FWIW, Steve Cuozzo from the NY Post gave this place a nearly identical review a few months ago.
I think it's the only zero star review he's given:
"The Guy???s American Kitchen waitress studied the half-chewed pork, slaw, salmon, mashed potatoes and maybe moon rocks we???d left on our plates. I wouldn???t feed the mess to a cat ??? the end-product of our struggle to extract edible elements from heaps of sugar and sludge masquerading as normal food.
???Would you like me to wrap that up for you???? she chirped.
I promise: One day soon, I???ll go back to reviewing real restaurants with real chefs. Enough of laugh riots like Ryu, Purple Fig and Mihoko???s 21 Grams!
But until the fall???s legitimate openings actually showup, we???ll do with the West 44th Street punch line from TV kitchen clown/wannabe rocker/ global menace Guy Fieri.
You expect it to be awful, of course???how could things like ???Unyawns cajun chicken ciabatta with donkey sauce??? not be awful? But Fieri must believe his name alone will fill 500 seats, as if Times Square tourists couldn???t also choose Applebee???s, Bubba Gump Shrimp or the very respectable Carmine???s down the block.
Guy???s isn???t bad looking for what it is ??? a colorful, three level sprawl of Americana, guitars, memorabilia and murals framed in warm brick. But one night, with maybe 400 seats free, the hostess showed us to the worst in the house: a tiny ???table??? for two in the deserted front bar.
A protest scored us a perch in the far back ???Studio??? room, where the televised NFL barely took the edge off turd shaped Awesome Pretzel Chicken Tenders, tasting not of chicken, pretzel or any recognizable digestible matter.
Guy???s does factory farm cuisine one better: Everything emerges from mysterious engines, deep in the bowels of the former New York Times loading dock, tooled to make all items taste alike.
I???m a soft touch for junk food turned out with integrity??? but not for stale, ice cold focaccia ($3.95 for ???bread???!), sashimi tacos with scarcely a molecule of tuna, or bone-dry pulled pork on unheated buns.
Sugar by the truckload has the run of the menu. It glazes commercial-grade salmon and hulihuli chicken. It pops up in a dip for mozzarella and pepperoni scrunched inside a leathery panko crust. In ???Thai chili??? form, it bleeds through ???California egg rolls??? filled with chicken, avocado, ginger, peppers??? but tasting of none.
One good dish squeaked through: juicy, braised pork shank which, while tasting not at all of the promised General Tso, peeled easily from the bone.
Pasta ended the rally. Fettuccine came with cajun-spiced blackened chicken breast???random meat fragments neither blackened nor spiced. Creamy Parmesan sauce could moonlight as engine lubricant. The plate must hold 3,000 calories. Could one human eat it all? If so, should he or she be allowed out of the house?
Irish-German chocolate cake was the sort of sickly-sweet affair that pleases when you???re drunk at 2 a.m. It came with stone-hard ???malt balls??? that failed to yield to knife or fork.
I took one of the balls home. A steak knife severed it in two, but my teeth didn???t make a dent. A hammer did the trick. By then I decided to leave further taste testing to Times Square???s bust our gourmands."
More than anyone, he champions small Mom/Pop joints and I don't see how that can be bad.
I used to think this about him and that somehow he's bringing a certain type of America into food and cooking that might otherwise not go out of their way to check anything in between the drive through and frozen foods section, but the more I reflect, he's really not providing much of an alternative to the mass produced nutritionally garbage food that Americans consume daily, and certainly don't think he's going to change the general perception that there's nothing concerning at all about our runaway industrial food-system. NOT TO SAY THAT HE HAS TO OR THAT THAT IS HIS AGENDA AT ALL! And I'm not going to argue that a greasy "melty-cheesey" hamburger is not absolutely delicious from time to time. But championing Mom and Pop restaurants does not seem in harmony with opening a 500 seat factory in times square.
Frank said:
The numbers in terms of cost productivity are very, very hard. You mess up one main for a table of 4, the restaurant will not make a dime on the entire table. Unless they order two $200 bottles of wine. If you're a millionaire tv celebrity you don't have to care much about these things. Especially with $30 for a main course consisting of generic and cheap ingredients. It makes my blood boil when some yahoo who can't cook shit and who has no respect for good food makes a ton of money with some idiotic tv show and then, like pestilence crawls across the country opening up one shit restaurant after the other just because he can and because he's a fat, greedy fuck-face with a two-tone chin-muff who can't rake in enough dough, fully knowing that the only reason any idiot would ever set foot in one of his useless "restaurants" is because they've seen his mug on tv.
