momof5 wrote:I've lurked off and on for awhile but after my experience tonight - I decided to finally join and give you the low-down.
I live in LaGrange and have been to Cafe 36 previous to Kitchen Nightmares. Years ago this place was decent - upscale and a dining experience. A couple of weeks ago I went and it was boring, bland and the place was empty. I was invited tonight to a seating with Chef Ramsey there. It was a joke. Our whole table felt like it was a scam. We saw Ramsey walking around a lot doing a whole bunch of nothing. Our order for our appetizer was taken a half an hour after we were seated...

You've hit the nail on the head with the description of service we witnessed on Wednesday night - people waiting for hours for their food, even though it was less than half-full. Ramsay isn't there for the initial B-roll taping, and he was doing basically what he is supposed to do - observing the place in action - the night you were there. We witnessed the three cooks very busily preparing food but nothing coming out in groups which meant waiters were hovering around the pickup window for far too long thus backing up the whole process and ignoring guests. It's a bad system they've got going, all the way.

I don't think that what you witnessed was a "joke" though. The place genuinely has problems in addition to and far beyond the reality of a TV crew being present. (Why you were kicked out, I'm not sure, but that is really inexcusable.)

As for chef Ramsay's ability to "fix" the place, I do have a great deal of faith. Just like any actor needs a good director and any writer needs a good editor, this is a business in need of a manager to crack a whip. They're not beyond hope. So often the solutions are the same for each restaurant (as it was on last night's BBC episode) - simplify the menu, focus on fresh ingredients and adjust prices to reflect the reality of where you are and what you're serving. There's a longer step as well which is motivating the front of the house and the back of the house to work in tandem and making sure the players involved actually know what their jobs are. All of these deficiencies are well apparent at Cafe 36, and Ramsay is as good a candidate as any to bring it all together. I take some admitted pleasure in venting with a negative review, but it takes someone like Ramsay to identify those problems and change them into actionable items for a business to really learn and improve. Again, I'll be back in a few weeks since I already have an idea of what could change for the better. I'm curious to see if I'm right!

Cheers,

J

MikeW665 wrote:As with anything that gets to a certain level of success, it’s bound to get too “Commercial”. With all of the shows and restaurants Ramsay has, I’m sure he’s spread pretty thin making it impossible to put the real effort into making something good. As I’ve said in another post, the UK version of the program is FAR better than the US version as it has far more soul. Plus, when you see something on TV, there is certain glamour to it. When you see the same thing in production, in person, it’s bound to change your perspective.

You're right, Mike. Producing TV is long and boring, and I know because that's what I do for a (meager) living. I was very impressed with the level of separation the crew had from the "action" of the restaurant - something which in my estimation is usually difficult to do!

The BBC version is very different from the US version, but they basically accomplish the same thing. The BBC version is about food, and the US version is about drama. Even with that, if the restaurant isn't fixed at the end of the day then people stop going and the business fails.

I'm not saying everything is as transparent as it comes across in the final, edited show, but the core is basically real.

they may purposely be making it worse for the show

I do know that on a regular day Cafe 36 would not have more than 10 tables in a whole night. Most people around here wouldn't consider it fine dining. Not to mention we have so many more restaurants with better food, service and prices. No one talks about Cafe 36 in this neighborhood, which is probably why Kitchen Nightmares is here.

I absolutely believe we were set up with our food and service to aid production (minus the hair). But, we were aware when Chef Ramsey left, which was on the earlier side (9:00 p.m.) of our 3 plus hour dining experience. Our food was served after he left (10:00 p.m.), so the kitchen was never closed. The owners of Cafe 36 were there doing much of nothing. One of them surely could've gone behind the bar and poured a couple of drinks instead of the waiter. And keep in mind, this restaurant still had many empty tables.

I am wondering if we were "kicked out" of Cafe 36 before our coffee was done so they could do more filming or something with production. I know Chef Ramsey had left and I doubt he was coming back for more filming.

Upon walking out the door our server was there along with another server. I indicated to them how rude it was of production to ask us to leave. He acknowledged that and said that he was sorry. That the restaurant is normally not this bad and he hopes to see us again. We laughed and said if he sees us it will be at Sunflower, a fabulous place around the corner. Ha ha.

