LTHForum.com

Ultimately my problem with Vettel's review is that he tosses around a lot of stars to a lot of places that don't deserve them, and then when it comes to a place like this, he downgrades it.

I personally don't give much weight to his reviews.

I agree - and it's largely the pricing that tempered my experience there such that I am not in a hurry to go back. First, the wine list was patently average, and priced higher than necessary. I can have more interesting wine at a fraction of the price at West Town Tavern, which is the first of several such places that come to mind. The cocktails at GE (and I even had the lauded London Calling) were, again, so-so. If you're looking at restaurants which are attempting to do cocktails near Violet Hour levels, Sepia kicks its butt roundly in that regard. Okay, having not distinguished itself with either its wine or cocktails, GE has nothing left but its food to get me coming back. The food, priced into the $30s for entrees, was more playful than actually successful. Even the popcorn amuse (I think it was an amuse, it might have been a bar snack), with its dehydrated powder-or-something flavoring, elicited a shrug from me. The popcorn was ice cold, tasted like it had been popped early in the day, and the powder flavoring - close your eyes, and I dare you to distinguish it from industrial offerings by Lays or Smartfood. Why should this be appealing to me?



I agree that it's an intensely personal venture (not that it should be viewed differently). But for me, that's part of the problem with GE. Maybe I, as the hard-paying customer, am not so much in on the joke, so to speak. Maybe I don't understand why it's worth paying $30 for a deconstructed this, reinterpreted that, which is more conceptual than tasty. Maybe I don't get the appeal of a restaurant which plays Whitney Houston's "I Wanna Dance With Somebody" more than once in one night. Maybe I don't understand why it's so fun to provide cold popcorn as an amuse. The problem with opening restaurants which are intensely personal is that they may be understood by only a few -- perhaps this is what Vettel was getting at in his review when he focused so much on the non-food aspects of the experience.

Do I think the restaurant is still a work in progress? Yes. But I think he needs to get it together fast lest he alienate enough customers who may simply not want to try it again, even if it's later honed into a smooth-operating 3-star restaurant. He doesn't have all the time in the world. Right now, he's asking customers to pay a lot of money to take a leap of faith. I realize it has its fans on this board in particular, but it didn't work for me, and I don't think I'm the only one.

I agree. Vettel rates most restaurants either two or three stars, thus rendering his ratings virtually meaningless, and the reviews themselves aren't particularly well-written. The reviews in the Chicago Reader or Time Out Chicago are much more insightful and better written, IMHO.

I agree, although my top source for reliable reviews is right here in LTH Forum.

Right, as I just said to a friend, expectation often forms 90% of a dining experience take-away.

I don't necessarily think there's a "joke" to get. People need to wipe the Bowles slate clean and start anew. For those who don't approach graham elliot like they would any other restaurant of its look and feel, I think the "joke's" on them. While it may seem incredulous to the members on this forum who care enough to be following this thread, people are still showing up at graham elliot dressed to the nines expecting linen and *plush.* I find that sad.

As for the prices, I'll agree that the main courses are a little north of what I had initially expected. That being said, most of the main courses I saw could easily feed two; the $35 Pork Prime Rib might feed three. Now, whether a couple is likely to feel comfortable splitting a main course as their meal is another story.