Yes, thank you. I've been on the grind in NYC restaurants for the past 10 years. I'm not going to pretend there's no injustice to what generally goes on and the people that rise to the top are certainly not the best cooks/chefs/people/workers in general. But that's the way it goes with everything. BUT the competitiveness in the NYC restaurant game is ferocious, and as far as the press and public seem to go, anything is fair game and there aren't really any rules determining how criticism gets dealt. This review was extremely harsh no doubt, but I've seen restaurants go under after a glowing 1 or 2 star review. But you have to come with game in NYC if you are going to survive, and I think celebrity chefs and franchises should not be immune. BTW I would love to start seeing reviews of hole in the wall spots as well as corporate chains.
Sure, it was low-hanging fruit, but that was pretty great. I think the first question, "Have you eaten there?" pretty much said it all.
And FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK the idea that you don't get to review a shitty restaurant because it's popular. You open up, you better be ready. Leave that thin-skinned shit at the door.
More than anyone, he champions small Mom/Pop joints and I don't see how that can be bad.
I used to think this about him and that somehow he's bringing a certain type of America into food and cooking that might otherwise not go out of their way to check anything in between the drive through and frozen foods section, but the more I reflect, he's really not providing much of an alternative to the mass produced nutritionally garbage food that Americans consume daily, and certainly don't think he's going to change the general perception that there's nothing concerning at all about our runaway industrial food-system. NOT TO SAY THAT HE HAS TO OR THAT THAT IS HIS AGENDA AT ALL! And I'm not going to argue that a greasy "melty-cheesey" hamburger is not absolutely delicious from time to time. But championing Mom and Pop restaurants does not seem in harmony with opening a 500 seat factory in times square.
Frank said:
The numbers in terms of cost productivity are very, very hard. You mess up one main for a table of 4, the restaurant will not make a dime on the entire table. Unless they order two $200 bottles of wine. If you're a millionaire tv celebrity you don't have to care much about these things. Especially with $30 for a main course consisting of generic and cheap ingredients. It makes my blood boil when some yahoo who can't cook shit and who has no respect for good food makes a ton of money with some idiotic tv show and then, like pestilence crawls across the country opening up one shit restaurant after the other just because he can and because he's a fat, greedy fuck-face with a two-tone chin-muff who can't rake in enough dough, fully knowing that the only reason any idiot would ever set foot in one of his useless "restaurants" is because they've seen his mug on tv.
Yes, thank you. I've been on the grind in NYC restaurants for the past 10 years. I'm not going to pretend there's no injustice to what generally goes on and the people that rise to the top are certainly not the best cooks/chefs/people/workers in general. But that's the way it goes with everything. BUT the competitiveness in the NYC restaurant game is ferocious, and as far as the press and public seem to go, anything is fair game and there aren't really any rules determining how criticism gets dealt. This review was extremely harsh no doubt, but I've seen restaurants go under after a glowing 1 or 2 star review. But you have to come with game in NYC if you are going to survive, and I think celebrity chefs and franchises should not be immune. BTW I would love to start seeing reviews of hole in the wall spots as well as corporate chains.
He doesnt have to serve great food to make money in Times Square.
What he does on tv shouldnt be reflective of his business. Hes not cooking on Triple D.
Guy Fieri???s Most Disgusting Food is Not Even at His Times Square Restaurant
Jordan Sargent
As you are probably aware, New York Times food critic Pete Wells became the most important man in America this week after eviscerating Guy Fieri's Times Square restaurant for essentially being Guy Fieri in building form ??? a bloated, neon monstrosity serving unappetizing food obnoxiously. Here's the thing, though, about Guy's American Kitchen & Bar, which has now become ground zero for everything wrong or right with capitalism: Fieri serves way more revolting food at one of his other restaurants.
