oakapple

Feb. 5th 2006 ← The latest New York Times review (two stars, per Bruni, on February 23, 2005) pre-dates Humm's arrival. If the kitchen has indeed improved to the degree stated here, unfortunately it will probably be a while till Bruni or his successor gets back there.

Even if the rules allow people to vote on that basis, I'd be curious to know to what extent they actually do. I like to think that most people have some integrity. Yes, there could be some pure "good guy" votes in there, but it doesn't mean they all are.

A Voce will be tomorrow's NYT review.

It's A Voce. Eater has established the betting line at even money for two stars.

A friend and I had dinner at Ici last Friday night. I should have taken better notes when my memory was fresh, but I vaguely recall starting with a goat cheese salad that was unspectacular, followed by sea bass that was simply grilled, and presented competently without any frills. Ici is about a fifteen-minute walk from the Brooklyn Academy of Music, and is a safe choice for a pre-show meal. Much of the clientele seemed to be from the Fort Greene neighborhood. The outdoor garden is lovely, and the restaurnt is child-friendly. Our meal was nothing special, but it was enjoyable and easy on the pocketbook. I will certainly consider going back the next time I am going to BAM. Otherwise, I wouldn't make a special trip.

Ditto on the great timing ... I'm taking my mother there for Mother's Day.

In fairness, the Times website says, and has said since before Bruni arrived, that the rating takes the price into account. I don't have a problem with that, as price certainly is part of the dining experience—namely, the last part of the experience, when you have to pay for it all.Any critic must have a view on whether a chef's experiments have succeeded. If the critic concludes that quite a few of them have not, should the restaurant be awarded a bonus star because the chef boldly dares to go where no chef has gone before? When was the last time that any NYT critic said something like, "A lot of these experiements are unsuccessful, but this restaurant still gets three stars for pushing the edge of the envelope." It's fair to say Bruni just isn't enamored with creative cooking, no matter where he goes. It's not a case of liking what Scott Conant did at Alto, while disliking Gilt. At every restaurant that has received at least three stars from him, the cooking is fairly traditional. On his blog recently, he admitted to very ambivalent feelings about WD-50, which suggests that Wylie Dufresne won't be getting a third star anytime soon. I agree with this. Frank is a meat-and-potatoes guy at heart, and creativity doesn't win any points with him.

Whether modern or classic, Italian food seems to be what Bruni knows best. It's worth bearing in mind that no restaurant delivers excellence every day, to every diner. Even on the Per Se and Le Bernardin threads, there's a fair number of disappointed diners, among many more who were satisfied. So at a restaurant like Roberto's, it's quite possible that Bruni's visit didn't catch them at their best.

A friend and I had dinner at Molyvos the other night. We both ordered a Sea Bass special ($30), which was cooked to perfection — crisp on the outside, tender on the inside, and perched atop a bed of vegetables. I wasn't very hungry, so all I had with it was the house cabernet ($12), which was unremarkable. Molyvos has settled into a happy middle age. Ruth Reichl was utterly smitten in 1997, awarding three stars. Five years later, Eric Asimov was still enthusiastic, but took the restaurant down to a more realistic two stars. I have a sense that Molyvos is executing a well-trodden path competently, but isn't doing anything that would make it a destination. Maybe it's because there are a lot more Greek restaurants today in Molyvos's class than there were in 1997.

We're going Friday night (pre BAM)....looking forward to reporting back.

Two stars it is, per Frank Bruni:

I do think that, at times, Bruni has chosen illustrative examples that seem trivial or petty. For instance, his review of The Modern included this critique of the service: These glitches seem like the kind of trivial mistakes at a new establishment that do not properly characterize the restaurant, and therefore did not belong in the review. If service really is an issue, surely there were better examples. If these glitches were isolated, I don't think they deserved to be mentioned.Having said that, as Leonard has pointed out on other occasions, Bruni generally will not award three stars if he has significant issues with the food, as he clearly did at The Modern. He doesn't award "style points," or bonus stars for lofty ambitions not consistently realized on the plate. (Perry St and Del Posto are the only significant exceptions in his 21-month tenure.) So, I certainly wouldn't assume that, but for these mistakes, The Modern would have earned the three stars it clearly aspired to.

I am familiar with the idea that a reviewer should cut a restaurant some slack in its early days, on the assumption that minor glitches will be smoothed out over time. I am not sure that Frank Bruni subscribes to that theory, except on rare occasions. Bruni gave the benefit of the doubt (and the higher rating) to Perry St and Del Posto. But I can recall a far larger number of reviews in which relatively minor complaints took a restaurant below its expected rating, even with an established chef at the helm. It's worth remembering that V Steakhouse, another Vongerichten creation, received an absolutely withering critique. Even if Frank Bruni thinks that way, I suspect that Paul Liebrandt (who ranks somewhere between a novice and Vongerichten/Batali stardom) was not somebody who would qualify for a free pass.

Well, my friend and I thought it was borderline 2-3. I gave it three on my blog, but it was a close call. It's nice to know they're "making all the proper changes," but Bruni had to review what it is, not what it might be down the line.

It might, if the ambiance were part of the dining decision. For instance, if I were looking for a romantic room to celebrate an anniversary, the video might tell me a lot more than any written description ever could.

Many critics thought that the original Craft menu was too confusing, and its current incarnation is a whole lot simpler. Overly complex menus are a big bugaboo with Frank Bruni. If a restaurant is on the borderline, it can cost them a star. Offering filet mignon at $44 or $49, with the difference being the ranch it came from, is one of the more peculiar things I've seen.

