Dinosaur BBQ (NYC)

[Jason Perlow]

The shame of it is that this lady, who knows nothing about barbecue, and who thinks that pulled pork should be cat food in a vinegar bath, has the power to hurt a place like Dinosaur.

←

I'm not so sure that an unfavorable review in the Times—particularly of this type of restaurant—can really do very much damage. Dinosaur will succeed or fail on its own merits.

←

Its not like a meal at Dinosaur is a such major cash outlay for a diner that a negative review, or even multiple negative reviews for that matter are going to make difference -- most of the people looking to eat that kind of food don't pay attention to those things. If it was Per Se, Daniel or Le Bernardin, or even a 3-star place like Babbo got slammed like that, it might be a different story.

I don't think members of biker gangs read the NYT food section.

[jogoode]

The shame of it is that this lady, who knows nothing about barbecue, and who thinks that pulled pork should be cat food in a vinegar bath, has the power to hurt a place like Dinosaur.

←

And let's respect our fellow food journalists. Severson doesn't deserve the title of "this lady." She's an award-winning food journalist!

[Todd36]

If you google Dinosaur, up comes a number of less than favorable impressions, along with some good ones. I suspect the place is inconstant at best, and the word of mouth they are developing may not be so hot. That may hurt in long run. You are argue about whether the people who wrote the reviews know BBQ or not, but they plain dididn't like it, and if you want to argue they don't know BBQ, then fine, they are ordinary people who do not know BBQ and most of Dinosaur's customers are ordinary people who don't know BBQ and may not like what Dinosauer gives them.

[pete ganz]

That's like the third time you have said they're inconsistent, but have you been there yet? I have, and while I'm no bbq expert, I thought the food was very good to excellent, especially the pulled pork. I haven't travelled the country for bbq like some of the people on this thread, but the meat and sides were tasty and I would definitely go back.

[verysleepy]

Its not like a meal at Dinosaur is a such major cash outlay for a diner that a negative review, or even multiple negative reviews for that matter are going to make difference -- most of the people looking to eat that kind of food don't pay attention to those things. If it was Per Se, Daniel or Le Bernardin, or even a 3-star place like Babbo got slammed like that, it might be a different story.

I don't think members of biker gangs read the NYT food section.

←

Jason- I don't think I saw one biker type on either of the two occasions that I was there. Some bad reviews in a few major publications would perhaps stop people in my age bracket- (50's) from venturing up there. I had no idea what to expect first time going up there. Would I be killed by a pack of wolves or muggers? Um no... but for someone that spends their time on 96th Street and below? My fears were soon allayed when I got there. I just hope many will not be influenced by a number of mixed reviews.

Nadine

[woodburner]

Owen

Dinosaur does not serve Carolina style vinegar chopped pork, which would be Eastern Carolina Style.  They serve a coarse pull. 

In North Carolina, depending on where you go, you can get it finely chopped, coarse chop (my personal favorite), even sliced.

The sauce on Dinosaur's seems to be put on after for serving. 

That's why I ask for mine to be very light on sauce.. or sauce on the side.

←

Variations of serving style are dependent upon final internal meat temperatures of pork. For instance sliced pork, is cooked to approximately 170ºF, this would never allow the meat to be "pulled or shreded" only sliced. A small portion of the internal fat will not have fully rendered yet at this stage.

For pulled pork, you need to finish with an internal temperature over 185º but more up near 200ºf, leaving most, if not all of the internal fat rendered. Pull and then chop to desired meat size. Cooking to this final temperature would not allow you to slice, as it would just fall apart.

woodburner

[verysleepy]

Woodburner,

I found the various places in North Carolina to serve the pork a few ways. You could request a coarse chop in most places, which was my favorite, as it was a bit less fatty.

[woodburner]

Woodburner,

I found the various places in North Carolina to serve the pork a few ways.  You could request a coarse chop in most places, which was my favorite, as it was a bit less fatty.