Allow me to introduce you to Tex Wasabi's, a restaurant of Fieri's that has locations in Santa Rosa, Calif. and the Sacramento-area. Tex Wasabi's features Fieri's takes on barbecue and various East Asian foods, with "St. Louis Style Ribs" sharing menu space with "Hong Kong Noodles." It would all be rather standard if not for the restaurant's "Gringo Sushi," which is sushi for Americans who don't want to eat any of that gross raw fish stuff. Tex Wasabi's offers four Gringo Sushi rolls, and they sound like they would make even a college freshman fresh off two bong rips gag.
Here are the four Gringo Sushi rolls (there used to be eight, God help us) ranked in descending order of nastiness:
Hidden Chicken: Thin slices of Teriyaki chicken, rice paper, sushi rice, avocado, tangerine, crushed wontons and iceberg lettuce. Because the only thing you think about when eating sushi is, "Man, I wish I was eating some iceberg lettuce."
Big Bird on Fire: Blackened chicken breast, rice paper, sushi rice and natural cut fries. Guy Fieri saying "Yo dawg, I heard you like fries," (he's probably said this in real life, by the way) will be a recurring theme.
Jackass Roll: BBQ pork, rice paper, sushi rice, avocado, natural cut fries and a garlic chili mayo sauce. I'm trying to think of a grosser combination than pork, rice paper, french fries and mayo, but I'm failing.
Kemosabe Roll: BBQ tri tip, rice paper, sushi rice, natural cut fries, crispy onions & a garlic chili mayo sauce. Wait, wait ??? add crispy onions.
If you (or a friend or family member) have ingested Gringo Sushi and are willing to push down the shame and tell us about it, please leave an incredibly detailed comment. In lieu of that, let's just talk about our favorite episodes of "Diners, Drive-Ins and Dives."
Nothing about this dude's schtick has a place in NYC or L.A..
I've been to about 10-12 places that he's highlighted on his show.
2-3 of them have flat out sucked.
3-4 were average.
4-5 of them were great, with a couple now in my regular rotation.
More than anyone, he champions small Mom/Pop joints and I don't see how that can be bad.
sure, but he just shows up and hosts, he doesn't have anything to do choosing the places... food network would have done that show w/ or w/o him... i'm sure i am not alone in watching that show DESPITE guy, not b/c of him...
after reading all the yelp reviews, it doesn't seem like the Times critic was out of line, just a little shitty in tone...
Review aside, he's still probably going to do well in that location because of tourists and people who don't read these kinds of articles. My job just brought in a bunch of out of towners who had never been to NYC before (for a photo shoot) and a bunch of them went to Guy's for dinner. Guess what? They loved it! Most people just aren't that critical or discerning about their food.
More than anyone, he champions small Mom/Pop joints and I don't see how that can be bad.
I'm not sure he does that "more than anyone," but I'm not exactly watching this kind of thing on a regular basis.
It seems like I've caught bits and pieces of plenty of shows that focus on independent local color restaurants, and I like to check these places out, too.
On the Food Network his show is the only one doin that.
i cant speak on other cable networks
theres a cat that does all Bronx Latin joints.
I say let dude do his thing... Dom Deloise with a 13 year old post grunge hair don't.
Don't know how any one can't take dude seriously after being a spokesman for Fridays.
Don't compare Guy with someone talented like Dom...haven't you seen Cannonball Run? Dom has done more for American culture than Mr. Babyback Quesadilla Wrap will ever do.
Does this really surprise anyone? It isnt because you have a tv show where you scarf down the greasiest shit you can find that you can make a out of the box amazing menu. You want to eat food that will take 10 years off your life and make you go to heaven at the same time? Come to Montreal and eat in a real restaurant like Pied de cochon or just have an amazing meal at Bis.
I'm with Richler: APDC has been mediocre and well overrated for at least the past seven years. Brown, heavy food lacking in finesse and consistency.
As far back as I can recall, I've had a need for a professional critic to tell me what to listen to, what to eat, etc. I'm sure there are people who love them...I guess.
As annoying as I personally find Guy to be at times, I think the article is a pretty dick move.
The fact that this mean shit is coming from someone who seems to have never cooked professionally in his life (according to any bio's I've found on the dude) makes his criticism even meaner and less relevant...Perhaps, when you are writing to advise an audience who also hasn't cooked professionally then his cooking experience (or lack thereof) is an irrelevant point...but I feel if you are going to outright bash the living shit out of a place, it helps to have at least some credibility/experience in the profession.
