KariAna
January 18, 2007 - 12:18 PM
You question has been answered. The chicken wings were
not raw. They had been cooked. Unfortunately the slow
marinating and slow cooking made the chicken wings have
the slimy consistency of being raw. Read Chef Tom's Blog.
He has explained in completely.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And I quote from Tom:
Marcel’s chicken wasn’t great, but he had actually made a stab at chicken confit -- a preparation often used with duck leg, in which the meat is cured in spices and slowly cooked in its own fat. If the chicken confit had worked, it would have been unusual and delicious. Most likely Marcel cooked the wings at a temperature high enough to make them safe, but the faulty execution gave the dish a soft, undercooked texture and appearance. And though the judge’s confit discussion did not make it into the episode, we discussed it and agreed that, like Sam’s unsuccessful watermelon dish, Marcel’s chicken showed a stab at doing something interesting. Also, Marcel was responsible for the vegetable tempura, which all agreed was delicious.
"Most likely Marcel cooked the wings at a temperature high enough to make them safe..." Most Likely? Hmmm sounds like damage control to me. Especially since it was described as Raw.
Who said they were raw?
At least one of the judges said "raw".
And let me reiterate my question because the people who were defending the chicken with Tom's Blog have yet to answer it.
If someone gave you a piece of chicken and told you it was very tasty and was "most likey" (Tom's words not mine) cooked safely would you eat it?
Amazon
January 18, 2007 - 12:20 PM
Quote:
Hi Foo Foo, RSH,daverocks and katie, nice seeing yall again.
What gets me about this episode is why is Elia being held responsible for Marcels well being? She is not his nanny and from what I remember, she wasnt even in the room. I have no clue if she knew what was going on.
Some wanted charges pressed but what if Marcel chose not to press charges? Isnt it his call?
Also, the producers proved how unimportant the health,mental and physical well being and reputation of the chefs is to them.
There is a heatwave, people did die. Production did not make sure the rooms the chefs stayed in had working A/C and by all accounts, only the common room A/C worked. A/C had to be turned off while they cooked so as not to interfere with the microphones.
Mikey needed an emergency dental procedure. They found some back alley dentist who did a terrible job and Mikey himself wanted to call 911.
Long shoots with no food or bathroom breaks.
Tobacco and booze were well stocked for the chefs.
Hm, A/C isnt important or a decent health professional but Marlboros and Bud Light are?
Nice job Bravo.
brillke
1) Where do you get the impression that Elia is being held responsible for Marcel's well-being? What she IS being held responsible for is being a collaborator in a physical assault on a sleeping man. She knew it was going to happen, she heard it going on, and did nothing to stop it. That is what she's being held responsible for.
2) Of course it's Marcel's choice whether or not to press charges. Unlike the rest of the bully-gang, he seems to be above that--which is lucky for them and Bravo/TCproduction.
3) I agree with the actions and priorities of the TC production staff. Here's my rant about it.
The question that no one has answered yet is this: what part did the production staff play in the increasingly harmful hazing of Marcel, and were they aware of the impending assault on Marcel?
It could be understood if by inexperience (this only being the second season) a bunch of immature, unethical chefs had been selected to compete. I don't know how unethical chefs could be weeded out, short of giving them an MMPI psychological battery of tests.
But more than one chef who has been sent home has indicated that the production staff, to some degree, has actively instigated some of the drama.
When I was in school, due to my height and basic amazonian nature, I was usually the first to rush to the defense of someone who was being picked on. Sometimes these victims turned into friends, and I can tell you that a victim of a hazing incident like Marcel suffered bears the marks for a long time. Worse, once it is known to the rest of the victim's peers, it further marks the victim as somehow wrong for having become the victim of thugs. Somehow he/she could have prevented it--somehow he/she caused it--somehow he/she is so different as to cause others to gang up on them.
If the production staff of TC cannot sort out what happened to have produced such a disaster of a season, then perhaps the show should end.
This season's TC was not a good reflection on TC or Bravo, and was often painful to watch for the viewer.
I think the production staff should get it right or they should pack their knives and go.
brillke
January 18, 2007 - 12:21 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Again, blaming the victim is a despicable tactic.
Are you saying that in your average restaurant kitchen, which is male-dominated, that they would conspire to physically attack with the intentions to deface someone in the kitchen they didn't like because of the things he said?
You're really saying that? Really?
No, someone would just pick a fight with him and then beat the hell out of him in the parking lot after work. I worked in bars and restaraunts for twenty years and I saw it happen several times.
Maybe I live in and work in rough places but Ive seen many an ass-whoopin between co-workers.
I wont even mention how pilots get their wings in the AF. I have family in 3 of the 4 branches of our armed forces and they would have done far worse then we saw on tv. Is it right? Never said that but just the way the real world is.
brillke
Stella88
January 18, 2007 - 12:22 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Everyone is getting on the men about this episode of abuse, but what about Elia? All through this competition, she has failed to step up. Sure, she is nice to everyone, but does she ever do the right thing? She should have never let Mia leave the show on her account. Instead, she just stood there rubbing the bridge of her nose like she always does when there is a any sort of confrontation. Did she ever tell the others to lay off Marcel? Which is worse....a sin of commission or omission?
I can't remember the name of the episode, but it was the one at the fire station--Elia told Marcel that she would always stand up for him. But, last night when Cliff was holding him down and llan called for her, she said "I can't right now!" She may not have wanted to be a part of shaving his head, but she also didn't want to be a part of standing up for him either.
Tom C, in his blog, also points out that she knew what was going on and did nothing to stop it.
In one of her interviews she repeatedly emphasizes that she is a Christian and studies the Bible every day. I find it offensive that, after her actions on TC, she wraps herself in the cloak of the Christian God because one thing is clear: if she is a walking billboard for Christianity, then the world would be better off without it.
Nice use a dumb stunt on a reality tv show to trash an entire religion. Simply fabulous.
I don't hold it against Christianity what Elia did. She seems to have mental problems, so, I hope she gets help from the Lord and/or mental health professionals.
Their actions reminded me of that group of 13 year olds who beat up a schoolmate, filmed it, and put it on YouTube. The
moral compasses of these collective four don't amount to the worst person I know.
I wouldn't associate with any of those numbskulls, let alone go eat at their restaurants. I can't stand the idea that any of them even will win. It bugs me that the four are going to Hawaii. They don't deserve anything but a bus ticket back to their hack jobs in Nowheresville.
I guess Marcel deserves to win, only by being the only nearly human person among the other two-faced, bullying and morally bankrupt gargoiles.
Holster
January 18, 2007 - 12:23 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Again, blaming the victim is a despicable tactic.
Are you saying that in your average restaurant kitchen, which is male-dominated, that they would conspire to physically attack with the intentions to deface someone in the kitchen they didn't like because of the things he said?
You're really saying that? Really?
No, someone would just pick a fight with him and then beat the hell out of him in the parking lot after work. I worked in bars and restaraunts for twenty years and I saw it happen several times.
Maybe I live in and work in rough places but Ive seen many an ass-whoopin between co-workers.
I wont even mention how pilots get their wings in the AF. I have family in 3 of the 4 branches of our armed forces and they would have done far worse then we saw on tv. Is it right? Never said that but just the way the real world is.
brillke
Some accept the lowest common denominator in life, some rise above it. And some just accept it as "reality."
meimeikitty
January 18, 2007 - 12:23 PM
Quote:
Just jumping in to say...
First: let me say, the trailers made this whole mess seem a lot worse than it was going to be. The speculation made on the boards was for naught. Not all shaved their heads and Marcel was not bald in the last episode.
Second: I totally do not approve of what happened. If you all remember I was one that felt Frank’s threats towards Marcel were not appropriate and he should have been spoken to about making those threats.
