Survivor Micronesia: Fans vs. Faves

Well frick.

Gladdened by the end of the WGA strike but still woefully aware of its reality by the number of new shows on recently (um...that would be ZERO), CBS wooed me by putting on a new Survivor season. I couldn't help myself...just pleading for something that wasn't a re-run I gave it a shot...and now, of course, I'm hooked.

This is the 16th (yes...16th...which means this show actually started when college was a recent memory for me) season and I was certain it had absolutely nothing to offer me. I watched the first couple seasons (I witnessed the wonder that was Richard Hatch and watched Sue Hawk give the now famous "The Snake and the Rat" speech) but I grew weary of what was just new and inventive ways of being evil and back-biting. Then of course, Mark Burnett and his production crew threw in a couple of really wretched seasons (remember the racially divided season? What about the all-stars?...BIGOTED and BORING, respectively) AND magically launched the career of arch-conservative and The View ruiner Elizabeth Hasselbeck, cumulatively making me think I'd never go back.

But television writers' strikes do weird things to one's soul: alas I found myself interested by this format which pits one tribe of "favorites" (those who have competed in past seasons and have been voted fan favorites) against the "fans" (new people). I'm not sure this is necessary, but by tonight's show I'd say it's working just fine.

But despite the formulaic 1-hour show, obviously so well rehearsed (by 15 other seasons) and the utter gutsiness of Jeff Probst who has absolutely no career except this show and is now a gazillionaire because of it, I still got hooked and here's how: the Newbies (Fans) go to Tribal Council tonight and it's pretty clear that there's this major alliance that's going to vote off Chet. (Who's Chet?...DETAILS ARE NOT IMPORTANT RIGHT NOW...PAY ATTENTION.) When Jeff goes to tally the votes, sure enough, Chet gets one vote. Get's two votes. Ope...yep...Chet's gone. Then Tracy gets a vote. Then Mary. Wait...Mary....Mary's part of the huge alliance supposedly voting Chet off. Then another vote for Mary. Three votes Mary. Oh my god...what the...? Four and Five. Mary's gone and these two stupid, gulumphish men who think they're running this major alliance are sitting there like apes trying to figure out what in the name of all that is holy happened.

Chet lives to see another tribal council and I'm thinking that the Survivor I remember and somewhat respect is back. And I'll surely be sitting here next Thursday, waiting to see what the gulumphish men have to say about the transpiring of the rail thin but conventionally beautiful Mary who wore the skimpiest bikini being voted off. And slowly coming to realize that they may actually be next.

Oh Survivor...I've kinda missed you.

Reality TV Takeover

(Harumph). I'm starting to feel the weight of this writers' strike as my lack of posting is really due solely to the fact that THERE'S NO NEW TELEVISION ON except for reality shows that are even starting to show the stress of lack of creativity. I'm stuck in an endless cycle of re-runs and marathons which were fun for a few weeks but are now making me feel lifeless and lethargic. So, in an attempt to save the pop culture tent from it's dearth of television, I'll give you a quick up date on the shows I have been watching...and re-watching...and re-watching....and re-watching...oh, sorry--I fell into the endless loop again.

Project Runway (BRAVO): I do look forward to this show b/c it's still able to maintain some sense of newness. Finally (half-way through the season), I feel like the people left make sense. I just want to know what kind of good luck potion Ricky's been taking...he should have been gone weeks ago. Everyone else at least creates compelling designs. And Michael Kors just makes me happy. He's just powerful enough to say whatever he wants and people listen, no matter how bitchy. And Tim Gunn, although for awhile seemingly a robotic version of himself, has managed to wittily regain my loyalty. That man does have a big ol' compassionate heart, albeit with a starched collar.

Make Me a Supermodel (BRAVO). No. No I won't. Because this is an awful show. If you want to know how bad, I'll tell you. It makes me regularly think, "Tyra Banks really is talented." Niki Taylor and Tyson Beckford--two of the weirdest, boring-est, plastic animatrons I've ever seen. And who are these dregs of model hopefuls who they found? Bad.

