The Pool Strives to Deal With Its Famous Dining Room

"Overpriced"? Of course it's overpriced. Aren't they just passing along the price of the already overpriced rent to the customer? The Seagram Building was the most expensive building in the world when it opened in 1958 and has maintained some of the highest rents in city for decades. For the budget minded might I suggest bringing a boxed lunch and sitting outside by the fountain on a nice spring day. The plaza is one of best urban spaces in the city.

I think PT Barnum said it best....There's a sucker born every minute. And your table is awaiting you including the $9 charge for water. Hedge fund guys and touristas will love it though. There's no accounting for taste however.

It is shocking news that the space has been vandalized. I hope this will be amended. But also some questions to the food. First of all, as someone who lives near the sea, I do not find it appetizing to read about fish that have travelled thousands of miles before they reach ones plate. Why would I pay overprice for a turbot caught in Portugal when I am in New York? And it just goes on, is there anything beyond the lobster from local waters on the menu? Second, the criticism of the gazpacho is just wrong: in Andalusia you always get your cold soup with a serving of chopped gazpacho ingredients, and maybe some croutons. The serving of sea-urchin roe looks delicious, though, something I might try to replicate at home. I generally enjoy Mr. Wells' reviews, but this one is confusing.

Torrisi and Carbone wowed and amazed with Torrisi Italian Specialties on beleaguered Mulberry St ..and even carried off an ode to upscale, throw back Italian at Parm. But they've sold their soul to the money making schemes of their restaurant group and inevitably lost a piece of their souls.

Thank you, Pete Wells for highlighting the egregious disregard for the Landmark status of the restaurant rooms in the Seagram Building. These violations were neither unintentional nor an oversight. The owner of the building actively sought to disrupt the rooms from the original campaign to remove the Picasso curtain. Shame on the architects who aided and collaborated with him. I’m sorry they were not credited with these affronts. Annabelle Selldorf and William Georgis should each be ashamed of their roles in defiling this city treasure. One can only imagine what is planned for the Frick with this team working there. It is a shame Landmarks cannot strip accreditation from architects who violate the Landmarks law. Serious consequences would deter future abuses. I sincerely hope the NYT continues to follow this story and that Landmarks does not capitulate but rather makes an example of this case.

I hate paying $1,000 for a sparkling wine. Bummer.

I am well aware of the history of this locale, in its previous incarnation, as the place to be seen for the power elite (whether actual or self-professed). I have never noticed any physical, aesthetic appeal to the space as a place to eat, however. This has always puzzled me: why was it so popular? The ceiling is too high, the windows too much -- there is no sense of intimacy for someone seated at table. In the photo of the dining room featured here, the feel is akin to that of a catered wedding dinner (albeit an expensive one ) held in a hotel event hall. Even the floral arrangements give off that vibe. Not appealing or inviting to me, but then I'm not the customer they're hoping for anyway. I'm still puzzled.

fail to respect landmarked design and architecture; fail to succeed at what you're apparently celebrated for-cook; commit highway robbery; win two stars!!!! Do everything right, but fail to commit highway robbery-win two stars. Despite being charmed and delighted with a restaurant like Olmsted's inventiveness and finding a flaw anywhere near the level of egregiousness as the many listed in this review, they received the same rating. "Olmsted is no competition to Atera and the other elite restaurants like it. But it is, in some ways, a challenge to those places, or at least to their notion that the best stage for a chef’s talent is the most expensive one." - Pete Wells, It is unfortunate that whilst lamenting this notion Pete Wells simultaneously embraces and encourages it. The "tour-de-force" restaurants more interested in presentation and pretension at a premium always seems to receive at least two stars even when accompanied by a brutal review (...Per se...). Apparently no matter how wonderful a dining experience in a cheap and cheerful neighborhood dig is, the most dreadful of dreadful fine dining establishments will always score higher - as long as the names are famous and the prices exorbitant enough to keep the filthy unwashed masses at bay... what am I saying, that's the ONLY thing I care about. I'm not going anywhere unless we have a reservation.

This seem like an architecture review. we need to know more about the food PETE. There is a need for THE NYT to review how the stars are allocated.this restaurant cooking is far superior than PRUNE. and thy both get 2 stars.IT DOES NOT MAKE ANY SENSE. Keep the good work.

Message of review is clear. If you want 2 stars from NYT, violate the law, make an ugly restaurant and serve crazily overpriced cuisine and even more crazily overpriced wine. oh yeah, and don't forget nice suits and desserts!