Third: The whole group was involved in what happened, Elia included. When Cliff called for her to come into the room from what I assume she was still in the bathroom, she responded she could not for some reason only she knows.
Fourth: Since these people have shown they cannot handle liquor, then as has been suggested, a liquor budget should not be available from Bravo/Top Chef in the future. If the contestants want to drink let them deposit money with Top Chef and let them draw on that money. Let Bravo/Top Chef set up accounts for them at the local liquor store. If they choose not to deposit the money then they should not drink. I have a feeling if they had to pay for all the liquor they consumed not much drinking would be going on. When Michael bought the liquor during that one challenge out of his food budget, the producers should have taken it away from him as a violation of the rules applying to the FOOD Budget. (I am sure there are rules about the food budget, since there seems to be rules for everything else.)
Fifth: Marcel handled the situation with dignity and should be commended for that. That does not negate his being in each of the contestants ears, moaning and telling them how to do things in the kitchen or how wonderful his education was. His snide remarks probably precipatated ted this whole mess. As I said I do not under any circumstances condone the actions of the group at all.
Sixth: I personally feel none of the contestants will find it easy to find a job after this, Marcel included. Marcel for his constant remarks (behavior) and the rest for their behavior regarding the incident on Top Chef.
Seventh: Since this has probably destroyed all of their careers, I wonder if Bravo/Top Chef should have aired the scuffle. Not that they did not have every right to but maybe they should have considered the outcome to the chefs. Do not misunderstand me, they had every right to air the segment, my question is should they have aired it. It has destroyed the entire group, the remaining group no exceptions. I think we have heard that Michael did not get his job back, was that because of the show? He was not around for the “attempted shearing,” but he also did not like Marcel, which was apparent.
What this all has done to their careers is sad. Not that it can be justified, their behavior was deplorable. It makes possible contestants in the future question whether they really want to be on the show. No one can predict how the other contestants will handle things, and guilt by association is a strong force. I think by airing the segment by Bravo/Top Chef they may have just sealed the fate of the show. Maybe they will come out of this untouched but I doubt it. Maybe it will show Bravo/Top Chef they need to provide better accommodations for the contestants. Who knows what will happen, but I think there is a lesson in there for everyone.
Do I think Marcel should be the next top chef, no not at all. He possibly could be a top chef in the future but right now he is too immature on a whole to handle that kind of responsibility. None of the chefs, because of this last episode, are really top chef material. I am a Sam follower but he could have tried to stop the scuffle and he chose to sit back on the sidelines. Out of the entire group Sam is the only one that has shown any type of leadership when team challenges have occurred so for that I will have to say, he probably is the best candidate. This is really a sad cast of characters, and it is even sadder what happened to the group dynamic. Just my take on the situation and probably not worth the time I spent writing this.
Though I disagree with some of it I think this is a very smart, reasonable post. I'm a Marcel supporter, but this entire cast is sad.
My personal opinion is despite their assertions to the contrary the producers of this show LOVE this type of controversy because it guarantees interests and ratings. Otherwise, why would they stick the contestants in untenable conditions but give them access to plenty of alcohol? Uh, can anyone say 'recipe for disaster?' The producers should be ashamed of themselves. Not that they are. They are probably planning to put next season's contestants on an iceberg in the arctic and make them prepare whale blubber while being jabbed with spears.
dasspipe
January 18, 2007 - 12:23 PM
Marcel is such a pussy! It's not like Cliff was throwing punches at him at all. I thought for sure Marcel was going to be man enough to tell the producers "you know what, it was a joke, I got a little too butt-hurt over it, Cliff should stay"...
WhataJoke
January 18, 2007 - 12:24 PM
Yes they had been cooked but had they been Cooked safely was my and still is my question. Tom's responce. "Most Likey" wouldn't get me to eat that chicken.
Holster
January 18, 2007 - 12:26 PM
Quote:
Marcel is such a pussy! It's not like Cliff was throwing punches at him at all. I thought for sure Marcel was going to be man enough to tell the producers "you know what, it was a joke, I got a little too butt-hurt over it, Cliff should stay"...
Thanks for that illuminating insight. You have made the world a better place.
meimeikitty
January 18, 2007 - 12:28 PM
Quote:
Marcel is such a pussy! It's not like Cliff was throwing punches at him at all. I thought for sure Marcel was going to be man enough to tell the producers "you know what, it was a joke, I got a little too butt-hurt over it, Cliff should stay"...
Are you for real? First and foremost this is a contest where people win money! Why in the world would Marcel ask the producers for Cliff to stay, especially after Cliff jumped him? If Cliff leaves Marcel is that much closer to winning.
sizzler
January 18, 2007 - 12:28 PM
Quote:
Quote:
WELL IT WENT HOW I THOUGHT IT WOULD
NO SURPRISES
TAKE CARE OVER THERE
ALOHA
HAVE FUN
Hey JMe, jumping in here because there is no way in HELL I am going to read over 300 posts!! SO, here goes my opinion.
First, for some reason, was feeling very let-down after this episode. Partly because I felt that Ilan should have been reprimanded in some way for his antics behind the camera..."come on Sam, get the clippers, Cliff has him down..." etc. He is such a scary little thing! To have that much hate for a person, WOW!!! Definately need the psycho music playing right about now. AND, Sam should have been called out on this too. He just sat there laughing, and even though he SAID he was uncomfortable with what was going on, he still did NOTHING. You can't tell me that they ALL didn't realize what was happening was wrong. Elia, not sure where she was, but heard her in the back ground saying something like "I can't do that" (not a direct quote) ALL PARTIES SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUNISHED FOR THIS!!!
Now, the food. What ever gave Ilan the idea that 'CHICKEN LIVER BON BONS' was a good idea!! Holy crap, that was just GROSS! The other QF dishes were ok, nothing special in my eyes, but way better than Ilan's disaster!
I know Cliff was probably going home anyway, but because of his assinine behavior, he did not leave with dignity. I still think he should have left instead of Mike, even though Tom said i was because he contributed the least to the EC.
Someone said that Cliff knocked Marcel's tray of salmon on the floor. Did he? Not sure, but he did say he saw it falling and it didn't look like he did anything to stop it. However, Marcel thought quickly and saved his dish by reducing the portion size. Nice going Marcel!
Elia says she took all of the offered cooking courses at some fancy schmancy school, yet she didn't know that cream needed to be COLD to whip?!!!!!! Good heavens girl, common sense should have told you that. She does not have what it takes to be TC, as someone pointed out..."I quit", "I give up" not TC comments.
As for the TRUE Top Chef???? Sam MAY be a better chef than Marcel, but in the face of all the ridicule and harassment that Marcel took, he showed a maturity that the others only dream of posessing. Sam showed his colors by sitting by and not stopping the Cliff/Marcel?Ilan incident, knowing full well that it was out of control. SO, I do hope Marcel wins. Because, TC means to be able to keep control of yourself in trying times, and NONE of the others have proven that they are capable of that.
Long, yes, but will now step off my soap box, and wait for the disagreements/agreements to come pouring in.
GEE SIZ
THANKS
NO "I TOLD YOU SO S"
SOUNDS LIKE IT GOT YOU A BIT WORKED UP
THOUGHT IT WAS PASSEA
PART OF THE ONGOING SAGA OF TC
BUT IT LOOKS LIKE MARCEL IS IN DEEP
NEXT WEEK
BUT I THINK IT IS ELIA THAT MIGHT GET SENT PACKING
TAKE CARE OVER THERE
ALOHA
HAVE FUN
Naw, Cupcake. No I TOLD YOU SO'S. Was too much fun for that, besides, you know I am ALWAYS right...lol
After reading some of the posts, (way to many to read, and sick of hearing about that stupid chicken!) Was just so irritated that people acted like it was a big fun party. (Not everyone mind you) But as someone else pointed out. It is only fun and games when you are friends, and these morons proved time and time again that they were NOT friends of Marcel. LOL I didn't even post until this morning. Read a few last night, saw all the "screaming" and said to myself, "Self? Let's go snuggle up to Hubby and the dog...much better company"...so Self went to bed...and snuggled up to Hubby and the dog.
