Why the Chicago restaurant scene is better than New York's

No one--yet-- is trying to inflict a ninja-themed restaurant on us.

CONFUSING the point of a restaurant with the mission of a "Saturday Night Live" skit, Ninja New York deposits you in a kooky, dreary subterranean labyrinth that seems better suited to coal mining than to supping. You are greeted there by servers in black costumes who ceaselessly bow, regularly yelp and ever so occasionally tumble, and you are asked to choose between two routes to your table.

The first is described by a ninja escort as simple and direct. The second is "dark, dangerous and narrow," involving a long tunnel and a drawbridge that descends only when your escort intones a special command, which he later implores you to keep secret.

I recommend a third path: right back out the door.

The whole review is a hoot.

My take is slightly the opposite. Would you ever see a "poor" review in the Chicago papers. I think we have just as goofy, lousy places here, but the media does not want you to know (it seems).

"For a toddler with a trust fund and a yen for udon and maki, Ninja might be a valid alternative to the Jekyll and Hyde restaurant. For just about anybody else it's nonsensical, and its climactic illusion may well be a disappearing act."

I laughed myself bleary-eyed from lines like that. Thanks, Ann.

Vital Information wrote:My take is slightly the opposite. Would you ever see a "poor" review in the Chicago papers. I think we have just as goofy, lousy places here, but the media does not want you to know (it seems).

Negative reviews in the mainstream media do seem to be less common than positive reviews. One reason might be that, given the limited timeframes we all work within, it's more helpful to get guidance to good places than warnings about poor places (i.e., I'm going out to dinner tonight; tell me where to go, not where NOT to go). Then, of course, there's the problem some newspapers face (e.g., Wednesday Journal comes to mind) of publishing negative reviews of places that might buy advertising space (this is a lamentable conflict of interest, but a reality). I am biased, but my experience is that the Reader is not afraid to print unfavorable reviews of current advertisers or emerging trendy places (last winter, Shatkin wrote a very critical review of Moto, at a time when everyone was gushing about it).

Hammond

I think David's take on the attitude taken by the wood-fiber based media is right-- that a really lousy place falls out of the consideration set and a Vettel or whoever never even writes about his meal. I can remember a few utter slams of some big-hyped places-- that Woodfield-themed outer space place, Mars 2112 or whatever it was, I think got a big slam in the Trib, and years ago Pat Bruno actually closed a terrible pasta place (in the location of the River North Hooter's) with a review that absolutely savaged their ineptitude at the simplest tasks; they seem to have given up without a fight after that, I was working nearby (early 90s) and they had paper signs up on the doors in a day.

But when you look at London, say, where critics compete to see who can be the most vicious toward some new chef, it's obvious where the differences in US reviewing generally lie. I wouldn't want to see us go that far in making restaurant reviewing a blood sport, it's obvious that that kind of reviewing has lost touch with the actual food and exists merely to let the writer show off, but a little more of that willingness to rip a fundamentally misconceived hotspot (say, one serving yuppie-ized salmon tacos as supposed nouvelle Mexican) would be healthy for the food reviewing scene.

You know, part of it is that Chicago possibly has less tolerance of such places than does NYC.

The Village's idiotic Jekyll and Hyde is a good example. An outpost here lasted for about ten minutes.

JeffB wrote:You know, part of it is that Chicago possibly has less tolerance of such places than does NYC.

The Village's idiotic Jekyll and Hyde is a good example. An outpost here lasted for about ten minutes.

Jeff:

Yes and no. I agree that success in Chicago for a place like the downright silly and childish ninja-grill is probably less likely than in New York, but Chicago has or has had a few places that are amazingly stupid in their own right (e.g. Tommy Guns).

Be that as it may, Ninja New York is about as stupid a concept as can be.

Antonius

Notice that we're talking about tourist-oriented places (and I for have never known anyone who has been to Tommy Guns' Garage, or at least would admit it).* Of course, Chicago has a whole tourist district full of dubious things; but I also think people who come to Chicago often have a certain idea of things they should eat here that are reasonably priced, and so at least some of the tourist traffic ends up at Pizzeria Uno, Al's Italian Beef, the steakhouses, etc. Which may not be traipsing Lawrence Avenue, but also isn't Rainforest Cafe.

It is harder any more to think of modest-priced places in New York that are famous-- high end yes (and of course for most people even a Rocco-level Italian place is toward their high end, let alone Lutece). Maybe one or two delis and Papaya King, but beyond that, can you really think of lowish (relative) priced places in New York that tourists (not people like us) would tend to know of before they got there? No wonder dorky places do so much more business there.

In any case, places like Ninja New York deserve a reminder of Mike G's rule: "If there's a reason to eat at a place other than the food, the food's no good."

