Jump to content

oakapple

Members
  • Content Count

    9,316
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by oakapple

  1. I am so surprised, not. I thought Tower was going to be there for keeps, not.
  2. oakapple

    Beautique

    Unfortunately, these consulting arrangements rarely produce food of the same quality as the chef's best work.
  3. Bearing in mind the favored demographic, the next focus will be the Beer Issue. Forced to review a beer-centric restaurant, Pete Wells will give one star to Tørst. Luksus will barely be mentioned.
  4. Why not just order your fucking burger that way? Because she's a virgin. She doesn't know. You wouldn't expect the usual kind of virgin to ask for the Viennese Oyster her first or second time out. I think she probably knows you can tell them to hold the lettuce, or whatever. She's not that naive. All she's saying is that if you order all these burgers the way they're usually prepared, this is what she likes best.
  5. Coincidentally, Eater dedicated its last 7 days worth of posts to "Burger Week". People don't consume Eater as an "issue" either. Yet, apparently they think that dedicating a whole week's worth of posts to a theme attracts additional readers, as they do these themed weeks several times a year. I've no idea whether a themed issue works for The Times in the same way, but this isn't the first time they've done it, so perhaps it actually works, on some level.
  6. That is pedantic, since there is no rational argument that Pete Wells should review high school lunchrooms, but there are rational people who think he should review extraordinary sandwich shops.
  7. I think even Pete would concede what I said above, which is that 99% of sandwich shops have zero chance of being reviewed. His argument, is that this is the highly unusual sandwich shop that warrants an exception.
  8. Even Eater — which has no print component, and never did — still adheres to the weekly format. Personally, I think the standard should be two visits, not three, which would allow 50% more reviews, and the opportunity to update outdated reviews more frequently. Wells has said that he eats out every weeknight and many lunches, so he is having far more work meals than he writes about. I would prefer to have a lot more quick takes. What seems outmoded to me, is withholding the formal review until you've visited three times — and then waiting 5 or 10 years to go back.
  9. Hilarious, but how much mediocrity do you have to inhale, before you find a gem like this?
  10. Do all the other Times critics and columnists engage in quite that way? Not that I've seen. And do you think the Times changed its policy and it just coincidentally happened precisely when Wells took over?
  11. I don't know what exactly is mandatory. I mean, the world didn't just suddenly change the day that Wells took over. He is willing to engage in ways that his immediate predecessor did not.
  12. Plenty of Frank Bruni's and Sam Sifton's review choices were criticized too. They simply did not respond.
  13. The Russ & Daughters mistake was far worse. He paid 3+ visits to at least 40 restaurants, plus countless others he didn't bother to write up — and that was the best of the lot? As a reminder, The Dutch was Sam Sifton's restaurant of the year. Birds of a feather.........
  14. Sure, but not all downtown hotels are the Ace or the Standard; and Juni didn't exactly get entirely ignored. Both Platt and Cuozzo reviewed it. (I am guessing, but haven't checked, that the set of restaurants reviewed by those two, but skipped by the Times, would be very small.)
  15. I would point out: even on the Restaurant column's "traditional beat", there have been plenty of restaurants that the critics skipped — and not just Juni and Luksus. At least within the last 10 years, and probably longer, it has never been the case that if a particular class of restaurant was in scope, then every example of the class got reviewed.
  16. oakapple

    Burgers in NY

    By Eater law, everything Balthazar does, will do, or has ever done, is iconic.
  17. Even with a more constrained definition of "relevance," Juni is obviously relevant. Not everyone thinks so, I will grant you. But way upthread, Wilfrid asked the board if they could name even ONE example of a chef who'd accumulated the accolades that Hergatt did, then opened a new restaurant and did not get reviewed. As I recall, no one could think of an example. In a review of L'Arpège in Paris, Pete Wells himself put Hergatt in the same class as Dominique Crenn, John Fraser, and Christopher Kostow. He did not the put chef of Dunkin Donuts in that category. The location doesn't p
  18. I think we can agree that sandwich shops are on the fringe of that column, i.e., exceedingly unlikely to be reviewed in the typical case. But we can also agree that over the roughly 50 years that that column has existed, there have been many exceptions, by all critics from Claiborne to the present. Whether this sandwich shop deserves to be one of the exceptions is a legitimate question. To say there should never be exceptions is to invalidate at least some of the choices that practically every critic since Claiborne has made.
  19. The Times did not give Manzo (or Eataly) a starred review. Sifton published an overview without stars as a "Critic's Notebook" piece. Pete Wells, on the other hand, filed a starred review of Gotham West Market, giving the whole she-bang two stars. The only difference, as far as I can tell, is the viewpoint of the guy awarding the stars. Sifton could've starred Eataly; Wells could've written up Gotham West without starring it. By the way, many years ago, a renegade Times critic gave four stars to all of Chinatown.
  20. Right there, you completely undermine whatever credibility you might otherwise have had. In the first place, The Times does not solely review restaurants that are "of the zeitgeist" (however defined); otherwise, The Simone would have been entirely out of Wells's jurisdiction. Moreover, unless Juni is totally empty (in which case it would've closed by now), it is clearly relevant to someone — probably to more people than you imagine. The Michelin stars are extremely important to the restaurants economically, and on plenty of occasions have recognized excellence (or the absence
  21. Irrelevance is a tricky thing to define. The main point of last week's review (I am pretty sure) was the new restaurant Limani, not the 20-year-old restaurant Milos. One percenters(*) are Times readers too, and occasionally "their" restaurants ought to be reviewed. The Times has reviewed Masa three times, and it is even more of a one-percenters' restaurant than either Limani or Milos. * Anyhow, that's a severe exaggeration. I think my income makes me more of a five or ten-percenter, and I've been to Limani twice.
  22. Please refresh my memory: how many times have you tried it before concluding that? Oh, right. I think I remember now. Rounded to the nearest ten, the answer is zero.
  23. It makes quite a lot of sense, as long as you understand what that phrase stands for. As it applies to restaurant reviews, there's no question the Times review of a restaurant tends to dominate all the others. For example, every critic in town hated Gordon Ramsay at the London, but do you know which of its many terrible reviews made internationall news? It was the Times review. Over and over again, I've seen restaurants' popularity blow up after the Times posted a rave. The NYT review is by far the most important that any restaurant gets, although, as others noted, it cannot save Paul Lieb
  24. I do sincerely believe that Alex Stupak is happy where he is, so Plotz was out of line. I do not believe that PL's current status is anything but a temporary fill-in until his next restaurant materializes.
  25. And my point is that the guy has gone back repeatedly to running restaurant kitchens, so that seems to be something he wants, and doesn't have right now. I am not aware of any statement he's made, to the effect he no longer cares about that. To the contrary, I would be very surprised if Liebrandt does not wind up running another kitchen. Your description of what happened at The Elm seems wildly inaccurate. Even if it was a chef-for-hire job, I sincerely doubt that its relatively quick failure was what he planned, expected, or wished for.
×
×
  • Create New...