Tonight will be another night of mediocre service. Tomorrow is the big re-launch. I have heard that the people at the re-launch will mostly be friends of the owners, LaGrange Business Association members, etc. ha ha I guess the patrons would consider themselves big wigs in the neighborhood but most of us don't care.

By watching what happened before we were kicked out I will guess that they are going to switch up some tables in the front. There was a guy walking around pointing things out - he looked more like he was trying to make plans to re-stage the front of the restaurant.

To me, two things will be interesting. One is how they'll pull this show together since we never saw Chef do much of anything other than stand in back watching food come out. Two, if this restaurant will still be open by the time this show airs. Chef Ramsey has a big job ahead of him.

MBK wrote:they may purposely be making it worse for the show

This just doesn't make sense to me.

Yes, an edited TV show will selectively play up drama or comedy or whatever makes the most compelling hour of broadcast time. The producers can even elect to show only the bad experiences of the Wednesday/Thursday crowds if they so please, but the TV crew has nothing to do with what's happening in the kitchen or on the floor for those nights. If the kitchen is slow, then they're slow. If the fish isn't fresh, then it isn't fresh.

Why, though, would a restaurant go out of their way to do their absolute worst on camera? The restaurant is real, the business owner(s) is real, the waiters are all people with jobs to keep, the patrons are all paying customers who should want to come back. If anything, the pressure of a camera crew around tends to make people very self-conscious about doing a good job. It would be kind of tough to have a crew show up and tell a restaurant that's working well "OK, just do everything wrong for the next 2 days" and have anyone with any sort of pride or vested interest in what they do actually agree to participate.

Everyone we engaged was nervous, on their toes and desperately trying to make us feel like we were in for a fine-dining treat. They just don't have the chops (at least not in this incarnation of Cafe 36), and as someone who hires actors all the time, I can tell you that their acting chops wouldn't have been good enough to pull it off anyway.

Sorry, I just don't abide by conspiracy. That's a very different thing from agreeing that the finished program will choose to paint the restaurant in a particular light to make a point. It's not the same as assuming that everyone is in on a joke and purposely screwing up.[/i]

it might be in their contract with the show who knows

I hate to say it, but I agree with MBK that they must purposely be making it worse for the show. I just find it hard to believe that any restaurant could be so awful -- a 3+ hour meal in a half full restaurant, raw, undercooked scallops and rotten lettuce (to quickly be replaced by a fresh salad, despite the 1 1/2 hour wait for first one)...A hair in the food? C'mon guys...Any place this bad would have been out of business months ago, given the competition and economics in that area.

momof5 wrote:we never saw Chef do much of anything other than stand in back watching food come out.

I agree that I would love to have been there on a night that he was really engaging the staff (or present at all), but I imagine a lot of that is shot during off hours. It would be very distracting to have him there night after night, and it might negatively affect the staff even more so. Still, that's his m.o. on the show - watch for a night, then go in and sort it all out.

Biggest fear - I see in the edited program that the piece of fish I ate had an expiration date from a week ago.

MBK wrote:it might be in their contract with the show who knows

I would love to see that contract:

"All restaurant staff must do an absolutely horrendous job, and we do mean completely terrible at everything. Any staff member caught not doing his/her absolute worst will be immediately dismissed and replaced with someone much less competent."

Hi everyone! Former lurker here, and here is just the opportunity to post, because:
1. I love both versions of Kitchen Nightmares.
2. I've been to old and new(pre-Ramsay) Cafe 36.

I am excited to see if Ramsay made any difference, because I was so disappointed in our visit to the restaurant now inhabiting its new digs. We went to the one at the original location over 8 years ago, and we had a lovely meal and time there.

We hadn't been back in some time, so about 1-2 years ago, we visited the new location at Calendar Court. It wasn't very busy (Sat nite), and I remember the service being slow, and the food being boring. Nothing like our first experience.