* Where many people admit to having been to Medieval Times-- once.

Mike G wrote: Maybe one or two delis and Papaya King, but beyond that, can you really think of lowish (relative) priced places in New York that tourists (not people like us) would tend to know of before they got there? No wonder dorky places do so much more business there.

Nathan’s comes to mind, but that's an exception, I think.

Antonius wrote:Yes and no. I agree that success in Chicago for a place like the downright silly and childish ninja-grill is probably less likely than in New York, but Chicago has or has had a few places that are amazingly stupid in their own right (e.g. Tommy Guns).

Get this: the local Oak Park high school regular takes a class to Tommy Gun’s. I have no idea why, but I think it has something to do with Chicago history. Barf.

Yeah, I was thinking Nathan's is really a chain these days, but then I guess so is Pizzeria Uno or Al's, so if there's an ur-Nathan's (where is it, anyway? Coney Island?) then that would be one.

Well, there are the bagel/deli places and the pizza places, even in Manhattan, such as John's on Bleeker. And Chinatown. You might have a point though: while LA and the Outer Boroughs are rich with "ethnic" dining choices, I don't think that tourists think of either city as a cheap food destination -- unlike Chicago and Philly, eg.

David Hammond wrote:

Antonius wrote:Yes and no. I agree that success in Chicago for a place like the downright silly and childish ninja-grill is probably less likely than in New York, but Chicago has or has had a few places that are amazingly stupid in their own right (e.g. Tommy Guns).

Get this: the local Oak Park high school regular takes a class to Tommy Gun’s. I have no idea why, but I think it has something to do with Chicago history. Barf.

David:

I would have thought they would be going to the Rain Forest Café...



A

David Hammond wrote:Get this: the local Oak Park high school regular takes a class to Tommy Gun’s. I have no idea why, but I think it has something to do with Chicago history. Barf.

On the anniversary and for groups, Tommy Gun's does what I'm told is a fairly accurate reinactment of the 1929 St. Valentine's Day massacre in which five associates of Al Capone shot six of Bugs Moran's men and an optician. I don't know if they perform this for students, but they might: it's certainly a watershed event in local history.

I haven't been there, but people I know who've gone to the regular show say it's a fun re-creation of the speakeasy era. They perform Cole Porter, George Gershwin, Fats Waller, Duke Ellington and the like, and apparently they draw much of their cast from regulars at Marriott's Lincolnshire Theater -- how bad could it be? According to this review, the food's even decent.

LAZ wrote:On the anniversary and for groups, Tommy Gun's does what I'm told is a fairly accurate reinactment of the 1929 St. Valentine's Day massacre in which five associates of Al Capone shot six of Bugs Moran's men and an optician. I don't know if they perform this for students, but they might: it's certainly a watershed event in local history.

Yes, it's very realistic I've heard. They even have actors portraying Josephine and Daphne sneaking out the back door.

Hammond

Antonius wrote:Yes and no. I agree that success in Chicago for a place like the downright silly and childish ninja-grill is probably less likely than in New York, but Chicago has or has had a few places that are amazingly stupid in their own right (e.g. Tommy Guns).

What exactly is Tommy Guns? I can kind of guess from LAZ's post, but I've never heard of it.

If it's the closet thing Chicago has the Ninja restaurant, I'm obviously missing out...

LionRock wrote:

Antonius wrote:Yes and no. I agree that success in Chicago for a place like the downright silly and childish ninja-grill is probably less likely than in New York, but Chicago has or has had a few places that are amazingly stupid in their own right (e.g. Tommy Guns).

What exactly is Tommy Guns? I can kind of guess from LAZ's post, but I've never heard of it.

If it's the closet thing Chicago has the Ninja restaurant, I'm obviously missing out...

LionRock:

I doubt you're missing out on too much, unless watching a reenactment of mass murder is something that heightens your dining pleasure -- I don't think it would do much for me. And contemplating Tommy Guns, I'm starting to think that the Ninja thing doesn't sound quite so bad. Better silly than vulgar...

I guess, though, if they just play Cole Porter tunes and dress in roaring 20's costumes and speak in a goofy manner, that's not vulgar, but it's still silly in much the way the Ninja thing is. Frankly, I'd rather see that ladies' historical reenactment group from Monty Python do the battle of Waterloo. Some kinds of silly are better than others.



Antonius

I have always believed that new york was the 2nd city when it came to gastronomy. Oops, did I just post that?

homaro cantu wrote:I have always believed that new york was the 2nd city when it came to gastronomy. Oops, did I just post that?

O:

I think you picked the right day to get away with that, what with the White Sox. Sort of like Carnival, the world on its head...