I'm in your camp with the coarse chop at the most, but for me just some thumb tip size chunks, and mix in some crunchy seasoned bark.

woof woof

woodburner

Edited January 14, 2005 by slkinsey (log)

[brooklyncook]

If you google Dinosaur, up comes a number of less than favorable impressions, along with some good ones.  I suspect the place is inconstant at best, and the word of mouth they are developing may not be so hot.  That may hurt in long run.  You are argue about whether the people who wrote the reviews know BBQ or not, but they plain dididn't like it, and if you want to argue they don't know BBQ, then fine, they are ordinary people who do not know BBQ and most of Dinosaur's customers are ordinary people who don't know BBQ and may not like what Dinosauer gives them.

←

Well, let's go with that.

For starters, let's be fair -- the food writers Sietsma and Severson didn't seem to care for it, whereas the NY Press writer was somewhat indifferent. She did write that she'd go somewhere where one dish excelled -- she notes Daisy May's Beer-Can Chicken - versus a place where everything in the meal is above-average.

So would I call that three bad reviews? Nein.

Now, do they really need to "know barbeque" to review it? Perhaps not, but it probably wouldn't hurt to have a bit of background in the subject. Comparing the Dino to Blue Smoke on a local level would make sense; comparing the Dino to authentic Texas barbeque would as well. Comparing the Manhattan Dino to the Syracuse Dino (and not having even been there themselves) -- no sense. It'd make more sense for one of you (who's travelled the Southern locales) to review the restaurant.

The comment on "there are ordinary people...who may not like what Dinosaur gives them" -- well, of course. Given that the reviewers didn't like what they got, that in turn denotes the inconsistency you suspect? Or does that just show that three ordinary people didn't get what they thought "authentic" barbeque should be?

[woodburner]

I'll start off.

Yeah, people need to understand and know every inch of bbq before they review it.

BBQ is a revelation, gathering if you will, friends sitting down to eat meat cooked over hot wood coals to be exact, that will include some inclusive side dishes which might include mac and cheese, greens, maybe cornbread depending upon which state of the union you cut your teeth.

The dino need not worry a bit, in my opinion regarding a couple of rag reviews.

Meat that cooks for 12-16 hours will certainly have variability in taste, flavor, and mouthfeel, maybe daily. That's part of the mystique.

These two review's are small potatoes.

carry on

woodburner

Edited January 14, 2005 by woodburner (log)

[Todd36]

The comment on "there are ordinary people...who may not like what Dinosaur gives them" -- well, of course.  Given that the reviewers didn't like what they got, that in turn denotes the inconsistency you suspect?  Or does that just show that three ordinary people didn't get what they thought "authentic" barbeque should be?

←

It's a feeble attempt by me to show a logic problem (more time to think when I'm home). Numerous people on this thread have said Seimesta and the NYT reviewer lack the knowledge to know what real BBQ is, therefore, their reviews are meaningless. Lets accept that proposition. If they lack knowledge about BBQ, that converts them into ordinary people with respect to BBQ. They didn't like Dinsosaur very much, even the NY Press review person said the apps were better than the mains, not a good sign. So I accept the proposition that the three review people are ordinary people and I also know they don't like Dinonsaur. That isn't a good sign: if people this thread has labeled as "people who don't know BBQ" don't like Dinosaur, the sort of people who are Dinosauer's target customers, Dinosaur has a problem.

[Fat Guy]

Dinosaur opened, and prior to the Voice and Times reviews we had reports from:

lambretta76

tcavallo

Jason Perlow

jhlurie

Mister_Cutlets

verysleepy

Rachel Perlow

pete ganz

juuceman

ahr

Daniel

wannabechef

Me

Several of the people on the above list are members and staff whose opinions I have tracked over the course of hundreds of posts and several years. These are not random idiots posting on epinions and citysearch.

Every single one of the people on the list above kept a level head and delivered what seemed like balanced critiques of Dinosaur. The overwhelming sentiment was positive. Very positive. In many cases celebratory.

Then the professional reviewers came along with disdainful, condescending reviews that barely hold up on their own terms no less against the testimony of so many people I trust, not to mention my own experience.

Something is going on here.