While I can't say that I necessarily observed this, I did note a disconcerting disconnect at GE between what you're paying for and what the restaurant views it doesn't need to do, all in the name of being casual. (However inartfully, this is what I think Vettel was getting at.) The bottom line is, you are charged upwards of $30 for entrees, $14 or so for cocktails and a goodly premium for wine. In other words, the diner puts out the green notes and therefore does have certain expectations in return (as you intimated in your post, ulterior epicure). For me, there was a disconnect between the prices and, say, the music, which contained a mish-mosh of songs, a lot of which were not good, and certainly not what I'd associate with being played at a restaurant charging what it does. I could easily get over that, but I noticed another disconnect when I had paid $14 for a drink and a goodly premium on red wine, and I didn't get a cocktail napkin (and the condensation does run down the bar into your lap) or an appropriate wine glass. And there's a disconnect between the very notion of casual and the room itself: While GE is inarguably no Avenues in terms of poshness, it's not Khan BBQ, heck, it's not even West Town Tavern or May Street Market, two restaurants which I think exhibit a casual decor. With GE's slick modern lighting and loft-like decor, nothing about it says, "Come in your shorts or yoga clothes and bring your kids, too." So it seems like there's a disconnect between the execution of what GE envisions to be a casual dining experience, and at least what I, as the customer, views to be such. And it starts with the prices, IMHO, and then moves on to the "experimental" dishes. While I get that GE may characterize using brioche twinkies, cheez-it crackers, etc. in his dishes as being playful, when you're paying a good amount for it, it first, better taste good, really good, but second, is it really "casual," just because it's playful? This type of chef-playing with your food is still firmly ensconced in high-end dining, and I'm not sure it falls within the idea of casual dining, no matter how humbly-rooted some of the ingredients may be.

For me, the mark of true casual dining is comfort and it doesn't exactly stretch the boundaries in any way. If we're talking about casual two-star restaurants, let's contrast GE with two-star Avec, one of my favorite places, where I think the casual message is delivered clearly: The room is stark, no-frills, but wood paneling brings the room in and the diners closer together. The benches and communal dining immediately signal to the diner that wearing your Sunday best probably isn't the best idea. That the servers are dressed in street clothes, and there is no uniform amongst them, communicates to the diner not to expect formal service. The loud chatter, the sounds of the kitchen sizzling as well as random playlist all tell the diner to relax - nobody will shoot you a dirty look if you laugh out load. Diners are sitting elbow-to-elbow. Napkins are kitchen towels (for the most part). Food is served and plated in a rustic fashion. Dishes are meant to be shared. You can spend $30-something on the special fish, but if you want to split a couple of small plates, you could spend significantly less than that and still feel fed and watered.

It is this disconnect with GE that most tempered my experience. If the entrees were $10 bucks less, and certain other things tweaked, I might feel differently.

It seems like you're too focused on the fact that Chef Bowles set out to make a "casual" restaurant. Each person's casual is a different thing. To one, it might mean "come in your shorts or yoga clothes and bring your kids, too." To another, it might mean getting your high-end food in an environment that doesn't feel as stuffy as many high-end restaurants, like Avenues.

There are 2 Chicago restaurants that I go to despite a dislike for the atmosphere and service. One is Old Town Brasserie. The other is Graham Elliott. Those 2 chefs could serve me $40 entrees from their garage, and I'd pay it as often as I could afford to.

I can't agree on the disconnect.
Personally, I love the concept. Great food, at a place where I can go in wearing jeans and with my shirt not tucked in.
At risk of offending some, too often great food is too prissy (e.g. Les Nomades). It is nice going into a place where it is loud, where I am comfortable ordering a beer, and still receiving food that knocks me off my chair.
Maybe it a guy thing, but for the most part, I don't care what the plates look like. Fine China does nothing for me. I couldn't care less. I care what the food ON the plates looks like and more importantly, how it tastes.
Plus, I like the general idea of taking food ideas and messing around with them. That popcorn that some didn't like? It sure tasted good and the idea of great tasting popcorn makes it a great way to start. This place is about having a good time. I went with friends -- some of whom were not all that serious about food -- and we talked loud and we had a good time and we also got to eat some great food.
I haven't gone back, but that is mainly because I have young kids. If I had more time to go out, I definitely would be back.

ulterior...As we were looking at the menu, our server informed us that we could do a multiple course tasting menu made up of items of our own choosing and we could do as many courses as we wished. In stating what I ended up ordering, I am simply repeating what our server called it. I did not see anything that was labeled as a "tasting menu".

As for rating, I certainly had no illusions of it being a 4-star restaurant. I don't think Vettel liked the atmosphere and therefore the rating suffered. On the other hand, his rating is just one person's opinion.

DML...I also love the casual atmosphere and don't think you need to be dressed up to enjoy great food.

That would be 99%+ of Chicago restaurants, surely.