A

Antonius wrote:LionRock:

I doubt you're missing out on too much, unless watching a reenactment of mass murder is something that heightens your dining pleasure -- I don't think it would do much for me. And contemplating Tommy Guns, I'm starting to think that the Ninja thing doesn't sound quite so bad. Better silly than vulgar...

I guess, though, if they just play Cole Porter tunes and dress in roaring 20's costumes and speak in a goofy manner, that's not vulgar, but it's still silly in much the way the Ninja thing is. Frankly, I'd rather see that ladies' historical reenactment group from Monty Python do the battle of Waterloo. Some kinds of silly are better than others.



Antonius

Thanks Antonius,

According to some things I have read, restaurants like Ninja are quite popular in Tokyo. In fact, some of the restaurants listed in that article sound even more bizarre -

Case in point -

Alcatraz BC
Ever wondered what it's like behind bars? Handcuffs your thing? Walk into Alcatraz, a theme bar named after the famed (and infamous) Rock of Alcatraz. A blue-clad "prison warden" will cuff you and lead you to your "cell" where you'll eat and drink jail-themed stuff.

"Jail-themed stuff?" I have to admit, I would be interested in eating at somewhere like that (or Ninja) but only in the company of good friends and if someone else was picking up the tab If nothing else, it would a story you could dine out on for a while (hopefully at some better restaurants)

LionRock wrote:... some of the restaurants listed in that article sound even more bizarre -

Case in point -

Alcatraz BC
Ever wondered what it's like behind bars? Handcuffs your thing? Walk into Alcatraz, a theme bar named after the famed (and infamous) Rock of Alcatraz. A blue-clad "prison warden" will cuff you and lead you to your "cell" where you'll eat and drink jail-themed stuff.

"Jail-themed stuff?" I have to admit, I would be interested in eating at somewhere like that (or Ninja) but only in the company of good friends and if someone else was picking up the tab

Wow. someone else would have to pick up the tab and the tab would have a large total for drinks!

I'll hold out for the Roman banquet/orgy...



A

Oh! That is too wonderful! It seemed that every new paragraph was dirty with LTHForum quotes! Thanks for the link, Ann!

shanti

Instead of naming this post "why the Chicago restaurant scene is better than New York's", I say why not name it " why some Chicagoans need to prove to themselves we're better than New York".
Let’s face it; most major cities in America now have in some form or another crap like this. PERIOD. The fact that the New York media has the balls to write a scathing critique about nauseous concept places like this says even more about the richness and depth of their culinary world and, just maybe, the expectations of its citizenry.
I don’t write this because I think Chicago plays second fiddle to anyone when it comes to food. I don’t. I write it because, as a lifelong Chicagoan, we should be able to embrace our culinary greatness instead of questioning it with inappropriate comparisons.

PIGMON wrote:Instead of naming this post "why the Chicago restaurant scene is better than New York's", I say why not name it " why some Chicagoans need to prove to themselves we're better than New York".
Let’s face it; most major cities in America now have in some form or another crap like this. PERIOD. The fact that the New York media has the balls to write a scathing critique about nauseous concept places like this says even more about the richness and depth of their culinary world and, just maybe, the expectations of its citizenry.
I don’t write this because I think Chicago plays second fiddle to anyone when it comes to food. I don’t. I write it because, as a lifelong Chicagoan, we should be able to embrace our culinary greatness instead of questioning it with inappropriate comparisons.

Well said. I kinda thought I was saying the same thing above, but I prefer your tone!!!

Vital Information wrote:

PIGMON wrote:Instead of naming this post "why the Chicago restaurant scene is better than New York's", I say why not name it " why some Chicagoans need to prove to themselves we're better than New York".
Let’s face it; most major cities in America now have in some form or another crap like this. PERIOD. The fact that the New York media has the balls to write a scathing critique about nauseous concept places like this says even more about the richness and depth of their culinary world and, just maybe, the expectations of its citizenry.
I don’t write this because I think Chicago plays second fiddle to anyone when it comes to food. I don’t. I write it because, as a lifelong Chicagoan, we should be able to embrace our culinary greatness instead of questioning it with inappropriate comparisons.

Well said. I kinda thought I was saying the same thing above, but I prefer your tone!!!

I prefer Omar's take on it.

You know, it's ironic that we're congratulating ourselves on being so much less touristy-suckery than New York, when at the same time we're talking about two different Brazilian meat-on-swords places. (Okay, so one of them actually seems to be good...)

Plataforma has been a NYC tourist draw for years. Like Fogo, it also happens to be very good.

Doesn't it make more sense that New York has more stupid-tourist-themed places than Chicago? Last time I checked a lot more tourists go to New York than Chicago.

I really wish I could say that the discerning palate of all people who dine in our city turns them off to the flashy, touristy restaurants where the taste of the food is not the focus of their menu. But you know, I can't.