to make a dish she didn't want to make in the previous challenge. There was no reason to sabotage or "help" her because it was obvious to everyone that she was not cut out for the show and was not going to be competition.

He thought Amy was floundering and stepped in to "help," which completely derailed her. I doubt there would be any backlash on her if she told him off, as long as she didn't say something like, "Hashtag What the F* are you doing?" because saying "hashtag" is obnoxious and brings her down to his level, or stabbing him with something, since violence cannot be accepted. The viewers would cheer her for telling him to back off, and TPTB know that so the judges wouldn't have any reason to ding her for it. 

Suggesting to her that she needed to be more assertive also doesn't bother me much, because as a "Food Network Star" {gag}, she needs to be able to course correct when presenting. It reminds me of that clip someone posted of Giada on Ellen, where Ellen Degeneres and the other celebrity were screwing everything up, and Giada had to keep steering the presentation back to the cooking demonstration. I think Amy was taken off-guard by his obnoxious interference and froze. We also saw her try and squeeze in between Matthew and Cory at the end, because they were both blocking her.

I agree this show is sexist in general, and they didn't cast very good women this year, but think they always planned for Jason to go to the end and replace Damiano as a judge on baking shows, and for Cory to be the winner. Annie (? mini-Martha) may go to the end and get a place on the show with Bobby Flay and Demaris as a mini-Martha Stewart, but Nancy and Suzanne were never going to go far, and I think they knew that when they were cast. I'm not sure if they knew Cao would do as poorly as she is, but suspect they did. They certainly cast Matthew to be the villain.

The previous episode had Suzanne in a team with all men, but I believe that if there was a woman on the team, she also would have been trying to rein her in. She demanded that she be allowed to cook dessert, stepped up to do her presentation in the middle of the pack, then flailed because she couldn't get a sentence out. She stood up for herself, asserted her position, but was completely scattered and the other team members trying to help only resulted in making her worse. She did just as poorly on Star Salvation. I didn't see any ill-will or sexism toward her in that challenge. Rusty (? seriously can't remember these people's names) was quite obnoxious and belittling to her in the Beauty and the Beast challenge, because he is obnoxious and arrogant and cannot see that he is just as bad, but I don't remember seeing him be sexist to the other women. However, because I find him obnoxious and arrogant, I tune him out when he is on the screen, so he very well may be sexist.

TL:DR - In my opinion, Matthew is immature and arrogant, but not sexist. He thinks he knows better than everyone, men, women and the judges. 

[Lura]

 I was more than a little surprised that all three judges said so little to Matthew for interrupting.  After all, this wasn't the first time he thrust himself into the spotlight.  This shameful rudeness is my biggest reason for him not to win the big prize.  In fact, I'd like to see him sent home, and soon.  I can't believe that Matthew doesn't know that he's being obnoxious, but maybe he reasons that it's better to be rude and make the judges remember him.  If that's the case, I'd say he made the wrong decision!  I've noticed, too, that while contestants occasionally say that they're pleased with their food, no one brags about it like Matthew does.  I could never watch a show with Matthew hosting it.  He's like the little brat in class who always raises his hand and waves it so the teacher will call on him.  Matthew seriously needs to grow up, but I really doubt that he ever will.  Being pushy is too much a part of his personality.  I've often wondered what his parents have said or done to make him grow up with this superior attitude.

[TomCorps]

1 hour ago, Lura said:

I could never watch a show with Matthew hosting it.  He's like the little brat in class who always raises his hand and waves it so the teacher will call on him.  Matthew seriously needs to grow up, but I really doubt that he ever will.  Being pushy is too much a part of his personality.  I've often wondered what his parents have said or done to make him grow up with this superior attitude.

Matthew's a putz, but I'm pretty sure it's more than just his parents who are responsible for his "superior attitude."  Think about schools that reward every student effort as though it were worthy of a Pulitzer.  Or social media (Sir Hashtag's specialty) that rewards young people with "likes" for simply having a thought (no matter how rude, commonplace or poorly expressed) and "friends" by the millions whom they don't even know.  Or, for that matter, "reality" shows like Food Network Star that package personality in such a slick way, it's hard to find any reality in them at all.  Millennial Matthew might just be the perfect product of the medium he inhabits. 

