Bruni and Beyond: NYC Reviewing (2005)

[bpearis]

Yes, but when Bruni arrived and was instantly recognized by the staff, I'm sure things changed.

Steve Cuozzo is arguing against anonymity in The Post today -- his picture ran with his article today, declaring "restaurant reviews are over" and going on to say such things as...

Of all the reviews I filed since the start of last year, I'd take back a third of them. Did I really give three stars to Jean-Georges Vongerichten's V Steakhouse, which went into a near-instantaneous tailspin? So from now on, The Post will tell you what's going on without pretending that what's true this week will be valid for all time - or even for the next month. Starting today, we're going to tackle restaurants in a different way.

Instead of trolling through one eatery each week, from the amuse-bouches through dessert, we'll tell you what's happening at more than one place, in the kitchen or on the floor. We'll aim to give you more useful - and interesting - information than you'll glean from reviews that read like cooking courses and turn stale overnight.

[rich]

Yes, but when Bruni arrived and was instantly recognized by the staff, I'm sure things changed.

Steve Cuozzo is arguing against anonymity in The Post today -- his picture ran with his article today, declaring "restaurant reviews are over" and going on to say such things as...

Of all the reviews I filed since the start of last year, I'd take back a third of them. Did I really give three stars to Jean-Georges Vongerichten's V Steakhouse, which went into a near-instantaneous tailspin? So from now on, The Post will tell you what's going on without pretending that what's true this week will be valid for all time - or even for the next month. Starting today, we're going to tackle restaurants in a different way.

Instead of trolling through one eatery each week, from the amuse-bouches through dessert, we'll tell you what's happening at more than one place, in the kitchen or on the floor. We'll aim to give you more useful - and interesting - information than you'll glean from reviews that read like cooking courses and turn stale overnight.

←

Bravo - a food critic that gets it. No more stars, no more broken bathrooms, no more music appreciation. Someone should send this column to the NY Times before it's too late.

I'm totally impressed - someone is actually thinking outside the box

[Stone]

A very interesting article. It probably deserves it's own thread.

[oakapple]

Yes, but when Bruni arrived and was instantly recognized by the staff, I'm sure things changed.

The rest of his comments (e.g., "epic waits for dishes and sloppy applications of dressings") strongly suggest he was not recognized on this occasion. We can't prove it, but it's the likely case.

Steve Cuozzo is arguing against anonymity in The Post today....

In that article, I couldn't find a single reason why the newspaper reader will be better off if he trumpets his arrival at each restaurant he visits. If that's what he has in mind (which he did not say), the last remnants of critical distance will be obliterated. I'm sure he's responsible enough to at least attempt to duplicate the experience the typical diner would have.

The point he makes that I strongly agree with, is that point-in-time reviews are ephemeral, and there needs to be a better way to keep critical opinion updated. In the traditional system, a major restaurant goes many years before it is re-reviewed, and a minor restaurant will probably never be re-reviewed. What will be the value of Frank Bruni's review of Perry St (assuming it had any value to begin with) a year from now, after JGV is no longer personally spending so much of his time there?

[Jason Perlow]

Of all the reviews I filed since the start of last year, I'd take back a third of them. Did I really give three stars to Jean-Georges Vongerichten's V Steakhouse, which went into a near-instantaneous tailspin? So from now on, The Post will tell you what's going on without pretending that what's true this week will be valid for all time - or even for the next month. Starting today, we're going to tackle restaurants in a different way.

Instead of trolling through one eatery each week, from the amuse-bouches through dessert, we'll tell you what's happening at more than one place, in the kitchen or on the floor. We'll aim to give you more useful - and interesting - information than you'll glean from reviews that read like cooking courses and turn stale overnight.

←

Wow. What a novel idea. I wonder who's done something like that before?

[chefboy24]

That's what I'm getting at.  Yes, OG is the best of its kind within its class but within the universe of the Times star system, to say it's the equivalent of a Blue Hill or a Hearth is laughable....in my opinion.

BINGO.

off with bruni's head.

[chefboy24]

By the way, I myself have been told at Nobu, on more than one occasion, that I would have to vacate my table by a certain time. Evidently it's standard procedure there.

I have been told that as well...... In my opinion, this isn't what a three star restaurant does. It's uncomfortable, and shouldn't be part of a fine dining experience. There is a reason why 3 star michelin restaurants in France *do not* turn the tables..... you get that table for the entire night. Nobu is about turning the tables. More money more money. Sure as a restaurant you have the right to do that, but people have the right to criticize.

