César - New York
View from one end of the counter
Rating: 16/20
Where: New York, NY
When: Dinner for 1 on 16 December 2024
Cost per Person: Tasting menu $365, Wine pairing $280
Accolades: 2 Michelin Stars
Why: Japanese-influenced small bites served in a counter setting
Hopefully, it will soon be possible to talk about “César”, a newly two-Michelin-starred restaurant in lower Manhattan, without mentioning its backstory. Chef César Ramirez rose to fame at the “Chef's Table at Brooklyn Fare”, a counter-seating-only restaurant located in the backroom of a grocery store called - unsurprisingly - “Brooklyn Fare”. Its Japanese-influenced, seafood-heavy menu of small bites received three stars from the Michelin Guide, and was the - to date - only restaurant ever to achieve this distinction in Brooklyn. I visited the original Chef's Table back in 2012, and enjoyed the food, but was a bit taken aback by the dress code (jacket required - making it easy to spot the diners among the hipster clientele of the grocery store), a no photos / no notes policy, and phone-call-only reservations. The no-photos policy was no idle threat - during our dinner, one couple almost got evicted from the restaurant for taking snapshots of the food.
Much has happened since my visit twelve years ago. The restaurant first moved to Manhattan while confusingly keeping its “Brooklyn Fare” name. But in July 2023, simmering tensions between the chef and the owner of “Chef's Table at Brooklyn Fare” broke into the open. Both parties accused each other of theft, and abruptly went their separate ways. After a brief closure, “Chef's Table” reopened under the helm of two previous sous chefs, and chef Ramirez opened his own eponymous restaurant the following year. The Michelin Guide awarded two stars to both of these restaurants in the December of 2024, and I took the opportunity to visit them during a single week to see how they compared.
My first stop was at César, which was fully booked on a Monday night, possibly partially due to the two stars that it had received only seven days prior. Just like chef Ramirez' previous restaurant, there was a counter of twelve seats surrounding an open kitchen. But in addition, there were also eleven tables. A much bigger setup than the original Brooklyn Fare location, to be sure. There were two counter seatings on Fridays and Saturdays, but during the rest of the week, and for all the tables, there was just a single seating - a welcome change of pace from the many restaurants in the United States that hurry guests along in order to flip the tables.
Also, compared to the industrial chic of the original Brooklyn Fare location, this venue had a much more comfy interior design. Light-colored wood was used for the walls, floors and the counter. White tablecloths covered the dining room tables. The strict dress code was gone as well - most people were dressed casually, only a no-hat policy was enforced. Sadly though, whereas chef Ramirez had been an integral part of the experience at Brooklyn Fare, he stayed mostly in the background here. He only stopped by to say hello at the beginning and then to serve any supplements that one might have ordered. The more you pay, the more face time you get?
The restaurant served two tasting menus, a regular one and a (slightly less expensive) seafood-only version. At the counter, where I sat, only the regular menu was available. Several supplements could be added to the dinner as well: truffles could be shaved over one or two dishes ($155 and $175), caviar added to another ($75) and finally, an additional course of a four ounce wagyu steak was available ($185). Clearly, it was easy to double or triple the price of the tasting menu if money was no concern. I chose the caviar, but passed on the other options - truffles are rarely worth it in my experience, and the steak would probably have made the difference between happily full and overly stuffed. Having flown in the same morning from San Francisco, and planning on three more substantial dinners during the following three nights, holding back a bit seemed like the more prudent choice.
César offered an optional wine pairing, for the not inconsiderable price of $280. What was impressive, though, was the total amount of wine served. The pours were generous and were already topped off if one took a sip during the introduction of the wine. Since most of the courses were just small bites, pairing one glass of wine with each dish added up to a lot, presumably more than a bottle’s worth of wine total. There was no need for an aperitif either, since the pairing started with the very first bite of food. The smart move here might be to share a single pairing among two diners - assuming that one is happy to drink from the same glass, since the restaurant won't split the pairing into two. The wines themselves, all white except for one red and two dessert wines, were just ok, though. On the whole they were more food-friendly than something that I'd drink on its own, and about half of them hovered in the $20-$30 per bottle price range. I imagine that ordering a good bottle of white wine would deliver more bang for the buck.
The first wine of the pairing was the only one that spanned more than one course, in fact it was meant for the first three bites. First, there was a thin cigarillo-shaped feuille de brick filled with a sturgeon rillette. This was a light bite overall, the cracker a bit oily to the touch, and its inside quite creamy - reminiscent of the cream cheese / fish toppings used for bagels. Not bad, though 17.
The next bite looked a bit like a nigiri. A slice of raw Japanese Spanish mackerel (sawada) sat on top of some rice that was seasoned with wasabi and ginger and surrounded by toasted nori seaweed. While it looked Japanese, this dish was not something likely to be seen in Japan. The rice was suffused with a ginger flavor that dominated the overall taste. The huge piece of fish itself wasn't too flavorful, though, and the nori very heavily toasted. Tasty? Definitely. But maybe not letting the ingredients, such as the fish, show themselves very much 17.
Rounding out the initial trio of bites was a Norwegian langoustine tartare, served in a rice-flower based cracker, with some Crystal caviar and shiso flowers on top. This dish had much brighter flavors than the preceding two: acidity, possibly from finger limes, a bit of creaminess, some saltiness from the caviar - there was a lot going on, resulting in a yummy bite. On the other hand, though, one could hardly taste the main ingredient, the langoustine - it merely supplied some creamy, chunky texture 17.