I've looked at every photo associated with this article. The only words that come to mind are "pretentious" and "twee." The "island theme" is like a bad joke - as if you've checked into one of those all-inclusive resorts in the Caribbean. And seriously, gray chocolate "fish" and blue "shells" on salt for dessert? I can get chocolates as good as, or better than, that at Godiva or many other sources.

I have never been to either restaurant but have followed the saga of this space and Rosen. I feel sad just reading about the decor. Arrogant millionaires like him who flout the rules because they have the money to do so (Mohammed Hadid and his monster house?) show the worst human traits. Even worse here as it was a protected landmark. A slap on the wrist will be the result. Hopefully it closes. But that won’t bring back what should still be there.

Interesting review, but I have to ask: were those two awkward floral arrangements seen in the pool left over from a weekend wedding or a weekday wake?

After a negative review like this , I am surprised it was awarded one star. If a place isn't very good for a variety of reasons , why lead people on and award two stars. I just don't understand!

One could easily purchase complementary furniture for the Lounge/Bar from Knoll, where many of the same pieces Mr. Johnson specified are still being manufactured. The room now looks like the lobby of a mid-price hotel. The carpeting is awful. The hideous dessert chocolates reminded me of the lovely cookie plate the waiter at the old Four Seasons brought us when decided to skip dessert and just have coffee. When we told our waiter how much we enjoyed the treat, he returned with a large package of the same cookies as a gift for us to take home. I sincerely doubt this happens at The Pool Room now. Oh yeah, get those flowers out of the Pool!

Ate there last month and thought the food was great. I did not have the opportunity to eat at the Four Seasons when it was running, so I can't really compare the ambiance, which was fine, but didn't hold a candle to The Grill. If I had to go back I would choose The Grill every time. I hear ZZ's clam bar is a better bet than The Pool.

How lucky some of us are to enjoy a spaghetti with butter and cheese, or clam sauce, and a five dollar chianti (really smart folks pay $3 for a nice wine). As the saying goes, "Let a thousand flowers bloom," so I am all for such architectural temples with all the trimmings, and the staff that cleans the lip of the bottle before serving, and the thousand dollar bottles. Why should people not patronize what they like, regardless of how the world thinks?

What a depressing article. We have been visiting the Four Seasons since the mid 60s when all we could afford was a drink in the bar or a dessert in the pool room. I wouldn't want to set foot in the place today. A sublime New York space has been despoiled for no purpose. The operators could charge the mentioned prices and serve the mentioned food without dismantling Johnson's finest work. I can only surmise that the building owner has zero appreciation of the jewel he owns and is messing with things just because he can. Vandalism. I highly recommend "Building Seagram's" by Phyllis Lambert for an appreciation of the magic that came together here.

Anyone else think the chocolates look an awful lot like the (still untouched) "guest" soaps my mom has had for 40 years?

Add this to the list of mediocre Expense Account focused restaurants in New York City which midtown especially is rife with.

If they are scoff-laws, the quality of the food is irrelevant. You could have just skipp d the review once you said they made renovations without LPC approval. I don't say that as some Philip Johnson groupie or out of nostalgia for the old r staurant. It is simply a matter of respect for th laws of a community. Another big corporation which doesn't have such respect opening a n overpriced tourist trap without following proper procedure is enough to make any decent person lose their appetite.

The fact that these owners ignored the binding rulings by the LPC is enough to warrant a boycott from New Yorkers, if not removal from the premises by our government. They clearly have no interest in being appropriate stewards of this important, beautiful space. What a travesty and a disgrace.

Sounds like a palace built to celebrate anti-sustainable cuisine and crass demonstrations of wealth.

I’ll have what he’s having...

$95 per glass?!?!? Nor per bottle? Really! Wow, now that takes a lot chutzpah! Stick it where it hurts – just order water. Then go home and open up your own dessert wine that you probably bought for $20 or less. You'll enjoy your dessert more.

I found the room to be sterile. The servers, who spoke in the faintest of whispers, were overly pretentious and patronizing. The bill was staggering. The food was tasty but the experience as a whole was NOT on the par with 11 Madison Park, Daniel, or LR Bernardin. And for God’s sake, publish a phone number. It’s easier to reach Hod himself! We were held up in UN week traffic and had no way to contact and say we were on our way. When we arrived, were were met with disdain, so much so that we were in doubt that we would be seated. After 20 minutes of phony ministrations, we were finally taken to a near empty dining room which remained that way all evening. Really, who do they think they are?