I don't think it's a question of ignorance. There are troublesome issues with each review, to be sure. Sietsema pushes up so close to a misstatement -- a reasonable and attentive reader would be likely to conclude that Sietsema was saying Dinosaur uses no wood -- that the Voice really should print a clarification. Severson's talk of axioms and inescapable truths is not only misguided but also indicative of closed-mindedness. But ignorance? No, I think Sietsema and Severson probably know a good deal about barbecue, and I wouldn't care if they didn't. There is no hard-and-fast expertise requirement for reviewers. A good reviewer gets the job done even when reviewing a restaurant that serves a totally unfamiliar cuisine: you do research, you find experts to visit the restaurant with you, you taste and taste until you start to identify and differentiate the relevant flavors, and you write to the best of your ability.

I don't think inconsistency can explain it. The probabilities just don't align very well in support of that theory given the quality and quantity of positive testimony we've seen here, and the language of the reviews hints at more than a simple case of inconsistency.

No, this feels more like a chip-on-the-shoulder kind of situation, in both cases. In both cases the reviewers are unreasonably holding Dinosaur up to absolutist standards that not only create self-fulfilling prophecies but also are not particularly sensible. Both reviews betray a certain hostility towards the idea of Dinosaur being a legitimate barbecue restaurant. I expect the average clueless diner to be blinded by atmospherics. Negative reactions to the silly decor, the chain-like menu language and the frat-party scene are unsurprising, and plenty of people are so put off by that sort of thing that they are incapable of enjoying anything else about the meal. Likewise, there are all sorts of people wandering around out there with opinions along the lines of "only X is legitimate barbecue, therefore everything else is bad" and "barbecue is only good in place Y, therefore it is bad everywhere else." But professional critics? They should be doing exactly the opposite: seeing past the distractions, the biases and the cliches, and drilling down to the essence of the food. I believe these two reviews simply failed to do that.

[Fat Guy]

There are a lot of claims being made on this thread about how all the good barbecue restaurants in North Carolina serve pork only. Those claims would not seem to reconcile very well with the reality of so many top North Carolina barbecue places that serve, for example, barbecued chicken. The standard throughout barbecue country, from Texas to Tennessee to Missouri to Illinois to the Carolinas, is multiple meats. This is the case even at the top-tier places. An establishment serving only one meat would be deviant, not standard.

[marlena spieler]

I know Kim's writing well enough that she's anything but irresponsible in her reporting.

←

hear, hear, jason.

and i thought the piece was written extremely well too.

i could hear kims voice loud and clear, and i could smell and taste it all. i felt like i was in a barbecue disneyland, and it ain't right to my taste, neither.

but damn, i could do with a few good ribs right now.

marlena

[Jason Perlow]

I know Kim's writing well enough that she's anything but irresponsible in her reporting.

hear, hear, jason.

and i thought the piece was written extremely well too.

i could hear kims voice loud and clear, and i could smell and taste it all. i felt like i was in a barbecue disneyland, and it ain't right to my taste, neither.

but damn, i could do with a few good ribs right now.

marlena

On the other hand though, I enjoyed Dinosaur very much when I went, and her assessment really does puzzle me. Kim has built her reputation as a feature writer doing investigative journalism, and not restaurant reviewing, however. This is not to say that a writer can't do both, but you got to wonder if this is something the Times stuck her with as opposed to something she really wants to do. God knows all of us come out cranky and unfair in our writing sometimes, I certainly do.

[Todd36]

There are a lot of claims being made on this thread about how all the good barbecue restaurants in North Carolina serve pork only. Those claims would not seem to reconcile very well with the reality of so many top North Carolina barbecue places that serve, for example, barbecued chicken. The standard throughout barbecue country, from Texas to Tennessee to Missouri to Illinois to the Carolinas, is multiple meats. This is the case even at the top-tier places. An establishment serving only one meat would be deviant, not standard.

←

My guess is that your talking about large scale, well established places. If you drive along on country roads, you're going to find pork and not chicken, ribs or anything else. I would guess pork only for two reasons: its cheap (cheaper than ribs or chicken) and it stays for a while. Have extra chopped/pulled pork?, it's going to stay for a while, that chicken is going to get ugly. It's also easier to make one thing. Good BBQ requires watching, something more difficult when you have to cook different kinds of meat with different requirements. The places I've liked have been real small and in poor areas, they depend on locals and the rare person like me who drives by. They are not listed in things like "Southern Belly." But we can disagree here if you want.