According to Eater, Craftsteak opens tomorrow. The restaurant is at 85 10th Ave at 15th St — a neighborhood classified as the Meatpacking District, Far West Chelsea, or "NoMeat," depending on whom you ask. A copy of the craft-like menu (PDF) is available here. As at the mother-ship restaurant, Craft, it looks like your meal can get expensive in a hurry. It wouldn't be a Craft menu if the entrées weren't sorted differently than you find them anywhere else. Thus, the steaks are sorted by where they come from: Corn-Fed Black Angus Beef; Hawaiian Grass-Fed Angus Beef; Corn-Fed Hereford Beef; Ridgefield Farm Corn-Fed Premium Hereford Beef; RR Ranch Corn-Fed Black Angus Natural; Snake River Farm Wagyu Beef. All of these categories make you wonder. From the Corn-Fed Black Angus Beef section, only the Hangar ($29) and the Filet ($49) are offered. What did they do with the rest of the cow? From the Hawaiian variety, four cuts are offered: Sirloin, Strip, Rib (all $39) or Filet ($44). From the Hereford, only the Porterhouse is available ($78). Then there's the Ridgefield variety, where they offer only the Strip, but you pay $42–66 for it, depending on how long it has aged (28–56 days). From the RR Ranch variety, only the prime rib is offered. I don't understand the difference between First Cut ($240), Second Cut ($210), or Third Cut ($180). How big a portion would that be? The Wagyu beef menu is as extensive as I've seen anywhere, with five cuts offered, anywhere from an 8 oz. Flat Iron ($49) to a 32 oz Porterhouse ($220). There are three Wagyu tasting menus, with a minimum of four guests, priced at $115, $135, or $165. And that's just a bit of the menu. There are extensive raw bar selections, and various other entrée meets and shellfish.

According to Eater, Buddakan will be Frank Bruni's review next Wednesday. Eater's insta-poll shows the smart money's on one star, with a chance for two. I cast my vote for two, because virtually everyone who's tried both has rated Buddakan higher than Morimoto, and Frank already one-starred Morimoto.

I strenuously disagree with all of this advice. Why on earth would you say "Let's stay in France for this evening if possible" just to impress the restaurant staff? You should say that only if it actually matters to you. And by all means, if pinot grigio is what you like, you should say so. Why would you spend the kind of money a meal at Per Se costs, and then not tell the sommelier your preferences? If it so happens that those preferences brand you as inexperienced, then so be it. Over time, your palate may become more sophisticated; but at the moment, your objective is to enjoy the meal that's in front of you, not to fool the sommelier into thinking you possess expertise that you do not really have. A wine pairing, if it's done skillfully, will give you the experience of several different wines, usually including at least a few that you most likely never would have ordered on their own. It's an excellent way to discover a wide range of tastes and styles.Wine pairings, on the other hand, are usually more expensive. After 6-7 glasses, even at 2-4 oz pours, you're probably going to feel like being carried home. It's a wonderful feeling on occasion, but sometimes I forego the wine pairing simply because I don't want to drink that much.

Yes, you still hear about people getting the 2×2, and it will cost extra—about $100 per person. As I recall from various reports, you need not order it in advance. Actually, if you can afford it, a wine pairing is ideal for someone who is still discovering his palate, as you'll receive a range of different wines that you probably would never have ordered on your own. The foie gras supplement (currently $30) has been on the menu from the beginning. When I went, they offered us a choice of the cold or hot foie gras (the cold version was on the printed menu). Half the table chose one, half chose the other, and everyone was equally satisfied!! The last several reports have mentioned a Wagyu beef supplement, so perhaps that is becoming a standard, although it wasn't on the menu two months ago, when I was there. I would ask in advance, but my understanding is that they are very accommodating of just about anyone who asks.

Was this the standard 9-course chef's tasting menu, or a special menu such as a 2×2?

Although Manhattan's overall cost of living is certanly not 7.25 X Tampa, the cost of land just might be. My one-bedroom apartment rent is much more than the mortgage on the four-bedroom, 3-car-garage ranch home that I formerly owned in Tampa.I tend to think that, with Del Posto's prices already being quite high enough, the cost of parking ought to be borne only by those who need the service. I have yet to see any evidence that Del Posto's valet parking is objectively expensive by Manhattan standards. What's unusual is that they have the service at all.

Rich is usually very well informed, so I'd be curious to know the basis for this. I have not observed a valet parking service in action at very many Manhattan restaurants—actually, I think it's quite uncommon—so if $29 is unreasonable, to what is it being compared? If the price at Rao's is $35, and it includes a wax and wash, that's still more-or-less comparable. (On the scale Del Posto is built for, I don't think it would do if the system were to just give a tenner to Louie, and he'll watch it for you.) Since every restaurant has bathrooms and a place for your coat, there are plenty of comparisons available that allow us to say, "This is unreasonable." Del Posto's valet parking is a service not generally offered at Manhattan restaurants. If you found a lot for yourself, you'd probably be paying around the same amount, without the benefit or convenience of valet service.

At Aquavit Cafe recently, my friend and I were comped two mid-courses, and I was also comped a dessert. There was no particular reason that I could see, aside from their desire to ensure a repeat customer—which they did.

I'm no expert on restaurant economics, but there are at least half-a-dozen restaurants in the city that are trying to compete at the same level of luxury, so I think one can make comparisons. When the restaurant has tables readily available every night of the week, I would presume they're having some struggles. I wouldn't compare them to WD-50, where the rents must be a lot lower.I think Per Se gets two turns at most of the tables. Just like Gilt, Per Se doesn't offer 8pm reservations except to VIPs, since those tables can't turn. The difference is that Per Se fills every available slot, and Gilt doesn't.