oakapple

Even in a recession, hope springs eternal :-) ← Given Charlie Palmer's longevity in this business, I have to think the new Aureole was designed with a longer time horizon in mind than just the current recession.

Unfortunately, the terms "brunch" and "memorable" seldom go together. Sneakeater is right about Norma's, but "expensive" is an understatement. If you want a memorable meal in New York, you'll have many more options at dinner time. For brunch, I would find the cheapest place possible, and save my money till later.

It struck me as a dish that could have worked, though obviously the lamb needed to be more done, and the egg less. However, I don't have the back-history with it that Jay Rayner does.

Yea, you missed it by about 20 years. Jeffrey Chodorow’s first place. Opened mid 80’s. Got some print praise in the beginning, fusion fare, big pretty space, but went downhill over the years. I think those who remember the heyday recall crazy packed happy hour on Thursdays catering primarily to the corporate set. Gotta think it’s running on tourist fumes these days. Amazing it’s still open. ← It's not really that amazing; there are many, many restaurants running on exactly that kind of business (like, practically the entire theater district). The OP ordered from the Restaurant Week menu, which means she probably wasn't getting their best stuff.

In an interview, Jay Rayner said that Gail sat in because he hadn't yet received his U.S. work papers. This implies that the two episodes Gail judged were shot first.Anyone care to guess why they weren't aired in order?

I am not defending errors, but "clearly in disarray" based on one lost booking is an extreme statement.

Informal.

thats called "Bad service." if this is really what happened. even if it wasn't, that was your impression, and it sounds like they've got some attitude.for a restaurant of marea's caliber, he should have went to the kitchen and got you a whole branzino head and presented it to your table with flourish. you did ask for it. ← Just to be clear, I think the OP was referring to an incident at Fiamma, not at Marea. Michael White hasn't been at Fiamma for a long time.

Eater reported this week that Bruni has been spotted three times in recent weeks at EMP. As Eater noted, "either Fantastic Frank is milking his expense account for all it's worth, or Danny Meyer could have a four star restaurant on his hands."

As mentioned upthread, I did not enjoy Marea the first time. A couple of dishes were over-cooked, another was served cold, and even the correctly prepared dishes seemed below the level of a purported four-star restaurant. I don't normally give second chances, but after reading all the glowing reviews I was willing to try Marea again, which I did last night. Marea was much better this time. I still do not see a case for four stars, but on the strength of this visit I would give three. Strangely enough, my friend and I rated the savory courses in the same order: pastas best, followed by antipasti, and then entrées. But we were very happy with everything, so it is all relative. The amuse-bouche was, I believe, a sliver of house-made salmon, served on a skewer. Last time, we didn't get an amuse, which I am fairly certain was a mistake. I loved the risotto with asparagus and mushrooms,, which had a rich, buttery taste. Then again, when you add so much cream and butter it's hard to go wrong. Scallop crudo had a bright, lively flavor. Hawaiian swordfish was just fine, but it seemed like a dish I could get at Tribeca Grill. Mind you, I like Tribeca Grill, but no one has suggested it is a four-star restaurant. Marea doesn't seem to take many chances with desserts, but they've been excellent on both visits. Last night, we shared a pineapple panna cotta. The petits-fours very good, but again, compared to other restaurants, Marea is solidly in three-star territory. I like the wine program here, especially the abundance of bottles under $50. The sommelier directed us to a bottle of Loire Muscadet for just $43. The spacing of the courses was better than the last visit. The whole meal stretched out over three hours, but I never really noticed the passage of time. The restaurant was full, but I had no trouble getting an 8:15 p.m. reservation on two days' notice. We arrived a half-hour early and were seated immediately. I don't have the knack for spotting celebrities, but the political pundit David Gergen was at the table next to ours. CNN broadcasts from the Time-Warner Center, a short walk away. I am assuming he's a regular, as he was in and out of there very quickly, which one wouldn't be likely to do on a first visit. Chef White appeared at his table about a nanosecond after he sat down.

The critics' reviews have generally tracked reports of other diners: mostly positive, with the occasional off-note. I would say it's pretty consistent.

Frank Bruni and Adam Platt have been skeptical of these places for their entire tenures, and we haven't been in a recession the whole time.

Exactly. If the restaurant offered the identical food, with counter dining on bar stools and hard rock blasting out of the iPod, Allegretti would be praised as a genius.

