令人吃得有點生氣的Atelier Crenn，連廚房沒有參觀就走了。
之前聽過好些食友對這家餐廳貶多於褒，所以來三藩市都沒有特別想試。這一次因爲該吃的名店也大致上吃過了，不如就試試這家吧，更何況去年摘了三星。
不信邪，結果⋯⋯
四大問題：
1. 技術的根基很薄弱（我邊吃邊跟Eric 說，應該沒上過廚藝學校也沒跟過嚴厲名師被鞭策才會那麼弱，他上網一查，果然。至於從何看到根基薄弱種種細節，留待專欄寫）
2. 菜單的建立完全失敗，我們邊吃邊等主菜上來，然後被告知要上甜點了⋯⋯ 嚇？！
3. 每一道菜都有個明顯的缺點，大致想到可以如何改進。
4. 重複的技術（從amuse bousche 到三道甜點，同一個技術出現四次！！！傻眼）、調味素材不斷出現，反映廚師見識及想象局限。
Arzak之後，另一家搞不懂為何得三星的餐廳。如果這家能得三星，我吃過的好些三星餐廳應該有四星或五星。
這頓埋單兩人吃了835美金，回去再吃Benu 一頓好過。完。
P/S: 下一個短帖將含技術性分析。
A slightly pissed off meal at Atelier Crenn, left without a visit to the kitchen.
I've heard more bad things than good for this restaurant, so I wasn't too eager to try it even when I was in San Francisco. This time, I've already tried a lot of the renown restaurants, so I thought why not, since it's recently got a third star.
But jinxed...
Four problems:
1. The technical foundation is weak (I was telling Eric, maybe because she never went to culinary school, so no one was on her back about techniques. He checked online, lo and behold. As to why I can see the technical foundation is weak, I'll write more in my column.)
2. The menu development is a complete failure, we were eating course after course, waiting for the main course to come, then suddenly are told, the dessert is coming... huh?!
3. Every dish has a glaring shortcoming, and I have ideas on how they could be improved.
4. Repetition of techniques (From amuse-bouche to dessert, the same technique was used 4 times!!! Shocked), the seasoning elements appeared again and again, showing the chef's knowledge and imagination have reached a limitation.
After Arzak, this is another restaurant I don't get how it deserves 3-star. If this is a 3-star restaurant, then some 3-star restaurant I've been to should be 4 or 5 star.
This ended up costing US$835 for 2 people. It would have been better spent at Benu. The end.
