Stars get in your eyes: How Michelin will change Philly’s restaurants

The arrival of the Michelin Guide is a momentous occasion for Philly’s dining scene — one that, even if you don‘t care about Michelin‘s vaunted star ratings, may very well change the way you eat in the city’s best restaurants as they strive for one of the restaurant world’s most heralded achievements and a new kind of diner potentially stalks the reservation books.

Inquirer critic Craig LaBan and food reporter Kiki Aranita discuss what the dawn of Philly’s Michelin era says about the state of the dining scene, what it means for our chefs, and which restaurants might take home a star or two (or none at all).

Craig LaBan, restaurant critic: I have mixed feelings about the Michelin arrival. It was inevitable: There’s no way a dining scene as accomplished as Philadelphia, which has finally begun to win the national accolades it deserves from other organizations (like James Beard), could be ignored by a guide like Michelin, which wants to become a growing part of the American restaurant conversation. Restaurateurs in general have wanted it because they want to be seen as national players, too.

It‘s what happens next that probably interests me most. Will this change the way that chefs cook, the way people build restaurants, the ambitions in general — to chase stars and destination diners — rather than just the joys of great hospitality for a local audience they build actual relations with? I worry that it‘s inevitable.

Kiki Aranita, food reporter: I don‘t seek out Michelin-starred fine dining in other cities (though, yes, I will probably go check out a Michelin-starred dumpling spot or noodle shop or taco stand) because I find that there’s this creeping sameness whether I’m in Copenhagen, Mexico City, or California. So I can see how you’re concerned that perhaps this may change the way chefs cook.

CL: I was talking with my friend Carlos Frias, the James Beard-winning former critic of the Miami Herald who covered Michelin‘s arrival to that town in 2022. He noticed a definite uptick in restaurants adding tasting menus and chef counters as an effort to lure Michelin‘s gaze. We already have some great tasting menus — but they happened organically, more or less. It‘s only been a week since the Michelin announcement and River Twice, the posh chef’s counter on East Passyunk that should get a look, just added a new 16-course tasting menu beginning next week. Coincidence? Hmmm...

KA: I hope that in one way it does change how people cook — that people aspire to the Michelin green star, which is awarded to restaurants that are committed to sustainability. (Although when I hung out at Oyster Oyster in Washington, D.C. for an upcoming piece about using less plastic in kitchens, one glaring piece of plastic was the green star award.)

Not too long ago you dispensed with bells. And now we may have stars. It‘s funny to see us coming back to rating systems in this context.

CL: I know it‘s rich for someone who rated restaurants for 22 years to gripe about Michelin ratings now. But there’s a big difference. My ratings were crafted to frame restaurants in the context of Philly, for the residents that frequent them. These were the places that mattered to this city and its quirks. My ratings were never meant to equate to a 3-star restaurant in NYC or San Francisco, because what did that really matter to local diners — other than pride?

Our dining scene is already competitive enough when you look at some of the most coveted tables — Mawn, Royal Sushi, Her Place. It‘s only going to get worse. That‘s already a symptom of our landscape of small restaurant spaces, which stems from our 19th-century streetscape. It‘s part of our charm. We’re the best small-restaurant city in America. But it‘s going to become a great liability once some of these gems get on the larger restaurant map. What happens when we begin to focus on building much larger places to cater to all those crowds of tourists?

KA: Philadelphia is going to get crowds of tourists anyway with all the big events the city has coming up (e.g., the Semiquincentennial, 2026 World Cup, MLB All-Star Game, and March Madness).

CL: Chefs are going to be very disappointed, at least to begin with, with how few stars Michelin bestows on our dining scene. The things that Michelin seems to value — luxury fine dining, in many forms — is just not what makes Philly such a great place to eat. We are not a city that depends on oligarchs and finance-bro expense accounts. We are not a power-lunching, luxury-dining-destination scene. People pay their own money to eat in Philly, largely; we are driven by great neighborhood restaurants. I suspect those places don’t necessarily fit the Michelin multi-star paradigm.

Michelin loves chef’s counters and tasting menus. Historically, it has leaned into “French” versions of any cuisine, no matter where they’re assessing. I happened to have been in Thailand when their Michelin ratings came out, and there was consistent grumbling (even among the aristocratic restaurant-going class) that this Euro-based organization just didn‘t get what real Thai cuisine was about. In many ways, I’m saying the same thing about Philly: Will Michelin get the magic and potential of our BYOB culture, or the quirky, DIY, indie spirit of small restaurant dining that makes this city a genuinely great place to eat? I highly doubt it.

It‘s going to be annoying to occupy a tiny section of a book largely occupied by NYC.