WhataJoke
January 18, 2007 - 12:30 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Again, blaming the victim is a despicable tactic.
Are you saying that in your average restaurant kitchen, which is male-dominated, that they would conspire to physically attack with the intentions to deface someone in the kitchen they didn't like because of the things he said?
You're really saying that? Really?
No, someone would just pick a fight with him and then beat the hell out of him in the parking lot after work. I worked in bars and restaraunts for twenty years and I saw it happen several times.
Maybe I live in and work in rough places but Ive seen many an ass-whoopin between co-workers.
I wont even mention how pilots get their wings in the AF. I have family in 3 of the 4 branches of our armed forces and they would have done far worse then we saw on tv. Is it right? Never said that but just the way the real world is.
brillke
Some accept the lowest common denominator in life, some rise above it. And some just accept it as "reality."
Actually you should try accepting it as "reality TV" and get over it. Or is there someone else's character you would like to analyse/assassinate?
SoonersRock
January 18, 2007 - 12:30 PM
Quote:
I believe you completely missed the point. It seems that you were trying to say that Marcel would get much worse treatment in another situation. I disproved that point. I also do not believe that sports teams, the army, or blue collar kitchens treat their fellow workers with such contempt. That whole assertion is rather elitist.
A) Actually, even though it's true IMO that he probably get up in a real life setting, that wasn't my point. I was just trying to introduce a little perspective to those posters comparing this to a rape for instance. That was my point.
Your benevolent husband's personal experiences notwithstanding, guys tend to get into fights when they don't like each other. I hate to break it to you.
C) Women do it to, only not physically. Women will eviscerate socially and psychologically other women who don't fit into the group. This aspect of human nature is the core basis of all reality shows.
Quote:
Cliff acted like an a**. He apologized. Marcel accepted. Period.
With that I agree completely as I stated previously about 10 pages ago. Cliff was stupid, what he did was wrong and he got kicked off the show for it. All I am saying now is let's not over dramatize it shall we?
Amazon
January 18, 2007 - 12:32 PM
Quote:
"Do you actually believe that any of those involved in the gang attack on Marcel should carry the title of top chef?
Is being part of a bully-gang your idea of the requirements for top chef?
I agree with Tom C--the rest of them should have been drop-kicked off the show like yesterday's compost, and Marcel should have won by default.
I think allowing the rest of them to continue degrades the Top Chef show and those involved in it. It's like giving an endorsement for bully-gang behavior in a top chef."
--------------------------------------
What I saw was a HUMAN BEING make an incredibly stupid mistake while drunk off his ass. I saw that same human take his punishment like a man and apologize for his very stupid mistake. I saw Marcel accept that apology. If Marcel is willing to accept it and move on, who am I to argue with him?
I am truly honored to be surrounded by so many perfect human beings who have never royally [censored] up and had to take their lumps.
You didn't answer the question and, indeed, try to throw a few red herrings around.
Come on. Either you believe the bully-gang's actions are part of what being a TC is required or not. You indicated in the post to which I replied, but which you did not post, that you didn't think Marcel should be named TC. Of those who are left, who should, then?
Here's your red herrings:
1) It wasn't ONE HUMAN BEING who did it...it was one who actually did the work, but three others (two of who were in the room at the same time) conspired and collaborated. Cliff didn't dream this up on his own and didn't do it without the encouragement and support of the others.
Related to this is your attempt to make it seem like they have all "paid their lumps." Bull****. Cliff was sent home. Sam, Ilan and Elia, all co-conspirators and collaborators in the assault, get to go to Hawaii.
2) Using the "the-alcohol-made-them-do-it" argument is also a red herring since the vast majority of people who get roaring drunk do not form a bully-gang and assault a sleeping colleague. It wasn't the alcohol--it was the moral character of those involved.
3) Raising the "nobody's perfect" excuse is also a red herring. Whether or not any poster is perfect is completely irrelevant to what the TC bully-gang did. None of us have held ourselves forth as being of TC material. None of us were on the show last night and involved in the bully-gang assault on Marcel.
sizzler
January 18, 2007 - 12:32 PM
I see your point but let me answer this as you might:
Was your head so far up your arse that you didn't see the rare chix and then send it back..Whadjya eat it for in the first place stoonad....lol
LOL good question. It was Chicken Lo Mein. Most of the chicken was bite sized and I never bothered to cut into it or check it till we looked at the left overs after we got back from El Hospital. And trust me if my head was up my ass at the time it was quickly and violently extracated by Uncle Sal.
Oh silly.....That wasn't raw chix..That was raw cat.
It'll do it evey time....lolololol
YIKES KRISTI
WHERES MC AND MEI MEI???????
TAKE CARE OVER THERE
ALOHA
HAVE FUN
ROTFLMAO!!! good one JMe...and ...where are Maui and MeiMei???
Amazon
January 18, 2007 - 12:34 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Right or wrong it's just the way things are. Plop Marcel down on a construction crew and let him run around pissing everyone off for a couple of days and see what happens to him. They tend to have their own means of "conflict resolution" in such settings.
Thanks for that uplifting insight. Isn't there a Muslim you want to torture somewhere? How many aliases do you have on this board anyway???
Can't wait for your witty response. Don't delay or disappoint!
Dont you feel your Muslim comment was a bit much?
brillke
It's not her fault because she was drunk...no, because it was the original poster's fault and they've already paid their lumps...no, wait--it's because none of us are perfect here that she's not at fault.
Trying to figure out which of your excuses to use here...
sizzler
January 18, 2007 - 12:35 PM
I see your point but let me answer this as you might:
Was your head so far up your arse that you didn't see the rare chix and then send it back..Whadjya eat it for in the first place stoonad....lol
LOL good question. It was Chicken Lo Mein. Most of the chicken was bite sized and I never bothered to cut into it or check it till we looked at the left overs after we got back from El Hospital. And trust me if my head was up my ass at the time it was quickly and violently extracated by Uncle Sal.
Oh silly.....That wasn't raw chix..That was raw cat.
It'll do it evey time....lolololol
YIKES KRISTI
WHERES MC AND MEI MEI???????
TAKE CARE OVER THERE
ALOHA
HAVE FUN
Here is me. I'm still in shock over last night's episode. Wow.
WOW MeiMei. Glad to see you are alright.. was worried you done got et!
dasspipe
January 18, 2007 - 12:35 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Marcel is such a pussy! It's not like Cliff was throwing punches at him at all. I thought for sure Marcel was going to be man enough to tell the producers "you know what, it was a joke, I got a little too butt-hurt over it, Cliff should stay"...
Thanks for that illuminating insight. You have made the world a better place.
Thanks for the sarcastic response to my opinion- it is MY opinion after all. Marcel gets put in a headlock and he feels the need to sleep on the bathroom floor? Too bad Ilan didn't complain that Marcel shoved him during his rampage out the door- that's assault too!
Amazon
January 18, 2007 - 12:36 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
In one of her interviews she repeatedly emphasizes that she is a Christian and studies the Bible every day. I find it offensive that, after her actions on TC, she wraps herself in the cloak of the Christian God because one thing is clear: if she is a walking billboard for Christianity, then the world would be better off without it.