Just my opinion...keep fighting the good fight, Pete.
Pete Wells is an excellent critic. Personally, I don't think there are many who can touch the quality of his criticism today. Wells does not lack credibility. Dismissing his criticism because he isn't a professional chef is ridiculous. I don't create music; does that mean I can't write about it critically? (The answer is no, fyi).
As far back as I can recall, I've had a need for a professional critic to tell me what to listen to, what to eat, etc. I'm sure there are people who love them...I guess.
As annoying as I personally find Guy to be at times, I think the article is a pretty dick move.
The fact that this mean shit is coming from someone who seems to have never cooked professionally in his life (according to any bio's I've found on the dude) makes his criticism even meaner and less relevant...Perhaps, when you are writing to advise an audience who also hasn't cooked professionally then his cooking experience (or lack thereof) is an irrelevant point...but I feel if you are going to outright bash the living shit out of a place, it helps to have at least some credibility/experience in the profession.
Just my opinion...keep fighting the good fight, Pete.
Pete Wells is an excellent critic. Personally, I don't think there are many who can touch the quality of his criticism today. Wells does not lack credibility. Dismissing his criticism because he isn't a professional chef is ridiculous. I don't create music; does that mean I can't write about it critically? (The answer is no, fyi).
The answer is "to each their own", fyi. I'm not trying to say my opinion is the absolute truth. I'm saying personally I've never given a shit about what a critic deems worthy or otherwise. And, when I find out they never even walked in the shoes of the people whose work they are shitting on; I find myself thinking that's even worse.
When I see someone professionally rip apart a musician's work, and that critic has never cut their own bar coded album, I can't help but think "this mother fucker can't even play mary had a little lamb on a recorder and he's talking about what the musician should and shouldn't have done?!" I understand that my logic is flawed in the sense that the reviews aren't created as advice for the person who created the album or for the restaurant owner. I know that reviews are made ultimately as advice or opinion for the customer...and that SHOULD make the critic's professional background in the field they are critiquing irrelevant...but for me it doesn't. Especially when the dude is writing the "review" as an open letter (or series of questions) to the Chef/Owner...
EDIT: For the record, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if this restaurant is straight donkey sauce horrible. But, I don't think NYT readers needed a review to know that. At least use a real restaurant as a platform to show NY that you're a professional consumer whose tastes matter...or 'write a review' or whatever people want to call it.
When it comes to fat pigs stuffing their cakeholes on TV I'll take Adam Richman on Man Vs Food anyday......anyone tried any of the places he reps on his show? I can never watch an entire show without being anything but starving afterwards
I've been giggling over Donkey Sauce for days, can't believe someone would write that on a menu
The answer is "to each their own", fyi. I'm not trying to say my opinion is the absolute truth. I'm saying personally I've never given a shit about what a critic deems worthy or otherwise. And, when I find out they never even walked in the shoes of the people whose work they are shitting on; I find myself thinking that's even worse.
So it's not valid to criticize, say, the President unless we've been President ourselves?
Well, that should dead the political threads once and for all.
Seriously, a music critic's experience listening to or studying music is as valid as any musician's experience playing music, just as a food critic's experience eating, dining in restaurants and studying food is as valid as any chef's experience cooking and serving food.
Do you have to be an architect to understand that The Barclays Center is ugly, or a car designer to realize a Trabant is a piece of shit?
The JectWon argument as stated is severely obtuse.
The answer is "to each their own", fyi. I'm not trying to say my opinion is the absolute truth. I'm saying personally I've never given a shit about what a critic deems worthy or otherwise. And, when I find out they never even walked in the shoes of the people whose work they are shitting on; I find myself thinking that's even worse.
So it's not valid to criticize, say, the President unless we've been President ourselves?
Well, that should dead the political threads once and for all.
I wish. But, I don't think that is in the same realm at all. I'm talking more critics of the Arts...with food/restaurants being included in that term. Art is totally subject to the person who is looking at it and it doesn't really hurt anyone. The Patriot Act...Drone Strikes....Medical Reform...not the same at all. Irrelevant to this convo in my opinion. Does that make sense?