Jon and Kate Plus 8 (TLC). These two (Jon and Kate) wanted three kids and ended up with 8. It's fascinating to watch what family chaos really looks like. And the kids are cute. And Kate's crazy. Not a bad way to spend an hour on Monday evenings.

America's Next Top Model Marathons (MTV, VH1). These have been running non-stop since Christmas and I'm officially running out of desire to watch them. I know every episode now and I do have my favorites, so given the marathon format, I can tune in at certain times to watch my favorites. Serves as a great reminder of just how bad the afore-mentioned modeling show really is.

The Office Rerun's (TBS). I'm just new enough to the series that these reruns are like little gems on Tuesday nights. Like Forrest Gump's box a'chocolates, ya never knaw what yure gonna git.

Scrubs Reruns (Comedy Central). This has been my one savior as I never watched this show when it was actually running on primetime, so it's like a new series to me. JD and the crew--love 'em.

Celebrity Rehab with Dr. Drew (VH1). Despite it's title and the fact it's on VH1, I haven't found this show necessarily exploitative or disgusting. It's fascinating to watch Dr. Drew Pinsky (of Loveline fame) treat these "celebrity" clients (Joanie Laurer--Chyna Doll--is a stretch on *celebrity* I think) who are withdrawing from a variety of drug addictions. As Dr. Drew says, the point is not to make "trainwreck" tv but to display the reality of rehab and I think this show does that. Is it "iffy" that the star's get paid to do this--yes, but it's VH1--they pay for celebs to lose weight, to live in a house together for no reason, to get married. It's what they do. Of all of these shows, Dr. Drew brings a little credibility and reality (truly) to a painful experience.

And while I'm reaching a point of desperation there are some shows I absolutely refuse to watch no matter what. No condition makes it ever okay to watch:

Rock of Love II with Bret Michaels (VH1). We had to suffer through RoL I and now there's another. The women on this show are disgusting. Bret Michaels is disgusting-er. No. No. No.

American Idol. When will this show go away? A parade of sucky singers being sold as what Americans should want to hear.

Almost anything on E! Now that Ryan Seacrest has his manicured, curiously feminine hands all over that channel, it's like American Idol lite.

Are you Smarter than a Fifth Grader? Not if you watch this show.

There's a whole list, but they all look basically the same. Let's just say this: I've never appreciated television writers more than I do at this very moment. Please writers, come back soon!

Project Runway is BACK!!!

There are some shows that, like calendars, help me to mark time while being endlessly entertaining and even admirable. Project Runway is just such a show. I've watched every season of this Bravo gem and it never gets tired. Hosted by Heidi Klum who now has possibly the most famous tv line ever (In fashion you're either een or you're aout...) and backed by judges and Tim Gunn, all of whom have now become endeared members of my television family (I have waited months just to hear Michael Kors talk about the designs--he's just as awesomely lovingly bitchy as Isaac Mizrahi--and Nina Garcia's no slouch either), I couldn't be more thrilled that the new season started Wednesday night.

I was absolutely *delighted* that Meghan did some television "toe-stepping" on PR for this last Wednesday. I concur wholeheartedly with everything she said and appreciated her insight since I only saw the last half-hour. I thought Rami, who won the first challenge with his clingy, drapey, cinched with a shoulder flower dress, was the right choice. I generally want to barf when I see those shoes with it, but otherwise lovely.

Really, I was sad to see Simone go and here's why: My fear with PR is that, as the seasons go, the casting gets more and more freakish. While last season we saw what I thought was a huge jump up in terms of technical ability and design potential, we also had a lot of crazies in the mix that really had no chance of winning. At this point, I'd like to see these tried-and-true reality shows really cast only for design talent and see what comes from that. While Wendy Pepper, Jay McCarroll, Santino, Andre, Jeffrey and Laura were all great *characters* in the end, their idiosyncrasies enhanced what was already there design-wise. What I know is that yesterday, that teal blue stretch fabric with vomitous raggedy train creation was something I could have put together. Frankly, even the stick-thin model looks lumpy and disgusting in it--and she's not a lumpy and disgusting kind of creature from what I can see. (And WHAT'S with the TEAL SUEDE SCRUNCHY STILETTO BOOTS.--so much wrong there) There's no way that woman should have lasted more than this challenge, but poor Simone who I think looked and acted fairly non-crazy gets the boot (only made better by the fact that her boot was not teal, scrunchy, or suede). I concur with Meghan here: the design needs to drive the decision and none of this "personality" crap. From the looks of things, there's plenty of personality already built into this cast.