[Blonde Gator]

2 minutes ago, TomCorps said:

Matthew's a putz, but I'm pretty sure it's more than just his parents who are responsible for his "superior attitude."  Think about schools that reward every student effort as though it were worthy of a Pulitzer.  Or social media (Sir Hashtag's specialty) that rewards young people with "likes" for simply having a thought (no matter how rude, commonplace or poorly expressed) and "friends" by the millions whom they don't even know.  Or, for that matter, "reality" shows like Food Network Star that package personality in such a slick way, it's hard to find any reality in them at all.  Millennial Matthew might just be the perfect product of the medium he inhabits. 

It would be interesting to know what his "peers" think about him.  I'd imagine the audience here is more of his parents' age.

[Surrealist]

3 hours ago, Totale said:

Four years ago for Project Runway.  I had never heard the term before and for all I know they invented it.  Whenever they (PR) say something like "This is what all the guys and gals in the big states are doing" I get suspicious.

Damn. I was two years off. I knew it was an outdated concept, but couldn't remember how outdated it was.

Like you, I get suspicious when that line is used.

The Matthew stuff had me cringing. I had hoped that he would have gained some degree of self-awareness the last time he was on the show. But, no dice. 

[Christina]

1 hour ago, Lura said:

I can't believe that Matthew doesn't know that he's being obnoxious, but maybe he reasons that it's better to be rude and make the judges remember him.  If that's the case, I'd say he made the wrong decision!

That is the part they brought him back to perform, obnoxious millennial who shows up the adults when it comes to social media. He was brought back for us to hate, because he provided so much attention the first time he was on, and most of us seem to be hate-watchers. They want him to be himself, a rude and dismissive know-it-all, and like some of the others here posted, I expect they will carry him to the end and cut him before the finale so we all cheer. 

[Surrealist]

2 hours ago, Christina said:

The more I think about it, the less I find Matthew to be sexist; he's just an arrogant ass. We saw him berating Cory, too, when he was insisting they needed to plate the chicken. Cory just shut him down with "No." In his talking head, Cory made it sound like Matthew kept pestering him to plate the chicken and he kept saying, "No." On his team challenge with Suzanne, he supported her making what she wanted because she failed when she had to make a dish she didn't want to make in the previous challenge. There was no reason to sabotage or "help" her because it was obvious to everyone that she was not cut out for the show and was not going to be competition.

He thought Amy was floundering and stepped in to "help," which completely derailed her. I doubt there would be any backlash on her if she told him off, as long as she didn't say something like, "Hashtag What the F* are you doing?" because saying "hashtag" is obnoxious and brings her down to his level, or stabbing him with something, since violence cannot be accepted. The viewers would cheer her for telling him to back off, and TPTB know that so the judges wouldn't have any reason to ding her for it. 

Suggesting to her that she needed to be more assertive also doesn't bother me much, because as a "Food Network Star" {gag}, she needs to be able to course correct when presenting. It reminds me of that clip someone posted of Giada on Ellen, where Ellen Degeneres and the other celebrity were screwing everything up, and Giada had to keep steering the presentation back to the cooking demonstration. I think Amy was taken off-guard by his obnoxious interference and froze. We also saw her try and squeeze in between Matthew and Cory at the end, because they were both blocking her.

I agree this show is sexist in general, and they didn't cast very good women this year, but think they always planned for Jason to go to the end and replace Damiano as a judge on baking shows, and for Cory to be the winner. Annie (? mini-Martha) may go to the end and get a place on the show with Bobby Flay and Demaris as a mini-Martha Stewart, but Nancy and Suzanne were never going to go far, and I think they knew that when they were cast. I'm not sure if they knew Cao would do as poorly as she is, but suspect they did. They certainly cast Matthew to be the villain.