People have been using religion/God to cover up their [censored] since forever. Nothing new there. Just adds a bit more soil to the brat pack's dinginess. Elia is from one of the wealthiest families in Mexico CIty; she can afford to be a hypocrite. Just as she could afford letting Mia sacrifice herself...even though Mia has more integrity in her pinkie than ELia has ever had and could really use the money. She and Ilan make a great pair.
http://mcrumistudio.com/hawaii4o.jpg
You two make quite a pair.
Considering Mia's actions during Sugargate I find it highly comical that you refer to her integrity. But hey don't let the facts get in the way of Slandering the "Rich" girl.
Listen to Mia's version of Sugargate on Chow..It's totally diff than what we saw she says.
Again...who do we believe??
In one of Mike's interviews, he said that Betty totally cheated...that they get EXTENSIVE, multipage instructions for each challenge that sometimes take an hour to review. Mike said that there was no way she wasn't aware of the rules.
meimeikitty
January 18, 2007 - 12:37 PM
Quote:
Quote:
I believe you completely missed the point. It seems that you were trying to say that Marcel would get much worse treatment in another situation. I disproved that point. I also do not believe that sports teams, the army, or blue collar kitchens treat their fellow workers with such contempt. That whole assertion is rather elitist.
A) Actually, even though it's true IMO that he probably get up in a real life setting, that wasn't my point. I was just trying to introduce a little perspective to those posters comparing this to a rape for instance. That was my point.
Your benevolent husband's personal experiences notwithstanding, guys tend to get into fights when they don't like each other. I hate to break it to you.
C) Women do it to, only not physically. Women will eviscerate socially and psychologically other women who don't fit into the group. This aspect of human nature is the core basis of all reality shows.
Quote:
Cliff acted like an a**. He apologized. Marcel accepted. Period.
With that I agree completely as I stated previously about 10 pages ago. Cliff was stupid, what he did was wrong and he got kicked off the show for it. All I am saying now is let's not over dramatize it shall we?
I've been around guys who fight, guys of rough character and guys who play practical jokes. And I hate to break it to YOU, but women fight as well and do the same nasty, stupid things that guys do.
But most grown-ups agree that those actions are stupid and try to avoid them. They don't justify the actions. Your first statement was that construction workers would treat him differently. I do think my husband is 'benevolent' (and yes, I know you were being snide) and I don't think most adults of any profession act like this group of chefs. You're backpedaling a lot on that original statement. If you were wrong to generalize you should just say so.
Holster
January 18, 2007 - 12:37 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Marcel is such a pussy! It's not like Cliff was throwing punches at him at all. I thought for sure Marcel was going to be man enough to tell the producers "you know what, it was a joke, I got a little too butt-hurt over it, Cliff should stay"...
Thanks for that illuminating insight. You have made the world a better place.
Thanks for the sarcastic response to my opinion- it is MY opinion after all. Marcel gets put in a headlock and he feels the need to sleep on the bathroom floor? Too bad Ilan didn't complain that Marcel shoved him during his rampage out the door- that's assault too!
Two illuminating insights in a row! The world is now better twice over! We thank you.
lem0n
January 18, 2007 - 12:39 PM
Not only Mike's interview but Betty's interview on chow.com was illuminating. Betty claimed she didnt even use splenda in the first place, she claims she used less suger the first time. I saw clearly on a rerun of that episode that she said she uses splenda. That's outright dishonest so cheating isn't too much of a stretch.
Amazon
January 18, 2007 - 12:41 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Again, blaming the victim is a despicable tactic.
Are you saying that in your average restaurant kitchen, which is male-dominated, that they would conspire to physically attack with the intentions to deface someone in the kitchen they didn't like because of the things he said?
You're really saying that? Really?
No, someone would just pick a fight with him and then beat the hell out of him in the parking lot after work. I worked in bars and restaraunts for twenty years and I saw it happen several times.
I cringe to think what kind of establishments you worked in. If that happened nowdays, everyone involved would be fired simply because the restaruant would be liable for fostering a hostile work environment.
But--your illogical comments aside--the only comparison that is valid is a comparison similar to the environment the show is replicating...which is one where top chefs are working, preparing gourmet food (mostly) for high-scale clients (mostly). They are holding themselves forth as top chefs--not construction workers, not basebal players, etc.
sizzler
January 18, 2007 - 12:42 PM
Quote:
Jumping in to say I am now actively rooting for Marcel (even though I believe Sam will probably win it).
Why? Not because everyone picks on him. Not because Cliff throttled him in his sleep. Because he made me lmao in last night's episode. When Padma said to the chefs, "Didn't anyone tell Cliff to stop last night?" Marcel said with a wry smile, "I did." That was funny! For him to have a good attitude and a decent sense of humor after what was done to him shows a good deal of character. Plus he was very gracious in accepting Cliff's apology. Plus he didn't run crying to the producers when he was attacked (and yes, I consider it an attack). Bravo Marcel!
When the show started I was rooting for Cliff. I can't believe he messed up this chance of a lifetime by this stupid prank. True, he probably would have been asked to leave this episode anyway, but at least he would have gone out remembered as a worthy contestant rather than a bully. Yick.
OHG-ROTFLMAO I forgot about that, when Padma asked if anyone asked him to stop...(gawd, now I can't stop giggling...) It was PRICELESS and I can't believe I forgot about it. He deserves an award for that!!
WhataJoke
January 18, 2007 - 12:43 PM
Quote:
Quote:
"Do you actually believe that any of those involved in the gang attack on Marcel should carry the title of top chef?
Is being part of a bully-gang your idea of the requirements for top chef?
I agree with Tom C--the rest of them should have been drop-kicked off the show like yesterday's compost, and Marcel should have won by default.
I think allowing the rest of them to continue degrades the Top Chef show and those involved in it. It's like giving an endorsement for bully-gang behavior in a top chef."
--------------------------------------
What I saw was a HUMAN BEING make an incredibly stupid mistake while drunk off his ass. I saw that same human take his punishment like a man and apologize for his very stupid mistake. I saw Marcel accept that apology. If Marcel is willing to accept it and move on, who am I to argue with him?
I am truly honored to be surrounded by so many perfect human beings who have never royally [censored] up and had to take their lumps.
You didn't answer the question and, indeed, try to throw a few red herrings around.
Come on. Either you believe the bully-gang's actions are part of what being a TC is required or not. You indicated in the post to which I replied, but which you did not post, that you didn't think Marcel should be named TC. Of those who are left, who should, then?
Here's your red herrings:
1) It wasn't ONE HUMAN BEING who did it...it was one who actually did the work, but three others (two of who were in the room at the same time) conspired and collaborated. Cliff didn't dream this up on his own and didn't do it without the encouragement and support of the others.
Related to this is your attempt to make it seem like they have all "paid their lumps." Bull****. Cliff was sent home. Sam, Ilan and Elia, all co-conspirators and collaborators in the assault, get to go to Hawaii.
2) Using the "the-alcohol-made-them-do-it" argument is also a red herring since the vast majority of people who get roaring drunk do not form a bully-gang and assault a sleeping colleague. It wasn't the alcohol--it was the moral character of those involved.
3) Raising the "nobody's perfect" excuse is also a red herring. Whether or not any poster is perfect is completely irrelevant to what the TC bully-gang did. None of us have held ourselves forth as being of TC material. None of us were on the show last night and involved in the bully-gang assault on Marcel.
None of us have held ourselves forth as being of TC material, but you and others see fit to make gross generalizations about the character of people you have never met. How would you like it if you were judged as such?
Amazon you called me a liar and were proven wrong when I not only demonstrated you defended the watermelon steak by disparaging Betty's TGIF food name, but also completely mistook Cliff for Marcel during one of the quickfires. Should I be allowed to sue you for slander and defimation of character.