The last thing that should happen with this show (or Top Chef--another BRAVO creation), which has really distinguished itself from other kinds of "trashy" reality shows (Fear Factor, MTV Road Rules, etc) is that the level of talent and the output of the designers is top notch. Bravo...we know this. Let's assume people tune in because they like to celebrate the innovation and creativity of the designers and not because they're "good for tv." Do you want to PR to become The Real World that now casts only those willing to be blatantly racist/sexist/any other -ist and/or have sex on tv? I think not.

Oh...and Bravo has excellent and numerous blogs from people involved in production, judging, and past participants of the show. Check them out. I'm thinking I'm going to make Nina Garcia's a regular stop for me.

I Made a Mistake!

As difficult as this can be to imagine, I screwed up. Thanks to "Anonymous" (which is a pet peeve of mine--if you're gonna get nit-picky leave your effing name), it was brought to my attention that Phil Keoghan is actually a Kiwi (no, not the fruit). He's from New Zealand and not, as previously stated, Australia. Sorry Phil and to all of New Zealand and to "Anonymous."

He's still cute, dontcha think?

It Begins!

Oh man, I wait every tv season for the next installment of The Amazing Race. This show is *amazing* and here's why:

1) Teams travel all over the world and we can watch it from the comfort of our own homes. I've seen amazing things while sitting under my down blanket and munching cookies. It's the best kind of travel ever. Are there delays? Yes. Travel stress? Yes. Do I feel any of it? No...I sit and watch how crazy it looks when someone else feels it.

2) The teams. The format is such that they start with 11 2-person teams and each week (except for 3 installments) one team gets eliminated. But the teams chosen range from your "Average Joes" to "some of the weirdest freaks ever to be broadcast on prime time." This year my favorites include a 23-year old and his grandpa, 2 lesbians who are married and are ordained clergy (nothing like stacking up the interesting social factors), and a Goth couple from Kentucky (is there such a thing?). Then, of course, there are the dating couples and the "blonde bimbo" teams. Awesome.

3) Mix the above with this element of competition and things get interesting. Often the travel woes make the competition exciting and nail-biting. The best way to watch this show is to pick a team at the beginning and root for them--it keeps you invested in the competition. Oh, and if it's possible to watch with others it only ups the excitement factor. If you're totally not into the first couple episodes, don't panic. Right around the 4th leg, everybody's exhausted and people start saying incredibly mean and/or funny things to their partners. Tears start rolling and very often whining's involved. It doesn't sound fun but somehow any viewer with a soul and a travel experience gets sucked in.

4) "The editing is phenomenal." It is. It always looks like teams are rolling in to the "pit stop" right after each other, sometimes actually running to beat the team ahead of them when in actuality they were 13 hours behind. Genius.

5) Phil Keoghan. He's australian. He's hot. And he's *mysterious* in that completely "Phil" sorta way. You have to watch to understand but I'll provide some clue right here:See how cute he is?

Check it out--you won't be sorry! CBS Sunday nights at 7pm or after 60 Minutes which is almost always delayed because of football. (Tonight it started at 7:20).

It's Time to Travel

Guess what I just heard...!!!

IT RETURNS!!!

A new season starts on November 4!!! At 8pm on CBS. For those who don't know, The Amazing Race is a reality competition show in which teams travel 50,000 miles across the world. Game Strategy: Finish 1st and win $1 million.

Oh how long I've waited for the comedy, the drama, the excitement, and the stupidity that leaps forth from this show. I say it's better than Survivor. But then, you'll have to watch to see if you agree!