KA: No, I think it‘s good to be in the same guide as New York. We’re a small city. Geographically, it makes sense (unlike Chicago). And a good reminder to New Yorkers that we’re an hour and 20 min away by train.

CL: Well, as the Michelin guide expands across the country, eventually being mentioned in it — beyond the stars — will be about as special as having been rated in the Zagat guide. It was more a certification of existence than excellence.

KA: It will be interesting to see if more diners acquire a Michelin gaze.

CL: There’s going to be a lot of disappointment when no restaurant in Philly gets 3 stars, let alone 2. I’d be very disappointed if we didn‘t get a bunch of 1-star places, at least. I’ve heard people rationalize this as, “Well, Michelin has a higher standard.” There’s some truth to that in terms of the level of fine-dining trappings they look for to achieve the higher ranks.

KA: Sure it can be true but then you have to stop and think, What does “value” mean to you? To a Michelin inspector? Is it good food? Servers who are really nice to you? A comfy chair? I think people’s perception of Michelin has changed. I think there’s less value — less holiness around it.

CL: One caveat to hedge this disappointment: Michelin has a history of starting the most promising places at a lower tier — to give the opportunity of rewarding them with more stars as they acquire whatever it is lacking that Michelin needs. There’s a subtle sort of unspoken dialogue that can begin between restaurants and the star service that begins with that first rating ... and then the climb begins.

KA: Let‘s be clear, when we’re projecting who will get a star or Bib Gourmand, we’re not imposing our own opinions on these establishments.

I really don‘t think we’re going to get any 2 stars; I don‘t think anyone is going to get more than a star. I’m with Craig on that climb.

CL: We may get one or two 2 stars, but I would not be surprised if we were shut out. I think we have some legitimate 2-star candidates. My question is whether Michelin, as a matter of unspoken policy, wants to come out of the gate as a hard grader just to make the point that they’re the final word on what‘s excellent. A guide that only awards stars to just a handful of restaurants is not that useful to locals, but the other kinds of mentions to fill out the book with notable places to give it more utility. Of course, that‘s our role as local media: to get into the fine-grained details of a restaurant scene in all its depth and nuances and varieties.

I think Royal Sushi is a borderline 2-star experience on its own, but not sure how they’d balance that with an assessment of Royal Izakaya at the front of the restaurant (two ratings? one whole take?). If I guessed, Royal Sushi would start with one.

KA: Can Michelin inspectors even get into Royal? Lol.

CL: That‘s actually a major question.

KA: I think Provenance is Michelin bait.

CL: You know how I feel about Provenance: It was literally built to the Michelin template. The chef’s counter. The extremely overlong tasting menu. All the trappings. I just don‘t think the cooking there has a clear enough voice and the consistency to merit that ranking yet. Also worth noting: Consistency should be measured at that level in years, not months. I highly doubt any restaurant that new is going to earn a star.

KA: Francie in NYC got their star within months of opening.

CL: Vetri has a legitimate shot, probably the best, in fact. It fits the fancy tasting format, the gorgeous space, the precious flatware and Murano chandeliers, the veteran service. It feels like an experience that‘s been crafted from top to bottom, and more importantly, it‘s a living, breathing restaurant that keeps evolving. My question is whether Michelin will find it innovative enough.

Friday Saturday Sunday is also a very complete restaurant that‘s functioning at a high level in so many aspects — upstairs and downstairs — as reflected by the Beard nomination for the Lovers Bar this year, after winning best restaurant in America two years ago based on the upstairs tasting experience. It has an extremely personal point of view. It‘s unlike any other place. But still... is it enough to get 2 stars? I think it‘s a perfect candidate for 1-star with promise of more if they keep progressing.

KA: They have comfy chairs. I’m looking at the list of starred establishments in Hong Kong, my other hometown, and a lot of those hero shots are of very fancy dining rooms.

Vernick Fish and Kalaya have real good shots. Zahav, I haven‘t been to in years. I think 1-star for everybody.

CL: I agree on Vernick Fish and Kalaya, especially Kalaya, because what Nok does there is so singular in the U.S. and it has the glamorous dining room to match. (Conversely, will Mawn in Kalaya’s old BYO space hit the mark? I doubt it: Bib Gourmand material.) I also believe Zahav has a very serious shot at a star. It‘s the national leader and pioneer in its category. A similar restaurant in Chicago, Galit, has a star — its owner, Zachary Engel, used to work at Zahav. After a couple years of thinking Zahav was coasting a bit, my meal there last fall felt fresh and energized. I think they’re still bringing it enough to get that consideration. It would be an upset if it didn‘t. But like I’ve said in regards to Michelin envy: Be careful what you wish for!