Money can't buy love or taste but it should have enabled the new owners of a beloved New York institution to honor the past while creating an exciting new dining destination. Haven't eaten there yet but in my opinion too many floral arrangements installed at every turn. Mies and Philip would not have approved.

What else could you expect from Rosen. Not only does money not buy him taste or even recognition of other's taste (Johnson/Mies), but he has defied the Landmark Commission to make these changes which completely upset the calm and elegant atmosphere of the original restaurant. The patrons are paying for these outrageous changes through the outrageous prices being charged them.

Touche Mr. Wells. This modernist architect applauds your observations on the violation of this iconic space.

Oh, no, what are those round tables doing there on the mezzanine side? The feng shui is just so wrong. My iPhone avatar is a picture of my son and I sitting there, together on one side of a rectangular table, in the Pool Room tradition. He took me to dinner there when he had very little money to spare and we had the most fabulous experience. The staff treated us like royalty. The trees are gone?! They provided a little bit of intimacy that is no longer there, sadly.

My impression of both rooms was that everything of the new ownership - staff, food, drinks - was all designed to wow tourists that the owners knew would never be back.

A pool has an obvious use in a seafood restaurant. Thankfully, this has not occurred to the owner.

IF "the building's owner" ever had any taste, he must have had it surgically removed. I personally feel that "the building's owner" has no taste at all, so his lack of appreciation for the importance of the trees in the Pool Room is no surprise. Only ONE wine under $90?! This "new" restaurant is not a place I will ever visit, not even as someone's guest. I prefer my memories of the "real" Pool Room as it was 20+ years ago, thanks.

One look at the picture of the Pool Room tells me all I need to know. The new people making the decisions haven't the slightest clue as to what made the original room so magical. None of the magic remains in sight. The tables and tablecloths look cheap and do not begin to make the wondrous assemblage that was there before. Tragic.

Haven't been, however, my hunch is this review is spot on. It's taken a while but congratulations, Mr. Wells. And, yes, no dessert wines for less the $95.00? This is where they should begin the tweeking. Sheesh.

On Slide 9 one sees colored chocolates on a bed of rock salt. This looks to me like a "deconstructionist nouvelle cuisine", where (in other restaurants) sweet ingredients are added to fish. Perhaps the next would be some chef's invention of a sea-food Russian borshch. There are two varieties of borshch: one, cold, made of beets; the other, hot, of cabbage with bits of boiled beef. Can one expect mussels or scallops to be added to either one?

I found the music from the dj (or the robot who programmed it) something I would expect on a mid-level cruise or an upscale Margaritaville, not at the former 4 Seasons! The food was fine but not as jaw-dropping as the bill. A weird experience. I felt like no one I liked was in charge.

My goodness, that is a lot of sea urchin roe for one appetizer. I can't imagine eating that much foie gras at one time, and can't fathom that much roe either. The turbo and crab dishes looked wonderful. But the wine prices are outrageous. I can't imagine why they can't find a decent dessert wine (even Sauternes) for less than $90 a glass. In reality, they could, if they wanted to. They just don't want to. One begins to feel that the prices are high, less as a reflection of total experience, but more so because they feel they can get away with it - prices as a filtering strategy to only invite the .01 percent. And they can. But, surveying Eleven Madison Park, the wine list offers sweet wines at the $15, $18, and $25 points before escalating to $32, $60 and $95. Le Bernardin has offerings at $16, $18, $25 and $35 before one reaches d'Yquem at $85. So if they wanted to be hospitable, they could certainly find a way to accommodate a diner who doesn't want to pay for d'Yquem when they dine out. But I don't think hospitality is the name of the game here.

Love ya, Pete, but my experience here was superb. Architectural triffles aside, ingredients, preparation, service and ambiance make this a new New York standard.

My impression is if the room adhered to Landmark specifications and Torrisi didn't happen to have a part in the restaurant next door, this would have read very differently.

This thoroughly written article focuses primarily on the architectural details and ambience of the restaurant. Unfortunately, the detailed description of the sea food dishes is not matched by the slides. The sea food reads extremely appetizing, although the photographs of sea-urchin roe and rice with Dungeness crab left me cold. In a sea-food restaurant, my main wish is to have a whole fish, grilled, crispy outside and soft inside, easy to bone. Well, perhaps my taste is too pedestrian ...