Posted 2 yrs 4 mos ago by
meriah At the risk of alienating Buzznet's growing legion of
devotees, I must admit I found this week's episode of L.A. Ink to be a bit of a yawner. I started to realize, as she tattooed Steve-O from Jackass, that it is mainly what she does that is interesting -- not what she says. Before you ponder my blasphemous poll question (I mean, how dare I even question the greatness that is Kat Von D, right?), here are some show highlights:
Kat puts a portrait tat on Steve-O (of him when he was a toddler) for his birthday. An odd choice for an outrageously odd man. He reveals to Kat that he's an actual clown-school graduate and admits that he was a spoiled rich kid (surprising, right?).
Tears were shed more than a few times as Hannah and Kim gave emotionally significant tats to their clients. Hannah's peacock tat was large and colorful while Kim's cherry blossoms were among the best tattoo art I've ever seen (excuse my french -- they were f***ing beautiful!)
Kat stresses as shop-construction delays stall the opening. The Chicagoans (Hannah and Kim) are forced to work out of Corey's shop -- and Kim is questioning her move to L.A. altogether. By the way: Did Hannah ditch her kid for L.A.? It was unclear what she meant when she said it was "either my daughter or my work." I'm sure we'll find out in upcoming episodes.
So what do you think: Is Kat boring, or what?
Once I found out some of the reasons behind why people were getting their tattooes, I hoped it would help change my mom's mind about hating tattooes and thinking people who get them are scumbags, but she missed the most significant parts and picked on every little thing she could in the parts she did see.
The tats were definitely amazing, and I'll watch it again, but probably not next week. Pixie annoyed me a little....
:]