Next, we were served the restaurant's take on “fish and chips”. A little filet of Japanese whiting fish (kisu) was dusted with rice flour, deep fried and then placed on a potato chip before being seasoned with sea salt and lemon juice. The dish was served very hot. For what it was - fried fish on a fried potato, this was pretty good; the lemon juice was crucial in cutting through the fat a bit. The flaky fish was light in flavor, and not too memorable. Not exactly what I'd expect at a two-star restaurant, but not bad 16.
The chef's signature dish from the “Brooklyn Fare” days had followed him to his new restaurant. Hokkaido uni was served with a black truffle mousse atop a toasted butter brioche. The ingredients of this dish were great to begin with - the uni in particular was of great quality. But what made it truly spectacular was the progression of the taste experience. First, one tasted the bright uni flavor. Interestingly, the uni was served cold (whereas the rest of the dish was at least at room temperature). Presumably, the uni would have been as flavorful had it been served warmer, but its coldness made it stand out even more when tasting this dish. This initial fusillade of uni flavor was replaced by a hint of truffles before ending up on an aftertaste of buttery brioche. I love dishes where one can taste every ingredient, since it shows that nothing was unnecessary and that the kitchen was able to carefully balance the different components 18. The overly chilled, pretty acidic white Burgundy paired with this dish was an odd choice, though. Something less sharp might have been a better match.
Two pieces of golden eye snapper sashimi (kinmedai) were served with a citrus vinaigrette, a ginger emulsion, a tomato water gelee, chili oil, finger limes and sliced water melon radishes. For me, this felt like two dishes in one. The sashimi was lovely - it sat on a sauce that added sweetness and creaminess to the fish and the pieces of radish provided a bit of crunchiness. A heavenly combination - if this were the whole dish, I'd have rated it a 19. However, there was also the rest of the sauce surrounding the sashimi, and it was very acidic and didn't seem to match the fish very well. It was better with the sourdough bread that had been served alongside it, but still at most a 15. Generously, overall an 18.
Speaking of the bread, it came from a local bakery and was served warmed up. Weirdly, though, the bread had been cut into pieces before reheating it, so that the cut surfaces had dried out in the process. I never really thought about it before, but I suppose that most kitchens would heat the whole loaf and/or trim off the dried-out parts. Other than that, it was a fine bread, crunchy with only a hint of sourdough flavor - neutral enough to be useful for sopping up the sauces. Clearly that was the intended use, since no butter was provided 15.
The next dish was billed as a seafood flan, served with a Peekytoe crab, wood ear mushrooms, lovage, chives, and - optionally - a heaping of caviar. I said “billed as” because it took me a second to actually find the flan in this dish: it was just a thin layer at the bottom of the bowl. The majority of the dish was made up by the other ingredients - mushrooms, caviar, etc, and a thick sauce. Since the caviar was optional, it is a bit weird to admit that it ended up being the dominant flavor of the dish - of good quality, salty, and adding lots of umami. It also stood out since it was cold, whereas the rest of the dish was warm. The crab and mushrooms were fine, but a bit less elegant than I might have expected. Overall, this didn't really fit my expectation of a “caviar on flan” dish, it was more like “caviar in a soup” 16.
“Surf and turf” consisted of half of a seared diver scallop paired with foie gras, served with a ravioli filled with sunchokes and a pinot noir reduction. Getting served foie gras in the US is always a “Toto, I’ve a feeling we're not in California anymore” moment for me, since foie gras is (currently) illegal to serve in the state. The scallop was cooked decently enough, but didn't have too much flavor. The reduction was a bit sweet, possibly to match the foie gras. The best part of the dish, though, was the ravioli. A tad overcooked maybe, but otherwise wonderful, with a creamy, slightly sweet filling 17.
The final seafood course of the evening was a Dover sole served with chanterelle mushrooms, a spinach puree and a vin jaune sauce (made from the same wine that was paired with the dish, incidentally). The fish was tending towards being overcooked, and didn't taste of much by itself. But the buttery mushrooms were quite nice, as was the buttery sauce 16.
A filet of duck came with maitake mushrooms and three different purees - of mushrooms, broccoli rabe (I think) and quince, respectively - as well as a duck jus. The duck was fine: it had barely any fat and a crispy skin. The mushrooms were buttery but didn't have as mush flavor as the chanterelles in the preceding dish. The purees were a mixed bag - the ones based on broccoli rabe and mushrooms were very flavorful, but the quince puree and the duck jus were too sweet for my taste - a problem I often have with American dishes in the fall. There were some good parts to this dish, but overall it wasn't particularly revelatory 16.
The palate cleanser was a yogurt gelato served with a bosc pear jam and a champagne/elderflower gelee. Seemingly simple, but quite good. The acidity of the yogurt was a good balance for the sweetness of the rest of the dish 17.
A single dessert concluded the tasting menu. A frozen tonka bean and white chocolate souffle came with white chocolate pearls and a bit of chocolate milk at the bottom. Interestingly, it was served with an ice-cold spoon. This dish must have been frozen while being aerated, since it was very light - like frozen air. The chocolate pearls added some crunch, and there were hints of chocolate and some nuttiness as well. A nice (and thankfully light) way to end the dinner 16.
Just before the check, we also got a single petit four: a dark chocolate mint bonbon (not pictured). The mint flavor was almost too strong on this one 15.
Overall: A lovely series of small bites, often inspired by Japanese cuisine. A few dishes (including the signature uni toast) were really good, but even everything else was quite tasty. But at this price point, and with the chef's three-Michelin-star background, the expectations were naturally very high. So it was a bit disappointing that the main ingredients of several dishes were overpowered by the other components - there was a bit too much going on. But the future looks bright: the restaurant has been open for only a few months, and there were definitely signs of greatness. It will be exciting to see what happens next 16.
