Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Deleted line(s) 25 (click to see context) :
*** The executive meddling in this case was that Alex Guarnaschelli wanted to be an Iron Chef, but kept showing she wasn't actually up to the task in the competition, so they had to keep doing it over and over. So they just kept running the show until they threw up their hands and declared her the winner in spite of her actual performance. They'd have been better off just declaring her an Iron Chef from the start and ignoring the people who called her out as undeserving.
Deleted line(s) 27 (click to see context) :
** Definitely a YMMV thing, because I like Symon. But personally, I still think Cora got an Iron Chef position due to affirmative action. Gotta have a token female, after all. *eyeroll*
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 39 (click to see context) from:
** A mitigating factor for Italian challengers is for the longest time there WASN'T an Iron Chef Italian.
to:
** A mitigating factor for Italian challengers is for the longest time there WASN'T an Iron Chef Italian.Italian.
* Why did ICA force them to have five dishes every time, that seems a bit of a bind on their creativity? Is it really better to have quantity over quality? ICJ had chefs make as many or as few as they liked and the quality was better for it (Jacques Borie won his battle with ''one'' dish because the other was disqualified for not having the theme in it.)
* Why did ICA force them to have five dishes every time, that seems a bit of a bind on their creativity? Is it really better to have quantity over quality? ICJ had chefs make as many or as few as they liked and the quality was better for it (Jacques Borie won his battle with ''one'' dish because the other was disqualified for not having the theme in it.)
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 38 (click to see context) from:
** For Glory. They wanted to prove they were BETTER CHEFS, not just that they could win an ultimately arbitrary challenge by exploiting its rules. When the iron chef is put completely out of their element by a challenger in theirs, win or lose, the audience admires the iron chef for their skill and versatility in doing as well as they did and the challenger walks away with their name added to a list. If the challenger willingly stacks the deck against themselves and still wins, the victory is absolute.
to:
** For Glory. They wanted to prove they were BETTER CHEFS, not just that they could win an ultimately arbitrary challenge by exploiting its rules. When the iron chef is put completely out of their element by a challenger in theirs, win or lose, the audience admires the iron chef for their skill and versatility in doing as well as they did and the challenger walks away with their name added to a list. If the challenger willingly stacks the deck against themselves and still wins, the victory is absolute.absolute.
** A mitigating factor for Italian challengers is for the longest time there WASN'T an Iron Chef Italian.
** A mitigating factor for Italian challengers is for the longest time there WASN'T an Iron Chef Italian.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*** The executive meddling in this case was that Alex Guarnaschelli wanted to be an Iron Chef, but kept showing she wasn't actually up to the task in the competition, so they had to keep doing it over and over. So they just kept running the show until they threw up their hands and declared her the winner in spite of her actual performance. They'd have been better off just declaring her an Iron Chef from the start and ignoring the people who called her out as undeserving.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 36 (click to see context) from:
* On ''ICJ'': Why did so many challengers so often go for the intra-cuisine battles? (Outside of the ones like the Ohta Faction who were trying to prove a point.) They had to know that because the style of the challenger was known, but the Iron Chef (except in certain circumstances) was not, the ingredient would either be chosen to favor the challenger or as a "neutral" one common to most cuisines. Moreover, the out-of-cuisine Iron Chefs were not usually expecting to be chosen, giving a surprise advantage. True, this didn't always work (see: Sakai in the Jinhua pork battle against a Cantonese chef, or Chen and Michiba in their foie gras battles against French chefs), but why unnecessarily level the playing field when you have a choice?
to:
* On ''ICJ'': Why did so many challengers so often go for the intra-cuisine battles? (Outside of the ones like the Ohta Faction who were trying to prove a point.) They had to know that because the style of the challenger was known, but the Iron Chef (except in certain circumstances) was not, the ingredient would either be chosen to favor the challenger or as a "neutral" one common to most cuisines. Moreover, the out-of-cuisine Iron Chefs were not usually expecting to be chosen, giving a surprise advantage. True, this didn't always work (see: Sakai in the Jinhua pork battle against a Cantonese chef, or Chen and Michiba in their foie gras battles against French chefs), but why unnecessarily level the playing field when you have a choice?choice?
** For Glory. They wanted to prove they were BETTER CHEFS, not just that they could win an ultimately arbitrary challenge by exploiting its rules. When the iron chef is put completely out of their element by a challenger in theirs, win or lose, the audience admires the iron chef for their skill and versatility in doing as well as they did and the challenger walks away with their name added to a list. If the challenger willingly stacks the deck against themselves and still wins, the victory is absolute.
** For Glory. They wanted to prove they were BETTER CHEFS, not just that they could win an ultimately arbitrary challenge by exploiting its rules. When the iron chef is put completely out of their element by a challenger in theirs, win or lose, the audience admires the iron chef for their skill and versatility in doing as well as they did and the challenger walks away with their name added to a list. If the challenger willingly stacks the deck against themselves and still wins, the victory is absolute.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 14 (click to see context) from:
** This is happening because he wasn't actually on the show until the latter half of the show's run. For some reason the dubbers decided to include him in the dub intros for every episode they localized- even though he's in roughly less than half of them!
to:
** This is happening because he wasn't actually on the show until the latter half of the show's run. For some reason the dubbers decided to include him in the dub intros for every episode they localized- even though he's in roughly less than half of them! them!