Really, we didn't have any reason to go back, ever. We might, tho, after we view the episode! Usually, in the BBC version, Ramsay returns after a 2 week - month hiatus, and sees if the changes he put in stuck. I can't remember if the US version does that or not.

Thanks for reading!

jmtsq-
Since your last time in Cafe 36 was more than one year ago, you have not been to the "American Bistro Cafe 36" in Calendar Court. The current owners have only been running the place for I believe a little over a year. The former Cafe 36 was french, upscale dining and very good. About 3-4 years ago if someone said they were going to Cafe 36 in my neighborhood (LaGrange) we would all think it must be a special occasion because Cafe 36 was upscale dining. Now if someone says they are going to Cafe 36 we all scratch our head and wonder why? LaGrange has a couple of great restaurants and Cafe 36 is not one of them.

Just to be clear, I do not think someone "planted" a hair in our food. As gross as that is to me, I think it was coincidence. I also don't believe the salad was "planted" either. But, I do believe the long wait was for show purposes. Infact, the more I think about it, the more I wonder if they continued to push drinks without food to lessen peoples inhibitions. The more we had to drink maybe, the more we became antsy or upset? Although we never got mad, we did become a little more vocal a little more irritable.

My husband brought up to me today that while we were asked to leave by someone on the production staff, there was still a very full table of at least 6 people in the center of the dining room eating and being served. That being said, I still believe a lot of the things that happened were for t.v./drama purposes.

momof5,

Is it possible this place has been running down that the crowd last night was now an exceptional presence? If they have been dealing with a lot less than a full house and now have one, then maybe they were running behind because they are not used to running at full steam?

How did you learn Chef Ramsey was going to be there? Was this a surprise or locally known for a while?

Regards,

A disclaimer to this, I have not been here in the post Ramsey relaunch period, however I was here just about a year ago and it was pretty awful.

When I say 'pretty awful' I mean that fora place in the area that's charging as much as they do for dinner I think that you could put more effort into the service and preperation of the meal.

While I agree with the comments about the onion soup being good but when it got to our table it was tepid. The scallops were rubbery, the warm goat cheese salad was cold, and pomme frittes seemed to be fried and left to sit in a warming bin until they took on that reheated feel. The server wasn't very apologetic and we were given the answer of 'that's how the food is always prepared' and that 'people come here for the ambiance'.

If I'm going to go to a dinner in the area that's going to run me in the market of $90-$100 I could think of a place or two that I would be willing to spend a little more money at for a better meal with better service.

I'm curious as to how it'll be post Ramsey but I have to say I'm in no hurry to run in there and try it out after the experience that I had.

Here is an interesting tidbit. I was asked today how I enjoyed my experience from someone who was there last night and a friend of the owners of Cafe 36. I told him the service was poor, the wait was poor and the food was poor. He said the biggest mystery to him is why the "real" staff wasn't there. I told him that the waiter that we had was a waiter that we had weeks before when we were there. He said the kitchen staff, the people making the food, were not the staff that is normally there. I asked him how he knew this and he said he's been friends of the owners since they opened up and he frequents the place. Hmmm, something to think about with the show being put together.

To answer someone elses question on how we were able to secure seating. A friend of mine is part of the LaGrange Business Association. I do not know if my friend is also friends with the owner, I never asked. Anyhow, they were offered seating - I don't know how much but my friend said I could bring up to six people. Most of the people there were connected to someone else somehow. There was a couple tables who obviously knew a couple of people on the film crew. We were allowed to pick which day we wanted to go. Wednesday, Thursday or Friday were offered. We were not offered a Saturday seating but thats because I think a lot of the Business Association were going to be in attendance that night for the re-launch. I also know of a couple of people who were going to go on two nights, one before and one after. We chose Thursday night just because it was the only night we were available. Again, we would've chosen Saturday if that was an option. This was a surprise to me because we were invited on Tuesday. But I don't think this was a surprise to local business owners. I believe they knew.