The previous episode had Suzanne in a team with all men, but I believe that if there was a woman on the team, she also would have been trying to rein her in. She demanded that she be allowed to cook dessert, stepped up to do her presentation in the middle of the pack, then flailed because she couldn't get a sentence out. She stood up for herself, asserted her position, but was completely scattered and the other team members trying to help only resulted in making her worse. She did just as poorly on Star Salvation. I didn't see any ill-will or sexism toward her in that challenge. Rusty (? seriously can't remember these people's names) was quite obnoxious and belittling to her in the Beauty and the Beast challenge, because he is obnoxious and arrogant and cannot see that he is just as bad, but I don't remember seeing him be sexist to the other women. However, because I find him obnoxious and arrogant, I tune him out when he is on the screen, so he very well may be sexist.

TL:DR - In my opinion, Matthew is immature and arrogant, but not sexist. He thinks he knows better than everyone, men, women and the judges. 

This is exactly how I feel about Matthew. 

He's a garden variety know-it-all. I don't know that I'd call him sexist. I'll wait to see if it becomes a pattern in his subsequent interactions with the female contestants.

Edited June 29, 2017 by Surrealist

[susannot]

10 hours ago, MajorWoody said:

My idea of "glamping" is staying in a 4 Star hotel, and looking out the window to the woods off in the distance. 

I feel you.  My idea of roughing it is a hotel room without cable.

[backformore]

3 hours ago, TomCorps said:

Matthew's a putz, but I'm pretty sure it's more than just his parents who are responsible for his "superior attitude."  Think about schools that reward every student effort as though it were worthy of a Pulitzer.  Or social media (Sir Hashtag's specialty) that rewards young people with "likes" for simply having a thought (no matter how rude, commonplace or poorly expressed) and "friends" by the millions whom they don't even know.  Or, for that matter, "reality" shows like Food Network Star that package personality in such a slick way, it's hard to find any reality in them at all.  Millennial Matthew might just be the perfect product of the medium he inhabits. 

I "liked"  your post, and then immediately felt guilty for causing you to feel superior.  So I apologize for enabling you by liking your post.

[cooksdelight]

5 hours ago, Blonde Gator said:

It would be interesting to know what his "peers" think about him.  I'd imagine the audience here is more of his parents' age.

I looked on his Facebook page. The women who are fawning all over him are mothers, 20-somethings, women who might be late 30s.

WTF???

[smiley13]

Matthew can be obnoxious, but I have not seen (just this season) anything worse out of him than superior acting Martha Jr.  She has had her fair share of snarky comments and she acts like she thinks she is better than the rest of them.  And wife of the fighter pilot has had rude remarks too.

I do like Rusty, Jason, David and Cory.

[Christina]

5 hours ago, cooksdelight said:

I looked on his Facebook page. The women who are fawning all over him are mothers, 20-somethings, women who might be late 30s.

WTF???

Well, that partially explains why they brought him back. 

When I watched the trial of James Holmes, the Colorado theater shooter, there were a group of women who called themselves "Holmies" who sent him photos of themselves in jail, deposited money in his canteen account, ordered books and magazines for him, travelled to attend his trial, coordinating with others so someone would be there each day, and created websites in support of him where they insisted he was being set up. His canteen account was ultimately suspended for anyone other than his family to deposit money after a teenage girl used her parent's credit card to send money to his account, and the parents filed a challenge to the charge. 

When looking at the things posted by the "Holmies," we realized that most of them were women in their 20s and 30s, very few were men, and even fewer were teenagers. It was quite disturbing to see, because many of them had children and it felt likely that they would bring dangerous people into their lives, to the detriment of their children, especially if they had any type of fame. There were "Holmies" who felt that he shouldn't be on trial for a possible death penalty because of his mental illness, and they ended up breaking off of the main group, because even they became uncomfortable with the women trying to get his attention at the trial. I fell into a Wikipedia black hole reading about all of the different psychological terms for women attracted to men who commit crimes, are in prison and have any modicum of fame. I then joked that if I was arrested, my internet history would be difficult to explain. ; )

To bring it back to Matthew, since he has a bit of fame, whether good or bad, certain people will be attracted to him. He has a fanbase consisting of a demographic that advertisers believe are the most valuable, and those who don't love him, will watch to see him fail. It's a win-win for them. 