As I've only been once, I can't say whether it was an off night or a typical night. Service was excellent, except that there was an extremely long pause between the primi and the secondi. There was no amuse-bouche, and the petits-fours were pretty anemic for a place purporting to aspire to four stars.There was something "off" about practically all the savory courses. Grilled octopus was rubbery. Sturgeon tasted like a dry sponge. Seafood with speck and smoked cod had no cod that we could detect. Another pasta arrived not warm enough, and though the description promised chilies, there was just one lonely chili. In a number of the dishes, we found the ingredients poorly calibrated and/or lazily plated. Desserts were just fine, but they were fairly routine interpretations of classics (cheesecake; panna cotta). The preview menu had something like 85 items, not counting desserts, which I knew immediately would be a problem. You can't serve 85 things, especially in a brand new place, without some of them being let-downs. The menu should have been about half that long.

It gets four stars yet again, this time from Restaurant Girl, albeit on a five-star scale.

Oddly enough, Leventhal's suggestions were remarkably similar to those I had read somewhere else. Where, oh where, did I read them???

My sense is that, while none of those ideas is wrong, you can become a Regular simply by patronizing a place regularly. Obviously, if you slip a twenty to the maitre d' it could hasten the process, but it's not essential. It also depends on the place. I suspect it would be a lot harder to make a dent at Ssäm Bar, where they already have plenty of long-term regulars, and where they are perpetually full anyway. ETA: The irony is that the author if the piece, Ben Leventhal, gets treated like royalty wherever he is recognized, simply because of who he is.

It is quite common, unfortunately. It is reasonably well known. It received a favorable two-star review last year in the Times, and it even made the critic's list of the 10 Best New Restaurants of 2008.

I also found it quite ordinary, not because it's a "comfort food restaurant," but because it is uneven. The ambition is clearly at a higher level than Convivio, but the menu is too long. It is practically impossible for a restaurant, right out of the gate, to offer so many selections without some of them being mediocre.But a four-star rating is clearly in play. I think Ryan Sutton is the best critic in NYC right now, and he gave it four stars for Bloomberg last week: Alan Richman doesn't do stars, but he said if he did, Marea would get four: Based on my one visit, I am more inclined to agree with Adam Platt, who gave a very weak three stars, but Sutton and Richman are two of the best, and one must bear in mind Bruni's well known bias in favor of Italian restaurants. Awarding an undeserved fourth star on his way out the door would be the perfect capstone to Bruni's career.

This is the sentence that I would like to construct my weekend around. ← Found it:http://www.sherwoodhousevineyards.com/FrameSet.htm Nothing spectacular but very different than the big vineyards with huge tour buses coming thru. ← Yes, we loved Sherwood House too. There are a few like that, but Sherwood House is the best we've found.There are plenty that lack the long dirt road, but aren't overrun by limos and buses. We love the Tasting Room on Peconic Lane. The principal tenant is Comtesse Thérèse, but she also hosts a number of smaller wineries that lack a tasting room of their own. We have never seen a bus there. Diliberto is another that's very cute, and where we have never seen a bus. Sometimes, it's just hit-or-miss as to whether a bus is present. However, there are some places with "attitude" that we won't visit under any circumstances, including Pindar, Martha Clara, and Pugliese.

The Frisky Oyster is probably the best restuarant in Greenport. We've been there a number of times (blog report here) and have always been pleased. This summer, the same management opened a slightly more casual satellite restaurant a couple of blocks away, to which we've not yet been.The only other Greenport restaurant with which we have any experience is Claudio's, a formulaic seafood place, which I do not recommend. Down the road, in Southold, is the North Fork Table & Inn (blog report here). It's run by Manhattan exiles, including former Gramercy Tavern pastry chef Claudia Fleming. It is certainly worth a visit. We found the Jedediah Hawkins Inn in Jamesport mediocre, and even in Manhattan it would be considered awfully expensive, with entrées topping out in the 40s.

Woody Allen once said that 80 percent of success is just showing up. Rick Moonen ought to have remembered that. He lost last night by a mere 2½ stars, but that included a zero on the quickfire. Had he managed to serve just about anything in the quickfire, he likely would have received the 3 stars he needed to win.

I have not heard of chefs losing their jobs over this. It's just a contest. People realize that under the pressures of a contrived, time-boxed challenge, a chef might not give his or her best performance. If anything, I suspect that even the losers are better off for having done the show.I do find the judges needlessly condescending. I'd love to see what Geoffrey Zakarian could do under these conditions.

I agree and that's why I'm not as interested as I thought I'd be. What I think is missing is the hungry competitiveness we've seen in Top Chef. There's bragging rights and a big donation to a charity versus an obscure chef competing for $100K and winning national television and magazine exposure. ← There is less at stake, so it feels less like a competition, and more like chefs having fun. Also, because it's four different people every week, there is no story arc.

Unless the OP loves pastrami, it might not be the best choice.