You disparage Christianity in order to slam Elia. If Sam or Ilan were a devout Jew could we all assume that you would adopt an Anti-semite stance as well? It's really ridiculous. You seriously need to get a grip.
brillke
January 18, 2007 - 12:45 PM
Quote:
Quote:
"Do you actually believe that any of those involved in the gang attack on Marcel should carry the title of top chef?
Is being part of a bully-gang your idea of the requirements for top chef?
I agree with Tom C--the rest of them should have been drop-kicked off the show like yesterday's compost, and Marcel should have won by default.
I think allowing the rest of them to continue degrades the Top Chef show and those involved in it. It's like giving an endorsement for bully-gang behavior in a top chef."
--------------------------------------
What I saw was a HUMAN BEING make an incredibly stupid mistake while drunk off his ass. I saw that same human take his punishment like a man and apologize for his very stupid mistake. I saw Marcel accept that apology. If Marcel is willing to accept it and move on, who am I to argue with him?
I am truly honored to be surrounded by so many perfect human beings who have never royally [censored] up and had to take their lumps.
You didn't answer the question and, indeed, try to throw a few red herrings around.
Come on. Either you believe the bully-gang's actions are part of what being a TC is required or not. You indicated in the post to which I replied, but which you did not post, that you didn't think Marcel should be named TC. Of those who are left, who should, then?
Here's your red herrings:
1) It wasn't ONE HUMAN BEING who did it...it was one who actually did the work, but three others (two of who were in the room at the same time) conspired and collaborated. Cliff didn't dream this up on his own and didn't do it without the encouragement and support of the others.
Related to this is your attempt to make it seem like they have all "paid their lumps." Bull****. Cliff was sent home. Sam, Ilan and Elia, all co-conspirators and collaborators in the assault, get to go to Hawaii.
2) Using the "the-alcohol-made-them-do-it" argument is also a red herring since the vast majority of people who get roaring drunk do not form a bully-gang and assault a sleeping colleague. It wasn't the alcohol--it was the moral character of those involved.
3) Raising the "nobody's perfect" excuse is also a red herring. Whether or not any poster is perfect is completely irrelevant to what the TC bully-gang did. None of us have held ourselves forth as being of TC material. None of us were on the show last night and involved in the bully-gang assault on Marcel.
IMO, the only red herring here is you wanting to see how many times you can type bully-gang in this thread.
You dont want to discuss the show or anyone elses opinion. You want be the moral police and anyone who dare disagree with you is tossing out red herrings.
brillke
WhataJoke
January 18, 2007 - 12:46 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
In one of her interviews she repeatedly emphasizes that she is a Christian and studies the Bible every day. I find it offensive that, after her actions on TC, she wraps herself in the cloak of the Christian God because one thing is clear: if she is a walking billboard for Christianity, then the world would be better off without it.
People have been using religion/God to cover up their [censored] since forever. Nothing new there. Just adds a bit more soil to the brat pack's dinginess. Elia is from one of the wealthiest families in Mexico CIty; she can afford to be a hypocrite. Just as she could afford letting Mia sacrifice herself...even though Mia has more integrity in her pinkie than ELia has ever had and could really use the money. She and Ilan make a great pair.
http://mcrumistudio.com/hawaii4o.jpg
You two make quite a pair.
Considering Mia's actions during Sugargate I find it highly comical that you refer to her integrity. But hey don't let the facts get in the way of Slandering the "Rich" girl.
Listen to Mia's version of Sugargate on Chow..It's totally diff than what we saw she says.
Again...who do we believe??
In one of Mike's interviews, he said that Betty totally cheated...that they get EXTENSIVE, multipage instructions for each challenge that sometimes take an hour to review. Mike said that there was no way she wasn't aware of the rules.
Were not talking about Betty's invovlement, we were refering to Mia's integrity. Try to keep up ok? I know its hard to keep track of for you with the list of people you feel the need to slam.
Holster
January 18, 2007 - 12:47 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Jumping in to say I am now actively rooting for Marcel (even though I believe Sam will probably win it).
Why? Not because everyone picks on him. Not because Cliff throttled him in his sleep. Because he made me lmao in last night's episode. When Padma said to the chefs, "Didn't anyone tell Cliff to stop last night?" Marcel said with a wry smile, "I did." That was funny! For him to have a good attitude and a decent sense of humor after what was done to him shows a good deal of character. Plus he was very gracious in accepting Cliff's apology. Plus he didn't run crying to the producers when he was attacked (and yes, I consider it an attack). Bravo Marcel!
When the show started I was rooting for Cliff. I can't believe he messed up this chance of a lifetime by this stupid prank. True, he probably would have been asked to leave this episode anyway, but at least he would have gone out remembered as a worthy contestant rather than a bully. Yick.
OHG-ROTFLMAO I forgot about that, when Padma asked if anyone asked him to stop...(gawd, now I can't stop giggling...) It was PRICELESS and I can't believe I forgot about it. He deserves an award for that!!
It was another priceless Marcel moment.
Doesn't say much that Sam, Ilan and Elia never apologized and in fact Sam and Ilan are still publicly dissing Marcel in public. But as common wisdom holds, you reveal more about you when you attack another than the person you are attacking. Marcel's professional silence is deafening.
swiss74
January 18, 2007 - 12:47 PM
Though I disagree with some of it I think this is a very smart, reasonable post. I'm a Marcel supporter, but this entire cast is sad.
My personal opinion is despite their assertions to the contrary the producers of this show LOVE this type of controversy because it guarantees interests and ratings. Otherwise, why would they stick the contestants in untenable conditions but give them access to plenty of alcohol? Uh, can anyone say 'recipe for disaster?' The producers should be ashamed of themselves. Not that they are. They are probably planning to put next season's contestants on an iceberg in the arctic and make them prepare whale blubber while being jabbed with spears.
-----------------------
Thanks for the response, and maybe being on an iceberg would have a positive effect.
WhataJoke
January 18, 2007 - 12:49 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
"Do you actually believe that any of those involved in the gang attack on Marcel should carry the title of top chef?
Is being part of a bully-gang your idea of the requirements for top chef?
I agree with Tom C--the rest of them should have been drop-kicked off the show like yesterday's compost, and Marcel should have won by default.
I think allowing the rest of them to continue degrades the Top Chef show and those involved in it. It's like giving an endorsement for bully-gang behavior in a top chef."
--------------------------------------
What I saw was a HUMAN BEING make an incredibly stupid mistake while drunk off his ass. I saw that same human take his punishment like a man and apologize for his very stupid mistake. I saw Marcel accept that apology. If Marcel is willing to accept it and move on, who am I to argue with him?
I am truly honored to be surrounded by so many perfect human beings who have never royally [censored] up and had to take their lumps.
You didn't answer the question and, indeed, try to throw a few red herrings around.
Come on. Either you believe the bully-gang's actions are part of what being a TC is required or not. You indicated in the post to which I replied, but which you did not post, that you didn't think Marcel should be named TC. Of those who are left, who should, then?
Here's your red herrings:
1) It wasn't ONE HUMAN BEING who did it...it was one who actually did the work, but three others (two of who were in the room at the same time) conspired and collaborated. Cliff didn't dream this up on his own and didn't do it without the encouragement and support of the others.
Related to this is your attempt to make it seem like they have all "paid their lumps." Bull****. Cliff was sent home. Sam, Ilan and Elia, all co-conspirators and collaborators in the assault, get to go to Hawaii.
2) Using the "the-alcohol-made-them-do-it" argument is also a red herring since the vast majority of people who get roaring drunk do not form a bully-gang and assault a sleeping colleague. It wasn't the alcohol--it was the moral character of those involved.
3) Raising the "nobody's perfect" excuse is also a red herring. Whether or not any poster is perfect is completely irrelevant to what the TC bully-gang did. None of us have held ourselves forth as being of TC material. None of us were on the show last night and involved in the bully-gang assault on Marcel.