I was at a taping of Top Chef in the fall and think that certain actions are set up / encouraged. What will be interesting for you who were there is to see how it is all edited. I know I am looking forward to see how the event I was at will be played. It seemed very uneventful, food was decent, service as good as at any buffet tyope function. Some items were pretty good a few were just ok. Nothing was horrible. a typical buffet style party. I was amazed to overhear a few people interviewed by the crew really ripped on the night. I did not see anything at all like they said. So it will be good to see it on TV.

momof5 wrote:Just to be clear, I do not think someone "planted" a hair in our food. As gross as that is to me, I think it was coincidence.

Speaking of hair in food found this via Nicholas Day on CHOW's Grinder: "Cook accused of stuffing hair into steak" in West Bend, Wisconsin http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=722919

I have a tough--almost impossible--time believing that the restaurant would deliberately worsen its service in an effort to look better once the relaunced restaurant is revealed.

In most cases, restaurants are a small business, and a labor of love. It's a tough business, and there's a fine line between success and failure. Remember the episode of Kitchen Nightmares where a California (I think) restaurant had mold-filled trays of food in its fridge, bugs in the food, etc.? Does anyone in their right mind think that was amped up for effect? Consumers have a long memory, and once Ramsey has come and gone, people are still going to remember those disgusting images. And I bet the restaurant will go out of business before long, if it hasn't already. After all, once the cameras stop rolling, there's a good chance that the restaurant will fall into its bad habits.

With stakes that hight, what small business owner would risk their livelihood by making themselves out to be worse than they actually are?

He said the kitchen staff, the people making the food, were not the staff that is normally there. I asked him how he knew this and he said he's been friends of the owners since they opened up and he frequents the place. Hmmm, something to think about with the show being put together.

This is an interesting discussion. From an operator's point of view - Things are slow, you are having a hard time with the business. Things aren't great, you apply for some FOX TV show. Three months later, they show up at your door. Regardless of the changes and improvements you've made, they want to talk about what a poor business you run. Let's remember that the time from application to Chef Ramsey showing up are probably months. Do you throw the improvements you've made out the door, or do you make yourself, your staff, and your restaurant into the poor thing they're looking for? For a new kitchen, dining room, and unbelieveable publicity, you play the lovable loser and make it look much worse then it is. I know I would.

momof5 wrote:To me, two things will be interesting. One is how they'll pull this show together since we never saw Chef do much of anything other than stand in back watching food come out. Two, if this restaurant will still be open by the time this show airs. Chef Ramsey has a big job ahead of him.

If you watch the current series on BBCA, you'll see that he pretty much never interacts in the front of house during a service. he sits back and watches them do their job (or not). He does deal w/ the kitchen during the night but that's it. Only after service does he address the FOH staff. It's just not the formula for the show.

And on an interesting side note, the most recent restaurant featured on the BBC version -- The Granary in Hampshire, had a mysterious fire a few weeks after GR left. I guess the owner was hoping to make up for the 4000 quid/week he was losing.

pizano345 wrote:Do you throw the improvements you've made out the door, or do you make yourself, your staff, and your restaurant into the poor thing they're looking for? For a new kitchen, dining room, and unbelieveable publicity, you play the lovable loser and make it look much worse then it is. I know I would.

I certainly don't want to keep flogging this dead horse. What we're dealing with here is a matter of perspective, and what I tried to report originally was my experience through my eyes as a TV producer. It just rarely ever makes sense to "stage" things in an environment where they are already going badly. The night I was there, the crew did not utter a single word to anyone once we were inside the restaurant. That's correct - for the nearly 3 hours I was there, the crew didn't talk to the kitchen staff, the front of the house, the owner, anybody. They just wandered and recorded.

Getting people who are not professionals to do anything on camera that's outside of their normal routine is incredibly difficult. Given that we are dealing with real business owners, cooks, waiters, etc, I'm sure it's entirely possible that their best intentions simply don't measure up. It's quite easy for a business owner to put in the time and effort to make changes he/she thinks are beneficial but not see the writing on the wall when they fail. They may simply make the same kinds of mistakes and inadequate changes over and over.

I find it funny that every single review on here says the same thing: the food is and has been lousy, the service is and has been bad, the whole experience is a wreck, oh but it must be staged for TV - as if just being a lousy restaurant weren't easy enough.