I don't see what's so revolutionarily casual about Graham Elliott. It seems like lots of two-star bistroish/gastropubbish places, more laid back than fine dining, but a lot chichier than a bar or family restaurant. Every restaurant on Division has the same atmosphere, roughly.

It is not a bar. It is not a family restaurant. It is a place with fine dining that it also comfortable.

The comparision was made to Avec. I won't go into Avec (and I'm not wild about Blackbird) because it is physically uncomfortable. I don't like the idea of being wedged in some place. That isn't "casual." That's "uncomfortable."

It may well be that you didn't like the food. Reasonable minds can differ on that. But it is definitely different from most places in that I can go, be comfortable, be loud, and also have a great meal.

Nothing, except the fact that a four-star chef voluntarily relinquished his four-star status for the sake of pursuing something closer to home.

But, you're right, graham elliot isn't doing anything more interesting or better than like-minded "casual" restaurants in Chicago. On any given night, whether I find myself at avec, blackbird, North Pond, or graham elliot depends on my mood and, perhaps, the crowd I'm dining with.

I'm still baffled as to what universe I'm living in, in which upscale chefs have never opened more casual places before now, in which Chicago never had chichi neighborhood restaurants in neighborhoods like Wicker Park, Lincoln Square, Andersonville and the South Loop, and in which every restaurant has been so hushed that I've never once had to raise my voice to be heard over the crowd noise and throbbing techno bouncing off the hard surfaces.

If Grant Achatz left Alinea to open a 2 star restaurant (and I mean actually ended his affiliation with the restaurant in every way), do you not think that would be a big deal?

It's not like this is a chef with a small empire that decided to open a more casual outpost. This was the chef at a 4 star restaurant that left to do his own thing, which is decidedly more casual. That's a pretty unusual situation.

ETA - I should have brought this up earlier (and I don't know, maybe I did) but I actually think it's incorrect to try to compare Graham Elliot to the likes of Blackbird, Naha, North Pond, etc. If you really think about it as a whole, I think that the closest comparison is actually to Schwa.

You got me baffled too.

jesteinf, this was exactly what i was thinking. It's one thing to open a casual restaurant. It's another thing to make the statement that you're giving up a 4-star podium to do your thing exactly how you want it. It's like a guided tour into his brain or something. This is the mind of a 4-star chef...

Based on food alone, it definitely deserves at least half a star less than Blackbird (personally). So 2* sounds fine to me, ignoring anything about service/decor/etc, which I generally don't care about.

After being away for a summer I recently returned to Chicago and ate at Graham Elliott's. Much of one's response to GE is grounded in expectations. The restaurant is reminiscent of Otom and of the (late) Butter. This is a restaurant whose chef is aware of the current trends in contemporary cuisine, uses them in places - but without a full commitment - and provides a casual environment in which to enjoy the cuisine. Based on my meal the restaurant deserved two stars (or perhaps 2.5), but like Otom, does not have the complexity of Moto, Naha, North Pond, etc. and certainly cannot fairly be compared to Avenues.

If this was a new chef blowing into town, we would be grateful for a breath of fresh air, a casual space with creative cuisine. Our waitress repeated three or four times how certain components of the meal were "fun" (the drinks, the popcorn, etc.). This suggests that they have selected a particular niche - Carnivale with cuisine - and they are managing it well. But Chef GEB has a past, and so we judge him by what he is capable. If being a four-star chef is equivalent to being a gifted artist, a virtuoso, a brilliant chef who strives for two-stars has different aspirations. Perhaps that goal is to gain financial security, spend more time with family, create a culinary empire, or find legions of adoring fans, but those who want the very most innovative or sensory dishes will be disappointed IF they judge the place against what the chef could do, rather than what the restaurant does do. So Graham Elliott on its terms is a welcome addition, but it terms of what Chef GEB has achieved, it is a let-down for those of us who really care about food. (This reminds me in some measure of Boston's megawatt chef Jasper White, who after closing his sterling Jasper's, opened Summer Shack, devoted to high quality fried clams and lobster rolls).