Seriously, a music critic's experience hearing or studying music is as valid as any musicians' experience playing music, just as a food critic's experience eating, dining in restaurants and studying food is as valid as any chef's experience cooking and serving food.
Do you have to be an architect to understand that The Barclays Center is ugly, or a car designer to realize a Trabant is a piece of shit?
The JectWon argument as stated is severely obtuse.
I'm not saying the fact I take a critic even less seriously when they have never done what it is they are shitting on isn't obtuse...it is obtuse....it's definitely stupid for me to take credibility away from a critic for that. However, I still feel that way...and I know others do to. It's the same feeling I get when I listen to Skip Bayless rant about what a player should or shouldn't have done.
I'm just saying, what is the fucking point of paying someone to tell you what you should take away from this art or that slice of pizza?
It just personally strikes me as a completely unnecessary profession. However, there is a market for it and people clearly must enjoy reading about how they should think about something and I'm sure there are people who have found critics whose tastes align nicely with theirs...I just haven't really given a shit about them....right or wrong.
The bottom line is that the review wasn't about the type of restaurant or the type of person or the way this guy approaches food.
It was about the service being terrible, forgetful and not helpful, all explained with actual actions by the staff or lack thereof.
It was about the food being terrible. Not as in all sport bar or diner or greasy spoon food is terrible (which it is not, not, especially not to professional cooks or to food critics, these people all love to get down on some shit like that from time o time -who doesn't). Read the menu, those dishes are pretentious and not down to earth. Their descriptions sound like they were thought up by a child with an eating disorder who was forced to watch the food channel for one year nonstop. It was explained in detail what the problems were with each dish sampled by the critic. How they mostly already failed as a concept and how the bad execution and various short-cuts then ruined them completely.
Again, I'm 100% convinced that the author gave a fair review of what was brought to the table, he even praised the pork shank along with constructive criticism detailing why the dish still failed.
The fact that fans of the guy gave the restaurant terrible reviews on Yelp (before the NYT piece was published) illustrates that the food must be truly horrible. It's not like this was a popular joint that out of the blue got torn to shreds by someone expecting this to be a fine dining experience.
The concept of the restaurant has nothing to do with down to earth, good and honest food as (in some cases) presented in the guys tv show. Read the menu and consider the prices in relations to the ingredients and it's obviously a big rip-off. You could say "you pay for the big name". OK but then the execution of the food should be spot on. Which obviously it isn't. ALSO, YOU DO NOT CHAMPION MOM & DAD JOINTS BY OPENING A 500 SEAT SHIT FACTORY ON TIMES SQUARE.
For any serious food critic who takes food seriously and to every other person who has a love and deep respect for food, it is offensive when good groceries are wasted by a neglectful, un-inspired or just plain bad kitchen. To receive a plate of obnoxiously titled terrible food feels like an insult to many. The way this poor critic has been insulted by what was presented to him, I think the review could be described as appropriate, light-hearted and humorous.
Would the writer risk his professional reputation by writing a unfounded, inappropriate review simply for laughs and giggles?
"Jealousy"? What does this guy have that anybody would want for even half a day except maybe his money (even that wouldn't tempt me)?
Comments
I think it's the only zero star review he's given:
"The Guy???s American Kitchen waitress studied the half-chewed pork, slaw, salmon, mashed potatoes and maybe moon rocks we???d left on our plates. I wouldn???t feed the mess to a cat ??? the end-product of our struggle to extract edible elements from heaps of sugar and sludge masquerading as normal food.
???Would you like me to wrap that up for you???? she chirped.
I promise: One day soon, I???ll go back to reviewing real restaurants with real chefs. Enough of laugh riots like Ryu, Purple Fig and Mihoko???s 21 Grams!
But until the fall???s legitimate openings actually showup, we???ll do with the West 44th Street punch line from TV kitchen clown/wannabe rocker/ global menace Guy Fieri.
You expect it to be awful, of course???how could things like ???Unyawns cajun chicken ciabatta with donkey sauce??? not be awful? But Fieri must believe his name alone will fill 500 seats, as if Times Square tourists couldn???t also choose Applebee???s, Bubba Gump Shrimp or the very respectable Carmine???s down the block.