Just a small update. I didn't attend the "re-launch" on Saturday but my husband was in the area and said that the name is the same and the place didn't look different, that he could tell. I know that Kitchen Nightmares usually does a re-launch that tends to be on a grander scale but I didn't hear or see of anything that would make it look bigger. But then again, this restaurant was always empty so just a full house would indicate a huge re-launch. I do wonder if they'll make more changes and fill in those changes on later for the show.
Also, I hope that no one thought I was saying that I thought things were necessarily staged. I do think the wait we had was for production purposes and I wonder if all the drinks that we were offered was also for production but I don't think the hair in the food or the awful salad was staged.
It's been fun chatting with everyone and if I hear of any other information on this I'll let you know.

Has there been an episode yet where Chef Ramsay visits a place only to discover it's delightfully and competently staffed, clean, and serving deliciously fresh cuisine? How about one where the place is at least marginally ok, not anywhere near as bad as expected? [let us non-watchers know!]

If it bleeds, it leads. The visited restaurants are complicit with the production by contractual nature. You have to want help and publicity to agree to be on the show, basically acknowledging that you're a nightmare. Either you have a death wish for your restaurant's current incarnation (you just took it over from someone else, or you're at the end of the creative juices), or want to excoriate your own staff, makeover the kitchen, get the press, and retool, hoping that things won't be so bad (moldy food and bugs) that the name won't be completely sullied, and you can continue. I can't fault producers for wanting to play up those aspects which are most ghoulish when advertisers and viewers are around and willing. I'm in the camp that believes there is no such thing as "reality" TV (doesn't prevent me from enjoying it, though).

Santander wrote:I can't fault producers for wanting to play up those aspects which are most ghoulish when advertisers and viewers are around and willing. I'm in the camp that believes there is no such thing as "reality" TV (doesn't prevent me from enjoying it, though).

I kind of talked about that earlier, but in my expereince most of that happens in the editing room, not during production (again, just speaking in generalities). You can edit a story to look any way you want - some shows are good about presenting "reality" others miss the mark entirely and fabricate from whole cloth. But ask any actor, TV is the director's and editor's medium, not the actor's. I'm well aware that what passes for "reality" programming rarely is.

All that said, what I'm trying to imply here is that this show was making an effort (in my experience) to do far less intrusion that I would have expected.

Just to answer the question about whether Ramsay ever visits places that aren't failing miserably, yes. That happens far more often on the BBC version of the show, though. He's been in restaurants that have perfectly good food, but the attendance has taken a hit because of some other factor(s) or maybe he's in a restuarant with really top-notch talent but their hands are tied because of management decisions.

One other thought - I wonder if some of the other changes (cosmetic and otherwise) occur throughout and after the production team has been around. Some of that may be revealed in a follow-up (weeks or months) as an epilogue for the episode.

Santander wrote:Has there been an episode yet where Chef Ramsay visits a place only to discover it's delightfully and competently staffed, clean, and serving deliciously fresh cuisine? How about one where the place is at least marginally ok, not anywhere near as bad as expected? [let us non-watchers know!]

Of course not. The point of the show is that GR advises the restaurant about how to turn itself around. The restaurants aren't meant to be randomly chosen. I don't think all of the restaurants are doing terribly. Some are clearly worse than others.

The enjoyment of the show, at least for me, is learning what types of issues go into a making a successful restaurant, at least from GR's perspective. In one episode, he taught a chef how to buy a whole (or large part, I can't remember) of a pig and use various parts in a number of different dishes.

KagaTakeshi wrote:

Santander wrote:I can't fault producers for wanting to play up those aspects which are most ghoulish when advertisers and viewers are around and willing. I'm in the camp that believes there is no such thing as "reality" TV (doesn't prevent me from enjoying it, though).