I've also reread Seimesta's review. I think its pretty clear he said he couldn't smell smoke or see wood, he didn't say they use no wood. The truth at Dino seems to be that they use some wood, but it sounds like it isn't their heat source. Truth be told, a few months ago Dino catered a political party across the street from where I was eating lunch and I talked to one of their owners. The BBQ smelled good, they had a cooker out. But I didn't smell wood and I saw no evidence of wood. I will make it up there some day to taste, probably next week.

I think the idea that several professional food reviewers have it in for Dino is interesting. Why can't it be accepted that they might be right?

[jhlurie]

Sighs

Why all the mention, and comparisons to Syracuse, or Rochester in the review? Half of the review is filled with these, and it's not fair.  Ok, compare Dinosaur with other NY BBQ places to give we New Yorkers a fair reference point.  Since I don't dine very often in Syracuse, it makes no difference to me.  (No offense to my upstate neighbors.)

←

I actually think of those comparisons as fair, because it's an attempt to put the restaurant in the context of its own other locations. Comparisons to totally unrelated places in Texas, or Kansas City, or North Carolina are a different matter. They can still exist as some sort of ideal (expecially if and when the facts are correct--like how much wood should be used or the type of smokers used), but the attitude shouldn't be "this sucks because we aren't there".

I think the idea that several professional food reviewers have it in for Dino is interesting. Why can't it be accepted that they might be right?

In terms of a pure food quality evaluation? They may well be. It's the inability to place the reviews in context, and to get past what seems like some really overblown assumptions that seem to irk a few people. This is Manhattan and you are going to be in pretty big trouble if your restaurant is filled with smoke. Conversely, this is Manhattan and yes, it doesn't have a depth of BBQ tradition as deep as at least 50 other cities in the U.S.

[slkinsey]

There are a lot of claims being made on this thread about how all the good barbecue restaurants in North Carolina serve pork only. Those claims would not seem to reconcile very well with the reality of so many top North Carolina barbecue places that serve, for example, barbecued chicken. The standard throughout barbecue country, from Texas to Tennessee to Missouri to Illinois to the Carolinas, is multiple meats. This is the case even at the top-tier places. An establishment serving only one meat would be deviant, not standard.

I'm not sure I'd say there are a lot of claims, but there have been some. As Todd36 points out, it really depends on whether you are talking about a larger, well-known place or about a guy selling barbecue in a gravel parking lot on the side of some local highway. I'd say that it is standard to sell multiple meats in the former and a single meat in the latter, although exceptions can always be found.

More to the point, I think, is the comment I made upthread about places that try to do multiple styles of barbecue along with the different meats. I have simply never been to a barbecue place that was successful at doing this. I'm not saying it's not theoretically possible, but I think there are a lot of things that get in the way. Show me a place that is selling both "Texas brisket" and "Carolina pulled pork" and I'll show you a place where at least one of those products will be not very good and not particularly representative of the advertised style -- and there's a fair to middling chance that neither style will be all that great.

[verysleepy]

Hi there

I have tried to link you with some of my favorite q restaurants that serve a variety of meats.

Well.. here is the link for Sonny Bryan's in Texas, serving great barbeque-

http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:6L0BA...39;s+menu&hl=en

And here is the link menu for the Salt Lick in Austin- known for all sorts of BBQ-

http://www.saltlickbbq.com/

And here is the menu selections for Kreuz's market in Lockhart TX.

http://www.kreuzmarket.com/

And here is the menu for Parkers in Wilson North Carolina- Great pork, plus kicking fried chicken.

http://www.hollyeats.com/images/NorthCarol...arkers-Menu.jpg

And here is the menu for Blacks BBQ in Lockhart Tx

http://www.blacksbbq.com/menu.htm

I could not find the menu or websites for Mitchell's in Wilson NC- but they have excellent variety of meats, as does Louie Mueller's in Lockhart.

Hey- what's the expression? "Sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you don't?" On occasions, I am in the mood for ribs, sometimes chicken or pork, sometimes a combo, etc. So... why not enjoy going to place that has it all?