Guy???s isn???t bad looking for what it is ??? a colorful, three level sprawl of Americana, guitars, memorabilia and murals framed in warm brick. But one night, with maybe 400 seats free, the hostess showed us to the worst in the house: a tiny ???table??? for two in the deserted front bar.
A protest scored us a perch in the far back ???Studio??? room, where the televised NFL barely took the edge off turd shaped Awesome Pretzel Chicken Tenders, tasting not of chicken, pretzel or any recognizable digestible matter.
Guy???s does factory farm cuisine one better: Everything emerges from mysterious engines, deep in the bowels of the former New York Times loading dock, tooled to make all items taste alike.
I???m a soft touch for junk food turned out with integrity??? but not for stale, ice cold focaccia ($3.95 for ???bread???!), sashimi tacos with scarcely a molecule of tuna, or bone-dry pulled pork on unheated buns.
Sugar by the truckload has the run of the menu. It glazes commercial-grade salmon and hulihuli chicken. It pops up in a dip for mozzarella and pepperoni scrunched inside a leathery panko crust. In ???Thai chili??? form, it bleeds through ???California egg rolls??? filled with chicken, avocado, ginger, peppers??? but tasting of none.
One good dish squeaked through: juicy, braised pork shank which, while tasting not at all of the promised General Tso, peeled easily from the bone.
Pasta ended the rally. Fettuccine came with cajun-spiced blackened chicken breast???random meat fragments neither blackened nor spiced. Creamy Parmesan sauce could moonlight as engine lubricant. The plate must hold 3,000 calories. Could one human eat it all? If so, should he or she be allowed out of the house?
Irish-German chocolate cake was the sort of sickly-sweet affair that pleases when you???re drunk at 2 a.m. It came with stone-hard ???malt balls??? that failed to yield to knife or fork.
I took one of the balls home. A steak knife severed it in two, but my teeth didn???t make a dent. A hammer did the trick. By then I decided to leave further taste testing to Times Square???s bust our gourmands."
scuozzo@nypost.com
Love this picture!
:face_melt:
It's shopped.
I've been to about 10-12 places that he's highlighted on his show.
2-3 of them have flat out sucked.
3-4 were average.
4-5 of them were great, with a couple now in my regular rotation.
More than anyone, he champions small Mom/Pop joints and I don't see how that can be bad.
I used to think this about him and that somehow he's bringing a certain type of America into food and cooking that might otherwise not go out of their way to check anything in between the drive through and frozen foods section, but the more I reflect, he's really not providing much of an alternative to the mass produced nutritionally garbage food that Americans consume daily, and certainly don't think he's going to change the general perception that there's nothing concerning at all about our runaway industrial food-system. NOT TO SAY THAT HE HAS TO OR THAT THAT IS HIS AGENDA AT ALL! And I'm not going to argue that a greasy "melty-cheesey" hamburger is not absolutely delicious from time to time. But championing Mom and Pop restaurants does not seem in harmony with opening a 500 seat factory in times square.
Yes, thank you. I've been on the grind in NYC restaurants for the past 10 years. I'm not going to pretend there's no injustice to what generally goes on and the people that rise to the top are certainly not the best cooks/chefs/people/workers in general. But that's the way it goes with everything. BUT the competitiveness in the NYC restaurant game is ferocious, and as far as the press and public seem to go, anything is fair game and there aren't really any rules determining how criticism gets dealt. This review was extremely harsh no doubt, but I've seen restaurants go under after a glowing 1 or 2 star review. But you have to come with game in NYC if you are going to survive, and I think celebrity chefs and franchises should not be immune. BTW I would love to start seeing reviews of hole in the wall spots as well as corporate chains.
And FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK the idea that you don't get to review a shitty restaurant because it's popular. You open up, you better be ready. Leave that thin-skinned shit at the door.
Here are three local spots he hyped that are anything but that stereotype and pretty damn good.
http://princelebanesegrill.com/
http://www.jamaicagates.com/
http://www.chefpointcafe.org/About-Us/franson-nwaeze-owner-chef-point.html
He doesnt have to serve great food to make money in Times Square.
What he does on tv shouldnt be reflective of his business. Hes not cooking on Triple D.
