tourist guide to los angeles

We couldn't find the page you requested, either because it is temporarily unavailable, has had its name changed, or no longer exists on FindArticles.

This error occurred at: 2009-12-26 23:01:00

If you'd like to forge ahead here are some ideas:

Thank you for visiting FindArticles.

| | | |

Here’s how successful social networkers use sites like Facebook and Twitter for everything from recruiting to manufacturing.

Next week's international climate change conference at Copenhagen is beset with problems of both political will and the substance of what's being advocated, say critics.

An increasing number of businesses, from hotels to cell phone providers, are advertising bargain prices and then tacking on hidden fees and charges to boost the final cost. Here’s how you can fight back.

LAist: SF Chronicle Totally Disses Los Angeles Restaurants
All comments for SF Chronicle Totally Disses Los Angeles Restaurants

guest
"So if we suck so much. why are you here? Is it worse to be a pussy living in a pod car, or someone reading about pussies living in pod cars? It's worse to be a pussy living in a pod car. When you are merely *reading* about pussies living in pod cars, you're merely reading about the pathetic. When you ARE the pussy living in a pod care, you ARE PATHETIC.
guest
If Angelina Jolie is sitting a couple feet away from you, you're gonna look. Anyone in Frisco who says that they wouldn't are either full of it or castrated, which is not to say that everyone is staring at each other in LA. Star sightings in restaurants, even in LA, don't happen regularly. I do think that SF is superior in "dining" which is not the same as places for "eating." The breadth and scope of "ethnic" cuisine in Los Angeles is second to none. Sorry New York.
guest
Wow look at everyone's panties in a bunch. Chill out people. In SF we go out to eat so we can, well eat. In LA you ask for a restaurant recomendation and it is always followed by "oh and it's a great place to be seen." But we don't care. That must explain why so many celebs come up here to be left alone to eat and not be "seen"
guest
Damn you guys are sensitive. I think the mutual inferiority complex thing is right on.
guest
Good lord, even LA blog comments lack substance.
guest
I agree with the poster above. I grew up in LA and live in SF now. Bauer wrote in his blog today about the bashing he got from LA bloggers regarding the article he wrote. I was sort of surprised. I love the food scene in LA and I thought the article was an accurate representation of someone who likes food and is a visitor to LA looking for something along the lines of the Delfinas, Michael Minas or Gary Dankos that visitors seek when visiting SF. I also thought the comment about locals dining in LA was complementary. I like that the locals fuel the restaurant scene in LA rather than tourists. Yes, the ethnic food blows SF out of the water. There is actually no comparison. There is no place like Langers in SF, or even damn good Korean at 3AM. But to highlight LA as a dining destination you kind of have to look at the pricier places. That's just the way it goes. Anyway, look at the article in the Times a few weeks ago about the boom of chefs going over to Century City to open restaurants and the agents they have to impress. Yes, it's not the only industry in LA, but it is a pretty notable one--just like us Bay Area crazy hippies! ;-)
guest
I'm an LA native, but I live in SF (and read SFist) now. I read Bauer's article in the Chronicle the morning it came out, without the LAist preface that the article was a slam on LA. I didn't take it as such. Bauer was a tourist in LA, and his guide was a writer from Los Angeles mag-- so of course he is going eat Westside buzz restaurants frequented by "industry" types-- isn't that what Los Angeles mag is all about? Of course he isn't going to have a full understanding of LA dining, and is going to fall back on stereotypes (that can be reinforced at places like Spago). He acknowledged his missing out on LA's great ethnic restaurants. (And yes, Thai food is better in LA. And Straits Cafe is no longer on Geary--it's gone upscale, and downhill, at the new SF Centre mall). Bauer did say that LA restaurants tend to do a better job at service, which is true. The idea of an LA/SF rivalry is tired, and in recent years I've mostly seen SF reviewers of LA focus on what they like about LA.
BentswoodGirl
