Palo vs. Michelin-starred Restaurants?

[jtba]

For people who are used to haute cuisine, how does Palo on the Wonder compare to the Michelin 1- and 2-star restaurants? (It sounds like Remy is closer to 2- & 3-stars?)

 

[TheRichFam]

I've eaten at several Michelin star restaurants and I'd agree with you on Remy. Easily two stars. However, I'd say that while Palo is amazing and by a wide margin better than the MDRs, I highly doubt it would get a Michelin star. PLEASE don't let that discourage you. You MUST go. It's amazing. Just not quite Michelin Star Amazing.

Make sense?

 

[cris0809]

I've eaten at several Michelin star restaurants and I'd agree with you on Remy. Easily two stars. However, I'd say that while Palo is amazing and by a wide margin better than the MDRs, I highly doubt it would get a Michelin star. PLEASE don't let that discourage you. You MUST go. It's amazing. Just not quite Michelin Star Amazing. Make sense?

I pretty much agree with this. Remy is a 2.

Palo none but it's a nice atmosphere and the food is good. We always try to visit at least once if for no other reason than an adult only meal on a ship full of kids.

 

[Bree]

We had Palo brunch and Remy dinner. Remy was fantastic and something I wouldn't hesitate booking again. Palo for us was just okay. The food was good and the selections were plenty, but I've had better at local restaurants.

 

[jdb in AZ]

Onboard restaurants have a major disadvantage over land-lubber restaurants, namely fresh ingredients. All food on a ship is hauled aboard before leaving the embarkation port. So toward the end of a 15-day cruise, it's hard to find fresh produce. Palo does the best they can with the ingredients at hand, but I agree with PP -- I've had better meals at local restaurants. And it's definitely nice to take a break from all the kids in the MDR's and spend an evening in an all-adult atmosphere.

Remy was great, and if it compares to a Michelin two-star, what does a higher-star restaurant have? Just wondering. I can't imagine being more pampered than we were at Remy, and I can't say that I would even want more attentive service. So would the difference be in the fresher food, or what?

 

[jtba]

Thanks to all the PPs for commenting. This helps as I've been to several 1- and 2-star places, just wasn't sure what to expect from Palo. Will definitely shoot for both brunch and dinner there, and if we ever get on one of the newer ships I shall look forward to Remy as well.

A foodie friend who's been to many 2- and 3-star places said the difference is the whole package--food of course (perfection), attentiveness, decor, etc.

 

[disneywonderfun]

If Olive Garden or Carrabba's has recently earned a Michelin star, than I would say Palo is in the same category. Seriously, the role of Palo is simply to give parents a night away from the kids and the MDR. Twenty or so meals from Palo in my life and the quality is only marginally better than Carrabba's. That does not mean it is not a good meal. Heck, Carrabba's can be quite tasty. But, there is nothing particularly remarkable about it although it is multiple steps up from the MDRs.

As far as Remy, my experience is much more limited although I have had both the brunch and dinner. I would say that it might just sneak into a single Michelin star. Despite ongoing comparisons to V&A at WDW, I just do not think it really reaches that level.

DWF

 

[jtba]

If Olive Garden or Carrabba's has recently earned a Michelin star, than I would say Palo is in the same category. (snip) there is nothing particularly remarkable about it although it is multiple steps up from the MDRs.

Wow, I guess I better significantly lower my expectations of the MDRs then, LOL. Very helpful, thanks.

 

[SuperDry]

If Olive Garden or Carrabba's has recently earned a Michelin star, than I would say Palo is in the same category. Seriously, ...

Seriously, to put Olive Garden and Palo in the same category is ridiculous. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, and I can see how some people may not like the food at Palo, but to compare it to Olive Garden is really doing a disservice to the people that are reading this thread, never having been to Palo, and trying to decide whether or not to go.

I think the collective opinions of the others in this thread is more accurate: Palo is comparable to a higher-end restaurant found in most cities, but not of Michelin star caliber. I look forward to dining in Remy next month for the first time, and from people that I'd trust on the matter, my expectation is that it will be equivalent to a Michelin one-star experience.

 

[Coldflame]

Seriously, to put Olive Garden and Palo in the same category is ridiculous. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, and I can see how some people may not like the food at Palo, but to compare it to Olive Garden is really doing a disservice to the people that are reading this thread, never having been to Palo, and trying to decide whether or not to go.