Ambra has the format and ambitions to get a look. Lots of people do like it and it‘s quite possible Michelin has a better experience than I did. There are a few dishes I still think about, but it‘s a matter of consistency over the course of that long menu for him [chef Chris D’Ambro] to get to the next level.

River Twice also, if Randy Rucker is cooking at the top of his game, has a shot.

KA: Maybe Ogawa for a star.

CL: Her Place is another 1-star candidate. Again, it‘s unique, personal, and high-achieving as Amanda Shulman has really polished it down to the details. It‘s an experience.

KA: The stars could go to Vetri, Vernick Fish, Kalaya, Fri Sat Sun, Provenance, Royal Sushi if they can get in, possibly Le Virtu?

CL: Le Virtu is wonderful! But it‘s too earthy for Michelin stars. Bib, for sure.

I’ll be curious to see if Jean-Georges gets a star, simply by the owner‘s pedigree. It‘s no doubt one of Philly’s most spectacular dining rooms, if not the most. But I’ve yet to have a dining experience there that truly excited me. Anxious to experience what the new chef is up to. That space deserves an extraordinary kitchen team with its own identity, not just a sky-high branch of the international chain. Would I be surprised if Michelin gave it some shine? Nope.

KA: I don‘t know. I haven‘t eaten at JG or Lacroix in years.

CL: Lacroix! I think Eric is a super-talented chef, but the restaurant as a whole is in dire need of a refresh and update. It just feels like I’m dining in 2015 when I go there. So starchy. That said, I hear they’re doing just that — resetting the vibe and menu at Lacroix, unveiling some new things in the coming months. I’m due for a revisit.

KA: Do you think Angelo’s could get a star? Michelin gives stars to taco stands, dumpling stands, noodle stands… A Michelin-starred cheesesteak stand would be hilarious. I don‘t think it‘s out of the realm of possibility.

CL: Well, Angelo’s or John‘s would be my votes, but that‘s just not going to happen. My sense is that they pick great taco stands and dumpling shops, but they also feel performative. Like, there are SO MANY great taco stands and dumpling shops and kebab houses if you really want to dive into that subject — what separates these places from the many others? There has to be something magical going on.

KA: I like how you described those stars as performative. What I actually think is that there’s not much of an in-between. You either have to be a super-fancy, high-end fine dining restaurant or a literal hole in the wall.

CL: The Michelin cliche would be to name the Barclay Prime $135 wagyu splurge its cheesesteak north star, so to speak. But even I don‘t think Michelin is that ridiculous.

The Bib Gourmand, a step below a star, is supposed to represent “high-quality food at a moderate price,” often with a focus on casual dining. We’re really good at that! Dozens and dozens of possibilities there.

KA: I think for Bibs we can just be like, “Please see our entire 76 list as possibilities.”

CL: Keep an eye on some of our most innovative vegan places, Pietramala and Vedge. I’m not sure about 1-star for them, but they are high-level restaurants doing something that is hard to do well — and with originality. The BYOB setting and lack of fuss in service and accoutrements might hold Pietramala back. Vedge fits the more upscale fine-dining mold, but is its food — pioneering when it was created — still innovative enough to set the national conversation? Not putting money on a star for either one, but both worthy of a Bib (especially Pietramala).

El Chingon is Bib material, so is South Philly Barbacoa / Casa Mexico (especially if service is not a major consideration). I would love it if they actually went up to Northeast Philly and had the braised bull’s cheeks with black potatoes at Ginger. After all, the 21-year-old chef left Moscow for Philly a few years ago specifically because Michelin decided to no longer rate restaurants in Russia, following the invasion of Ukraine. He wants to be the youngest chef to hold a Michelin star. He must have known they were coming to Philly! So I think he deserves a visit. No stars yet, but a Bib perhaps, or a Bib for any number of other great places in Northeast Philly. I nominate Gamarjoba and Uzbekistan. But don‘t hold your breath. If Michelin makes it to the Northeast, I’d be truly surprised.

Whatever the guide ends up being, it‘ll be mostly Bibs, and not so many stars. You will hear a collective scream to the heavens: “No one likes us, and we don‘t care!” Even though we really do care. But that chip on our shoulder is Philly’s superpower. Nothing propels us like being told we’re not as good as NYC or D.C. or wherever. In that regard, a Michelin snub could be a plus.

KA: I think it‘s a good thing Michelin is coming. It shows me two things: 1. Our Philadelphia Convention and Visitors Bureau cares enough about our dining scene to invest in it. 2. There could be more out-of-town eyes on our city, and therefore, dollars — which our restaurants, many of them scrappy, without the ability to make a lot of money through liquor, need.