TV Families that Ensure Interesting Mondays

If at about, oh, 7pm your Mondays get tedious and uninspired, take remote in hand and turn on TLC. It's two for the price of one--with the real families featured in Little People, Big World and Jon & Kate Plus 8. Allow me to tell you why these families endlessly fascinate me.

First, the Roloffs. This family, first introduced by TLC about 4 years ago on a show intended to feature the life of, well, little people in a big world. From the picture it's clear that Amy and Matt, the parents, are both little people while only Zach (far left) is a little person kid. Their other kids, (from right) Jeremy (Zach's twin brother!), Molly, and Jacob are average height (the Roloffs don't say "normal height" and I say good for them.) Over the past four years viewers have witnessed the way life gets done when you're 4 feet tall. One of the greatest developments I've witnessed as a regular watcher is how truly normal their life is. Don't get me wrong, both Matt and Amy have been incredibly resourceful in making this family work, but in the end, I watch because the people are so interesting and not because they're "little" or average. My love and personal take on each family member will show up in a future post because, truly, Matt Roloff deserves an entire tome devoted to his crazy amazingness. For now, suffice it to say, show up for the height differential, stay for the family life. More to come on this in a moment.

Now for the Gosselin's. I first saw this brood of 10 on a Discovery Chanel special that eventually morphed into a mid-season replacement and now is one of the most fascinating and scary shows on television. Jon and Kate are poster children for the effects of in-vitro: their twins (Cara and Mady) are 7 while their sextuplets (Aaden, Hannah, Alexis, Collin, Leah, and Joel) are 3. The show chronicles their life in both learning how to deal with a family this size but also how to make that life meaningful for the "older" girls and for the "little kids." This show, like America's Next Top Model (sadly), renders me powerless thereby often gluing me to the tv for as long as they continue to show these episodes. I have friends who just had one kid and their life is hectic. I cannot even imagine this life and yet I can sit and watch it unfold in front of me. Amazing.

What I find most interesting about both shows is the ability to watch gender construction rammed into the fertile minds of all of these children. Both families successfully deal with situations that are so possibly debilitating, they amaze me. At the same time, the ways in which they talk to their children, dress them, deal with their problems, etc. are so conventionally "boys are blue and girls are pink" that sometimes I find it hard to breathe. On LPBW, Amy and Molly often do what Matt calls "girls day out:" they go to the spa, have lunch, go shopping, get their nails done. Which is fine, except that Matt, who's the biggest...little...alpha male on television harps so hard on the boys to be "manly men" that I almost pity them. Jeremy and Zach (the oldest children) take it in stride, but poor Jacob. On yesterday's episode, Matt said that Jacob was "whining like a girly man". I often think Jacob would be happier hanging with Amy and Molly. On J&K+8, what's fascinating is that added to the gender mix is the fact that two of the girls are older which changes the dynamics--Cara and Mady are constantly pegged as being overly emotional, whiny, and clingy.

It's just a very interesting process. I probably could not handle the lives of these two families. But I find it interesting that despite these extreme circumstances in which they find themselves, the ways they categorize and socialize their children are very traditional...and boxed in. I'm fascinated. Watch 'em and you will be too.

Guess Who's Baaaack?

The Roloff's!

That's right...TLC's Little People, Big World returns for another fun-filled season. Not just another couple months on their farm in Oregon, this season features a true RVing expedition ala National Lampoon's Summer Vacation. Unfortunately, I missed the premier of this season because I was busy watching ABC's new offering Samantha Who?, but I have no fear that I've missed anything. The way TLC tends to schedule programs, the first episode will be broadcast about 8 times in the next 7 days to prepare me for the 2nd episode next Monday... and I couldn't be more excited.

I've gone far too long without Matt Roloff in my life. And if you don't know what I'm talking about, you've gone far too long without Matt Roloff in yours. This is an awesome show and I'm pumped they're back for more!

Guess What?!?

I can't WAIT.