I think the collective opinions of the others in this thread is more accurate: Palo is comparable to a higher-end restaurant found in most cities, but not of Michelin star caliber. I look forward to dining in Remy next month for the first time, and from people that I'd trust on the matter, my expectation is that it will be equivalent to a Michelin one-star experience.

I don't think they were necessarily comparing them. They simply stated that *if* those popular, mass-produced restaurants earned single star Michelin, Palo deserves *at lest* that. At least that's the way I understood it.

 

[disneywonderfun]

Seriously, to put Olive Garden and Palo in the same category is ridiculous. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, and I can see how some people may not like the food at Palo, but to compare it to Olive Garden is really doing a disservice to the people that are reading this thread, never having been to Palo, and trying to decide whether or not to go.

I think the collective opinions of the others in this thread is more accurate: Palo is comparable to a higher-end restaurant found in most cities, but not of Michelin star caliber. I look forward to dining in Remy next month for the first time, and from people that I'd trust on the matter, my expectation is that it will be equivalent to a Michelin one-star experience.

Admittedly, I have not been to an Olive Garden in over a decade! However, I will strongly endorse that Palo is almost a clone of Carrabba's with respect to food prep and quality. In fact, it might be a touch below a place like Carrabba's. Discussions in the past included what would be the cost of a Palo meal shoreside. The overall number seemed to be around a $30 meal for appetizer, main, and dessert. Alcohol was removed from the equation for obvious reasons. Of course, there were some outliers who felt Palo was equivalent to a $100 meal in their communities. Having eaten in a wide range of restaurants in a diverse set of locations, all I could say is that I would be sorely disappointed if a usual Palo meal cost anything beyond $50 per person. I do think some of the discussion becomes blurred because of the gluttony on board. I have seen a great number of people at Palo order multiple appetizers, a couple mains, etc, etc. There is nothing wrong with that as it gives one the chance to sample various items. However, the sheer volume of food ordered at Palo does not equate to a higher level of quality than a chain Italian restaurant in the US. Do not forget, Carrabba's gets their steaks sourced from the same place as Fleming's under the overall corporate umbrella. I have never had a tenderloin at Palo that even approached the quality of that at Carrabba's much less aged versions at Fleming's. That is the reality of Palo. My wife will not even go there anymore for a sit down meal as she basically finds it equivalent to uninspired chain food.

DWF

 

[Maddysdaddy]

In response to your original question, I would not classify Palo as "haute cuisine". As much as my wife and I enjoy eating there, it was the equivalent of a higher end Italian restaurant where we live - certainly much better than "chain restaurant" food, but certainly not at a level where the words "Michelin Star" should be part of the conversation.

 

[JavaHound]

jtba,

I know you asked for opinions (and certainly received a variety of them), but I'd strongly encourage you to try it for yourself. I've had poor meals at great restaurants and great meals at hole-in-the-wall joints. You never know until you try. I won't attempt to compare it to other restaurants (chain or otherwise), but my wife and I have always enjoyed our meals at Palo, finding both the food and the service exceptional.

Like most everything else on the cruise, the attitude with which you approach it will greatly determine how much you enjoy the experience.

 

[BuzzLightyearInTampa]

Admittedly, I have not been to an Olive Garden in over a decade! However, I will strongly endorse that Palo is almost a clone of Carrabba's with respect to food prep and quality. In fact, it might be a touch below a place like Carrabba's. Discussions in the past included what would be the cost of a Palo meal shoreside. The overall number seemed to be around a $30 meal for appetizer, main, and dessert. Alcohol was removed from the equation for obvious reasons. Of course, there were some outliers who felt Palo was equivalent to a $100 meal in their communities. Having eaten in a wide range of restaurants in a diverse set of locations, all I could say is that I would be sorely disappointed if a usual Palo meal cost anything beyond $50 per person. I do think some of the discussion becomes blurred because of the gluttony on board. I have seen a great number of people at Palo order multiple appetizers, a couple mains, etc, etc. There is nothing wrong with that as it gives one the chance to sample various items. However, the sheer volume of food ordered at Palo does not equate to a higher level of quality than a chain Italian restaurant in the US. Do not forget, Carrabba's gets their steaks sourced from the same place as Fleming's under the overall corporate umbrella. I have never had a tenderloin at Palo that even approached the quality of that at Carrabba's much less aged versions at Fleming's. That is the reality of Palo. My wife will not even go there anymore for a sit down meal as she basically finds it equivalent to uninspired chain food.