IMO, the only red herring here is you wanting to see how many times you can type bully-gang in this thread.
You dont want to discuss the show or anyone elses opinion. You want be the moral police and anyone who dare disagree with you is tossing out red herrings.
brillke
LOL and Imagine how stupid the Moral police would look as they can't seem to tell the difference between Cliff and Marcel. Internet Keystone Cops is more like it.
Holster
January 18, 2007 - 12:50 PM
Quote:
Though I disagree with some of it I think this is a very smart, reasonable post. I'm a Marcel supporter, but this entire cast is sad.
My personal opinion is despite their assertions to the contrary the producers of this show LOVE this type of controversy because it guarantees interests and ratings. Otherwise, why would they stick the contestants in untenable conditions but give them access to plenty of alcohol? Uh, can anyone say 'recipe for disaster?' The producers should be ashamed of themselves. Not that they are. They are probably planning to put next season's contestants on an iceberg in the arctic and make them prepare whale blubber while being jabbed with spears.
-----------------------
Thanks for the response, and maybe being on an iceberg would have a positive effect.
Banishing all that Kenmore crap to an iceberg would be a fab idea if it weren't so ecologically problematic. Dang!
WhataJoke
January 18, 2007 - 12:52 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Though I disagree with some of it I think this is a very smart, reasonable post. I'm a Marcel supporter, but this entire cast is sad.
My personal opinion is despite their assertions to the contrary the producers of this show LOVE this type of controversy because it guarantees interests and ratings. Otherwise, why would they stick the contestants in untenable conditions but give them access to plenty of alcohol? Uh, can anyone say 'recipe for disaster?' The producers should be ashamed of themselves. Not that they are. They are probably planning to put next season's contestants on an iceberg in the arctic and make them prepare whale blubber while being jabbed with spears.
-----------------------
Thanks for the response, and maybe being on an iceberg would have a positive effect.
Banishing all that Kenmore crap to an iceberg would be a fab idea if it weren't so ecologically problematic. Dang!
Lets give it all to Cliff, now that would be crule and unusual punishment!
SoonersRock
January 18, 2007 - 12:53 PM
Quote:
You're backpedaling a lot on that original statement
Not really... you just took it out of context.
lem0n
January 18, 2007 - 12:54 PM
Haha I can't believe you called her. Maybe you can catch the rerun again. She says used splenda!! I don't know if the editors somehow spliced that clip from somewhere else, but it seemed apparent she was talking about the splenda in the cookies. Might also explain why they didn't take the right shape.
Holster
January 18, 2007 - 12:54 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Not only Mike's interview but Betty's interview on chow.com was illuminating. Betty claimed she didnt even use splenda in the first place, she claims she used less suger the first time. I saw clearly on a rerun of that episode that she said she uses splenda. That's outright dishonest so cheating isn't too much of a stretch.
This one is the BIG what??? still to me.I know it's ancient news......but Marissa says she looks over and sees Betty using Splenda for the egg whites..Betty says it was for the lemonade.....I still can't figure that one out...When we hold the Senate debates over this show...I hope Nancy Pelosi asks that question.
I actually called Betty at her restaurant I wanted to know so badly...lol
She said no Splenda in the cookies..Hmmmm
Well, Mike said she definitely cheated, and if MIKE says so, it's got to be true, cause Mike's the last person to rat out anyone, let alone his Betty.
Way good enough for me.
Holster
January 18, 2007 - 12:55 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Though I disagree with some of it I think this is a very smart, reasonable post. I'm a Marcel supporter, but this entire cast is sad.
My personal opinion is despite their assertions to the contrary the producers of this show LOVE this type of controversy because it guarantees interests and ratings. Otherwise, why would they stick the contestants in untenable conditions but give them access to plenty of alcohol? Uh, can anyone say 'recipe for disaster?' The producers should be ashamed of themselves. Not that they are. They are probably planning to put next season's contestants on an iceberg in the arctic and make them prepare whale blubber while being jabbed with spears.
-----------------------
Thanks for the response, and maybe being on an iceberg would have a positive effect.
Banishing all that Kenmore crap to an iceberg would be a fab idea if it weren't so ecologically problematic. Dang!
Lets give it all to Cliff, now that would be crule and unusual punishment!
LOL. Indeed it would.
actor59
January 18, 2007 - 12:55 PM
Quote:
Just jumping in to say...
First: let me say, the trailers made this whole mess seem a lot worse than it was going to be. The speculation made on the boards was for naught. Not all shaved their heads and Marcel was not bald in the last episode.
Second: I totally do not approve of what happened. If you all remember I was one that felt Frank’s threats towards Marcel were not appropriate and he should have been spoken to about making those threats.
Third: The whole group was involved in what happened, Elia included. When Cliff called for her to come into the room from what I assume she was still in the bathroom, she responded she could not for some reason only she knows.
Fourth: Since these people have shown they cannot handle liquor, then as has been suggested, a liquor budget should not be available from Bravo/Top Chef in the future. If the contestants want to drink let them deposit money with Top Chef and let them draw on that money. Let Bravo/Top Chef set up accounts for them at the local liquor store. If they choose not to deposit the money then they should not drink. I have a feeling if they had to pay for all the liquor they consumed not much drinking would be going on. When Michael bought the liquor during that one challenge out of his food budget, the producers should have taken it away from him as a violation of the rules applying to the FOOD Budget. (I am sure there are rules about the food budget, since there seems to be rules for everything else.)
Fifth: Marcel handled the situation with dignity and should be commended for that. That does not negate his being in each of the contestants ears, moaning and telling them how to do things in the kitchen or how wonderful his education was. His snide remarks probably precipatated ted this whole mess. As I said I do not under any circumstances condone the actions of the group at all.
Sixth: I personally feel none of the contestants will find it easy to find a job after this, Marcel included. Marcel for his constant remarks (behavior) and the rest for their behavior regarding the incident on Top Chef.
Seventh: Since this has probably destroyed all of their careers, I wonder if Bravo/Top Chef should have aired the scuffle. Not that they did not have every right to but maybe they should have considered the outcome to the chefs. Do not misunderstand me, they had every right to air the segment, my question is should they have aired it. It has destroyed the entire group, the remaining group no exceptions. I think we have heard that Michael did not get his job back, was that because of the show? He was not around for the “attempted shearing,” but he also did not like Marcel, which was apparent.
What this all has done to their careers is sad. Not that it can be justified, their behavior was deplorable. It makes possible contestants in the future question whether they really want to be on the show. No one can predict how the other contestants will handle things, and guilt by association is a strong force. I think by airing the segment by Bravo/Top Chef they may have just sealed the fate of the show. Maybe they will come out of this untouched but I doubt it. Maybe it will show Bravo/Top Chef they need to provide better accommodations for the contestants. Who knows what will happen, but I think there is a lesson in there for everyone.
Do I think Marcel should be the next top chef, no not at all. He possibly could be a top chef in the future but right now he is too immature on a whole to handle that kind of responsibility. None of the chefs, because of this last episode, are really top chef material. I am a Sam follower but he could have tried to stop the scuffle and he chose to sit back on the sidelines. Out of the entire group Sam is the only one that has shown any type of leadership when team challenges have occurred so for that I will have to say, he probably is the best candidate. This is really a sad cast of characters, and it is even sadder what happened to the group dynamic. Just my take on the situation and probably not worth the time I spent writing this.