My Acceptance of the Top Chef Finale

It's taken awhile for me to come to terms with the way Top Chef season 3 ended up. Hung won. (crickets...quiet...more crickets). By all means, Hung was worthy. He'd been told by the judges outrightly 3 weeks ago that he was the best technical chef there, but that they found his food soulless. They wanted to see more of "Hung" in his cooking. Frankly, I thought his cooking already was a good indicator of "Hung." I guess they gave him more credit--maybe he was different in person. But, in being consistent with the rest of what seemed to be an "iffy" season, I don't think the new live finale format went off without any hitches.

Hitch #1: Casey blew it in the final round making the "final 3" format senseless. Once we watched her completely bite it in Aspen (which was sad, but predictable. I think it would be hard to argue that Casey deserved to be in the finals. Did I like her, yes. But was the run of creativity that got her to the end in part luck, also yes.) it was silly that she had to show up to the final judging table and basically try to save face. Everyone knew she was out--including her. She stuck up for herself, god love her, and bowed out gracefully. However, the final three didn't seem to "pan" out (ha-HA!). Recommendation: Go back to the final 2 scenario. I almost wonder if they tried the "final three" to avoid the fan reaction from last season when fan-fave Sam shockingly got eliminated (b/c he totally sucked it in the last competition round) leaving Ilan and Marcel (neither fan favorites) to go to the lackluster, overly "foamy" finale. It doesn't matter--the 2 best should, by all means, funnel into the final.

Hitch #2: Directly related to Hitch #1--the judging. It annoyed me that Gail was back for the finale when she'd been there all of 3 prior shows. Anthony Bourdain seemed the rightful choice to be there, as he was there equally often as Gail, blogged the show EVERY WEEK (check this out for the finale--hilarious and I'm willing to trust that he knows better than I) , and brings forth the chef perspective instead of the food critic perspective. Ted Allen was already representative of that group and, honestly, the show is not "Top Food Snob." If you're going to harp on technical skills and, ultimately, choose Hung b/c of them, then your judges need to have some credibility in that area. Sorry, Gail, but get out. Recommendation: Stick with a panel of three judges who are there EVERY WEEK and have the one rotating guest judge throughout the season, but for the FINALE go to the three who have seen everything from start to finish.

Hitch #3: Dale had soul that the judges somehow overlooked. Fact is, I loved Dale. I think a lot of fans of the show loved Dale. Dale is lovable and obviously serious and he lives food. Hung tells me that but Dale shows me that. So, when the judges did the dish-for-dish comparison, it sounded to me like Dale was the one. The judges got hung up (ha-HA...and I didn't even mean to here) on that (supposedly) crappy lobster dish, but here's the thing: Dale brought it. He served it. He rocked it. Yeah he made a mistake...but he had the balls to make a BIG mistake. Anthony Bourdain called them "balls the size of casaba melons"--seriously. That would have made me choose him. Hung did not do that, thereby forcing me to assume that Hung has little balls...(ahem) culinarily speaking. Recommendation: For the sake of my fan-ship, please pick Dale next time. Just throw me one...I'm begging. (Although, I think Harold of Season 1 managed to be both a fan-fave and a kick-ass chef).

Hitch #4: With the "final three" format, the eliminated chefs who returned to "help" prepare the final meal were actually a hindrance. Brian got to eat the meal. Um, excuse me, but Brian had just been eliminated for basically presenting a circus on a plate. Is he the best to judge refined culinary style in the final? And Howie? Seriously, I felt bad for Casey; I think Casey felt bad for Casey. She should have gotten extra points for getting Howie's help. When they did the final two, each chef got two of the last four eliminated, thus making up some kind of team. Honestly, that was better for the most part. Recommendation: Stop forcing people to work with the crappy chefs who were already eliminated.

I did really love one part of this finale: I thought it was genius to pair each finale contestant with a major culinary figure (Rocco DiSpirito, Michelle Bernstein, Todd English (who's hot)) That was cool to watch them work as sous chefs for the contestants and to hear their commentary ala Tom Colicchio from the kitchen. If they could talk them into it, these chefs should be the "helpers" for the finale, not eliminated contestants.