For me, Dinosaur fits the bill!

[Todd36]

I went there for lunch today, with three co-workers.

1. The brisket tastes like reheated meat and is OK.

2. The ribs are salty and without much flavor.

3. The pulled pork is good, but has too much smoke. I still have an acrid taste of smoke in my mouth an hour later.

Overall, it's OK. Not worth the hype. Their sauces are sweet and not very good. Like generic stuff from a supermarket. Complete with added gums according to the label. The sides are pretty good.

They have wood stacked inside the front door and wood on a cart in the dining room, for show. Co-worker from Rochester said its a cleaned-up version of the upstate joints and lacks their character.

By NYC standards, its decent BBQ. Its not good by the standards of any decent BBQ place. I think the NYT and other reviews are on point and are accurate. I'm also wondering why I still have that acrid flavor in my mouth. My co-workers thought it was OK, but not worth the trip.

[Todd36]

In terms of a pure food quality evaluation?  They may well be.  It's the inability to place the reviews in context, and to get past what seems like some really overblown assumptions that seem to irk a few people.  This is Manhattan and you are going to be in pretty big trouble if your restaurant is filled with smoke.  Conversely, this is Manhattan and yes, it doesn't have a depth of BBQ tradition as deep as at least 50 other cities in the U.S.

←

Having been there three hours ago, I can say it looks like a Cracker Barrel with slightly obscene move posters. It screams formula, pre-fab. It doesn't look or feel right at all.

[wannabechef]

First, I posted a positive review way up thread. I loved the food at Dino and can't wait to go back. That said, while its my opinion that those bad reviews were off, I don't see why they're not entitled to their own opinion. And like others said, I doubt it will hurt their business. And if it does, well hey, less wait time for us!

I do have one suggestion for the management though, if they're reading this thread, as far as ambiance goes. They need to somehow lose the PA system for announcing ready tables. I know its a matter of practicality, but it just felt so cheap. Especially when you're eating at the bar area and you hear announcments every 2 minutes. It feels like you're in Fudruckers or something. Isn't there a more subtle way to let people know their tables are ready? What do other places do?

~WBC

[MarketStEl]

What bugs me about Kim Severson's piece is that the real subtext seems to be that New York will never be a great BBQ town, but Syracuse already is (at least to some extent), thanks to the same people about whom she's writing.  That raises a host of issues that she doesn't address.

←

Here's one: One first-rate barbecue joint does not a great barbecue town make--unless the town in question is small and the joint so good that people will drive from a couple of states away to eat there.

I could see where you could infer from Severson's review exactly what you say above, ghostrider, but I would say that the inference is stretching it a bit. The most I'd be willing to assert on the basis of the review is that Syracuse has a damn fine 'cue joint.

[bbq chef]

I do have one suggestion for the management though, if they're reading this thread, as far as ambiance goes. They need to somehow lose the PA system for announcing ready tables. I know its a matter of practicality, but it just felt so cheap. Especially when you're eating at the bar area and you hear announcments every 2 minutes. It feels like you're in Fudruckers or something. Isn't there a more subtle way to let people know their tables are ready? What do other places do?

~WBC

←

They use the PA system in there store in Rochester and it works there. Maybe they chose to continue what works for them.

As far as there menu looking like a theme, I have a menu from them from the first time I ate at the Syracuse store back in 1998. It looks pretty much the same. Althuogh I haven't been to the NY location yet, I'm sure that it just needs some time for it to gain its own character.

[MarketStEl]

A further comment on decor:

Gates' & Son's Ol' Kentuck' Bar-B-Q at 12th and Brooklyn in Kansas City--one of the two direct predecessors of the current Gates' Bar-B-Q--was housed in a building that looked like a 1950s coffee shop, only with darker wood paneling.

The current architecture and decor of Gates' six red-roofed locations today just screams "chain," just as the servers scream "Hi, May I Help YOU?" the moment you walk through the door.

In other words, the atmosphere at Gates' is in some ways as inauthentic as the 'cue is genuine. And there's no better sauce on the planet.

What was that somebody said about judging books by their covers? Knock the place because the food isn't good, but don't make assumptions about the food based on the decor.