Nice post Swiss and I'll watch the rest of the shows.....I am not invested in any of the remaing chefs so whoever wins so be it I just don't care anymore! But The one thing I find funny is yes the four did come up with the idea as a joke, but Sam either was not drunk enough to shave his head or thought better of it! Plus was it the Nyquill and the Imodian I was on? Or am I just mistaken...but did not Sam say let him go to Cliff the joke has gone too far?
swiss74
January 18, 2007 - 12:56 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Though I disagree with some of it I think this is a very smart, reasonable post. I'm a Marcel supporter, but this entire cast is sad.
My personal opinion is despite their assertions to the contrary the producers of this show LOVE this type of controversy because it guarantees interests and ratings. Otherwise, why would they stick the contestants in untenable conditions but give them access to plenty of alcohol? Uh, can anyone say 'recipe for disaster?' The producers should be ashamed of themselves. Not that they are. They are probably planning to put next season's contestants on an iceberg in the arctic and make them prepare whale blubber while being jabbed with spears.
-----------------------
Thanks for the response, and maybe being on an iceberg would have a positive effect.
Banishing all that Kenmore crap to an iceberg would be a fab idea if it weren't so ecologically problematic. Dang!
_______
lol
Holster
January 18, 2007 - 12:57 PM
Quote:
Quote:
You're backpedaling a lot on that original statement
Not really... you just took it out of context.
Maybe backstroke then??
Amazon
January 18, 2007 - 12:57 PM
Quote:
...Fifth: Marcel handled the situation with dignity and should be commended for that. That does not negate his being in each of the contestants ears, moaning and telling them how to do things in the kitchen or how wonderful his education was. His snide remarks probably precipatated ted this whole mess. As I said I do not under any circumstances condone the actions of the group at all.
Which is it--did Marcel's actions precipitate it or not? To precipiate an action is to trigger or cause it. So either Marcel's actions precipiated the assault or they didn't.
Quote:
Sixth: I personally feel none of the contestants will find it easy to find a job after this, Marcel included. Marcel for his constant remarks (behavior) and the rest for their behavior regarding the incident on Top Chef.
Marcel has a chef's job with one of the top chefs in the country. Sam is out of work. Ilan is working as a line cook. Obviously, Marcel isn't that difficult to work with because he has a plum position, one most chefs would very much love to have. The competition must be rigorous for the job, and Marcel has it.
Quote:
Seventh: Since this has probably destroyed all of their careers, I wonder if Bravo/Top Chef should have aired the scuffle. Not that they did not have every right to but maybe they should have considered the outcome to the chefs. Do not misunderstand me, they had every right to air the segment, my question is should they have aired it. It has destroyed the entire group, the remaining group no exceptions. I think we have heard that Michael did not get his job back, was that because of the show? He was not around for the “attempted shearing,” but he also did not like Marcel, which was apparent.
You honestly think it's right to call it a "scuffle"? If someone attacked you when you were asleep and treated you so roughly that you had bruises, all in an attempt to deface you--you'd call that a "scuffle"?
I addition, it hasn't negatively impacted Marcel's career, since he has a plum job with one of the top chefs of our country. And I don't think it would negatively impact his career because comments in a kitchen in no way will ever justify a gang physical assault.
To not show the assault would have totally twisted what viewers believed to have happened on the show. It would be very convenient for Sam, Ilan, Cliff and Elia, to hide their actions. I believe they will all have to deal with the impact of their actions on TC in the future.
Quote:
What this all has done to their careers is sad. Not that it can be justified, their behavior was deplorable. It makes possible contestants in the future question whether they really want to be on the show. No one can predict how the other contestants will handle things, and guilt by association is a strong force. I think by airing the segment by Bravo/Top Chef they may have just sealed the fate of the show. Maybe they will come out of this untouched but I doubt it. Maybe it will show Bravo/Top Chef they need to provide better accommodations for the contestants. Who knows what will happen, but I think there is a lesson in there for everyone.
Wait a minute--in all probability, the only negative impact will be on those responsible for the assault. I see the production staff as perhaps instigating it, but nothing--not living in a hot apartment, staying up all night, having to listen to someone who annoys you, being drunk--NOTHING justifies a physical assault on a sleeping colleague.
I think Tom C, Gail and maybe even Padma (although, based on the trashy clothes she wears, I don't think much could embarass her) will be embarassed by it, but they were twice removed from the situation...the production staff called the producers who called Tom C.
Quote:
Do I think Marcel should be the next top chef, no not at all. He possibly could be a top chef in the future but right now he is too immature on a whole to handle that kind of responsibility. None of the chefs, because of this last episode, are really top chef material. I am a Sam follower but he could have tried to stop the scuffle and he chose to sit back on the sidelines. Out of the entire group Sam is the only one that has shown any type of leadership when team challenges have occurred so for that I will have to say, he probably is the best candidate. This is really a sad cast of characters, and it is even sadder what happened to the group dynamic. Just my take on the situation and probably not worth the time I spent writing this.
It's hard to believe that you would still even consider Sam after his role in the assault. That's being a "top chef" to you? And this isn't the first time that Sam has cheered someone on while they did his dirty work for him...it is his pattern. That's a "top chef" to you?
I don't think any of them at this point have TC qualifications. I don't think the bully-gang ever will because there is a vacuum in moral character there which won't get filled simply by the years.
If one has to be chosen TC, I can't see anyone else but Marcel. The others put themselves into a position that they glaringly don't deserve to win.
Indeed, Tom c was read to send the gang home and declare Marcel the winner by default. I think, if the TC show wants to continue and wants to send a message to future cheftestants, this is what should have been done.
But the producers overruled Tom C. I wonder how much they will enjoy the backlash that has resulted?
Amazon
January 18, 2007 - 01:00 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Again, blaming the victim is a despicable tactic.
Are you saying that in your average restaurant kitchen, which is male-dominated, that they would conspire to physically attack with the intentions to deface someone in the kitchen they didn't like because of the things he said?
You're really saying that? Really?
No, someone would just pick a fight with him and then beat the hell out of him in the parking lot after work. I worked in bars and restaraunts for twenty years and I saw it happen several times.
Maybe I live in and work in rough places but Ive seen many an ass-whoopin between co-workers.
I wont even mention how pilots get their wings in the AF. I have family in 3 of the 4 branches of our armed forces and they would have done far worse then we saw on tv. Is it right? Never said that but just the way the real world is.
brillke
The comparsion is invalid because you are comparing apples and oranges. You are attempting to compare two completely different work enviornments and saying that what "would happen" in each is the same.
Amazon
January 18, 2007 - 01:01 PM
Quote:
Marcel is such a pussy! It's not like Cliff was throwing punches at him at all. I thought for sure Marcel was going to be man enough to tell the producers "you know what, it was a joke, I got a little too butt-hurt over it, Cliff should stay"...
Oh, my.
Holster
January 18, 2007 - 01:01 PM
Very OT. but I wanted to salute the life of one of America's great humorists, Art Buchwald. Any time we lose a comic, the light dims in our world. Joke in peace, Art!
Television has a real problem. They have no page two.
~Art Buchwald
swiss74
January 18, 2007 - 01:02 PM
Nice post Swiss and I'll watch the rest of the shows.....I am not invested in any of the remaing chefs so whoever wins so be it I just don't care anymore! But The one thing I find funny is yes the four did come up with the idea as a joke, but Sam either was not drunk enough to shave his head or thought better of it! Plus was it the Nyquill and the Imodian I was on? Or am I just mistaken...but did not Sam say let him go to Cliff the joke has gone too far?
You are probably correct on that, I can not remember and will have to rewatch it for that reason, UGGGGGGGGGG. I guess I meant he should have tried more forceably to remove Cliff from Marcel. I do not mean start another fight or scuffle but I am sure there was a way he could have acted more positively in that craziness.
aguynamedWayne
January 18, 2007 - 01:02 PM
But the producers overruled Tom C. I wonder how much they will enjoy the backlash that has resulted?