So, there it is. My humble opinion. Am I happy with Hung? No. But honestly, I haven't been happy since Harold won in Season 1, so now the bar is really high...but I'm sure looking forward to the next season already.

America's Next Mediocre Model

Aaahhh...there's nothing so comforting as the newest cycle of America's Next Top Model. I've thought long and hard about why this show fascinates me to the degree it does--it's the combination of Tyra Banks (who is like Oprah before she sold her soul), the usual judging panel (Twiggy, Nigel Barker, Ms. Jay, and a guest judge), and Jay Manuel, the director of the girls photo shoots. I've come to know all of them over the past 4 years and I can expect certain things. The lynch-pin--that uncontrollable factor--is always the new crop of girls rollin' in off the farm, hopin' to be the next, biggest model, like, ever.

This season, I have to admit, I'm not impressed--but I never am until after the make-over show. They all look like know-nothing Barbies who wanna make it big juxtaposing their awkwardly spindly arms and legs and pouting their lips. And they're bitchy.

But this season, there's yet another twist that I'm not sure I'm down with. Ironically, Heather, one of the contestants who actually shows evidence of synaptic activity and thereby sets herself apart from the pack, has Asperger's Syndrome (a mild form of autism). I only mention it because it's been mentioned about 7,000 times in the first two episodes. In what seems to be an odd, possibly damaging move, Tyra has trotted this fact out to everybody who will listen to her. Personally, from what I see, this girl acts just as bizarrely as the rest of the house. However, tonight (which was a replay of Wednesday's new episode), the audience saw a montage of groups of girls talking about how they think Heather is 1) weird 2) not clean 3) too clingy 4) antisocial...basically, you name it and poor Heather is guilty of it. Meanwhile, this girl, who I don't doubt deals with this on a daily basis appears alone and without any kind of support network in the house except for a girl from Cornell (or is it Columbia...who cares--she's a model) who actually has a brain. What makes it worse is that it's a self-reproducing system. The more the girls talk about how weird she is because she's always alone, the more they won't hang out with her. AAAAHHHH!!! This season the show has a "the worst sorority ever" vibe. More than any other season, this group of girls has manifested a blatant cruelty about them that hinges on Heather's "achilles heel". I'm hoping for the ever-entertaining Tyra smackdown.

For a competition show, I question whether this information was essential to everyone in the house. In previous cycles, Mercedes hid Lyme disease almost until the finals, Rebecca had some kind of nervous system dysfunction that caused her to black out, and Michelle contracted impetigo which, before it was diagnosed, the girls in the house "assumed" was a strain of flesh-eating bacteria. Cassie even admitted to being bulemic...and liking it. Even in those cycles, this information came out organically well into the competition and it still did not bode well for the sufferers. So I feel like poor Heather has been set up to fail. To her credit, she seems to be keepin' on, rocking it out this week in a bizarre anti-smoking photoshoot and getting called first (which means she did the best). So there, rest of the house--y'all can suck it.

Thank god they sent Mila packing. Ten minutes into this show, she was talking about her strategy to win the competition. "I think if I just think about the positive, the bad will go away." On top of that, I think she looked weird (a comment I can make because of the platform of this show) All of which made me think, "Oh, she's got to go." Thankfully, I've been watching long enough that Tyra heard me and responded in kind.

Social Experiments...No. Social Exploitation...Yes.

I've been annoyed in the past couple weeks at the categorization of shows like Kid Nation and Beauty and the Geek as "interesting social experiments." These are NOT social experiments; experiments have some method, a sense of ethical grounding, and an outcome of furthering our understanding of something. Let's call them as they are: Lame attempts by morally wayward television networks to play up fabricated, stressful, and often exploitative social environments in such a way that seems socially relevant. The only relevance is that the networks somehow assume that we'll take these to be as "interesting" as they do. Let's deconstruct both so that you can decide for yourself, shall we:

Kid Nation is CBS's brainchild. A show that transplants 40 kids, ranging in age from 8-15, in a deserted "Western Town" to "see what they'll do." I object on several levels, but most of all on the fact that "see what they'll do" has been obviously directed by creating a Survivor-like game that further splits the group into "tribes" who competes to see who gets to be what class for that week. The winners call the shots, while the losers basically become the slaves, cleaning the latrines and doing the other unsavory work. Lord of the Flies this is not. By virtue of "the game," the kids automatically fall into a very clear hierarchy of status, basically dictating the ways in which the winners will treat the losers. Just to add a little something extra, a town council--4 "very special" children chosen by CBS for their "leadership abilities" get to award a gold star (literally a gold block worth it's weight--$20,000--to the best kid.) So, we now must consider the rift that this individual prize can inflict on the tribes. SUMMARY: To ensure this group of kids is really rotten to each other, all of their social interactions have been dictated by an economic class structure imposed on them, which ultimately will mean kids crying and in pain on television for the whole country to watch. Well done, CBS--I didn't think we could sink any lower than the race-divided Survivor season, but I think we've achieved that here.

Not to be outdone, another fine season of Beauty and the Geek premiered last week on the CW.
As the graphic shows, this fine offering by none other than executive producer Ashton Kutcher, pairs nerdy guys (self titled) with hot-but-stupid girls. The idea is to see who can win the prize at the end by employing savvy teamwork (anytime thinking is involved, the geek's the go to guy; if the challenge involves waxing of any sort, the beauty's up to bat). Again, this is only a social experiment if we are learning something and, alas, we're actually getting stupider watching this show. More disturbing, these qualities are treated as essentials so that all the girls are assumed to be dumb, and play the role well, while the guys couldn't be more socially awkward. Watching this show makes it impossible not to laugh at and not with the boys, which makes it no better than Kid Nation. You just get the sense that somehow the boys think they'll now be cool for having been on this show--that it will change something for them socially. It doesn't. The girls still think they're disgusting.

This is my point of departure from the "social experiment" nomenclature. Nothing learned, nothing gained, and in fact, our own ideas about these social labels only become more embedded--more condoned--than ever before. What I really don't like about these shows that I feel is different from other reality-show games is that the intention is to exploit how socially unknowing these people are. It's as heartbreaking, sometimes, as watching the Average Joe finale--another great example of taking advantage of someone on tv.

And that's exactly what this is: Dangling a modest amount of money at groups of people who need something (kids who need the money for their families or guys who need the money to feel like they're socially acceptable) and then asking them to debase themselves for the whole country to laugh at...it's not cool. And it's certainly not a social experiment. I happen to be in the business of social experiments and I can tell you without doubt that this is very simply and clearly exploitation. The problem is, that word is just so hard to make look good on a commercial or on a billboard.

"Top Chef" is Lowdown

Top Chef producers and judges, I just have one bone to pick--that's right I have a beef. You people are all chicken. (cramming in as many food idioms as I can): The "Restaurant Wars" episode this season (3) was not good. Here's why:

1. There's no such thing as a "do-over." Yes, both teams equally sucked on the first go around. Dale screwed up on the scented candles, Howie made disgusting risotto. So judge them on that!!! You've only been saying all season, "We have to judge them based on what they've done tonight." Instead, on this one episode, you put that rule aside immediately and gave them another go-around.

2. You gave them a crappy designer and sicced the winner of the QuickFire with Steven from last season. Master sommelier or not, that dude is 100% hindrance. He was that way on his own season. You really think it helped by having him run his yap again... to the point that Dale had to tell him to shut it. It was like baby-sitting a guy with a free-run of the wine cellar.

3. Tre got the boot. This is my biggest annoyance. He was a great chef and to have Howie and Casey standing there while Tre goes home...please. Somebody step in and do something. At the end of the show, there's a disclaimer that reads that contestants are eliminated based on the judges' decisions in consultation with the producers. When you kick a guy off like Tre (Padma, are you listening?) it makes it easy to enact the Conspiracy Theory offensive. Is there a coincidence that Howie, who's made questionable food and been up for elimination many times, also happens to make great television while Tre, who's been solid since day one, happens to be a little less, shall we say, "televisonally appealing." (Buddy Tre is totally boring...that's the problem). Casey who's all homespun and everything (the only chef not formally trained (Tre was the other...hmmm)...as was evidenced in the Chopping Onions Debacle of '07 on Wednesday) gets a huge amount of screen time. Why? Her cooking ability? I think not...she's a cute girl with an unfortunate hair-do (in my humble opinion) from Texas (perhaps also unfortunate)...that's why. C'mon.

