Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by oakapple

  1. The odd thing is, there are no comments here about Ralph Lauren's new place, which is in the same neighborhood, is pretty damned expensive, where no one has asserted great importance for the food, and where they have a truly obnoxious door policy (still in place as of yesterday). Maybe that's what Chevalier should've done: make it impossible to get in. ETA: Another similarity is that both the Baccarat Hotel and RL are named after a luxury good.
  2. Of course, the instant I walked into the place, I knew that this style is not remotely fashionable among the vast majority of restaurant taste-makers in NYC. Indeed, I strongly suspected this would be the case, even before setting foot in the place. My fears were confirmed. I'd like to think that a few others, besides Wilfrid and myself, would recognize how truly shallow the objections really are; how little real substance they have. The hotel is named for a luxury crystal company: is that really the best you can do? It's the reverse-Ssäm problem. When it was new, that restaurant's sup
  3. As you know — although it might get lost in the present discussion — I am not predicting success for this restaurant, much as I wish it to be otherwise. But the hotel was called "Baccarat" before Masson and Gallante were hired. What you are really saying is that they shouldn't have built the hotel.
  4. The horrors!!! Where's AvroKO and Edison bulbs when you need them? If you can build a successful restaurant concept on baccarat, grey good, "luxuriousness" and "Bon soir", you have chosen the wrong career. I think those concerns are crazily over-blown, although you are living proof that even knowledgeable people can be fooled by them.
  5. The horrors!!! Where's AvroKO and Edison bulbs when you need them?
  6. Well, here was Adrian's list "Jean George's, emp, Batard, mission Chinese, spotted pig will all make the list." That is a list I can believe. The Modern has a very low Q-score among the food set. Not that it deserves this, but it does.
  7. In fairness, I don't think Kreuther's new restaurant is going to be a clone of Atelier circa 2004. Adrian's criticism (rightly or wrongly) is that Chevalier is not a restaurant built for 2015's clientele. He grossly exaggerates the problems, but I would admit there are some. I do think Adrian is imagining that Kreuther is much more of a progressive than he actually is. There aren't huge differences in service style between Chevalier and The Dining Room at The Modern, the only Kreuther restaurant that we can evaluate now. The set of people who'd hate the former, but eagerly recommend the la
  8. And none complained about the price of the cocktails.
  9. I think mongo_jones is the only one who would be happy to see him fail. what now? i don't even live in new york. I believe you said that you want this type of restaurant experience to decay and perish; and the faster that happens, the better. If that's not rooting for the guy to fail, I don't know what is.
  10. I agree, the landlord seems to have conflated two very different ideas. EMP must surely be the restaurant that will reach #1 on the SP list, if any of them do. The Four Seasons analogy is probably not the best one, given that restaurant's recent troubles. Even before that happened, The Four Seasons was widely seen as a dinosaur (whether fairly or not). It's not a comparison that is going to get pulses racing.
  11. I don't take issue with your "This isn't for me" reaction. Your preferences are your own, and that's fine. What I take issue with, is the presumption that since the restaurant isn't built for you (or people like you), it must be built for people who are indifferent to food. This is a very Chowhoundish idea. I seriously doubt that before the Chowhound era, anyone would've suggested that such restaurants were categorically and intentionally designed to favor diners who cannot tell good food from bad. The pursuit of deliciousness (with all other amenities ignored)—surely a legitimate aim—
  12. Thanks....now I see it. I resplied separately to Adrian, whose post was very Chowhoundish, and not in a good way. I agree with your suspicion. In fact, I'd promote it from suspicion to fact.
  13. Why would we assume that because the restaurant is not built for "modern foodies," they don't give a damn whether the food is any good? Sometimes, people do quality work because they actually believe in what they are doing.
  14. The Modern is really two, almost totally different, restaurants. Frank Bruni reviewed the Bar Room separately, and gave it a higher rating than the dining room, on that premise. Chevalier does have a bar, but it is much smaller, and if you order there, you're going to get the dining room menu. The Modern has its own Bar Room menu, in a completely different style than the Dining Room. It naturally attracts its own kind of crowd.
  15. I think mongo_jones is the only one who would be happy to see him fail. Many more think he is likely to, and wishes the management had taken different choices to make that outcome less probable.
  16. I think it is a myth that the crowd you're referring to doesn't know the difference between good and bad. Actually, there is considerable evidence that the opposite is true: the Jim Leff generation, who have grown up thinking that the merely decent is truly great. The flipside of being offended by "bonsoir" is going into flights of rapture just because the food is served in a converted haberdashery.
  17. Certain individuals keep referring to them as "grey goose" cocktails, as if vodka and tonic out of a soda gun for $26 is the best they do, and that is not the case whatsoever. They do not have what I'd call a serious cocktail program, and I think they should, assuming they want to attract a broader audience than just ex-La Grenouille regulars. But that's not offensive, and to call it that is an offense to things that are actually offensive.
  18. I think the chopped liver, prepared tableside, is their best dish: objectively better than anything I've ever had anywhere else. Of course, the "anywhere else" was always at home: it's not common to see this in restaurants. The steak is obviously not a bargain, but you're paying for the live music too, and you need to find that humorous. Otherwise, it's just over-priced steak. However, it is not unpalatable. It's just not great steak qua steak.
  19. Clearly, you should spend your discretionary dining dollars where you enjoy yourself. This much is obvious. But it's not offensive for a restaurant to be what you personally don't enjoy. The subway ride for areaps doesn't sound like fun to me, but I'm not offended that some want to do it. Now, it might be that Chevalier's model is not economically sustainable, but it's not offensive to be serving what too few people want. Stupid perhaps, but not offensive.
  20. It also appeals to a clientele that would tend to wear jackets when visiting that kind of restaurant, whether they'd been to La Grenouille or not.
  21. I've never understood the antipathy for this restaurant. I've been twice and enjoyed it twice. Of course, you need to have guests who "get" the joke. Otherwise, it's pointless. I wouldn't go alone.
  22. Offensive to some people here, not to others. Folks, get a grip. Paula Deen is offensive. Greeting a customer with "Bonsoir, monsieur" is not.
  23. For the most part, those signifiers offend only those whom they were meant to offend (i.e., the people who wouldn't go anyway). I realize that you are one of the exceptions.
  24. They're nothing compared to the puff pieces that Eater wrote for The Dutch (or a dozen other places).
  25. This is absolutely true, but they attracted accolades far in excess of their actual merit, and the inconveniences Wilfrid wrote about had a certain hidden "cost", even if that cost was non-monetary.
  • Create New...