DWF

Wow, I couldn't disagree more.

IMHO, the service and ambiance at Palo is orders of magnitude ahead of Carrabba's. And two of the main reasons we dine out is the service and ambiance. And FWIW, I LOVE the beef tenderloin at Palo and find it superior to anything on the Carrabba's menu (which I find to be full of extremely greasy dishes).

 

[TheRichFam]

I also agree that comparisons to Olive Garden are fairly silly. Either you had the worst PALO experience ever or you live near the best OG on planet earth.

Even Carabbas's is a stretch. I love Carabbas as chains go, but holy cow. Ingredients being sourced at the same place is a small factor here. I could source my meat at the same place as Ruth's Chris and not treat it correctly and end up with a bad steak.

Agree with PP- try PALO. If you hate it, don't go next time. But I'm fairly certain you'll love it.

 

[disneywonderfun]

I also agree that comparisons to Olive Garden are fairly silly. Either you had the worst PALO experience ever or you live near the best OG on planet earth.

Even Carabbas's is a stretch. I love Carabbas as chains go, but holy cow. Ingredients being sourced at the same place is a small factor here. I could source my meat at the same place as Ruth's Chris and not treat it correctly and end up with a bad steak.

Agree with PP- try PALO. If you hate it, don't go next time. But I'm fairly certain you'll love it.

Yes, we all do agree on one thing, definitely go to Palo to decide for yourself. Part of my impression likely results from the sheer number of meals we have had at Palo in our lives. There is nothing on the menu we have not tried, so there is not much to make it a "new" experience. Also, I should not discount the ambiance issue. It is quite nice. One of my favorite photos of my wife and I is of us at Palo with the sun setting in the background.

I guess my only parting shot would be to have reasonable expectations. It WILL BE BETTER than anything in the MDR. It will not be more elegant than Remy's. It is a fairly minimal upcharge, so even consider going twice if your cruise is a week long.

DWF

 

[jtba]

Thank you, everyone. I will for sure be booking Palo for at least one dinner on our Alaskan cruise. In fact I am hoping to get brunch on Tracy Arm day as well; I've read that it's magical to view the glaciers while seated in the serenity of Palo!

My original question was just to get an idea of how good Palo is in general; there was never any doubt in my mind that we would go. Having said that, I am lowering my expectation of the MDRs quite a bit...

 

[mhconley]

Holy carp... Carrabbas? I would not eat at a Carrabbas if it was the only restaurant around. Never had a good meal there. I'd say Carrabbas is on a par with Applebees and Applebees is horrendous.

Never been to Palo but the food and service in the MDRs is better than Carrabbas.

We did do a Remy dinner on our one and only cruise and I would definitely say it would get 1 if not 2 Michelin stars. I have eaten at some of the top restaurants in the US and Remy was easily their equal in food, ambiance and service.

Martin

 

[wnissen]

I have been to a Michelin three-star restaurant in Paris and New York, a two-star in California (many times), and at least a half-dozen one-star places in those locales. Victoria and Albert's probably gets a star. Probably. Palo definitely not. I haven't tried Remy.

Please don't interpret this to mean that I haven't enjoyed my meals at Palo. It is a very good restaurant, and I leave with a grin on my face every time. But the Michelin standards are just in a whole other universe. An ordinary "fancy" restaurant with nicely pressed linen napkins and main courses that start at $25 doesn't get a star. It's hard to find a place with two stars serving dinner for less than $150 person for food just because the kitchen and service staff required are so numerous. The Bay Area is famous worldwide for its dining, and yet there is just one three-star that isn't the French Laundry. Paris has only eleven. We are talking the few dozen most exquisite restaurants in the whole world here! If the staff and kitchen are "on", you should weep with joy. The criterion Michelin uses is "vaut le voyage", to say that it is worth taking a trip whose sole purpose is to eat at the restaurant.