HOME > Chowhound > Los Angeles Area >

Discussion

Lucques - Disappointing

  • c

While the restaurant provides one of the most elegant atmospheres in LA, the food itself is disappointing or at least nothing special esp for the prices.

Softshell crab was greasy, beef carpaccio was covered in too much sauce thereby overpowering the flavor of the beef, and their signature beef short ribs are way too rich (this is the 2nd time I have tried and the 2nd time I have felt sick from them).

On the one good note, the whole fish was very good.

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
Delete
  1. Maybe they had an off-night?
    I loved the soft-shells at Lucques...

    .and never found the short ribs anything less than delightful.

    1. I have yet to go to Lucques, but have purchased her cookbook--her short ribs are supposed to be her specialty. (To me short ribs, or any meat for that matter, is/should be rich--quite a compliment I would think.)

      4 Replies
      1. re: Funwithfood

        Yeah...I'm trying to get my head around the concept of "too rich". Is that even a valid category?

        No, I haven't been there either, but if my digestive system couldn't handle rich food I'd never order any braised meat, especially short ribs - deep and extravagant richness is what that stuff is all about. Stick with chicken breast or halibut or something.

        1. re: Will Owen

          "Too rich" not meaning "too flavorful" but in "wow, that gave me the worst stomach ache and it has only been 5 minutes since eating the dish".

          1. re: Will Owen

            For what it's worth, I agree with the OP on the short ribs. I had them and I knew it was a fatty cut, but it was maybe 10% meat 90% fat. Just not tasty, and in fact, somewhat distasteful. I had the short ribs at Josie and they were closer to a 50%50% meat/fat ratio, much more pleasing. Fat should add flavor to meat, not vice versa I think.

            Even chicken and fish are better with butter. Or deep fried. Etc. If you want to give me some fat, fry it up so it crackles please.

            1. re: Sasha

              Fatty is different than rich--I dislike fatty also, but rich....mmmm.

        2. f
          Foodie Universe

          I wasn't as impressed with the food as I was expecting to be either, and like you I didn't think it was a good idea to put the sauce on the beef carpaccio. The desserts were fantastic, though, and so was the butter.

          Link: http://foodieuniverse.blogspot.com

          1. Couldn't agree more, I have been twice, but will not be returning. Got the short ribs the first time and agree with your opinion.

            1. I went two weeks ago and what I had was great: the morels appetizer and the prok belly. Oh, and the pork belly was really rich but then, it was pork belly and that was what I wanted. Everything was really well prepared and nothing I had was oversauced. Oh and the blood orange and tangello sorbets were a nice way to come down off the pork high.

              1. I went to Lucques about a month ago. I loved their short ribs and pork belly! Also had the sorbet, which was a great end to a very good meal.

                1. Don't know about the short ribs and the pork belly, but when my wife and I went for Sunday Supper a few weeks ago, it was damn near close to a perfect meal. My chicken was absolutely moist and tender, and my wife's snapper was amazing - perfectly cooked fish. The salad, with frisee and haricot verts with a citrus-shallot vinaigarette, was wonderful as well. And the dessert (blood orange sorbet and chocolate cookie) was great as well.

                  We were loathe to go to Lucques after so many negative reviews on the old site, but we are certainly going back.

                  Different strokes, I guess.

                  1. i felt that many of the dishes there were simply too greasy, even the vegetables.

                    1. I was there about a month ago and enjoyed the soft shell crab and a morel appetizer, but was very disappointed in the short ribs. I found them to be perfectly cooked, but not very flavorful. The desserts were mostly disappointing except for the confectioners plate.

                      Previously, I had always been quite pleased with my meals at Lucques.

                      1. I agree -- we went last week and I was also disappointed. For roughly the same price, you could go to someplace in New York that would have a) mindblowing food and b) impeccable service. Lucques had neither. As far as the service, our waiter was rushed and we were often served by busboys who couldn't seem to figure out how to get the plates onto our two-top -- they would stand there hovering until I moved the little vase or the candle so they had more room. A couple instances of awkward reaching, too (which seemed curious since there should have been enough room -- the two-top next to us wasn't even occupied). We enjoyed our food, but I did think my eggplant gratin main was a bit greasy, and coupled with the saltiness from the olives baked in the dish it wasn't something I would order again. The heirloom salad with feta was "heh" -- good but I have had better versions elsewhere. The desserts were not high points either -- the chocolates on the confectioner's plate were too sweet, and I didn't enjoy the grainy texture of the sugar in a Mexican chocolate cake.
                        Overall, I'd give it a B. For service, a C.

                        1 Reply
                        1. re: Eastsider

                          Great. All we have to do is book a plane ticket from Los Angeles to New York. I'm sure it'll be worth the $200 plane ticket. </sarcasm> =)

                        2. right. Restaurants in NY never have off nights or bad service. (sarcasm again!)