This is completely different than those of us with attractions to Hubert Keller, Eric Ripert, and the like, because they also exude intelligence, competence, and general pleasantness, and we are NOT crackpots!!!! As opposed to those who are attracted to an immature pest who was cast on the show to punish us for watching. He has toned himself down greatly from his first appearance, since it didn't get him the positive attention he desired, and he seemed to expect people to support him against the old meanies, and that didn't happen. He is still obnoxious and immature so he can't completely eliminate his jerkiness. That would require a measure of self-reflection he doesn't possess. 

TL:DR - Huh, I got nothing other than we are NOT crackpots! 

[Carolina Girl]

On 6/26/2017 at 5:12 PM, wings707 said:

I was really annoyed when Melissa told Amy that she was just making potatoes out of potatoes.

I so wanted her to stay "what would you LIKE me to make out of it?  Blueberry muffins?"

[cooksdelight]

Now I'm wondering if FN peruses everyone's Facebook page when they apply.

[smiley13]

1 hour ago, cooksdelight said:

Now I'm wondering if FN peruses everyone's Facebook page when they apply.

I would hope that they are thoroughly reviewing their social media.  Applying for the show is like a job interview.

[schnauzergirl]

I just saw Sunday's "glamping" episode -- thanks FN for expanding my vocabulary of useless words.  Matthew is creepy on so many levels and I'm wondering if there's off-camera feedback that he's simply ignoring because he is, after all, Matthew, center of everything.  Amy didn't show authority, but her dish was good. I was surprised that Randy fell apart.  Addie did her usual spiel, but even I, a so-so cook, knew those potatoes needed more than she was giving them,   Trace was the right choice to go home.  Cory, Jason, or David for the win.  

[Stella Rose]

I thought the word 'glamiping' in and of itself was the most annoying thing I could ever hear.  Then I heard - and saw Giada say it with those huge teeth, and honestly - I shuddered.  

I think I will see LBH and her giant teeth in my nightmares.  She will be chasing me through the woods with a huge, shiny, empty fork and shouting glamping over and over...   Cackling like a witch.

I may never sleep again.

[Stella Rose]

14 hours ago, TomCorps said:

Matthew's a putz, but I'm pretty sure it's more than just his parents who are responsible for his "superior attitude."  Think about schools that reward every student effort as though it were worthy of a Pulitzer.  Or social media (Sir Hashtag's specialty) that rewards young people with "likes" for simply having a thought (no matter how rude, commonplace or poorly expressed) and "friends" by the millions whom they don't even know.  Or, for that matter, "reality" shows like Food Network Star that package personality in such a slick way, it's hard to find any reality in them at all.  Millennial Matthew might just be the perfect product of the medium he inhabits. 

I know I shouldn't reward you with a like...  but   :-)

[Blonde Gator]

10 hours ago, cooksdelight said:

I looked on his Facebook page. The women who are fawning all over him are mothers, 20-somethings, women who might be late 30s.

WTF???

Did you leave him a little "love" note, too?  (sarcasm...., what I mean is did you tell him to not be such a snotty jerk?)

[cooksdelight]

Nah, let him be his usual self.

[Totale]

6 hours ago, smiley13 said:

I would hope that they are thoroughly reviewing their social media.  Applying for the show is like a job interview.

You'd think they'd have learned their lesson after sad (and expensive to them) events of the past.

[susannot]

9 hours ago, Christina said:

There were "Holmies" who felt that he shouldn't be on trial for a possible death penalty because of his mental illness, and they ended up breaking off of the main group, because even they became uncomfortable with the women trying to get his attention at the trial. I fell into a Wikipedia black hole reading about all of the different psychological terms for women attracted to men who commit crimes, are in prison and have any modicum of fame. I then joked that if I was arrested, my internet history would be difficult to explain. ; )

Wow, that's really twisted.  What can explain sad, desperate women like that?  The same thing happened a generation ago with, believe it or not, Charles Manson.