You mean he wasn't actually cooking a giant turd?
So disappointed...
Guy Fieri???s Most Disgusting Food is Not Even at His Times Square Restaurant
Jordan Sargent
As you are probably aware, New York Times food critic Pete Wells became the most important man in America this week after eviscerating Guy Fieri's Times Square restaurant for essentially being Guy Fieri in building form ??? a bloated, neon monstrosity serving unappetizing food obnoxiously. Here's the thing, though, about Guy's American Kitchen & Bar, which has now become ground zero for everything wrong or right with capitalism: Fieri serves way more revolting food at one of his other restaurants.
Allow me to introduce you to Tex Wasabi's, a restaurant of Fieri's that has locations in Santa Rosa, Calif. and the Sacramento-area. Tex Wasabi's features Fieri's takes on barbecue and various East Asian foods, with "St. Louis Style Ribs" sharing menu space with "Hong Kong Noodles." It would all be rather standard if not for the restaurant's "Gringo Sushi," which is sushi for Americans who don't want to eat any of that gross raw fish stuff. Tex Wasabi's offers four Gringo Sushi rolls, and they sound like they would make even a college freshman fresh off two bong rips gag.
Here are the four Gringo Sushi rolls (there used to be eight, God help us) ranked in descending order of nastiness:
Hidden Chicken: Thin slices of Teriyaki chicken, rice paper, sushi rice, avocado, tangerine, crushed wontons and iceberg lettuce. Because the only thing you think about when eating sushi is, "Man, I wish I was eating some iceberg lettuce."
Big Bird on Fire: Blackened chicken breast, rice paper, sushi rice and natural cut fries. Guy Fieri saying "Yo dawg, I heard you like fries," (he's probably said this in real life, by the way) will be a recurring theme.
Jackass Roll: BBQ pork, rice paper, sushi rice, avocado, natural cut fries and a garlic chili mayo sauce. I'm trying to think of a grosser combination than pork, rice paper, french fries and mayo, but I'm failing.
Kemosabe Roll: BBQ tri tip, rice paper, sushi rice, natural cut fries, crispy onions & a garlic chili mayo sauce. Wait, wait ??? add crispy onions.
If you (or a friend or family member) have ingested Gringo Sushi and are willing to push down the shame and tell us about it, please leave an incredibly detailed comment. In lieu of that, let's just talk about our favorite episodes of "Diners, Drive-Ins and Dives."
http://gawker.com/5961072/guy-fieris-most-disgusting-food-is-not-even-at-his-times-square-restaurant
Haha! Me, too.
He's put on a few places here in the Kane on DDD. I'd say around 5. I would rate 4 out of 5 as decent places. Not Eric Ripert, or anything, but good.
sure, but he just shows up and hosts, he doesn't have anything to do choosing the places... food network would have done that show w/ or w/o him... i'm sure i am not alone in watching that show DESPITE guy, not b/c of him...
after reading all the yelp reviews, it doesn't seem like the Times critic was out of line, just a little shitty in tone...
On the Food Network his show is the only one doin that.
i cant speak on other cable networks
theres a cat that does all Bronx Latin joints.
Slow down there, Sherlock. Who's to say it's not the pasta that got doctored?
Don't know how any one can't take dude seriously after being a spokesman for Fridays.
Don't compare Guy with someone talented like Dom...haven't you seen Cannonball Run? Dom has done more for American culture than Mr. Babyback Quesadilla Wrap will ever do.
I'm with Richler: APDC has been mediocre and well overrated for at least the past seven years. Brown, heavy food lacking in finesse and consistency.
Pete Wells is an excellent critic. Personally, I don't think there are many who can touch the quality of his criticism today. Wells does not lack credibility. Dismissing his criticism because he isn't a professional chef is ridiculous. I don't create music; does that mean I can't write about it critically? (The answer is no, fyi).
The answer is "to each their own", fyi. I'm not trying to say my opinion is the absolute truth. I'm saying personally I've never given a shit about what a critic deems worthy or otherwise. And, when I find out they never even walked in the shoes of the people whose work they are shitting on; I find myself thinking that's even worse.