Unfortunately, the Producers of the show, by overruling Tom, proved that they care nothing for a fair compitition, they care only for ratings. And any and everything seems to be ok with them, as long as people keep watching. Sad.
lem0n
January 18, 2007 - 01:06 PM
I didn't realize I hadn't read Chef Colicchio's blog until you mentioned that he was willing to let Marcel win by default. Good for him! I didn't know what his reaction was to this situation because it wasn't shown much. Also I'd like to point out that he says on his blog:
"It was like watching an instructional video in bad group dynamics -- four apparently decent individuals (three if you buy Elia's argument that she was clueless)"
I can't believe she claimed to be clueless. There was a screen shot of her arm in the video that someone has put online. And she was called to come over. She said she couldn't but she knew what was going on. Wasn't she laughing at it?
Let's pretend she "didn't know" specificially what was going on. She knows that they were just talking about shaving Marcel's hair. She knows they ran over with glee to pull this "prank." And she heard what was going on.
Amazon
January 18, 2007 - 01:08 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Marcel is such a pussy! It's not like Cliff was throwing punches at him at all. I thought for sure Marcel was going to be man enough to tell the producers "you know what, it was a joke, I got a little too butt-hurt over it, Cliff should stay"...
Thanks for that illuminating insight. You have made the world a better place.
LOL....I speeeeeeeeeet!
That's it! I finally got what kind of accent Elia has...it's the same accent as the guy in Beverly Hills Cop: "Whud yew lahk a lemon tweeeeeeest?" The actor who made up the accent called it "Eurotrash."
meimeikitty
January 18, 2007 - 01:11 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
You're backpedaling a lot on that original statement
Not really... you just took it out of context.
Maybe backstroke then??
LOL
swiss74
January 18, 2007 - 01:13 PM
Quote:
Quote:
...Fifth: Marcel handled the situation with dignity and should be commended for that. That does not negate his being in each of the contestants ears, moaning and telling them how to do things in the kitchen or how wonderful his education was. His snide remarks probably precipatated ted this whole mess. As I said I do not under any circumstances condone the actions of the group at all.
Which is it--did Marcel's actions precipitate it or not? To precipiate an action is to trigger or cause it. So either Marcel's actions precipiated the assault or they didn't.
Quote:
Sixth: I personally feel none of the contestants will find it easy to find a job after this, Marcel included. Marcel for his constant remarks (behavior) and the rest for their behavior regarding the incident on Top Chef.
Marcel has a chef's job with one of the top chefs in the country. Sam is out of work. Ilan is working as a line cook. Obviously, Marcel isn't that difficult to work with because he has a plum position, one most chefs would very much love to have. The competition must be rigorous for the job, and Marcel has it.
Quote:
Seventh: Since this has probably destroyed all of their careers, I wonder if Bravo/Top Chef should have aired the scuffle. Not that they did not have every right to but maybe they should have considered the outcome to the chefs. Do not misunderstand me, they had every right to air the segment, my question is should they have aired it. It has destroyed the entire group, the remaining group no exceptions. I think we have heard that Michael did not get his job back, was that because of the show? He was not around for the “attempted shearing,” but he also did not like Marcel, which was apparent.
You honestly think it's right to call it a "scuffle"? If someone attacked you when you were asleep and treated you so roughly that you had bruises, all in an attempt to deface you--you'd call that a "scuffle"?
I addition, it hasn't negatively impacted Marcel's career, since he has a plum job with one of the top chefs of our country. And I don't think it would negatively impact his career because comments in a kitchen in no way will ever justify a gang physical assault.
To not show the assault would have totally twisted what viewers believed to have happened on the show. It would be very convenient for Sam, Ilan, Cliff and Elia, to hide their actions. I believe they will all have to deal with the impact of their actions on TC in the future.
Quote:
What this all has done to their careers is sad. Not that it can be justified, their behavior was deplorable. It makes possible contestants in the future question whether they really want to be on the show. No one can predict how the other contestants will handle things, and guilt by association is a strong force. I think by airing the segment by Bravo/Top Chef they may have just sealed the fate of the show. Maybe they will come out of this untouched but I doubt it. Maybe it will show Bravo/Top Chef they need to provide better accommodations for the contestants. Who knows what will happen, but I think there is a lesson in there for everyone.
Wait a minute--in all probability, the only negative impact will be on those responsible for the assault. I see the production staff as perhaps instigating it, but nothing--not living in a hot apartment, staying up all night, having to listen to someone who annoys you, being drunk--NOTHING justifies a physical assault on a sleeping colleague.
I think Tom C, Gail and maybe even Padma (although, based on the trashy clothes she wears, I don't think much could embarass her) will be embarassed by it, but they were twice removed from the situation...the production staff called the producers who called Tom C.
Quote:
Do I think Marcel should be the next top chef, no not at all. He possibly could be a top chef in the future but right now he is too immature on a whole to handle that kind of responsibility. None of the chefs, because of this last episode, are really top chef material. I am a Sam follower but he could have tried to stop the scuffle and he chose to sit back on the sidelines. Out of the entire group Sam is the only one that has shown any type of leadership when team challenges have occurred so for that I will have to say, he probably is the best candidate. This is really a sad cast of characters, and it is even sadder what happened to the group dynamic. Just my take on the situation and probably not worth the time I spent writing this.
It's hard to believe that you would still even consider Sam after his role in the assault. That's being a "top chef" to you? And this isn't the first time that Sam has cheered someone on while they did his dirty work for him...it is his pattern. That's a "top chef" to you?
I don't think any of them at this point have TC qualifications. I don't think the bully-gang ever will because there is a vacuum in moral character there which won't get filled simply by the years.
If one has to be chosen TC, I can't see anyone else but Marcel. The others put themselves into a position that they glaringly don't deserve to win.
Indeed, Tom c was read to send the gang home and declare Marcel the winner by default. I think, if the TC show wants to continue and wants to send a message to future cheftestants, this is what should have been done.
But the producers overruled Tom C. I wonder how much they will enjoy the backlash that has resulted?
__________
You are entitled to your opinion as I am entitled to mine. That is just the nature of how things are. Yes I said it will cause problems for all getting a job, maybe not now but in the future. And yes I think even after the scuffle (maybe in your eyes a stronger word should be used) Sam is the only one who has shown leadership in the kitchen during team competitions. I did not say leadership anywhere else. That does not negate the fact that cooking is also the final determination. We can only wait to see what happens. If Marcel outcooks them all, that is great. Let him be Top Chef. I just believe there is more to being a Top Chef than being able to cook. Administration of assignments is important also. Maybe we need to agree to disagree on this and not make an issue of our different opinions. You have yours and I have mine.
WhataJoke
January 18, 2007 - 01:14 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Again, blaming the victim is a despicable tactic.
Are you saying that in your average restaurant kitchen, which is male-dominated, that they would conspire to physically attack with the intentions to deface someone in the kitchen they didn't like because of the things he said?
You're really saying that? Really?
No, someone would just pick a fight with him and then beat the hell out of him in the parking lot after work. I worked in bars and restaraunts for twenty years and I saw it happen several times.
Maybe I live in and work in rough places but Ive seen many an ass-whoopin between co-workers.
I wont even mention how pilots get their wings in the AF. I have family in 3 of the 4 branches of our armed forces and they would have done far worse then we saw on tv. Is it right? Never said that but just the way the real world is.
brillke
The comparsion is invalid because you are comparing apples and oranges. You are attempting to compare two completely different work enviornments and saying that what "would happen" in each is the same.
Amazon your whole argument is stupid beacuae you fail to realise that in almost any work invionment if you don't like someone you can at least go home to get away from them at the end of the night. Apples and Oranges? Amazon is trying to compare Apples to Donuts.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.