Chart House

Reputation should matter with restaurants. It’s what creates regulars and warrants good press. And since success is what you attract by what you’ve become, a top tier restaurant has much to live up to. But when a self-professed foodie feels that the reputation is largely disproportionate to the total experience, it hurts just a little more.

Maybe I’ve become a snob with food. Or perhaps my culinary expeditions have become so ambitious that any setback is an outrage of biblical proportions. It would be like buying tickets to the World Cup, making the trek out to the stadium and being appalled when a bunch of middle school kids come out to play the actual game. The game-play is atrocious and no apology is made for your time being wasted.

For my mother’s birthday, my wife and I wanted to treat her to an upscale dinner. On the level of Scalini Fedeli, The Frog and Peach, Chez Catherine or David Drake. David Drake is now closed, Scalini Fedeli isn’t open on Sundays, my mother worked at Chez Catherine and I gave up on the last one. So I selected the Chart House in Weehawken, NJ. Seafood – check. Ambience – check. Never been there before – check. Excellent reputation – check.

We were greeted by what a single-man might refer to as “hotties” or “potential” at the host stand. But for me, the obviously objective and happily-married blogger, I shall call them “professional greeters who deserve a glance when the wife isn’t looking.” They were courteous and professional and brought us to our table.

Initial service was very good. Our server was attentive and polite. She said that if we wished to order their signature hot chocolate lava cake for dessert, we should order it at that time. So we did and that set a positive tone.

We ordered the appetizers: lobster bisque (my wife), a $13 crabcake (me) and to split we decided on the fried calamari (pronounced “gal-a-maad” for all of the follow Italians). The bisque’s preparation was imaginative. It was served in a mini soup pot with a handle. My wife’s soup was velvety, creamy and had chunks of lobster. The thing about lobster bisque is that classical preparation uses lobster shells and stock to flavor the dish. There really shouldn’t be any chunks of lobster (or sometimes crab) in it except as a garnish. The expectation is that the natural flavors will permeate the soup enough. Additionally, there should be white wine or sherry to add a depth of flavor. The consistency is achieved through successive strainings through ever finer sieves finally passing it through a cheese cloth to filter out any little bits. I found that her soup was rich and creamy, but the existing lobster chunks were more than a garnish. I find this trend common nowadays. I think restaurants believe their patrons will appreciate (or perhaps expect) the chunks of lobster in such a dish. As for our overall impressions of the dish, my wife enjoyed it, I’ve had better in Palm Beach, and my mother found it satisfactory.

The fried calamari was standard. It was light and crispy and perfectly cooked. The grease from the fryer had been drained properly which is refreshing because I find it typical with this appetizer that it is rushed out too quickly to satiate a guest’s impatience, rather than let it stand for a minute. I liked that the tentacles were included in the dish too. I think it not only looks better but makes the dish more unique. We found that the calamari had a slightly fishy smell to it, indicating that it may not have been fresh. Nevertheless, this did not stand out as impressive.

The crabcake was very good. It was succulent and cut easily with a fork. More crab and not too much "cake" is always optimal and this was great. And while it did not have the pizzazz, flavor or hype of a Maryland crabcake, it was delicious nonetheless.

I ordered the Patagonian toothfish (better known as Chilean Sea Bass). To clear up any misconceptions, this fish was first marketed to the US by the Chileans, but it isn’t usually caught in Chilean waters. It is actually caught near Antarctica and is the trade name for one of two fish (the aforementioned and Antarctic toothfish.) It is also NOT on the endangered species list.

I have eaten Chilean Sea Bass in two forms previously -grilled and in sushi – and both were positively existential experiences. Using Limani (see 8/14/09) as the barometer of excellence, I would rate this dish a 3/10. While it was opaque, and therefore fully cooked, it was mediocre. It lacked refinement or finesse. It did not have that firm or crisp texture that broiling creates. A pan-sear/broil (and/or oven-roast) creates a textural contrast between the caramelization on the outside and succulence of the interior flesh. This preparation not only failed to achieve that but also did not bring out the natural sweetness of the meat. The accompaniment of perfectly cooked vegetables was unable to distract me from the inexperienced cooking. I can’t say that it was slimy, but it feel apart much too easily. I didn’t get the “buttery” quality they were hoping to achieve. I even contemplated returning it to the kitchen because it was probably undercooked. Usually when the flesh flakes, it falls apart easily but each piece has solidity to it. It was almost mushy and almost water-logged. I also felt that it needed salt which is saying a lot. I rarely salt my foods and this lacked serious flavor. That is not to say it needed an abundance of seasoning, but a dash of salt would have brought out the natural flavors appropriately. Like my mother's dish, it came served with fluffy, perfectly cooked, coconut-ginger rice. The starch was able to absorb some of the butter from the dish and gave it a nice taste.

My wife had the filet mignon with garlic mashed potatoes. It was cooked to a perfect medium-rare and seasoned well. She enjoyed it, but we’ve had better. It doesn't compare to Ruth's Chris, Roots Steakhouse, Sammy's Ye Old Cider Mill, or Peter Lugar. And while this may have been a step above standard, I am disappointed at the effort. The garlic mashed potatoes were average. The garlic permeated the side dish well, but it lacked a creaminess that would have enhanced the flavors and better complemented the meat. What upsets me about my wife's overall dish is, oddly enough, actually the nature of the restaurant. This is an upscale establishment with an alleged reputation for excellent seafood. So, if they are going to offer a non-seafood option, it should be spectacular. Why befoul the menu with an average dish? I do not believe doing so would take away from your seafood focus. It may even increase clientele. Everything should be top notch.

And then came dessert; the pies de resistance of our visit which can be never taken away. While awaiting the arrival of our hot chocolate lava cake, our server provided us with the dessert menus and take our coffee orders. She also explained the special, Champagne Sorbet with Masturbated Berries. That's correct ladies and gentleman! Not mascerated berries...but masturbated berries. I looked to my two dinner companions who had fallen silent. Maybe it was a Freudian slip on her part, but it was certainly as clear as day. The innuendos go without saying and we decided against that dessert. And while we did laugh hysterically when she walked away, we contemplated informing the manager discreetly of the error. And while it would have been our honest intention simply not to have that mistake made again for future guests, we figured that such a mistake may cost our server her job. Unfortunately, in retrospect, I feel partially responsible for turning her loose to unconsciously offend another unsuspecting guest who may be someone of status.

The chocolate lava cake was fantastic. The cake was moist and the ganache was heavenly. We split it between the three of us.

The bill was $225 including tip. Not worth that price...despite the server high jinks. If I return, I think I might have to bring my medieval food taster and AED. Because if I have another meal as disappointing as this one, and my serf keels over and dies, I might have a heart attack and my fiefdom will come to an end.