Nobu was never trying to be serious, anyway. It's raw fish and celebrities. Who cares?

[BryanZ]

I think this, content-wise, was one of Bruni's better reviews. He logically discussed the food relative to a coherent theme, as opposed to obscurely trying to connect the two. Although 3-stars can certainly be argued against, as he indirectly refers to the Nobu conecpt as chain restaurant food, if he still stands by the 3-star rating for the original Nobu, then he would have to give 3-stars to this newest branch.

[rich]

I think this, content-wise, was one of Bruni's better reviews.  He logically discussed the food relative to a coherent theme, as opposed to obscurely trying to connect the two.  Although 3-stars can certainly be argued against, as he indirectly refers to the Nobu conecpt as chain restaurant food, if he still stands by the 3-star rating for the original Nobu, then he would have to give 3-stars to this newest branch.

←

Or, one could argue, if it's a clone, why bother reviewing it all? Possibly just a mention in the Diner's Journal that one has the same food as the other. Why waste one of the precious 52 reviews on a clone?

[oakapple]

Or, one could argue, if it's a clone, why bother reviewing it all? Possibly just a mention in the Diner's Journal that one has the same food as the other. Why waste one of the precious 52 reviews on a clone?

←

Well, major restaurants get re-reviewed every once in a while. Nobu hasn't been reviewed in the Times since the Reichl era, and this was as much a re-review of Nobu as it was a new review of Nobu 57.

I mean, if one took the above quote to its logical conclusion, no restaurant would ever be re-reviewed. I haven't counted, but I'd say Bruni does about one rated re-review every two months, or about six of them a year.

[rich]

Or, one could argue, if it's a clone, why bother reviewing it all? Possibly just a mention in the Diner's Journal that one has the same food as the other. Why waste one of the precious 52 reviews on a clone?

←

Well, major restaurants get re-reviewed every once in a while. Nobu hasn't been reviewed in the Times since the Reichl era, and this was as much a re-review of Nobu as it was a new review of Nobu 57.

I mean, if one took the above quote to its logical conclusion, no restaurant would ever be re-reviewed. I haven't counted, but I'd say Bruni does about one rated re-review every two months, or about six of them a year.

←

Actually not. If Cuozzo is correct (and I believe he is) a restaurant should be re-reviewed at least every month or two. Since you can't do something like that in NYC, then the NY Times reviewer should had just stated that Nobu 57 and Nobu are the same, both worth the same three stars as they were years ago and devoted the column to another restaurant.

[Megan Blocker]

Here's Gawker's take on the whole new reviewing system at the Post: click!

They're not really foodies over there, so I'm not sure how insightful there comments are, but they definitely are entertaining!

[oakapple]

If Cuozzo is correct (and I believe he is) a restaurant should be re-reviewed at least every month or two.

←

Well, no. Cuozzo doesn't say that every restaurant should be re-reviewed every month or two—which is obviously impossible. What he says, is that there's no assurance that a review will remain valid for any particular amount of time. You've got places like Gotham Bar & Grill that have remained consistently great for many years, and places like V Steakhouse that went into a swoon almost immediately after it opened.

Even under Cuozzo's new system, he's got one reviewing slot per week, and he won't be able to keep track of every twitch & turn at every important restaurant in town. And it's not yet clear that this new system is any radical improvement. Gothamist was underwhelmed.

....the NY Times reviewer should had just stated that Nobu 57 and Nobu are the same.....

Why should he have said that? Bruni's whole point was that Nobu, in fact, has faded a bit, and Nobu 57 is now a superior version of the concept. Whether Nobu has faded enough that it would no longer merit three stars is a question Bruni never gets to, but he certainly does not say that they are the same.

Edited September 30, 2005 by oakapple (log)

[oakapple]

Mr. Bruni is on vacation for two weeks. This week's review of Ben & Jack's Steakhouse is by Marian Burros.

Burros's food writing is far superior to Bruni's, but she seems to have succumbed to Mr. Bruni's grade inflation, or the "BruniCurve" as Eater calls it. Given the ample availability of strong steakhouses in Manhattan, it's hard to see how this place deserved a star, given all of the problems recounted in the review.

But here again is ample evidence that the Times's anonymity policy works. A few people here cling to the belief that anonymity is a fiction. Yet, from the many service glitches that Ms. Burros experienced, it's clear in the review that she was not recognized on at least some (if not all) of her visits.