[Lura]

Unless TPTB intend to cast Matthew in some wicked capacity (show host?), I think they're saving him on the show for a particularly mean dismissal.  The closer he gets to the end, it seems the more obnoxious he becomes.  You can tell that he tastes success and firmly believes he'll have it.  I would not rule out the possibility that the producers want him on this show for as long as possible to build up interest in "what happens to Matthew."  Otherwise, it seems that he would have been weeded out by now for his attitude.  His cooking seems nowhere near a winner.

[Lura]

Quote

Quote

Quote

On ‎6‎/‎28‎/‎2017 at 6:58 PM, TomCorps said:

Matthew's a putz, but I'm pretty sure it's more than just his parents who are responsible for his "superior attitude."  

 

Oh, boy, have I messed up posting this quote or not?!!

Thanks, TomCorps, for bringing up so many other ways in which kids develop into insufferable braggarts.  People always tend to blame the parents, although these traits usually do begin at very young ages.  Believe it or not, even children's TV can contribute if the child is vulnerable and the host keeps telling the kids certain things that boost confidence, such as "You're the best!"  Seems like nothing's sacred anymore.

Still, I would think that many people (friends, employers, etc.) would have put a bug in Matthew's ear that he needed to change his attitude.  It really does work against him.

[Terrafamilia]

Hmm... I'm envisioning a segment of The Kitchen called "Thank you, Matthew" in which one of the hosts, most likely Zakarian, (barely) tolerantly entertains Matthew's assistance on some dish and ends the bit with that as the catch-phrase.

[candall]

I thought it was a fairly creative challenge, although they really gave themselves a lot of wiggle room on "camping food basics."  (Could someone throw one of those ribeyes on the grill for me, please?)

Tangy pickle-flavor fried chicken with beef jerky gravy does not sound appealing.  But I don't know why that fast food chain is putting ribs on their burger either.

The bell pepper full of tomato paste made me laugh.

[mlp]

Quote

I thought it was a fairly creative challenge, although they really gave themselves a lot of wiggle room on "camping food basics." 

They certainly did.  I thought the ingredients they were given fell into some no man's land between rustic family camping and picnic basket on the lawn with white wine and paté.  I will say that I'm glad we're about done with the ugly word "glamping" which looks to me like something a jabberwock might do and definitely doesn't make me think of food.

[cooksdelight]

47 minutes ago, candall said:

Tangy pickle-flavor fried chicken with beef jerky gravy does not sound appealin

It's not tangy once you cook it. I use dill pickle juice and it makes the chicken a LOT juicier than usual.

I was hoping they'd all get the same items, that even people who do high-end camping would take with them. Ground sirloin, gourmet hot dogs, special buns, a variety of chips, cookies, corn on the cob, baking potatoes, normal condiments. Ribs would have been a great challenge, to get them cooked and tender in a short amount of time. I've never in my life taken canned vegetables on a camping weekend.

Edited July 2, 2017 by cooksdelight

[leighdear]

Supposedly, the pickle juice marinade is what gives some versions of Chik Fil A it's taste.  Quite a few of the "Secret Recipe" sites seem to think this, and many cite former employees as passing on the info.  

http://www.thekitchn.com/the-secret-to-chick-fil-as-super-juicy-chicken-is-in-your-pantry-227382

https://www.clarkscondensed.com/recipe/copycat-chick-fil-chicken-sandwich/

[LiveenLetLive]

ugh Melissa...I just can't.

[Hotel Diva]

Ok, it seems that Addie was in the bottom this episode. Is she a losing version of Donald Trump?

Bye, Helmet Bieber, it was delightful to see you cook, it's just the food was way blander than it was usually.

Okay, I have stated in previous topics that Rusty was the only person that seemed annoying, but now I think Matthew is a big pain in the butthole. Why is it okay to interrupt Amy while she's presenting? Why is it okay to get in the way of Amy's personal space and invade it? I mean, that not only sounds like bullying to me, but it also sounds like sexism. Like men interrupt women, and women interrupt men, and so on and so on. I will continue jabbering  about Matthew until he really leaves, because I can't wait to see him leave.