When I see someone professionally rip apart a musician's work, and that critic has never cut their own bar coded album, I can't help but think "this mother fucker can't even play mary had a little lamb on a recorder and he's talking about what the musician should and shouldn't have done?!" I understand that my logic is flawed in the sense that the reviews aren't created as advice for the person who created the album or for the restaurant owner. I know that reviews are made ultimately as advice or opinion for the customer...and that SHOULD make the critic's professional background in the field they are critiquing irrelevant...but for me it doesn't. Especially when the dude is writing the "review" as an open letter (or series of questions) to the Chef/Owner...
EDIT: For the record, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if this restaurant is straight donkey sauce horrible. But, I don't think NYT readers needed a review to know that. At least use a real restaurant as a platform to show NY that you're a professional consumer whose tastes matter...or 'write a review' or whatever people want to call it.
I've been giggling over Donkey Sauce for days, can't believe someone would write that on a menu
So it's not valid to criticize, say, the President unless we've been President ourselves?
Well, that should dead the political threads once and for all.
Do you have to be an architect to understand that The Barclays Center is ugly, or a car designer to realize a Trabant is a piece of shit?
The JectWon argument as stated is severely obtuse.
I wish. But, I don't think that is in the same realm at all. I'm talking more critics of the Arts...with food/restaurants being included in that term. Art is totally subject to the person who is looking at it and it doesn't really hurt anyone. The Patriot Act...Drone Strikes....Medical Reform...not the same at all. Irrelevant to this convo in my opinion. Does that make sense?
"Guy Fieri makes food for food critics the same way Adam Sandler makes films for film critics"
And they are both laughing on the way to the bank.
I'm not saying the fact I take a critic even less seriously when they have never done what it is they are shitting on isn't obtuse...it is obtuse....it's definitely stupid for me to take credibility away from a critic for that. However, I still feel that way...and I know others do to. It's the same feeling I get when I listen to Skip Bayless rant about what a player should or shouldn't have done.
I'm just saying, what is the fucking point of paying someone to tell you what you should take away from this art or that slice of pizza?
It just personally strikes me as a completely unnecessary profession. However, there is a market for it and people clearly must enjoy reading about how they should think about something and I'm sure there are people who have found critics whose tastes align nicely with theirs...I just haven't really given a shit about them....right or wrong.
It was about the service being terrible, forgetful and not helpful, all explained with actual actions by the staff or lack thereof.
It was about the food being terrible. Not as in all sport bar or diner or greasy spoon food is terrible (which it is not, not, especially not to professional cooks or to food critics, these people all love to get down on some shit like that from time o time -who doesn't). Read the menu, those dishes are pretentious and not down to earth. Their descriptions sound like they were thought up by a child with an eating disorder who was forced to watch the food channel for one year nonstop. It was explained in detail what the problems were with each dish sampled by the critic. How they mostly already failed as a concept and how the bad execution and various short-cuts then ruined them completely.
Again, I'm 100% convinced that the author gave a fair review of what was brought to the table, he even praised the pork shank along with constructive criticism detailing why the dish still failed.
The fact that fans of the guy gave the restaurant terrible reviews on Yelp (before the NYT piece was published) illustrates that the food must be truly horrible. It's not like this was a popular joint that out of the blue got torn to shreds by someone expecting this to be a fine dining experience.
The concept of the restaurant has nothing to do with down to earth, good and honest food as (in some cases) presented in the guys tv show. Read the menu and consider the prices in relations to the ingredients and it's obviously a big rip-off. You could say "you pay for the big name". OK but then the execution of the food should be spot on. Which obviously it isn't. ALSO, YOU DO NOT CHAMPION MOM & DAD JOINTS BY OPENING A 500 SEAT SHIT FACTORY ON TIMES SQUARE.
For any serious food critic who takes food seriously and to every other person who has a love and deep respect for food, it is offensive when good groceries are wasted by a neglectful, un-inspired or just plain bad kitchen. To receive a plate of obnoxiously titled terrible food feels like an insult to many. The way this poor critic has been insulted by what was presented to him, I think the review could be described as appropriate, light-hearted and humorous.
Would the writer risk his professional reputation by writing a unfounded, inappropriate review simply for laughs and giggles?
"Jealousy"? What does this guy have that anybody would want for even half a day except maybe his money (even that wouldn't tempt me)?