Sneakeater

The hamburgers are big.

Oh, so it's at 6th & Washington Pl.! My mental image of where I walked by it is farther north. (You can't miss it, BTW -- even though, at least as of a few days ago, there's no visible signage.)

Try this: http://forums.egullet.org/index.php?showto...aded&show=&st=& (It's easier to read if you click on "standard" toward the upper right.)

Also, pre-theater you might (unfortunately) want to stay closer to BAM (which lessens your options).

It certainly removes Franny's from the running.

What's your parents' address? Recommended dishes? Anything to avoid?

The German place is not. Too bad.

I'm not going to go wild about Insieme, but I really enjoyed my meal there. The food part, anyway. Let me get the non-food stuff out of the way: Bland, Midtown-modern room. Staff almost entirely obviously Downtown people, out of place in these quintessentially Midtown surroundings. Unfair complaint about slow/uncoordinated service in a restaurant open only a couple of weeks (ignore it) YOU CAN'T EAT AT THE BAR! WHAT'S UP WITH THAT? Now that that's out of the way, on to the food: As is well known, the menu is divided into the "traditional Italian" side, and the "modern Italian-American" side. What was interesting to me was that I wanted to focus on the "modern" side, thinking it would show more of what Chef Canora is up to these days, but I, for one, found the traditional side more compelling. I ended up ordering an antipasto and a primo from the traditional menu, and an entree from the modern menu. The antipasto was a veal tartare. Nothing startling, but extremely delicious. The primo was the now-famous lasagna verde, which deserves all its accolades. The meat was perfect: almost nutty, and crunchy at the margins. Segundo was sable with uni. Tiny portion, but also very good. I enjoyed the dessert -- a gianduja bar -- very much. By-the-glass wine list wasn't extensive, but was consistently interesting. Both wine and food prices will strike Hearth regulars as high. I'd put Insieme exactly on a level with A Voce. They both feature very well-prepared traditional Italian food with contemporary twists. (Insieme takes that farther, of course, with its split menu conceit.) To be sure, I think A Voce is slightly overrated, so this isn't the highest of high praise. But I nonetheless enjoy the food at both these places, and respect the care with which it's both conceived and executed. There's enough that I still want to taste on the menu at Insieme* that I know I'll be back. ______________________________________________________ * How did I not order the antipasto that essentially consists of a plate of fried offal? That's a dish that has "Sneakeater" written all over it. I just thought it was too obviously directed at me, I guess.

That was in the dining room, BTW. Gotta say: place was packed late on a Sunday night.

I thought the old Gramercy Tavern was boring. I thought Blue Hill was boring. Now: Michael Anthony At The Gramercy Tavern Boring + Boring = ? Not boring, but not wildly exciting, either? Something like that. Certainly much better, to my taste, than either of its predecessors, though. Started with -- this was almost a week ago, and I don't take notes -- a raviolo with some kind of shellfish? Crab? In a broth? Sort of a tired dish, verging on the cliched. But certainly well executed. Entree was very good. Venison, somehow cooked so there was a haunting aftertaste of cranberry. I've never seen that familiar combination pulled off so interestingly. This is exactly what Chef Anthony is best at: some simple familiar thing done with some kind of special technique that elevates it to the memorable. My problem with Blue Hill was that those effects were too subtle. This one registered. This venison didn't shy away from the gamey, BTW. I was delighted -- although my date said something about "dogfoodiness." I can't remember what I had for dessert. But I remember walking out of there feeling very grateful for Nancy Olson. The new GT is, to me, sort of like Telepan. The food is wholly admirable, and very good. But there's not much to say about it.

I don't think anyone here would say it should merit special (or any) attention.

I doubt anyone here would say so.

To be fair, it's also (or more accurately, really) named after the very famous highly architecturally significant NYC office building in which it's located.

All I can tell you is that I walked by Petrosino countless times, and it never occurred to me to pay it any attention at all.

That's a point. Of course, we all know that they don't get New York. [sMILEY]

What I mean is that there are dozens of small Italian restaurants. The City is lousy with them. Only a few are probably extraordinary -- but we only know about them if (a) we happen to stumble upon one or (b) some reviewer points it out. You only know how good Petrosino was because Bruni reviewed it. If Bruni hadn't reviewed Petrosino, you never would have gone there. It would have been another of the multitudes of small Italian places that get reviewed in "$25 and Under" (or used to before that column's focus became more seriously downmarket) and that we all immediately forget about. So you never would have known how good you thought it was. So how can you say that, among the dozens of other places like Petrosino -- small Italian places that we all ignore -- there are no others worthy of note? Absent reviews, you'd have to eat there to know. And probably, you wouldn't bother.

What's so surprising about an expensive, design-oriented restaurant, in a central business district, charging a lot of money for food that isn't bad but isn't that good?

I'll bet there are at least dozens of restaurants like Petrossino. Some are better than others. Some worthy of general recognition, others not. Are you saying you think that, out of the multitudes of small Italian restaurants in New York, Petrossino is the only one that desreves more recognition that it's getting?

It's on Sixth Avenue, somewhere a bit south of 10th.

No, I mean, me too, I felt the exact same way as you did. I'm just saying that if one of the Times's "good" reviewers had decided to review a place like this, I'm not sure there would have been the same uproar.

I think that part of the reason for the controversy over Bruni's choice of Max Brenner as a review subject is that nobody is really very interested in what Bruni thinks about things. I mean, if it were Ruth Reichl or Mimi Sheraton or Craig Claiborne -- or oakapple or Fat Guy or any number of people here -- we'd be curious just to hear their take on a place, whatever it is.

I think Bruni may understand Italian food better than some other kinds. But I think he's as bad a reviewer of Italian restaurants as any other kind. As I keep saying, he just doesn't have the technical chops.

I'd like to emphasize rich's list in connection with the "hidden gems" conversation above.

I hope I'm not walking into some unknown political minefield when I post the following link as additional evidence (beyond the eG thread I linked above) that foodies were excited about this place when it first opened: http://offthebroiler.wordpress.com/?s=brenner Also, for all the talk of Max Brenner's being an obvious tourist trap, opening their second location on Second Ave. in the East Village isn't the move of a corporation targeting the tourist trade. Hell, I could even point out that both their existing NYC branches are Downtown, which Nathan says is now the epicenter of serious New York dining. As Fat Guy said, it wasn't obvious to me that the place is a joke.

I mean, I have to say that I, personally, am more interested in a review of Max Brenner than of either Piano Due or Brasserie Ruhlmann.