#22. Please. I live near Wilshire/Western and take the purple line to my job at an environmental consulting firm everyday. I also take the bus when necessary. As of present, my boyfriend and I make a combined income that goes way into the six-figure range. We're not students nor are we "poor" or blue-collar. I make a lot of generalizations, too, but you are just straight up wrong in your post. But back to the article. I really don't have an arugment about SF vs. LA restaurants in general, but I really hate how a lot of mexican eateries in SF serve black beans instead of pinto/refried. Gross! Black beans, when mashed, looks like dog poo. When not, it still looks like a pile of dead roly-poly bugs. Anyhoo, I'll always side with LA over SF cos LA is my home. Oh, and SF doesn't have a King Taco. Mmmm mmmm good!
guest
go back to san francisco you stupid hippie.
Elise Thompson
When people move here and constantly bitch about what's wrong with LA, I wonder, "Then why are you here?" She listed the downtown restaurants in response to this specific assertation: "The city is so spread out, for example, that it's difficult for conventioneers downtown to get to the top restaurants..." So if we suck so much. why are you here? Is it worse to be a pussy living in a pod car, or someone reading about pussies living in pod cars?
qwerty
"Unlike San Francisco, where tourists constitute a hefty percentage of the patrons at popular places, the Los Angeles dining scene is fueled by locals." Is this person seriously trying to say that restaurants teeming with tourists are superior to those that are patronized by locals? What?
albs
your use of "totally" is what bugs. did he diss LA? yeah, ok maybe he did. but did he say LA restaurants are terrible? no, not at all. his review was generally positive, not a total rip on LA. he even acknowledges that LA has more to offer than what he covered and that he ignored one essential aspect of LA dining: ethnic cuisine. but you're right, "LA is fake" is a tired cliche. his writing is weak and his choice of restaurants sucked. his insights? um, that LA's most recommended fine dining establishments are Hollywood-ed out with (local) industry types.. is that inaccurate? the hottest places in town are invariably hot only because celebrities are going there, not because the food is actually good (when in fact, it is actually good).
guest
In a nutshell, he's right. LA has always lagged behind SF, NYC, Seattle, Portland, Chicago, etc. List goes on. Admit it everyone. We could and SHOULD be a lot better. All these restaurants that have been mentioned here are popular because of their status as places to be seen, not places to have an extraordinary meal. With the amount of money and influence in this city, we should have a great restaurant on every corner. I find most of the place in town put their emphasis on decor and marketing than they do in creating great food and an interesting menu. LA is a place where people open restaurants to invite to create a scene, not because they love food.
Carrie Meathrell
I'm sorry, Albs, I don't really see what sort of insight he offered into the LA dining scene - most of the restaurants he covered have been extremely well documented (often by this very website) - he couldn't find anywhere more original to eat than Spago? Or Lucques? These are all stories we've heard a million times before. And I enjoy hyperbole; perhaps I shall amend the headline to say: "SF Chronicle writer gives L.A. restaurant scene a back-handed compliment that ends up just sounding tired and uninspired." Is that a more precise depiction of the article? Or are we to remain bogged down in semantics?
albs
the "totally disses" byline blows things WAY out of proportion. the way he framed his article was meant to appeal to his SF audience, and it fits the popular (and often accurate) perception of LA. the restaurants he went to are the places that were RECOMMENDED TO HIM as the "best of LA," and you can't deny that hollywood pervades those spots. if you actually read the article, he has many great and insightful things to say about the LA food scene at the restaurants he visited. he also disclaimed the fact that he didn't have the time to explore LA's incredibly diverse and top-notch ethinic cuisine, which he admits makes "make dining in Los Angeles so satisfying." LA does ethnic cuisine better than any other city, bar none. i don't know that our high-end fancy pants dining can live up to SF's reputation just yet, but i wouldn't know. i generally can't afford to eat at those kind of restaurants. and ps: in-n-out exists in SF too.

tourist guide to los angeles

Category