My favorite "dish" of the night was actually a cocktail: the London Calling: a creative take on a Pimm's Cup, perfect for a hot weekend evening. Many of the other dishes, while enjoyable, lack subtlety. The cheese risotto (with Cheez-Its, bacon, and apple slivers), had properly cooked rice, but the cheddar cheese was overwhelming. The Caesar Salad (with Brioche Twinkies) was a cute concept (all of the dishes are cute concepts), but aside from the cubes of brioche not so distinctive from the classic Caesar. My Berkshire pork rack was one of the best and meatiest pork chops I have had - Vettel is right about this dish. The root-beer barbeque and peach chutney were evocative of an off-centered Song of the South, but by the time I finished the dish, I had no desire to order it come fall. The flavors, while potentially exciting, needed to be dialed back. The food doesn't attempt the sublime subtlety of Avenues. Both the beef stroganoff and the molten carrot cake with raisin marmalade were very tasty, but neither one had the combination of novelty and taste combinations of which Chef Bowles had been known. Compared to the chef's best dishes these plates were either cautious in execution or slightly unbalanced in taste - or both.

So ultimately it comes back to expectations. GE is a restaurant that competes well with Otom (I give a slight edge to the latter) and with other casual restaurants that take food seriously. We should be grateful to have GE as an addition to the River North dining scene, a locale too often dedicated to the tourist gaze. Yet, at the same time losing the full range of artistic skills of Chef Bowles - at least for the moment - is a disappointment. How could we help but hope for a restaurant that would compete with Alinea, Moto, L20 - with Avenues. GE is not that restaurant. Still, this is a moment of a still-young chef's development and Chef Bowles is a member of our culinary community - far more talented than most of us scribblers - and we wish him well, even if he has, for the moment, squashed our gastronomic fantasies.

Is he using Cheetos instead of Cheez-Its now?


This dish now comes with TWO of those ginormous double (triple?)-cut chops?

To clarify:

I meant Cheez-Its, not Cheetos (I haven't eaten either in a long, long time).

Perhaps I was wrong, but I thought there were two rib chops served together, but perhaps it was a single chop. It was huge. They were not served as two pieces, and I didn't take photos.

When I went, it was a single 2 rib chop.

An exceptionally insightful and well-written observation, GAF. Many thanks.

graham elliot will be rolling out a new autumn-minded menu in two weeks. They'll also be turning over their decor and "theme" to suit the seasonal change.

Hours are being adjusted as well: Monday-Saturday 5pm-10:30pm. The restaurant will close on Sundays.

You can find details of specific dishes to be added/dropped at the ulterior epicure.

Hi,

If you care to copy and paste the update on Graham Elliott's menu, I would appreciate it. I turned 30 some years ago. Reading white lettering on a black background is just too challenging for me.

So now they are going from Summer to Fall, I wonder what change will be made to the lighting. The yellow was impossible to deal with and made everything seem off. I like full spectrum white light where your food looks like it did in the kitchen.

Regards,

Just for you. And, I tend to agree with you about mood lighting, though for photography purposes more than any other.

I was told that pumpkins will replace the lemons. Time will tell.

If life hands you a bunch of pumpkins, make pie.

Allow me to quote myself Mike G style from earlier in the thread:

Yes, but he seems to be deviating from your previously described plan. Autumn will see not just orange, but red, brown and yellow lights as well.

HI,

Thanks for the copy and paste, it really helps!

I wasn't too thrilled with my one visit there. One of them was our waiter asking us not to use flash, "At the request of the Chef." You cannot take decent pictures in that tinted lighting. The very next evening, Gary went and freely snapped away with flash without any such comments.

Now that I think about it, why not take pictures in that atrocious lighting, then post them as-is. If anyone complains the food looks lousy, explain it was taken in the environment provided by the restaurant.

Mike G does not have the patent on quoting himself. I do it, too, to avoid reinventing the wheel. It can save a lot of time sometimes.

There's more on my less than happy experience at Graham Elliot Bowles, the restaurant, which I will get to sometime soon.

Regards,