I kind of talked about that earlier, but in my expereince most of that happens in the editing room, not during production (again, just speaking in generalities). You can edit a story to look any way you want - some shows are good about presenting "reality" others miss the mark entirely and fabricate from whole cloth. But ask any actor, TV is the director's and editor's medium, not the actor's. I'm well aware that what passes for "reality" programming rarely is.

you can feed your subjects and setup controlled enviroments to try and get what you want on tape also.

chgoeditor wrote

" have a tough--almost impossible--time believing that the restaurant would deliberately worsen its service in an effort to look better once the relaunced restaurant is revealed.
In most cases, restaurants are a small business, and a labor of love. It's a tough business, and there's a fine line between success and failure. "

I doubt many of the places KN shows are like this. When you watch him interview the management too many of them seem to be in the business for the wrong reasons. It amazes me that these people make it as long as they do. Most have no clue how to coordinate a front romm with the kitchen. Highlights of this were the woman who would go shopping in the afternoon at the grocery for her product, the owner who would only allow the staff to come in 1 hour early to prep before dinner. The Long Island sister and gangster wanna be brother. They all are in the wrong business, or at least have no clue of how to do food service.

With stakes that hight, what small business owner would risk their livelihood by making themselves out to be worse than they actually are?"
All one has to do is watch Jerry Springer and his kind. It amazes me how bad people will allow themselves to be exploited for their 15 minutes.

If I see any mold in coolers this year I can only think it is a plant. If I were on this show it would be the first thing I would make sure my kitchen did not have.

Maybe I'm feeling a tinge of regret now for starting this thread and continuing to discuss the point. I'll be done with it after this:

My perception (again, solely my own) was to see that there was very little crew interaction with the restaurant staff. As someone who works in TV, I found this surprising and very refreshing. Yes, I think we are all aware that "reality" shows are often not completely real. That wasn't my point.

We've all been to terrible restaurants, we've all seen incompetent owners, cooks and waiters. We've all waited too long and paid too much for awful food. I find it hilarious that just because there's a TV element that the knee-jerk reaction is that it must be staged.

Done now - moving on to other threads and other discussions... (and going back to eat at Cafe 36 next week).

Got this from Vie's PR firm, Four Star Hospitality Group LLC; thought it might be of interest:

On Sunday, March 2nd, Chef Paul Virant hosted celebrity chef Gordon Ramsay and the crew of his hit reality show, Kitchen Nightmares, for a wrap party at Vie (4471 Lawn Avenue Western Springs, IL). The wrap party celebrated the completion of a week-long schedule of filming at nearby Cafe 36 (22 Calendar Avenue LaGrange, IL) which will be featured in an upcoming episode of Kitchen Nightmares.

By midnight, forty guests arrived for a family-style buffet in Vie’s bar courtesy of Chef Paul Virant.

The menu included:

House made country pate with fruit and nut focaccia, cranberry aigre doux and whole grain mustard
Lamb head cheese and Cavaney Farms turkey gizzard confit with house olives
Sopressata with wood grilled bread, Prairie Fruits Farm Moonglow cheese, caramel apple jam and toasted honey wheat bread with pumpkin seeds
Spicy sprouting broccoli salad with garlic, chili, and toasted bread crumbs
Local beet salad with wood-grilled onions and meyer lemon
Mixed local lettuces salad with parmigiano-reggiano
Marinated and wood-grilled rushing waters rainbow trout with Wisconsin fingerling potatoes, herb aioli, pickled garlic, shaved radishes and fried house made “pickles”
Marinated and wood-grilled tallgrass strip steak with toasted barley, marinated romanesco cauliflower, mushrooms, and a mustard béarnaise
Gooey butter cake
Brownies
Shortbread with crab apple butter

The party ended around 2:30 am on Monday, March 3rd after Chef Virant gave Chef Ramsay the VIP tour of the kitchen and a ‘look see’ into his towering stash of hundreds of jars of pickled and preserved local fruits and vegetables.

Vie

4471 Lawn Avenue

Western Springs, IL 60558

708/ 246 – 2082

Now Gordon Ramsay getting up from a delicious meal and suddenly punking Paul Virant with an unannounced, unscripted all-access inspection at full blast, with no extra production equipment and just one cameraperson following, whatever they find, they broadcast - that, I would pay to see. And I love Vie.

Wow! What a great time the Ramsay crew must have had. Congrats to chef Virant and crew. I'm sure this was some sort of personal milestone for the whole gang. And damn, that menu looks great

=R=