4. Executive Chef's get all the blame. Another problem. While I understand leadership skills are important, in this case Tre and Sara Mair took the "heat" for whatever went right or wrong in their kitchen. (And Sara did deserve all the credit she got for dealing with Howie who is an ass...lovable maybe but still a complete, utter ass.) However, the problem with just holding them accountable is that it's allowed slackers like Casey and even CJ (who I love) to 'skate' through to this level. Other "team leaders" who were much more talented (from what I could see) were kicked off much earlier in the competition while their team members almost got a free pass because they weren't in charge. This is how we have Casey, who can't chop onions, still here.

I love this show. It is good tv. But let 'em cook and judge 'em fair. If the whole disaster that was the "first" Restaurant Wars challenge got another chance, then Tre should get one too.

"Top Chef" is Tops

There truly are a lot of reasons to love Bravo's "Top Chef."It's awesome reality television. Here's why the recipe works:

1. Really interesting food challenges. It's been progressive across the seasons; now in it's third season, we're seeing some really cool food prepared beautifully (I'm sure it smells awesome--if only they'd hurry up with that "smell-i-vision" idea) but under impossible time and/or budget constraints. The contestants have to rise to the challenge consistently--and usually they do.

2. Tom Colicchio as the "head judge." This guy is a great mixture of gruff Burgess Meredith in Rocky ("C'mon Roc!) and really refined and respected opinions in the food world. He makes great television because he does not appear elitist--he might be finicky and an utter nightmare to work for (which is strictly hypothetical--I have no idea) but we'd never know it. Other judges from the culinary world appear "bitchy." Not Tom. Not only do I trust what he says but he also rocks the "Mr. Clean" look that just makes him so darn cute. I'd love to sit down and have lunch with Tom.

3. A stable of past contestants involved in the current season. Leanne Wong (Season 1) is the food producer (she devises the menu/rules for the challenges and tests them) and she's really brought the level of cooking up with demanding yet really innovative challenges. Both Harold Dieterle (Season 1 Winner and my overall TC favorite) writes an incredible blog responding to the most recent episode as does fan-favorite Sam Talbot (Season 2 Final Four). While I don't read them, Ilan Hall (Season 2 Winner) and infamous Marcelle (Season 2 Runner-up) also give their two cents in blog form. What's nice about this is not only some continuity to the show (this presence seems to make it more fulfilling in a way that other reality shows are not--have you heard from Colby, the winner of one of the middle "Survivor"s recently?) but they also provide the really interesting behind the scenes details. They've walked in those Crocs--they know the pain of a Quickfire challenge intimately and hearing their takes on things adds yet another dimension to an already good show.

4. Really good guest judges. Out of the four judges on the panel, one is always a guest from the culinary universe. In the past seasons, they've been kinda lame (with some notable exceptions). Season 3 has brought out some really famous chefs. Although some say they've gone more commercial (lately Rocco DeSpirito was hawking his Bertolli frozen dinners), I don't care. It's people I know which makes it all the more fun when they saw awful things about how the chefs mutilated the challenge. Definitely ups the train-wreck factor.

and last but certainly not least: 5) Anthony Bourdain (often guest judge) is now a regular blogger about the show! I couldn't be more thrilled. The regular judges' blogs have been good (especially Tom's and Gail Simmon's) but because of schedule conflicts, Tom's had to "take a leave" from blogging for awhile. Bourdain filled in a couple weeks on Tom's blog but now he's got his own and it's awesome. It's a mini Kitchen Confidential every week and I'm drinking it in. Thank God for Anthony Bourdain.

And more on Top Chef Season 3 to come; it's getting good now and the cuts are starting to get more important...and painful to watch.