The review notes that the restaurant fawned over its celebrity guests, and unless the place is run by idiots, they almost certainly would have done the same for Ms. Burros had they realized who she was.

Edited October 12, 2005 by oakapple (log)

[Tess]

I enjoy Burros's writing, but I would be kind of ticked off if I was dining in a restaurant and a reviewer made comments about me like that. Oh well, I guess it's the sort of restaurant where you have to expect to be noticed if you're a celebrity.

[BryanZ]

Am I the only one to have found the writing in Burros' piece very dry? Perhaps Bruni writes like a flowery high-school girl, but this review did not have any flow nor did it pull the reader in at all.

[Megan Blocker]

...Bruni writes like a flowery high-school girl...

←

[BryanZ]

The review of Ninja this week was actually quite good. His usually contrived one-liners were actually somewhat witty this time. Of course, it's easy to bash a restaurant like Ninja if the food isn't good, but I was thorougly entertained from beginning to end.

Yay Frank!

Edited October 26, 2005 by BryanZ (log)

[oakapple]

The review of Ninja this week was actually quite good.  His usually contrived one-liners were actually somewhat witty this time.  Of course, it's easy to bash a restaurant like Ninja if the food isn't good, but I was thorougly entertained from beginning to end.

←

The easiest review to write is when the subject is truly awful. The hardest review to write is when the subject is simply average.

Edited October 26, 2005 by oakapple (log)

[rich]

What I found most interesting is the "poor" review and then a list of five recommended dishes. If I could find five dishes to recommend, I would not call any restaurant "poor." But then again, logic is not the NY Times or said reviewer's strong suit.

Edited October 26, 2005 by rich (log)

[oakapple]

What I found most interesting is the "poor" review and then a list of five recommended dishes. If I could find five dishes to recommend, I would not call any restaurant "poor." But then again, logic is not the NY Times or said reviewer's strong suit.

←

I found nothing illogical about it. Referring to one of those dishes, he said, "It was actually good, a judgment that applied to only about a third of the food, much too small a fraction for a restaurant this expensive."

The judgment "Poor" seemed amply justified by the text. As I have not been there, I can't personally say that it actually is poor, only that the bottom-line rating is consistent with the reasons given to justify it. Previous comments on the Ninja thread suggest that the rating is not only consistent with the text, but that it is accurate as well.

[SobaAddict70]

To my eyes, both environments were attractive, but I admit to leaving the restaurant in an altered state. That cold tea and hot coffee, administered with so much flourish that I consumed them with too little restraint, had me buzzing with something other than excitement.

Tres snarky there, eh, Frank?

Discussion relating to The Cafe at Country can be found here.

[oakapple]

The Bruni Digest is one of my favorite food blogs. Every week, the blog takes Bruni's latest review apart, line by line. Lately, the blog's owner, Julia Langbein, was starting to get a little bored. It seemed Frank's reviews were almost getting reasonable, as if he were finally learning his craft. This week, Frank returned to his old habits, uncorking a one-star review of the restaurant D'Or Ahn, despite the fact that he had a whole lot of trouble finding anything good to say about it:

A bewitching theater for a new kind of Asian fusion, D'or Ahn isn't a great restaurant, and on its clumsier nights it isn't even a very good one.

The confused review was full of the tortured prose that Langbein calls "Brunisms," such as:

These cutlets were more ethereal than I realized fried beef could be - maybe too ethereal, and thus an illustration of one of the restaurant's frustrations. The kitchen turned out a great deal of food more intriguing than satisfying, with a sense of surprise that wasn't matched by a payoff in flavor.

Now, the Associated Press has taken notice. In an article linked to the Yahoo home page (at the moment; it changes frequently), writer Adam Goldman profiles Langbein's blog. Bruni claims to have seen the blog, but only "once or twice for a nanosecond." (Methinks he protests too much.)

Interviewed for the article, former Times restaurant critic Ruth Reichl said, "I look now and there's a Bruni blog. There's some incredibly smart young woman who makes fun of him on a weekly basis. They would have done that to me."

Edited November 12, 2005 by oakapple (log)

[Todd36]

Clear and obvious lack of knowledge shown in today's review---fish collar is not an exotic dish in NY Japanese restaurants. The NYT should admit that they have a problem and remove Bruni. They are hurting their reputation badly. The NYT has serious management issues--- e.g. Judith Miller and how well they handled that situation.

[Nathan]

salmon and yellowtail neck/collar is common.

I haven't seen tuna collar before (which is what Bruni specifically stated was unusual).